McCain: I’ll balance the budget by cleaning up entitlement programs
posted at 9:29 am on July 7, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | regular view
John McCain will send a message to fiscal conservatives this week: he’ll take on entitlement programs in his first term. Pledging to balance the budget in four years, McCain will cut waste and begin overhauling Social Security and Medicare, a bold vision that presents an opportunity and a risk for the Republican. George Bush saw his second term run aground on the shoals of Social Security reform:
McCain is making the pledge at the beginning of a week when both presidential candidates plan to devote their events to the economy, the top issue in poll after poll as voters struggle to keep their jobs and fill their gas tanks. …
McCain’s emphasis on balancing the budget is likely to excite conservatives, who have remained skeptical of his candidacy, and provoke derision from Democrats, who will argue that it’s a warmed-over version of proposals that President Bush failed to enact.
The Democrats shrug off McCain’s pledge as unrealistic. He has a $400 billion gap to close, as the CBO predicts that kind of deficit in 2013 under current budget plans. Can McCain possibly do that with a combination of entitlement reforms and surgical excision of waste? McCain believes he can, and points to the essential problem in a speech he will deliver this morning:
This Congress and this Administration have failed to meet their responsibilities to manage the government. Government has grown by 60 percent in the last eight years. That is simply inexcusable. When I’m president, I will order a stem to stern review of government, modernize how it does business and save billions of dollars. I will veto every single bill with wasteful spending. We aren’t going to continue mortgaging this country’s future for things Americans don’t want or need.
My opponent has a very different record on this issue. He has sought millions upon millions of dollars in earmarks since his election to the Senate. In 2007 alone, Senator Obama requested nearly $100 million for earmark projects. I have never asked for a single earmark in my entire career. He supported the $300 billion pork laden agricultural subsidy bill. I opposed it. He voted for an energy bill stuffed with give-aways to oil companies at a time of record profits. I voted against it.
We grew spending by over 35% from 2000, when we had a $2.0 trillion budget. Some of that went to the war effort, but plenty of it came in other discretionary spending. And, as McCain tells Politico, the real spending problem isn’t in discretionary programs but in entitlements. The explosion of spending threatens to overwhelm the federal budget over the next few decades, but already accounts for 58% of federal spending.
In real terms, we have increased entitlement spending by 759% over the last 43 years. In 2007 dollars, we spent $582 billion in 1965, and in 2007 that has transformed into a $2.5 trillion boondoggle. What’s worse, the rate of increase has speeded up. We have added more than a half-trillion dollars over the last five years. It took 43 years to add a half-trillion 2007 dollars to discretionary spending.
McCain at least puts entitlements on the table as a problem in the bloated federal budget. Barack Obama has only mentioned entitlements in terms of expanding them, adding new taxes as a way to redistribute capital through the federal government. A real agent of change would offer solutions rather than the hair of the dog.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 5 6 7 8 Next »
McCain will not be able to do any of this with a democrap entitled congress. Unkeepable campaign promises.
paulsur on July 7, 2008 at 10:19 PM
10:08 pm
Ubertards are big on hype, defamation and destruction, placing blame on everyone but themselves. They’ll deprive you of anything and everything with heightened hypocrisy as it is futile to try getting them to release a single right or privilege to match. They’ll keep their machine because it is theirs, even if they are not keeping up the maintenance so that it is forcing a problem.
Generally as a principle, a conservative conserves what he has, utilizes what he has, maintains what he has, keeping his machine running smoothly so as to be a productive member of society.
that’s all
maverick muse on July 7, 2008 at 10:20 PM
Sigh….
so any conservative who has problems with McCain on the ISSUES, who posts those problems, is now a Liberal? or at least just as bad?
Reason will persuade, name calling and attacks will just entrench us in our positions.
I notice that NO McCain supporter talks about the reasons we should SUPPORT him, but just the reasons we have to vote AGAINST Obama. In this very thread numerous posts have brought up problems with his stance on economics, and the problems we have with his outlook, votes, and lack of leadership when a senior member of the Senate on this exact issue…
But the only responce we get is Obama is the Debil, and we are Liberals if we don’t support the Non Conservative McCain.
Explain to me, just how do you expect that to convince me to go against my beliefs and vote for him?
Romeo13 on July 7, 2008 at 10:21 PM
Here’s the link to Forbes on Cap and Trade
Here ya go Rush Baby:
1 Jigger Light Rum
1 Jigger Dark Rum
1 Jigger Creme de Banana
3 Jiggers Coconut Milk
2 Jiggers Coconut Creme
5 Jiggers Pineapple Juice
1 Pony Marachino Cherry Juice
1 Pony Corn Syrup
1 Dash Vanilla, Coconut, Banana extract
Combine all above in blender, pulse 10-20 times until mixed well.
Add 2 Jiggers Whole Cream (liquid whipping cream). Pulse about 5 times.
Check taste. You can pour over ice, or crush ice beforehand, whatever floats your boat. Add fresh pinapple/cherry as garnish if desired.
Makes a little over two Daquiri size glass servings.
Cheers!
As to moose nuggets, you’ll have to ask upinak
catmman on July 7, 2008 at 10:29 PM
Wow. You really have a self control problem. You know, stomping your little feet will not win people over to your position. Maybe screaming at people works in Alaska, but in the contiguous 48 it doesn’t persuade.
Try this book for starters.
And then anger management.
fossten on July 7, 2008 at 10:39 PM
I know many will think this pronouncement by McCain to be nothing more than campaign rhetoric. The thing about McCain, though, is his rhetoric usually matches where he will really take the fight. If anyone would be able to get something through the congress even half as ambitious as McCain’s goal, it will be more than most any other president could do.
BryanS on July 7, 2008 at 10:41 PM
Oh and you complaining about this and that is going to solve anything?
Give me a break.
As for you, and stomping my feet. I wouldn’t mind putting a foot up your …. well I will leave you with the visual effects since you seem to have such a non vivid personality.
I am not sure how the hell it is my freaking fault that McCain is where he is now. But I am not going to say screw it I am not voting just because he is now the option! That is just wrong and honestly very ignorant in my opinion.
If you would like to be ignorant, that is fine and dandy. But don’t start screaming when Obama takes over.
upinak on July 7, 2008 at 10:53 PM
upinak on July 7, 2008 at 10:53 PM
I would agree with you on that last point, except its in the rather bizarre nature of McCain to screw up a wet dream, and he will certainly do that time and again over the next four months.
In addition, I sincerely doubt his sanity.
If McCain does win against the empty suit that will oppose him, it will not be because of McCain, and there will still be longterm damage to the Republican Party.
That hideous paradox – a win as a road to longterm minority status – is, in my experience, unprecedented, and underscores the entire debacle of a McCain candidacy.
TexasJew on July 7, 2008 at 11:18 PM
Well, you certainly don’t disappoint in the entertainment department. You want to physically attack me over a political difference? That is truly sad.
And I’ve already begun to prepare for an Obama presidency, but ironically my preparation would be exactly the same for a McCain presidency, so your continued fearmongering leaves me cold.
You keep saying over and over again that I only have one option, that I must vote McCain, that I must play the hand that I’ve been dealt, etc. etc.
What this means to me is that my vote does not count.
Good luck in anger management class, I think I’m finished talking to you as I don’t want to see you collapse in an apoplectic fit.
fossten on July 7, 2008 at 11:22 PM
that’s all
Branch Rickey on July 7, 2008 at 11:25 PM
Didn’t you get the new meme: “McCain or die!”
ahahahaha
Nighty Nite
Branch Rickey on July 7, 2008 at 11:32 PM
If you fell like one less scoop of $hit in your milkshake ………. Vote McCain
MB4 on July 7, 2008 at 11:39 PM
I don’t know Gilda but I do know comedy when I read it and it does exist in the HA comments here. The retards who hate McCain so much are in for a long, long period of banging their heads against a brick wall.
carbon_footprint on July 7, 2008 at 11:48 PM
Michelle has posted an article about McCain going to Mexico to campaign at the Baslica de Guadalupe. Seem like he is intentionally trying to alienate his base. That was the last straw for me.
Johan Klaus on July 7, 2008 at 11:48 PM
I’ll play catch up on all of these posts and perhaps find that someone else made the point.
A substitute talk-radio host for Jim Quinn this morning noted that McCain claims that he does not know how to use a computer. If this is true, McCain needs to come up to speed regarding more informed opinion on economic issues, especially as applied to his cap and trade schemes energy independence, and the cost of fast-tracking illegals to citizenship.
If McCain is going to add Social Security reform to his package, he had better have well-produced ads to counter the scare tactics that AARP will promote to frighten senior citizens and also to provide an optimistic message to young people to invest in their own retirements through alternative plans. A fact-filled message can be done creatively. Otherwise, the Dems will clobber McCain with emotional, half-baked propaganda.
onlineanalyst on July 7, 2008 at 11:51 PM
This is great now he just needs to back down from comprehensive immigration reform and global warming regulation and I can vote for him. Cutting the budget is a fantastic idea if it is followed by income tax cuts not increased energy taxes (global warming regulation).
Poptech on July 7, 2008 at 11:54 PM
Disagreeing on policy does not equate to hate.
Johan Klaus on July 7, 2008 at 11:56 PM
I didn’t see that one yet. A friend of mine asked me the other day where McCain was. I wisecracked ‘He’s in Mexico trying to get shore up his base.’ I was just being snarky. Right again and I didn’t even know it.
Now people who won’t vote for McCain are retards? Got news for you jerkweed: I’m already over this election. America loses if either of these two lumps get into office. I’m not banging my head into anything except a beer mug. What I’m going to enjoy for the next 4 years is watching lever pulling loyalist chimps like you make excuses every time McCain screws you. But keep shaking those pom poms anyway girlfriend. Your weary sophisticate schtick might actually work to sway someone to vote for McCain. No, really.
austinnelly on July 8, 2008 at 12:03 AM
When Democrats say “balanced budget” it really means “no money for stuff you really want because we’re spending it on other stuff“.
What does McCain really mean?
landlines on July 8, 2008 at 12:27 AM
That sort of thinking got us 8 years of Clinton and 3,000 dead Americans at the WTC.
Mojave Mark on July 8, 2008 at 12:53 AM
Show me the citation or quote from Tickell…you won’t, so please, be more honest in your postings.
\
Don’t tell me, you rode the pine of the debate team.
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 1:12 AM
You won’t go against your beliefs…those beliefs are that if you give the election to the Dems, in four years you will win it back.
No one can argue against an idea so stupid…show me where, anywhere in the history of politics that strategy.
Live with your idea, you would never accept an alternative, being rationale and analyzing the effect of yours, and the others that think the same, is beyond you.
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 1:16 AM
And because you see no difference in Barack, that is you see his military position the same, his tax increases the same, his no drilling policy the same, that makes you a great analyst. Not to be able to discern the difference? You and a few others are unique that way, can’t quite see there is a difference.
No, you won’t vote for McCain, if fact you probably wouldn’t vote for any Republican, I mean they are all the same to you, right?
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 1:22 AM
I’m surprised that you ever even heard of a debate team.
But we’ve had some sort of breakthrough here today. Now we know that you’re a gorebal warming true believer. What other parts of the left-wing bible do you subscribe to?
You speak in incomplete sentences, paleface.
What exactly is your hard-on for McCain anyway? At the start of this thread you were saying that he’s a super-duper fiscal-con trooper. That has been exploded and it seems you were just using that issue, which you yourself neither knew nor cared anything about, to try to dupe others into supporting him. You never even put up any resistance as that position was shot to pieces here.
Why not drop all the fun and games and tell us why you support McCain? What are your reasons? Not what you think will sway us, just what motivates you.
It may not be any more successful at convincing people to see things your way, but it cannot be any less successful.
flenser on July 8, 2008 at 1:39 AM
What sort of quote or citaton would do? He’s a non-scientist who’s obsessed with this global warming nonsense. Like all such people he’s also a believer in left-wing politics, and the UN in particular.
But here’s a quote for you if you insist.
Can you believe that wicked United States?
flenser on July 8, 2008 at 1:48 AM
and you keep proving us right. you mccain people will not debate in good faith. someones post reasonably and articulately asking for you to explain why they should vote for mccain and you belittle them. thats what they do on DKOs and DU. but its no surprise mccain supporters use those tactics.
john mccain, endorsed by the nytimes!
chasdal on July 8, 2008 at 2:28 AM
Indeed. And the laughs just keep on coming. It’s as hilarious as it is endless. This comment thread would more accurately be titled “Why Ron Paul Lost: The Self-Beclowning Chronicles.”
I respect and understand principled, rational opposition to McCain. But little to none is in evidence here amongst the True Conservative™ tantrumists, despite (or because of) their voluminous postings and deliberately disingenuous manipulations of the words of those who would dare confront them.
But hey, they freely chose their own marginalized irrelevance so I’m quite amused to encourage them to publicly reinforce that decision. For the sake of comedy, dontcha know.
Heeheehee! The trollbait, they fall for it. Every. Single. Time.
QED.
Gilda on July 8, 2008 at 2:40 AM
Gosh Terrye. It’s an incredible coincidence, but once again, you forgot to mention that the Democrat ran to Hostettler’s right on immigration.
misterpeasea on July 8, 2008 at 2:50 AM
Sigh, as usual you project your own opinions onto others beliefs and actions.
I will not support McCain because to support him give vindication to HIS actions and beliefs.
He has not earned my vote, and all of your OPINION that there is NO OTHER CHOICE does not make it so.
The ONLY way American politics will change is when the entrenched Politicians and media figure out that they need the support of people like me… that they will need to WIN my vote, not just be a little bit better than the other guy with the entrenched voting demographics.
The two party system is NOT enshrined in the Constitution… it is a fabricated power structure brought about by those two partys. They have even made laws that make it harder for other partys to run candidates, which them getting a pass to those laws. They have gerrymandered congressional districts to perpetuate their own power…
And you want me to support a candidate who THEY chose, who does NOT support what I believe…
Sorry… its not my fault if McCain looses, its his, and the party who chose him.
Romeo13 on July 8, 2008 at 3:13 AM
Juan McDumptey said F-you to those who wanted a wall
Juan McDumptey will have a great fall
All of Juan’s blind followers and all of Juan’s coolaid men
Won’t be able to put Juan McDumptey together again
MB4 on July 8, 2008 at 3:34 AM
Why thank you! I do agree.
Awww, now that’s just limp. Flaccid, if you will. And you had been doing so sorta-kinda well previously. Let’s recap your, uhh, performance so far:
1. Beclowning yourself
2. Whiny victimhood
3. Running to Mommy
At this point you had accomplished the rare über-embarrassing Trifecta, but was that enough for you? Nooo, you had to make this last remark which permanently revealed you as a:
4. Sore Loser
What’s the 4-version of the Trifecta? Quadfecta? No that’s not it… Wait, I got it! Quadtarded.
You’ve achieved Quadtardardation. Congratulations! Have we witnessed a world record, perhaps?
Golfclap!
Gilda on July 8, 2008 at 3:43 AM
With this coming down the pike at them can you blame either party for trying to lose this election?
{^_-}
herself on July 8, 2008 at 5:20 AM
McCain’s words sound good…I want to believe them. However, years of hearing ‘conservatives’ say these things and turn around and drop a few hundred billion on utter bullcrap has informed me to expect otherwise.
Whoever is able to actually curb these earmarks and entitlements will be the proud owner of a bronze statue I will make in their honor.
Methinks I won’t be in the market for bronze anytime soon though.
MannyT-vA on July 8, 2008 at 6:38 AM
I like reading your stuff.
JiangxiDad on July 8, 2008 at 7:28 AM
I haven’t read all 7 pages of comments on here but since I have a big ego I’ll comment anyway.
I’m voting for McCain because he’s not Obama. I feel good about saying that. My vote does matter but only if I use it wisely.
I’m voting for McCain because he’s right on the war on terror.
I’m voting for McCain because I believe I will have a better chance of influencing his actions on the economy, immigration, judicial nominations, abortion etc. etc……
If I write in Fred and Obama wins will I sleep better? No! If I vote for McCain and Obama wins will I sleep better? No, but I’ll know that I made the best effort to keep him out of office.
Yes, the major reason I am voting for McCain is because he’s not Obama and I feel good about that.
Vince on July 8, 2008 at 7:30 AM
You don’t understand, we know exactly where you are coming from.
You want the perfect candidate, and he doesn’t exist. You (the generic you), would rather lose (as you stated, and you attacked me for stating the same) then to negotiate your terms. You probably won’t ever vote for a president again because you have created a make-believe candidate, a Cinderella candidate, and every election you will be holding a glass slipper.
No, the far left have the same people, so it is a wash, only they have Nadar. Well you have Barr or whomever as a back-up. Maybe you can resurrect Perot, they helped last insured Clinton. (interesting you used the words “and the party who chose him”, obviously you are not a Republican)
No my posts to you (generic you) isn’t to change your position, you won’t, I have seen and listen to too many radicals (and they never see themselves as radicals, but always “leading the charge”), I respond to you to expose your weak arguments, so others say “I don’t want to be one that helps the Democrats retain power”…you on the other hand, are taking action so that happens.
And when several liberal supreme court justices are selected, your taxes skyrocket, gas is ever more expensive, our military budget cut, you will be the one “leading the charge”, squealing at how unfair 8 years of Obama is. (perhaps you think Obama will win, and you can’t bear to support a loser, typical whiner response so it may fit) How you, a person that owns a keyboard, knows what is best, is amazing.
Well, a leader can’t take charge from the back of the pack…so please, stay back, out of the way of the leaders.
You will have plenty of time to say “Well if they only would have listened to me”, the rest of us will be too exhausted from the battle to listen to your whining.
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 7:46 AM
Better read that post again, I stated several reasons, and if you notice I was responding to someone who had belittled me.
My, my, aren’t we the great debater…read the post and take notes,then respond.
Here is what you call reasonable and articulate:
You have a different standard then me…
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 7:54 AM
Good points in your entire comment, onlineanalyst.
McCain doesn’t know how to use a computer? Good lord, REALLY?! I’m not surprised that’s he’s technologically handicapped, I’m just surprised he admitted it out loud. That and the fact that he claims he doesn’t understand economics! Is he trying to paint himself as a doddering old fool, or can he just not help himself? Doesn’t he have handlers to protect him from himself?
Redhead Infidel on July 8, 2008 at 7:56 AM
Listen if you want to be an honest poster.
Answer my question…
Where is the article or citation from Tickell?
You stated the above, now show me where I quoted Tickell…or please apologize for misrepresenting. This is always fun, because this is where we find out the character of someone who posts.
Do they eat crow and apologize, or blow the person off and pretend they were correct…let’s wait and see what tactic fenser takes, he knows I didn’t cite or post anything about Tickell (I just mentioned his name).
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 8:00 AM
Well here is an interesting post full of lies and innuendos. Let’s see what other lies flenser is up to, seeing as he has already lied about me citing a liberal global warming idiot.
This is how he dodges a question:
Looks like he couldn’t find an example of a political strategy of losing an election so they could win in it next time. I still can’t believe someone could argue that.
Well what have we here:
Where did you get such a lie…point out where you think I am a global warming believer, oh because I read a book and some papers from global warming nuts? Well I have news for you, you need to read the opposition to know their arguments. Lindzen is one of my true heroes, honored to be at one of his lectures years ago before this warming junk.
Here is a gem:
I stated my support for him, he is our candidate, better on judicial appointments, security, taxes, earmarks, spending. Those are in his voting record and no one has come up with any tax he has voted on (besides the cigarette tax that I stated) The problem I have had is your lying. Just in this one page of posts, you said I was a global warming believer, I cited a liberal nut, that I never told reasons of support for McCain, that I was a liberal, that I showed no resistance, that I was trying to “dupe” others. How do you dupe, when your posts are read by hundreds in an open thread? What do you do, squirt lemon on your computer screen to see secret wrtitings?
You have now passed from interesting and unusual to an outright liar.
Your jumping to conclusions can’t be ignorance. When someone mentions they read a liberal paper, you have two choices…you can call him a liberal for reading that (which would be dishonest), or understand that he reads a lot (but then that means you have to give credit)…okay, your choice is to not tell the truth.
Show me, in the past three years of posting on this blog, that I am any where close to being a liberal…if not, please be a man and apologize for your very disturbing lies.
Before you start spreading lies about someone, you should do a little research. That is what the archives are for…but now I am dealing with a stupid liar…great, this will go nowhere fast.
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 8:29 AM
Nicely stated.
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 8:31 AM
He never claimed that you quoted Tickell. He said you cited Tickell.
Here’s the quote.
You can say you didn’t cite Tickell, but you’d be misrepresenting.
OOPS.
fossten on July 8, 2008 at 8:47 AM
Well, as long as everyone feels good about it, nothing else matters. Truth and logic be damned.
fossten on July 8, 2008 at 8:51 AM
Heh.
Redhead Infidel on July 8, 2008 at 9:06 AM
Okay, now I have to straighten you out, I don’t think you are lying, just pretty stupid for getting involved with something you know nothing about.
See where he talked about VoMagic for quoting somebody on the left, and then he accused me of the same?
If he was not accusing me of quoting and just citing, why mention it? You know, Ed at the top of this blog mentioned Obama, is he now an Obama supporter?
So you are saying using a name in a sentence is the same as quoting them? You make no sense.
He was comparing my mention of Tickell (among several other names) to an actual quote that someone else stated.
Either he was lying, or stupid…you say he wasn’t lying, then he was stupid for drawing a conclusion that a list of names (on both sides of the issue), and choosing one at random is the same as quoting them and believing them (why not choose Ball or Lindzen). Notice out of that, he became convinced I was a global warming believer
….because a list of people that I had read (not stating I believed or that I qouted or that I cited) contained a name that is tied to the global warming nuts, ignoring Ball and Lindzen.
So now I am a global warming advocate, Ed is an Obama supporter, and Michelle Malkin is a democrat (she “cited” democrat sources), boy you really stepped in it.
Now do you get it? I didn’t think so.
That is why you are who you are…now mind your own business, you have embarrassed the man you are trying to defend and you have severely embarrassed yourself.
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 9:21 AM
Well I just explained your truth and logic, a list of names is the same as quoting and adhering to the beliefs of one name on that list.
Yeah, it makes me feel better that you are not lined up with the Republicans supporting McCain.
It does make me feel good that someone with your “truth and logic” is not on the same side of the issue as most of us.
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 9:26 AM
Oh, I see. I guess we just didn’t get the nuance. Maybe you should look in the mirror and see who’s embarrassing himself over small semantical issues.
By the way, you’re one of the worst name callers on this forum. And that’s saying something. Internet bravado is awfully pathetic. Even if you had a decent argument to make, it’s completely undercut by your gratuituous and excessive use of the word “stupid” directed at others. You’re no better than the dkos types.
Grow up.
fossten on July 8, 2008 at 9:26 AM
Well, you just proved that you’re a liar. You’ve done nothing but whine and moan for 7 pages about how we “McCain haters” need to just suck it up and vote for him, and now you’re saying you’re glad I’m not on your side? Hmm, maybe you’re bipolar. Keep up the good work, I now know to ignore your posts, as you’re only either divisive or confused.
fossten on July 8, 2008 at 9:30 AM
Thanks for the Colada recipe. Big time!
RushBaby on July 8, 2008 at 9:59 AM
Gee, such vitriol, so when someone calls me a name, I can’t respond.
I seldom if ever start out my posts with name calling, however I reserve the right to use that tactic when it is used against me.
You seem to keep making accusations, but never come up with an example.
I am not the one who claimed that a list of names (of people I have read) is the same as quoting them and believing them. That is your position and the other guys.
So tell me about this
Could you explain this?
BTW, I have the right to change my mind about a poster, after they have issued a few lies, why would I now care to have them on my side. What a strange ideal you have, you think you can attack and lie, and the other person will just go along with you.
Well we have finished that, let’s get back to the thread.
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 10:32 AM
McCain has shown with over 20+ years in the Senate that he is a cost cutter, his votes have been against tax increases, entitlements, earmarks.
One of the truly frustrating things about McCain is that his record is so clean on earmarks, that the anti-McCain have a hard time attacking. Because if they were honest, any man they are supporting has a much worse record.
Fred? Worse
Huck? Worse
Paul? the Martian economy is in total collapse because of him
Romney? hardly, his tax (fees he called them) was rampant in Mass.
Yet they attack McCain for being the best? How do you figure.
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 10:37 AM
So 9-11 was the fault of conservatives?
Johan Klaus on July 8, 2008 at 10:43 AM
yeah right2bdumb is crazed.
right4life on July 8, 2008 at 10:47 AM
I have not seen that word used so much since I lived in Germany.
Johan Klaus on July 8, 2008 at 10:47 AM
The name calling really adds to the debate.
Johan Klaus on July 8, 2008 at 10:49 AM
To quote the Mafia; it’s not personal, it’s just business.
Johan Klaus on July 8, 2008 at 10:50 AM
Here let me try one more time, and try to take you guys off the name calling and focus:
McCain has shown with over 20+ years in the Senate that he is a cost cutter, his votes have been against tax increases, entitlements, earmarks.
One of the truly frustrating things about McCain is that his record is so clean on earmarks, that the anti-McCain have a hard time attacking. Because if they were honest, any man they are supporting has a much worse record.
Fred? Worse
Huck? Worse
Paul? the Martian economy is in total collapse because of him
Romney? hardly, his tax (fees he called them) was rampant in Mass.
Yet they attack McCain for being the best? How do you figure.
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 11:12 AM
17 posts over 15 hours. And not a single post, not a single sentence, about the topic of the thread.
Amazing.
misterpeasea on July 8, 2008 at 11:21 AM
You’re back to this nonsense again, in spite of the fact that it was throughly debunked on this thread. I asked you to list all the conservative and fiscally conservative bills that John McCain sponsored in his 20+ years in the Senate. No response.
I pointed out that his Club for Growth scores placed him below Trent Lott. No response.
I listed several bills which he did introduce in Congress, bills which were pork for Indian tribes. No response.
You were asked to explain how your so-called cost cutter could support things like the global warming bill, which come with an immense price tag. No response.
Instead you simply repeat your pre-programmed talking points. Are you a paid staffer for the McCain campaign?
flenser on July 8, 2008 at 12:00 PM
You got called out for calling everybody who opposes McCain “MDSers” and your response to that was to get over it, you were being misunderstood because your name calling is affectionate. Like when you call people stupid. I guess we just didn’t get the nuance of your sophisticated name calling.
That’s one example. I will dig up several more later, I’m at work now.
fossten on July 8, 2008 at 12:19 PM
I did, so presumably you’ll be apologising now.
I was nice enough to quote Tickwell for you. And you were the one who cited him, remember?
I said that you cited him, not quoted him. Now please apologize for misrepresenting.
BTW, what’s your native language?
I did not “accuse” you of “quoting” anyone. You attacked another poster for daring to to quote approvingly from a lefty. I noted that you yourself cited a lefty approvingly.
Other commenters on this thread are attacking the global warming nonsense. You are not, in fact you are defending it.
Are you? Where exactly do you stand on it, politically speaking? Do you support or oppose McCains position on it?
I said you cited a lefty, and you did.
No, I said that the reasons you offered were not the reasons you believed in. I don’t believe for a second that you know or care anything about earmarks, or about fiscal conservatism in general.
You are a liberal.
The idea that McCain is fiscal conservative has been completely debunked here. And you offered no resistence, most likely because you know little and care less about the topic. I have yet to see any remark from you that suggests you know anything about the matter other than what you picked up from Team McCain.
You are the one pretending to be gung ho about earmarks when it’s obvious that you don’t know earmarks from earwigs.
flenser on July 8, 2008 at 12:21 PM
Ha! I’ll spell it out for you, since 17 posts over 15 hours have evidently not been enough:
You came into this thread (like you do in all threads), all insult-hurling towards McCain supporters and belligerent and puff-chested, demanding! answers! to questions you’ve admittedly repeatedly cut & pasted “ad nauseam” here and elsewhere.
This is your (transparently dishonest) secondary agenda. You are not interested in discussion of issues, or the opinions of others. Oh no. Your mind is made up, and your purpose is not the exchange of ideas.
Your real intent, your primary agenda, is to dominate the discussion so that you can once again repeat your tired old talking points, hopefully at the expense of others. Your real purpose is to make everything all about you. In other words, you are not here to discuss, you are here to self-aggrandize and bully.
Instead of falling for your fake secondary agenda, I chose to give you exactly what you asked for by emphasizing your primary one: you. And like all bullies, you quickly resorted to sniveling whining in the face of the slightest challenge.
It was extremely funny to watch though. Once again, do keep up the good work!
Gilda on July 8, 2008 at 12:34 PM
Actually I had a huge response to your lies…but then I realize they have all been covered…you know what you posted and now you are trying to parse your way out. Cited, quoted, a list of names, and choosing one name to say I am a lefty, saying I support Global Warming and no proof…
Good bye my little lying friend. I will let you live in your dream world.
A real man would have apologized…I called it right when I said you wouldn’t.
Here I will leave you with your parting shot, this is the best you can do:
Poetry…
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 12:59 PM
For the record, I don’t think you’re a lefty. I think that’s a weak assertion to make. I do, however, think you undermine your own credibility through name calling. That’s beyond dispute. And you don’t do it only in response either, although that claim is the pinnacle of childishness, i.e. “He called me a name first! Waaaah!”
fossten on July 8, 2008 at 1:04 PM
Everyone, please.
I would like to think that civility could be something that separates this board from so many liberal ones.
Now, just to tick all of you off, heh-heh: your arguments are pointless.
McCain is moot. Only the economy will matter by November. IndyMac is going down now, the first bank of many. Fair or not, Bush and his staff don’t have chairs and the music is stopping. When the economy tanks, the presidency changes hands. Maybe not fair, but that’s politics for ya.
I will still vote Republican this fall as an exercise in optimism and hope. Maybe hell will freeze over.
olddeadmeat on July 8, 2008 at 1:37 PM
IF Senor Juan McVain (devotee of La Raza and Ted Kennedy) gets elected and when he screws the USA royally on the non-tax tax of the hoax of “global warming / cooling /climate change” disguised to have you give up your liberty and freedom, will you and ‘not2bright’ still feel good?
Just a query.
Branch Rickey on July 8, 2008 at 1:56 PM
No, I won’t…but with Obama it is a given.
If given a choice of staying on an island with no food or water and a guarantee of dying…or swimming to shore with a 50% chance of living, I go swimming. Other words when faced with two possibilities, I choose the ones that will give me the best odds of surviving.
And I am not a one issue kind of guy, I detest the open borders, but I fear liberal supreme court even more, higher taxes, and no energy…it is not a choice between two evils, it is a decision of what is best with the options.
So with the winning runner on 2nd or 3rd, and two outs, do you walk or pitch…well you know it depends on the hitter and the pitcher. One time you may walk,the other you may pitch.
I am taking my chances with McCain, because I don’t want to load the bases with Democrats. With the House, Senate, Obama in the executive, then the Judicial is the grand slam.
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 2:33 PM
no, not nicely stated. its pathetic that the reason you have is “he’s better than the other guy”. you will be wasting your vote. if you vote for the guy who wins are you gonna jump and high five your buddies like you accomplished something? all you will have done is reinforce to the national party that liberal policies are okay w/ the electorate. make no mistake about it, mccain is a liberal.
chasdal on July 8, 2008 at 2:44 PM
You’re not any sort of guy, are you?
I posted that you cited a lefty. And you did. No parsing is needed.
No, it’s reading all the comments you make here over a period of months. I have yet to see you make a genuinely conservative comment, but I have seen you repeating left-wing talking points, for instance about the GOP’s “racist history”.
You’re a lefty supporting the GOP because of 9/11. Nothing wrong with that, but stop pretending you can lecture us on conservatism.
flenser on July 8, 2008 at 2:46 PM
Yes, I’ve noticed the way you go on about that. Every thread is filled with you voicing your detestation for open borders.
flenser on July 8, 2008 at 2:48 PM
18 posts. Not a single sentence on the thread topic.
misterpeasea on July 8, 2008 at 3:02 PM
You really step in it, don’t you?
The GOP’s racist history? Where do you get that stuff, do you read one sentence (like one name on the list).
When you accuse, then post what you are referring to. And if think I am a liberal, then you haven’t read what I have posted, what a dunce.
Now post the “Gop’s racist history”, start with the post where I credit Eisenhower with being the first with civil rights movement, and he is the one that sent the armed guards to force integration, then move onto the post where I stated the civil rights was passed because of conservatives, post where I said for 150 the Republicans had the blacks back, post where Reagan created more job opportunities for blacks and the number of independent black company owners grew at the highest rate, now move to Bush who under him Blacks with a degree earned the equal to whites, and black married couple exceeded the average pay of whites, and then don’t forget the post where in the 50’s the dems promised the blacks if they supported the dems, they would move them up in the ranks of the unions, but they never did, just a couple as their “union house ni**ers”, after you find those posts, you might move onto the posts where I skewered the libs for creating a school system designed to enslave. Every major school district in the U.S. has been controlled by the libs for over 35 years, that is 3 generations of k-12, and each year it has gotten worse…and the blacks suffer the most. Yet with all that, we (conservatives) make a few years of gaffs, during a tumultuous time, and we allowed the libs to snare the minorities with the “great society”, where it destroyed one of the great cultures and families. Blacks families that had a lower rate of divorce, single parents, then the whites…and the liberals destroyed that institution. So after you post that, you can post where I am the supporting the “GOP racist history”…once again you have proved you are a tool and a fool.
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 3:34 PM
As a matter of fact, I am proud that I feel I have a counter to Barack and his very liberal supporters.
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 3:39 PM
Please stop satirizing yourself. My sides may never recover from the amount laughter your twaddle posts create.
Branch Rickey on July 8, 2008 at 3:43 PM
You are like the Ode to Joy! You are a symphony of brilliance.
Keep on keeping on and I LOVE your posts!
Branch Rickey on July 8, 2008 at 3:47 PM
One more little addition, go into Google advanced search, use my moniker with the term liberal you will find 2,060 references.
Now look at yours, you have 167.
So out of those 2000 posts, find where I ever sided with the liberals.
Here is the first one that pops up:
Here is another random one:
And here is one that touches on you and your dealing with facts.
So looks like you have been “outed”.
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 3:53 PM
Does this qualify?
misterpeasea on July 8, 2008 at 3:54 PM
Listen you haven’t posted anything but little comments, you are a bomb thrower. (and they just don’t make sense,”satirizing yourself”, sheesh)
Why don’t you hop in and post something of substance rather then just little snide comments.
Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me…I fell for your “genuine” question and answered civily…you have set the tone with that garbage response.
So get off the sofa, stop watching ball games, put down the bon bons, and pick up a book…
You and flenser belong together…he doesn’t understand, and you can’t read…what a pair to draw to, couple of jokers.
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 4:01 PM
Qualify for what, that makes me a Gop racist? Tell me how did the GOP lose the black vote?…they had it for 150 years. But don’t mention the 60’s, you become a racist.
Now you tell me how the GOP lost the black vote…I will be waiting.
Looks like you overlooked that…
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 4:05 PM
It’s you saying the GOP has a racist history, isn’t it? In the past (i.e., “history”), they were so adamant about not giving rights to them (i.e., “racist”).
Well. I don’t think the GOP had the black vote for 150 years, because blacks haven’t had the vote for 150 years. The earliest they had it was 1865. Right? And they quit voting Republican in the ’30s. Right? So about 65-70 years at the most. Even if they voted Republican until the 60s, that would only be about 100 years.
Anyway. Blacks started voting Democrat during the Great Depression. When you claim they started voting Democrat during the 60s because of anything Republicans or conservatives did, you speak from ignorance.
misterpeasea on July 8, 2008 at 4:30 PM
The GOP was formed in 1854. If they had the black vote for 150 years they would mean that they lost it in 2004.
Is that what you are saying?
I told you this before, several times. The Dems took the majority of the black vote starting in the 1930’s with the New Deal. Jobs and money, that was the key then as it is now.
flenser on July 8, 2008 at 4:35 PM
You mean the GOP lost the black vote, are you a GOP racist?
Just using your line of reasoning.
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 4:57 PM
You made my day. I was trying to annoy you and you fell for it.
Don’t change. You are hilarious just the way you are.
p.s. small posts? like this:
So, show me where he voted to increase taxes: REPEAT, VOTING AGAINST A TAX DECREASE, AS MCVAIN DID B/C OF BRUISED FEELINGS, = A WORTHLESS POLITICIAN, show me the entitlements that he proposed, the earmarks: TRY HIS CAP AND TRADE HOAX…gee you can’t. I CAN!
Now show me where the evidence against McCain was in the Keating five?
Robert Bennet [THAT’S YOUR SOURCE? I REST MY CASE. PLUS, I FOLLOWED THE KEATING 5 IN THE 80s, extensively, AND IF THE LOWLIFE GLENN HAD NOT BEEN INVOLVED HEADS WOULD HAVE ROLLED] READ SOME HISTORY! was the special investigator hired by the senate sub-committee to investigate. He specifically recommended “no charges” against McCain because there was no evidence; hmmm, Bill Clinton’s attorney.
Amazingly in this country you need evidence to convict someone
{I must have missed McVain’s “conviction”}, something you obviously have not heard about.NOR HAVE YOU HEARD OF GRAMMAR. You SHOULD NOT END A SENTENCE WITH A PREPOSITION. Pretty basic stuff.
However, if you want to find “evidence” you can read the hit piece in the NYT in January of this year. You would love it. If YOU are dumb enough to read the NYT; I can’t help you.
right2bright on July 7, 2008 at 11:15 AM
Quit while you are behind in the argument department. Just a suggestion.
Branch Rickey on July 7, 2008 at 12:03 PM
Branch Rickey on July 8, 2008 at 5:00 PM
You can obfuscate and be incoherent all you like.
But do me a favor: don’t go around yammering about how the GOP lost the black vote in the 60s because they wanted to deny rights to blacks. There’s nothing correct about any of that.
misterpeasea on July 8, 2008 at 5:02 PM
why b/c McVain will tax me for the carbon footprint, right2bright (a.k.a. Lindsey Graham) hahahahahaha
Branch Rickey on July 8, 2008 at 5:06 PM
They began shifting in the late 20’s (when the courts began shifting to being more atuned to civil rights), and the shift continued into the 50’s (that was a 30 year shift, hardly a “movement”), even after Eisenhower nominated Chief Justice Warren (but it was probably 40/60 in the 1956’s). But it was Kennedy in the 60’s (Davies J-curve) that nailed the hammer in the coffin, the GOP allowed the Democrats to fully implement programs that, still, have kept the blacks in their ranks.
The great society, the great give aways that destroyed the black families, also bought their vote.
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 5:13 PM
Why do you guys keep doing this to yourself, don’t you have any pride?
Are you familiar with Davies J-Curve? Hurry and Google it, Kennedy began the process of slamming the door on the Republicans. We went from 40% of vote in 1956 to 8% in 1964, just 8 years, (1960 30%). So we went from 40% to 8% in about a decade, sounds like a trumping during the 60’s to me. But to you, insignificant…
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 5:22 PM
How many times…I never said deny rights, turned their backs yes, but not deny.
How do you figure moving from 40% of the vote to 8% in 10 8 years?
Sheesh…
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 5:24 PM
Glad I made your day, you pathetic creature…obviously not married.
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 5:26 PM
Oh, you’re right, totally different. /sarc
You’ve been outed.
fossten on July 8, 2008 at 5:37 PM
So it wasn’t the mean ole’ racist Republicans after all? it was the Dems buying their votes? Well, if you say so. You’re too clever for us.
flenser on July 8, 2008 at 6:25 PM
Hey guess what guys, have you ever watched a basketball game. They have defense and offense.
So when someone makes a layup, is it good offense or poor defense.
Think about it…
You see, the Dems made the move with the great society etc., the Republicans sat and watched. The Republicans could have made a move to defend, but they sat and watched. Now, what Republican do you think agrees with me?…of course you would have to call him a racist. But go ahead and take a stab at it…
was it:
Reagan
Sowell
both or neither
Are both of you so simple that you only see one side? That you can only analyze one action? Carry only one thought?
You are making this so easy, you guys are masochists, you love to be embarrassed.
2 against 1 and you can’t score…hahahahaha! I crack me up.
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 7:09 PM
I believe you’ve finally gone off the deep end into incoherency.
You are a legend in your own mind. Enjoy.
fossten on July 8, 2008 at 7:19 PM
Cmon, make a choice, us racists hate to be left alone, Reagan or Sowell or both or neither.
Cmon, please? Which one (if either) agrees with me…in fact maybe they are the ones who taught this to me?
Cmon, make my day…
or do you know that I am right, and you…gulp, made a mistake.
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 7:35 PM
Wait fossten, this is great…you have posted or at least googled on a post 306 times and 228 were about McCain…so what is your gig, a McCain poster also?
right2bright on July 8, 2008 at 7:37 PM
Somebody made a mistake.
misterpeasea on July 8, 2008 at 8:17 PM
A lot of people are not Obama. In fact all other people are not Obama. Hitler, Stalin, FDR, Carter, Clinton, etc.
jeffNWV on July 8, 2008 at 8:28 PM
Dude. I didn’t make the claim you’re saying I made. Go back and read the posts. You need to be addressing flenser. I don’t give a crap about your stupid question.
Again, you are addressing the wrong person. If you’re going to bait someone, at least get the right person. You’re not only mistaken, but incompetent.
fossten on July 8, 2008 at 8:44 PM
You remind one that life is stranger than fiction.
Very happily married to the sweetest man who happens to be brilliant, handsome and successful. Life is good.
Branch Rickey on July 9, 2008 at 3:16 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 5 6 7 8 Next »