Re: Small, unintrusive government in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r13720074 en Wed, 25 Nov 2009 07:46:59 EDT Wed, 25 Nov 2009 07:46:59 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13782406 LegoPower77 : I stand corrected. It was SC where he spoke out against Bob Jones and damned himself there. His subsequent attacks on Pat Roberts (irrespective of how we feel about him) in VA ensured his loss in a number of other southern primaries.
--
"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." —Ronald Reagan]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13782406 Thu, 30 Jun 2005 14:26:55 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13782031 tapeloop :
said by LegoPower77 See Profile:

Actually McCain's undoing in SC was his own. He spoke quite forcefully against Pat Roberts and the "Religious Right"... In South Carolina of all places, N.B.: That's why he lost.
(momentarily throws topic to one side)

Actually in was in your state of VA that McCain spoke out against against Robertson & Falwell.

Not only that, it would have been rather difficult for those comments to affect his SC numbers, since he made the speech on Feb. 28--nine days after the SC primary was held. :D

And it wasn't so much an attack as a declaration that the GOP shouldn't be turned over wholesale to the hardliners (which, no matter how you slice it, Pat Robertson is.):

I am a pro-life, pro-family, fiscal conservative, and advocate of a strong defense. And yet, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell and a few Washington leaders of the pro-life movement call me an unacceptable presidential candidate. They distort my pro-life positions and smear the reputations of my supporters. Why? Because I don't pander to them, because I don't ascribe to their failed philosophy that money is our message. I believe in the cause of conservative reform....The Republican Party will prevail because of our principles--because that's what it's about, my friends--principles, not special interest money or empire or ego.
...
Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance whether they be Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton on the left, or Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell on the right.
Of course, not pandering to the Christian right is a sure way to lose a nomination...which McCain proved. :huh:

But you'd be remiss to think that Rove's "whisper campaign" had no part in McCain's primary defeat in SC.

(picks topic up again, dusts it off, sits down to tea)
--
Copyright infringement is illegal. Murder is illegal. Therefore, file sharing is murder.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13782031 Thu, 30 Jun 2005 13:42:53 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13780741 LegoPower77 : Actually McCain's undoing in SC was his own. He spoke quite forcefully against Pat Roberts and the "Religious Right"... In South Carolina of all places, N.B.: That's why he lost.
--
"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." —Ronald Reagan]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13780741 Thu, 30 Jun 2005 10:45:24 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13728992 anon : I apologize for misunderstanding]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13728992 Thu, 23 Jun 2005 14:44:51 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13728784 JakCrow : Again, to clarify, I was refering to Sessions attempt to be "big government" man. Not McCain.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13728784 Thu, 23 Jun 2005 14:19:14 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13726253 scrummie02 : I think not..he's republican. Remember the Dems in his time were protesting and smoking dope, he was at the commie prison camp. I like McCain, he does what he thinks is right for the people and holds people accountable.

BOTH parties just want to get their own in office. The current administration plays on the religious right, the current dems play on anything that isn't Bush and republican conspiracy. Both parties lie, cheat and screw you over.

McCain has the ballocks to stand up to things he thinks are sh*t. Gotta respect that. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13726253 Thu, 23 Jun 2005 08:15:21 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13725580 t3freak : "Why is this -republican- getting the federal government involved in state and local issues that the fed has no business being in?"

Because any fed law stomps a state law. Like the medical pot excuse.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13725580 Thu, 23 Jun 2005 02:52:23 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13724335 gomer1701ems : Ferengi Rule of Acquisition Number #34:

"War is good for business."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13724335 Wed, 22 Jun 2005 23:01:01 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13722742 anon : To stave off bills like sessions, which was introduced in the US house of representatives.

There is lobbying going on at the federal level so the ilecs and cablecos don't have to fight this in every state, hence the necessity for a federal response. Thats the way this works. These companies fling shit in every direction and expect that something, somewhere, will stick.
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13722742 Wed, 22 Jun 2005 19:36:03 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13721861 tapeloop :
said by bogey780 See Profile:

McCain ever the populist is greasing the skids for a presidential run.

Well, he might as well kiss it goodbye. He stabbed enough party faithful in the back last month to ever win any national primary.

PS- I flirted with the idea of supporting McCain in 2000 and even signed on with his campaign to receive info.
You mean he WAS stabbed IN THE BACK by enough "party faithful" (the Rove wing of the GOP) during the 2000 primaries. SC ring a bell?

Must...stay...on...topic...:D]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13721861 Wed, 22 Jun 2005 17:33:59 EDT how many here own stock in comcast and sbc http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13721591 Eric Martin : I wonder how many astroturfers are posting on this website.

I see alot of stupid anti-muni comments.

REP. Sessions has a financial stake too. He might be posting antimuni comments here also.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13721591 Wed, 22 Jun 2005 16:58:22 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13721514 JakCrow : Well, the problem IS the party faithful.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13721514 Wed, 22 Jun 2005 16:49:41 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13721230 bogey780 : McCain ever the populist is greasing the skids for a presidential run.

Well, he might as well kiss it goodbye. He stabbed enough party faithful in the back last month to ever win any national primary.

PS- I flirted with the idea of supporting McCain in 2000 and even signed on with his campaign to receive info.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13721230 Wed, 22 Jun 2005 16:16:11 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13721058 anon : What we need now is the goverment to quit taking money from the RIAA/MPAA.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13721058 Wed, 22 Jun 2005 15:51:43 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13721043 anon : "Because Republicans are SUPPOSEDLY for smaller government. Don't act stupid."

I've heard this before, but everything I have seen, the Republicans are the ones that pass more laws giving Goverment all the more control.

Its also just like the Republicans calling the Democrats liberals. When everything I have seen, its the Republicans that are so "liberal" with all the money thrown around.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13721043 Wed, 22 Jun 2005 15:49:55 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720858 IT Guy : Didn't you know? War is good for the economy. :D]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720858 Wed, 22 Jun 2005 15:26:57 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720803 ronpin : They also promote for-profit wars -- when their kids don't have to fight.
--
When Clinton lied -- no one died.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720803 Wed, 22 Jun 2005 15:19:56 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720798 JakCrow : Yes. I've heard many "conservatives" say that of him. Though real conservatives don't make such silly claims.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720798 Wed, 22 Jun 2005 15:18:32 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720699 Glenn : Everyone knows McCain is a democrat in disguise. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720699 Wed, 22 Jun 2005 15:08:35 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720547 IT Guy : They promote smaller government when their party isn't the majority makeup of the government.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720547 Wed, 22 Jun 2005 14:48:37 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720498 BonezX : more business affiliation then party affiliation.

that and he should not be able to make anything that SBC is pushing.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720498 Wed, 22 Jun 2005 14:44:05 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720365 Primis1 : In case you missed the boat, it's a Republican (McCain) and a Dem (Lautenberg) taking up a side against a Republican (Sessions). Party affiliation is fairly irrelevant in this case it seems and it's other interests that are drawing the lines.

Also, I can't really believe you're at all surprised that McCain would be involved against something like this. Either that or you haven't followed politics at all in the past few years... McCain's still railing against the cableco's over ala carte' at last check. This is right in his wheelhouse.

And as for Sessions' involvement, it's well-documented why he's interested in his side...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720365 Wed, 22 Jun 2005 14:31:09 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720350 JakCrow :
said by broadbanderexpanderc:

Conflict of interest? Not for McCain. Conflict of interest YES for Sessions, the individual whose already trying to regulate broadband by BANNING local governments altogether from setting up their own broadband networks. Funny that an ex SBC employee whose wife owns more than $500,000 in stocks would do such a thing. McCain and Launtenberg are simply reacting to corrupt legislation, attemping to insure city's rights to set up their own utility infrastructure.
Yes. Conflict of interest on Session's part. I should have made the clearer.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720350 Wed, 22 Jun 2005 14:29:03 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720343 JakCrow :
said by Nerdtalker See Profile:

said by JakCrow See Profile:

This is a state and local level issue.
I understand that. You're saying that it's ironic that a republican (who would usually advocate for state rights) is getting involved with an issue that should only concern that state. You're insinuating that there's some hypocrisy here, right?
You are correct.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720343 Wed, 22 Jun 2005 14:27:44 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720237 ieolus : Because Republicans are SUPPOSEDLY for smaller government. Don't act stupid.
--
"Speak for yourself "Chadmaster" - lesopp]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720237 Wed, 22 Jun 2005 14:18:38 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720126 anon : Conflict of interest? Not for McCain. Conflict of interest YES for Sessions, the individual whose already trying to regulate broadband by BANNING local governments altogether from setting up their own broadband networks. Funny that an ex SBC employee whose wife owns more than $500,000 in stocks would do such a thing. McCain and Launtenberg are simply reacting to corrupt legislation, attemping to insure city's rights to set up their own utility infrastructure.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720126 Wed, 22 Jun 2005 14:06:40 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720074 Topmounter : Obviously it is not just a state / local issue right now.

Any law, whether it is for or against it makes it a national issue. It would be nice to see a law defining it as not a national issue.
--
"If PCs are hard, then Macs are flaccid" -bb]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720074 Wed, 22 Jun 2005 14:01:38 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720051 Nerdtalker :
said by JakCrow See Profile:

This is a state and local level issue.
I understand that. You're saying that it's ironic that a republican (who would usually advocate for state rights) is getting involved with an issue that should only concern that state. You're insinuating that there's some hypocrisy here, right?
--
"Some people never see the light till it shines thru bullet holes." -Bruce Cockburn

iPod Shuffle=iPos

I'm testing Gmail's spam filters: Broadbandreports1@gmail.com
Spam: 6200+]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720051 Wed, 22 Jun 2005 13:58:25 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720030 JakCrow : This is a state and local level issue. AND it looks like a nice conflict of interest too. Imagine that...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13720030 Wed, 22 Jun 2005 13:56:02 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13719987 Nerdtalker :
said by JakCrow See Profile:

Why is this -republican- getting the federal government involved in state and local issues that the fed has no business being in?
Why are you advocating against a bill that would stop another government official from passing a law banning every community from wiring itself for broadband?

Seems kind of backwards to argue against the government getting involved after they've already begun to.
--
"Some people never see the light till it shines thru bullet holes." -Bruce Cockburn

iPod Shuffle=iPos

I'm testing Gmail's spam filters: Broadbandreports1@gmail.com
Spam: 6200+]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13719987 Wed, 22 Jun 2005 13:51:53 EDT Re: Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13719977 Primis1 : Better question: What does party affiliation have to do with anything?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13719977 Wed, 22 Jun 2005 13:50:53 EDT Small, unintrusive government http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13719963 JakCrow : Why is this -republican- getting the federal government involved in state and local issues that the fed has no business being in?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,13719963 Wed, 22 Jun 2005 13:49:15 EDT