Russia pictures sugar daddy marriage nude. Sugar daddy s helping women. Sugar daddy. Giant sugar daddy candy. Sugar daddy 101….

Voting for the Conservative point is good, and gets 100 points … I get that.

Voting for the Liberal side is bad, and gets 0 points. I get that.

Not voting doesn’t move the issue. that doesn’t mean it doesn’t get counted, but should count as a 50. The vote was held, but you didn’t shift things.

8 * 100 + 2 * 0 + 15 * 50 = 1550

1550 / 25 votes = 62

62 is what he deserves for his Conservative/Liberal shift applied to these 25 votes over this year (50 being neutral, 100 Conservative, and 0 pure liberal).

62 is much closer to 50 than 100… barely Conservative would be the impact of McCain.

Or do you think nobody could have done better than 8-2 with 15 no-shows? He did not really shine with this showing.

calling it 8/25 isn’t exactly honest I’ll admit, but it wasn’t 8/10 either. A fair appraisal gives a no-vote a neutral score (not a no-score). So McCain deserves a 62 on the scale.

Don’t expect a lot of praise. 12 points off neutral (of 50 possible) isn’t an amazing score, is it?

landlines on May 16, 2008 at 1:01 PM

Agreed.

I’d also like to know how McCain would have voted on this vote he missed:

20. Hate Crimes—Cloture
HR 1585 (Roll Call 350). The Senate voted to stop debate and vote on an amendment establishing a special category of crime if it was based on the victim’s race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender or disability. ACU opposes efforts to criminalize thought, but on September 27, 2007 the Senate invoked cloture on the amendment by a vote of 60-39, after which the amendment was adopted by voice vote.

Either “McAmnesty” (aka “Give Away America”) or “McCain/Feingold” (aka “Shut Up America” act) should earn him a nearly perfect ZERO score when his votes are properly-weighted.

Sen. John McCain’s presidential campaign is trying to tap a new audience of potential voters by taking his campaign message straight to liberal and nonpolitical issues-based blogs, which reach millions of readers but don’t often delve into conservative politics.

…

Mr. McCain’s campaign said the Web outreach is a logical extension of an attempt to reach voters beyond his base. It also builds on his successful use of conference calls with conservative bloggers during the Republican primary, which blunted many of the harshest criticisms of the senator.

Why can’t we come up with a method for our elected representatives to vote without having to be physically in the Capitol building in Washington, D.C.?

Digitally signed documents, video teleconference, etc. are ways that the Senator or Congressman could place their vote.

Red Pill on May 15, 2008 at 4:39 PM

Because it could be hacked.

Digitally signed documents, video teleconference, etc. are ways that the Senator or Congressman could place their vote.

I understand that McCain has been on the road campaigning. I also think that the fact that the ACU rating does not penalize for missed votes provides a very nice “loophole” where a Senator can avoid a controversial vote when s/he wants to and still be considered “conservative”.

Why don’t we try to get John McCain on the record for how he would have voted on the 15 votes he missed?

3. Iraq War—Cloture
S 574 (Roll Call 51). The Senate refused to move to a vote on a resolution disapproving the “surge” of 20,000 additional troops into Iraq. ACU opposed this resolution. Although the motion achieved a 56-34 majority on February 17, 2007, 60 votes are required to shut off debate, so the resolution was not approved.

8. Small Business Regulation
S 761 (Roll Call 139). The Senate killed an amendment allowing small businesses to opt out of the most burdensome reporting provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act regulating reporting of publicly-traded companies on the stock exchange. ACU favors this exemption, but the Senate defeated it April 24, 2007, by a vote of 62-35.

10. Coastal Drilling for Natural Gas
HR 6 (Roll Call 212). The Senate rejected an amendment to the Energy Policy Bill that would have allowed Virginia to petition for natural gas exploration and drilling in the state’s coastal waters. ACU favors development of domestic energy sources and supported this amendment, which was defeated June 14, 2007 by a vote of 43-44.

11. Energy Policy
HR 6 (Roll Call 226). The Senate passed legislation imposing massive new regulation on the energy industry, including a rise in automobile mileage to 35 miles per gallon by 2020, a ban on the incandescent light bulb, new energy efficiency mandates for appliances, the use of 15 billion gallons of biofuels by 2015, and the taxpayer subsidy of new energy technologies. ACU opposes this kind of direct government interference in the economy, but the bill passed June 21, 2007 by a vote of 65-27.

14. New Student Loan Program
S 1642 (Roll Call 273). The Senate killed an effort to establish a new program of government loans to full-time undergraduate and graduate students. ACU opposes the creation of new federal subsidies and opposed this amendment, which failed July 23, 2007 by a vote of 37-54.

15. U.N. Peacekeeping Operations
HR 2764 (Roll Call 317). The Senate killed an amendment designed to stop an increase in the U.S. share of United Nations peacekeeping costs, which is now 25 percent. ACU opposes increased assistance to the U.N. The amendment failed September 6, 2007 by a vote of 30-63.

16. Abortion and Sterilization
HR 2764 (Roll Call 318). The Senate adopted an amendment that would bar the use of taxpayer money for any organization or program that supports or manages a program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization. ACU favors such a limitation, which was approved September 6, 2007by a vote of 48-45.

17. “Mexico City” Policy
HR 2764 (Roll Call 319). The Senate adopted an amendment repealing the Mexico City Policy, which prohibits the use of taxpayer funds by organizations that promote or perform abortions. ACU supports this limitation and opposed the amendment, which passed September 6, 2007 by a vote of 53-41.

18. Davis-Bacon Requirement
HR 3074 (Roll Call 334). The Senate voted to kill an amendment prohibiting implementation of the Davis-Bacon Act, which requires union rates to be paid on federal construction projects. ACU opposes Davis-Bacon, and supported the amendment, which was defeated September 12, 2007 by a vote of 56-37.

20. Hate Crimes—Cloture
HR 1585 (Roll Call 350). The Senate voted to stop debate and vote on an amendment establishing a special category of crime if it was based on the victim’s race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender or disability. ACU opposes efforts to criminalize thought, but on September 27, 2007 the Senate invoked cloture on the amendment by a vote of 60-39, after which the amendment was adopted by voice vote.

21. Health Insurance Expansion
HR 976 (Roll Call 353). The Senate passed a major expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) program authorizing $60 billion over five years, increasing subsidies and prohibiting the Department of Health and Human Services from requiring that poor children be covered before other groups. The costs of the expansion were to be paid from increased tobacco taxes. ACU opposed this massive expansion of welfare programs, but it was adopted September 27, 2007 by a vote of 67-29.

22. Energy Policy—Cloture
HR 6 (Roll Call 425). Although the Senate had earlier voted for new energy regulations (see Vote # 11 above), the House then revised them, and the Senate refused to shut off debate and move to a final vote on the revised bill mandating increased automobile mileage, the production of 36 billion gallons of “biofuels” by 2022, and new energy efficiency standards on appliances, lights, and other consumer goods while increasing taxes on domestic oil and gas companies. ACU opposes expansion of federal authority into the economy and so opposed this bill. On December 13, 2007 by a vote of 59-40, a majority of the Senate voted to pass the bill, but under Senate rules, 60 votes are required to invoke cloture, so the bill failed.

23. Eminent Domain
HR 2419 (Roll Call 429). The Senate defeated an amendment that would have prohibited federal, state and local governments from using eminent domain to take farmland or grazing land and use it for parks, open space or similar purposes. ACU opposes misuse of eminent domain, and so supported the amendment. However, on December 13, 2007, the Senate killed the amendment by a vote of 37-58

24. Energy Policy
HR 6 (Roll Call 430). Voting on a third revision of the Energy Bill (See Vote # 22 above), the Senate this time voted to pass legislation imposing massive new burdens on the energy industry of the United States while rejecting measures to increase domestic supplies of oil and gas. ACU continued to oppose this intervention in the economy, but on December 13, 2007, the Senate adopted it by a vote of 86-8.

25. Alternative Minimum Tax Adjustment
HR 2764 (Roll Call 440). The Senate killed a one-year extension of a provision keeping 21 million middle-income taxpayers from being hit with the Alternative Minimum Tax designed to apply to millionaires. ACU favors complete repeal of the AMT, and so opposed this stop-gap measure. The extension was defeated December 18, 2007 by a vote of 48-46. Although the measure did get a majority of the votes cast, under a unanimous consent agreement, 60 votes were required to pass this bill.

Not voting doesn’t count against you…nice.

If it did, counting the non-ACU votes, he’d be a 32% “conservative”…nice.

I aqlso find it a bit funny how those of you who like or support McCain are so virulent. I know there are virulent McCain bashers too, but why the rabid support?

It certainly isn’t because he is a conservative. He simply isn’t. It isn’t because he is strong on several important issues, though he is on some others.

I can understand those who have thrown up their hands and will “hold their nose.” They are simply resigned to the only choice we have. I don’t agree with that logic, but I can at least understand it. But those who aren’t willing to “hold their nose” will not supplant their principles should at least be given the respect of their stance. Isn’t that what seperates us from our opponents?

Libs/Dems are the ones who will vote based on the way the wind is blowing. Conservatives are truer than that. They don’t like or support McCain for real, not perceived, faults. This doesn’t make them any less important whether they vote for McCain or not.

Arguing about judges is irrelevant. Though an argument could be made that McCain would more likely appoint judges supported by liberals simply because he wants to seem the “compromise” candidate. Yes, we don’t know what he will actually do until it happens, but what is the more likely? Based on his past behavior is he more likely to appoint judges conservatives would support or judges liberals would support?

Trying to play it off as him appointing “centrist” judges is ridiculous. We don’t want judges who are “centrists”. We want judges who will interpret the law as set down by the Consitution. Being a centrist supposes there is middle ground or different interpretations of the Constitution – and there simply aren’t.

And here is a fact those who support McCain can take to the bank – no candidate is going to win office without the base of the party. Though we have our problems, conservatives are the base of the Republican party.

Like it or not, that same base (at least a significant part of it) isn’t going to vote for McCain – not with the drivel he’s doing with courting La Raza and advocating for cap and trade schemes.

And without the base McCain won’t even get the chance to appoint a centrist anything.

Fine. Doesn’t mean you can’t or shouldn’t try to push McCain in the direction you want him to go.

JiangxiDad on May 14, 2008 at 2:51 PM

Any good cliffs nearby?

Misha I on May 14, 2008 at 11:34 PM

A jab and a parry…nicely done.

Fine. Doesn’t mean you can’t or shouldn’t try to push McCain in the direction you want him to go.

JiangxiDad on May 14, 2008 at 2:51 PM

Any good cliffs nearby?

Hollowpoint

austinnelly is a little distracted to notice things like that. He’s busy wallowing in self-pity over the facts that keep piling up against him.

austinnelly on May 14, 2008 at 4:23 PM

What is McCain’s position on paragraph breaks?

I’m overjoyed that we’ve stopped claiming that McCain is going to appoint Strict Constitutionalist’s to the bench.

Ill keep proclaiming it.

As long as McCain proposes high quality centrist judges, the Senate will find it difficult to reject everyone without looking pretty foolish.

NuclearPhysicist on May 14, 2008 at 4:35 PM

That alone makes McCain worthy of election.

right2bright on May 14, 2008 at 5:19 PM

I’m overjoyed that we’ve stopped claiming that McCain is going to appoint Strict Constitutionalist’s to the bench.

As long as McCain proposes high quality centrist judges, the Senate will find it difficult to reject everyone without looking pretty foolish.

NuclearPhysicist on May 14, 2008 at 4:35 PM

That alone makes McCain worthy of election.

I understand the desire to resist change within the Republican Party

NuclearPhysicist on May 14, 2008 at 4:43 PM

I’m hardly resistant to change. I just don’t want the party to change into one that closer resembles McCain.

Thanks Entelechy. Nice to see you again.

My above “Ted Olsen’ comment was meant to respond to your previous comments on judge appointments by McCain. I simply forgot to address the comment to you. Sorry about that.

I understand the desire to resist change within the Republican Party, but devotion to this idea won’t get us anywhere. Things change within the American electorate and we need to learn how to adapt and work within the current system to find converts to conservative principles. We achieve nothing by standing on the side-lines and hoping for a conservative messiah. All this approach gets us is outsider status and irrelevance.

3. Some hope is far better than a certainty of far-left socialist policies, so I will take hope over absolute despair any day.

NuclearPhysicist on May 14, 2008 at 4:03 PM

I can’t argue with that. It would just be so much easier if elections could stop being a pick between the lesser of two evils.

I don’t and didn’t like everything about Bush, but at least when I voted for him, I was just voting against Al Gore (I didn’t vote in 2004, but the same would have been true there as well).

If I do end up voting for McCain, I won’t be proud of it.

And the worst part though, is that Republicans have seen the popularity of McCain and think that’s the direction they should be heading.

He [Rep. Tom Cole] then spoke of the need to “re-brand” the party in the likeness of McCain, which may be a tall order, since many rank-and-file conservatives have reviled McCain for years for his transgressions against party orthodoxy.

So it’s not just a choice of what’s best for the country. By supporting McCain, we could also be changing the GOP.