LegoPower77
Abecedarian
Premium
join:2002-08-03
Arlington, VA
| reply to tapeloop
Re: Small, unintrusive government
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 |
|
tapeloop
1959. I try to kick the ball. I miss.
Premium
join:2004-06-27
Airstrip One
|  reply to LegoPower77
said by 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. (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. 
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. 
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. |
|
LegoPower77
Abecedarian
Premium
join:2002-08-03
Arlington, VA
| reply to tapeloop
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 |
|
asdfdfdf
@xtraport.net | reply to JakCrow
I apologize for misunderstanding |
|
JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA | reply to JakCrow
Again, to clarify, I was refering to Sessions attempt to be "big government" man. Not McCain. |
|
scrummie02
Bentley
Premium
join:2004-04-16
Arlington, VA
| reply to Glenn
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. |
|
t3freak
join:2004-04-11
New Port Richey, FL | reply to JakCrow
"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. |
|
gomer1701ems
join:2001-08-23
Minneapolis, MN | reply to IT Guy
Ferengi Rule of Acquisition Number #34:
"War is good for business." |
|
asdfdfdf
@xtraport.net
| reply to JakCrow
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.
|
|
tapeloop
1959. I try to kick the ball. I miss.
Premium
join:2004-06-27
Airstrip One
| reply to bogey780
said by 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. 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 |
|
Eric Martin
join:2005-06-19
66308 | reply to JakCrow
how many here own stock in comcast and sbc
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. |
|
JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA | reply to bogey780
Re: Small, unintrusive government
Well, the problem IS the party faithful. |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here
| reply to JakCrow
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. |
|
anon7007
@rr.com | reply to JakCrow
What we need now is the goverment to quit taking money from the RIAA/MPAA. |
|
anon7007
@rr.com
 from:
ronpin
| reply to ieolus
"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. |
|
IT Guy
Ow, My Balls
Premium
join:2004-07-29
Las Cruces, NM
clubs: | reply to ronpin
Didn't you know? War is good for the economy. |
|
ronpin
Imagine Reality
join:2002-12-06
Nirvana | reply to IT Guy
They also promote for-profit wars -- when their kids don't have to fight.
--
When Clinton lied -- no one died. |
|
JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA | reply to Glenn
Yes. I've heard many "conservatives" say that of him. Though real conservatives don't make such silly claims. |
|
Glenn
I'D Rather Be Skiing
Premium
join:2000-10-05
Wallingford, CT | reply to JakCrow
Everyone knows McCain is a democrat in disguise. |
|
IT Guy
Ow, My Balls
Premium
join:2004-07-29
Las Cruces, NM
clubs: | reply to ieolus
They promote smaller government when their party isn't the majority makeup of the government. |
|
