A list of McCain's lies and flip flops, with citations.

Many, many more listed at Link

Some of you won't like the link. That doesn't make the list of lies and reversals any shorter.

__________________

Reading is Fundamental.

The Captain also has fibbed a bit regarding his support of veterans.

Vets to McCain: Back New GI BIll

All talk and no action or as they say about the current CIC, all hat no cattle.

Well, to his credit, McCain didn't need all those veterans' benefits once he ditched the old ball and chain and married his rich trophy wife. Maybe he just wanted to encourage other vets to follow his lead.

__________________

Reading is Fundamental.

Captain is collecting a little over $58,000 a year in veteran's benefits and another $20,000+ a year in social security benefits. He deserves every penny but if it weren't for Mrs. Captain's fortune he would likely be a bit less cavalier about increasing benefits for his fellow veterans. Too few heiresses, too many vets.

Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah......

Yes, I figured that would be the response. But can you disprove any of the allegations against McSame?

__________________

Reading is Fundamental.

Hey Kathy (my 'chum')

Sounds like gossiping over the fence. Wonder if they have curlers in their hair?

So stating facts sounds like gossiping to you, but quoting the Enquirer doesn't? Sheesh.

Well, I guess if you can't refute, you try to redirect.

__________________
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? " ~Epicurus

Sigh, loosen up those curlers. Gossiping is what one does when one posts a hurtful "rumor" for the express purpose of being able to say "Well, if it's true -- Shame on him!". Your chum then says: "If it's true it's totally disgusting." Mission accomplished, you've succeeded in spreading a particularly hurtful piece of information (based on fact or not) and shown all of us how upright and moral you are.

I'm by no means above being snarky and mean but I try very hard to keep hypocrisy to a minimum.

Hyprocrite:
IN BRIEF: A person who pretends to be good, pious or sympathetic without really being so.

As another poster asked, please do post any information you may have to refute the allegations about Senator McCain. Surely blah, blah, blah, isn't the best we can expect from you and/or chum is it?

I wonder what color hair trolls actually have?

What's the matter, all your mirrors broken?

That's the best you can do????? lol lol lol

No, but I thought appropriate response to a poster who thinks blah, blah, blah, blah, blah is clever --

If you ignore certain posters/do not respond to them, you take away their power. If the best response a person can give is "blah, blah, blah..." or "I have to keep my thoughts simple for you"; do you really think that they want to have a meaningful discussion?

By engaging these types of posters, you (the general you) allow them to be part of the conversation and bring in their negativity or spin.

Instead of "if you build it, they will come", try thinking "If I ignore them they will go away". It works for me.

This is directed at no one in particular...just an observation.

__________________
Mental that one, I'm telling you. ---Ron Weasley, "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets"

You're right, that was a tacky thing to say and I edited it. My apologies.

I'm confused by this. Do you mean Veteran's benefits should NOT be increased??

__________________
Doing the right thing isn't always the same as doing the easy thing.

No, I meant they should be increased. I used cavalier under its definition of "haughty disregard for others". Should the sentence have read "He deserves every penny but if it weren't for Mrs. Captain's fortune he would likely be a bit less cavalier about not increasing benefits for his fellow veterans."? Maybe shouldn't have used cavalier or maybe it's just an awkward sentence.

THe whole topic of this post, imho, is to bash McCain. The reason I posted blah, blah, blah is because it didn't look like a request for an unbiased discussion but an assault on McCain. If you are going to call him McLiar as the topic header do you really think we are all going to view this as a request for a mature discussion of issues and/or candidates??? I think not.
John McCain has a long history of working for our country. That produces a huge record. The Martin Luther King holdiay quote was from 1983-25 YEARS ago. Has your perspective on issues ever changed in the last 25 years???? I know mine have. Being against abortion but allowing it for cases of rape is not necessarily flip-flopping. Lots of people feel this way. Obama doesn't have decades of political experience to be able to come up with such a laundry list as McCains. And I know some of those topic lines are taken out of context.
Are there any of you out there who have not changed your mind on some topics, issues, etc... in the last 25 years??????
So if there are future topics with such headers as Captain McLiar you can expect anyother post similar to blah, blah, blah........

Yep, I can see by this entry that you seriously wanted to discuss the issues not make rude comments, etc..... By the way, since you KNOW so much maybe you can tell us all about his personal life behind closed doors.....so his first wife was a ball and chain huh?? Nice thing to say. And he's been married to his "trophy" wife for how long now???? Seems to be working to me. But obviously you have intimate details of his marriages. More power to ya!

After 25 years a position change is allowed.

It's when a position that was held six months ago suddenly changes once one is running for President that it's officially called a 'flip-flop.'

Ahhh yes, like Obama's been doing..........

I will say that both candidates are guilty of flip-flops during this campaign period.....as do the majority of candidates when they feel that they have to moderate or balance their previously held and expressed views to reach and capture those votes they need and want. Both are guilty of this..and will probably have more changes in their expressed views before this is all over. Sad, but true.

__________________
"Well-Behaved Women SELDOM make history."Laurel Thatcher Ulrich


"Yesterday is but a vision, and tomorrow is only a dream. But today well lived makes every yesterday a dream of happiness, and every tomorrow a dream of hope." Anonymous

"Your candle does not lose it's light by lighting another candle" Generosity

Have the courage to be yourself.

I agree. Politics is a nasty business. I bet there's not one candidate that hasn't flipped on something. The higher up the ladder you climb the more you have to loose. With all the speeches they give, the bills with pork, etc... mistakes will happen. Also, lots of time when it looks like someone has flip flopped on a bill you need to check exactly what the bill was and what other stuff was attached to it. What looks like flip flopping might not be when you look at all the variables. Things are taken out of context ALL THE TIME in politics.

Truer words have never been spoken......things are taken out of context all the time. Every politician has changed their stance at some time or another. I have changed my mind when presented with new facts and I want a president who is able to do so when presented with more information, a change in the way things actually are and is not afraid to say "Well, after much thought and consideration, I believe that the previous thoughts I had on this subject has changed and now I feel that blah blah blah. That is not flip flopping to me, it is common sense and human. The present PTB has never admitted a mistake and that inablity to look and listen has caused us to be in a world of hurt in this economy, the war in Iraq, the "War on Terror" just to name a few. The ability to say that your previous stance on a subject was incorrect or is not the way you believe now is an admirable quality and should not be considered a failiing. To not admit that what you thought previous was faulty and you could never be wrong is arrogance.

Those candidates who continue to grow in their views and vote accordingly should be commended instead of condemmed, And that goes for both parties.

On Sen McCain's previous womanizing, I find it interesting that when Bill Clinton did it, it was another example of the lack of morals that the Godless Democrats possessed, but when McCain is guilty by his own and others words, it is something from the past and shouldn't be used as a measure of his character.
I would rather debate the positions of the candidates rather than gossip and innuendo, anyway. I don't really care about who slept with who but who would I trust with something I love very much....my country. I believe that the person who is careful with those he loves and professes to love in his personal life will be careful and straightforward with things he professes to love in his public life.

__________________
GO NAVY WRESTLING!!BEAT ARMY!!!
RJB 3/18/60 - 5/22/04
We miss you, sweet brother
God Bless the USA!!!!! Praying for my Youngster son at United States Naval Academy, class of 2014!!

http://mylifeundertheabaya.blogspot.com/

I think the big thing with Clinton was that he did it while in office and lied about it. That's not the same as something that you owned up to in your past. Plus he has a lifetime history of womaninzing. Not an isolated incident. We know McCain loves his country whether or not he has cheated on his wife.

I think cavalier is what threw me.....too much on my mind to digest a complex sentence like that.....LOL.

__________________
Doing the right thing isn't always the same as doing the easy thing.

This is my sentiment as well.

__________________
Doing the right thing isn't always the same as doing the easy thing.

Yep, Clinton is a man-whore. And I am hard pressed to believe that Hillary didn't know all about it and accepted him for who he was (and where he could take her). Several Presidents have been womanizers in office--and no one really knew until after the fact or cared. Several Presidents (including the current) have lied or lied by omission, yet they were not held accountable for their lies.

It would be nice to hear people admit that the only reason was Clinton was held accountable was because SOME Republicans were out to get Clinton for personal reasons.

__________________
Mental that one, I'm telling you. ---Ron Weasley, "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets"

Just out of curiousity, if "we" agree to only refer to Senator McCain by his correct title can we expect that Senator Obama will not be referred to as "Muslim Obama", the Messiah, Hitler, etc.?

Some posters have said Senator McCain is more qualified because of his years of experience but if his political decisions can't be criticized is it fair to run on that record?

Like usnamom I agree that most politicians at one time or another have changed their minds on an issue -- perhaps because of new evidence on an issue or perhaps out of political expediency. IMO, a little investigating can tell most of us whether a change of mind was a honest decision of conscience or political expediency. Calling every change of mind a flip flop isn't fair to any of them.

[quote=ana21;3027198]Just out of curiousity, if "we" agree to only refer to Senator McCain by his correct title can we expect that Senator Obama will not be referred to as "Muslim Obama", the Messiah, Hitler, etc.?

Some posters have said Senator McCain is more qualified because of his years of experience but if his political decisions can't be criticized is it fair to run on that record?


Well I can't be held responsible for anyone calling Mr. OBama names. If people call him names and it upsets you why wouldn't you take the high road and NOT DO THE SAME thing to Senator McCain???
At least Senator McCain has a long, long record to look at. What do we really know about the new and relatively untested Obama????

Well, even if some Republicans were out to get him they can't get him if he didn't do anything!!! That's pretty much trying to toss the blame to someone else. Good for whoever outed Clinton! He's pretty smarmy. I also agree Hillary had to know he was a womanizer and looked the other way. I think part of it is that techology is so great these days that we know things we couldn't have possibly known during earlier presidential terms of office. That might be why prior presidential "naughties" weren't out there they way they are now. And do I want my Presdient getting oral sex from someone other than his wife in the White House? HELL NO!!!!

And why do you care if a President is engaging in oral sex, if his or her spouse doesn't? I mean really!!

No, I'm not shifting blame--but, I can pretty much guarantee that if someone makes it their life's goal to catch someone doing something wrong, they will! Bill was an idiot when it came to womanizing/sexual exploits! Really, he was! And I'm a fan of Bill and/or Hill!

Frankly, I don't care who was slobbering on Bill's knob, nor do I care that McCain shacked up w/ the "trophy" woman while legally still married to wife #1. Hillary knew, and McCain and wife #1 were pretty much through when he met the trophy....I want someone who can LEAD the country, and re-establish our credibility, and who doesn't tinkle off our allies, or get us into wars based on lies!

I don't think we, the average citizen, needs to know everything about everybody!

__________________
Mental that one, I'm telling you. ---Ron Weasley, "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets"

I've referred to him by his initials: B.O.

I'm entitled. Until I married, those were my initials, too.

[quote=kathytheshopper;3027451]No, you can't be responsible for what other people call Mr. Obama but you are frequently in the amen chorus when such name calling or accusations are made. Why should Senator Obama's supporters give a flying flip if Senator McCain's supporters are offended after what's been said about our candidate and his supporters. The "high road" is a two way street and judging by your response to my question you're not planning on taking it

You're right, Senator McCain has a very long record to examine. Apparently though, judging by your posts, it's not fair to look too far back at that record. Can you give us a timeframe where you think it would be okay to examine his record -- would that be 10 years, 4 years, 2 years, 6 months ago, last week, yesterday?

As to your last question "What do we really know about the new and relatively untested Obama???" I'll take Senator Obama's time in the Senate and match it to the exact same time period for Senator McCain on just one issue, support for the troops, my candidate wins hands down.

[quote=ana21;3027491]
Sorry, but I believe you think he wins 'hands down' becaue he is pro-abortion, anti-oil, and falls left of center on pretty much every issue.

If Obama and McCain's records regarding troop support were reversed, you'd still defend and embrace whatever it was Obama had voted for or against.

'Cause you like him.

'Cause he's liberal.

And that's certainly your right. I think we all find defensible most things the candidates who best represent our positions do. Rare is the person who can call a spade a spade when their own candidate is the one they might otherwise find offensive.

[quote=wowitsdark;3027503]Excuse me but you're strong suit is not mindreading.

I compared Senator Obama's and Senator McCain's records on one issue. Your assumptions about my possible other reasons for supporting Senator Obama aside, why don't you explain how it is you justify supporting a candidate who doesn't support the troops. I would hate to think Mr. McCain's pro-oil policies and stand on taxes takes precedence in your mind over the support of those men and women most members of your party were so anxious to send off to war.

[quote=ana21;3027517]
There's really no point in arguing with you. I'm sure you're aware that no issue - no vote in congress, no bill that passes a senator's desk - happens in a vacuum. I completely tune out anything from either candidate that lambasts the other for what bill they did or did not vote on. It's entirely too common for bills to address things completely unrelated to the bulk of the work just to tweak the other side and prevent them from being able to fully support it.

You tell me 'my side' was *anxious* to send young men and women off to war. I can accuse your party of being *anxious* to send women in for abortion. We can go round and round for eternity if you'd like, but in the end, it's pointless.

I'm a much better mindreader than you're giving me credit for being. Transparent people make it relatively easy to do.

Why do I care if the Pres is engaging in oral sex if his or her spouse doesn't??? Becuase he is the leader of the most powerful country in the world and he can't keep his schlong in his pants, that's why! If he can't control that is he stable? Why remain married? Some of us think marriage is sacred and having affair after affair is insulting to many people and shows a big character flaw, IMHO.

[quote=wowitsdark;3027524]Excuse me again, but you were the one who began the "argument" and made the assumptions about my support of Senator Obama. I don't see an answer to my question unless "lambasts", "unrelated", and "tweak" can be interpreted as such.

ITA about transparent people and your post is a perfect example of such an individual.

I always forget how repressed so many Americans are.

__________________
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? " ~Epicurus

On a personal level what he did bothers me.

However, the most disconcerting thing is the lengths to which he went to conceal the Monica mess. He let it drag on and on and on and on and denied denied denied. He let it paralyze the nation and lied under oath and all in the name of hiding his guilt, allowed gazillions of tax dollars to be wasted.

What if an enemy of the US had gotten hold of that information before the Republicans did and blackmailed him with it? When push came to shove, would he have protected America or would he have tried to protect his reputation? IIRC, the Russians had come into that bit of dirt because they'd been conducting surveillance (sp?) of his conversations from underneath the White House.
The Russians were somewhat chummy with Saddam and several other unsavory characters. What if they decided it was information worth blackmailing Clinton with?

What would he have done? The lenghts to which he went to keep the info from the American public don't give me a lot of confidence that he would have put self aside and let his personal chips fall where they may've.

Oh I don't know, schlong is pretty out there.

The "Monica thing"dragged on and on, as you put it, because the Republicans pursued it rabidly. With all that was going on in the country, they were worried about sex in the White House instead of the real issues the country always faces. They just became the moral police when those to whom it should matter (Hillary and Chelsea) were the ones who should have been addressing the situation--and my belief is that Hillary, a very smart woman, had already addressed it---just with her husband--not the world.

Also, Obama is NOT pro-abortion, he is PRO-CHOICE.

__________________
"Well-Behaved Women SELDOM make history."Laurel Thatcher Ulrich


"Yesterday is but a vision, and tomorrow is only a dream. But today well lived makes every yesterday a dream of happiness, and every tomorrow a dream of hope." Anonymous

"Your candle does not lose it's light by lighting another candle" Generosity

Have the courage to be yourself.

Correct... sort of. I really don't think they were all that worried about sex in the White House. I think they just wanted to take Clinton down because they opposed him and he, in his continued denials, gave them all they could ever have hoped for.

All it would have taken was acknowledgment of the truth from him and they wouldn't have had the ability to drag it out for so long.

But for whatever reason, it was more important to him to either A) protect himself from the embarassment or B) not give Republicans the satisfaction.

Either way, he put his own needs/desires above what he himself claimed was the need of America to move on to 'more important things'.

"I did it, it was a stupid thing to do, and I'm sorry. Now let's move on." That's all he'd have had to say but instead he dug in his heels. HE gave his foes continued power when he goofily wanted to act like he wasn't sure what 'is' meant. He didn't have the wisdom to QUIT throwing fuel on the fire that they so gleefully watched him start.

So, basically, the Republicans just wanted to humiliate him....pretty sad and petty. I don't think he needed to answer to their prurient interest to them...just Hill.

__________________
"Well-Behaved Women SELDOM make history."Laurel Thatcher Ulrich


"Yesterday is but a vision, and tomorrow is only a dream. But today well lived makes every yesterday a dream of happiness, and every tomorrow a dream of hope." Anonymous

"Your candle does not lose it's light by lighting another candle" Generosity

Have the courage to be yourself.

Humiliate? Did I say that? If I did, it's not what I meant.

They wanted to keep him from furthering his agenda, which they disagreed with. He gave them ammo like nobody's business and dug in his heels like no politician in history.

Bottom line: He put self-preservation above the interests of the country. That's a problem.

Please don't tell me that you believe Democrats are above using whatever tactics they can to get the job done. Politicians are politicians and Democrats certainly aren't exempt from bad behavior when they think it will help them accomplish what they want to.

ETA: I wanted to come back and say that I don't think the pursuit of Clinton was ENTIRELY motivated by politics. He trotted his wife out onto 60 Minutes to convince us that they had this stellar, traditional marriage so we would like him and he would win the election. What he was doing behind the scenes certainly flew in the face of that picture. He messed with an underling on company time and on company property, all while supposedly being very into the whole sexual harrassment in the workplace issue. If any other old almost-60-year-old geezer politician was 'doing' a summer intern in the closet off the board room while preaching about workplace equity, about not taking advantage of women in the workplace, etc... you betcha that would be news.

Did he expect them to just let it die when he lied under oath?

It was in his power at any time to put a stop to it by simply owning up. What he did was disgusting and bound to lose him some popularity points, but it wasn't illegal. Had he had the strength of character to fess up from the get-go, the legs would've been chopped off the story immediately.

But he didn't. He put self-preservation above all else. That says a lot about the strength of his character... that it's not very strong!

And I love Beavis and Butthead and Borat is my hero! Take that!! lol

DUH, yes he is. If you want it to be allowed and legal -prochoice-that means you are proabortion by default.

Oh I don't know. I think Bill needed the education since he didn't think/know oral sex counted as sex!!!! What an idiot for that statement-depends on what is is? I think he did an awesome job of humiliating himself all by himself!!

What a ridiculous thing to say. You can want something to be legal without thinking it's a great thing to do or being "pro" that thing. I want divorce to be legal, but I don't run around encouraging people to divorce.

__________________

Reading is Fundamental.

I have no problem believing that.

__________________

Reading is Fundamental.

I agree that serial womanizing is a character flaw. Interestingly enough, I read John McCains autobiography, Have you read it? It reveals a very serious character flaw about him by my standards and it looks like yours as well.

__________________
GO NAVY WRESTLING!!BEAT ARMY!!!
RJB 3/18/60 - 5/22/04
We miss you, sweet brother
God Bless the USA!!!!! Praying for my Youngster son at United States Naval Academy, class of 2014!!

http://mylifeundertheabaya.blogspot.com/

Pro choice is not the same thing as pro abortion. This is the fallacy that you are operating under. Pro choice means, and I know you already know this but can't see the forest for the trees, Kathy, it means that I want everyone to exercise their free choice under the present law whether to have a baby or not. It should be a choice for someone to decide for themselves since they will be the one to raise that child if they have that child. The choices are:

1. Have the baby or
2. Put said child up for adoption or
3. Have an abortion.

Because there are three different lines above, that makes it "choice".

Using your reasoning presented here, you must be pro welfare, pro abuse to name a few because some of those women who are having to make the choice whether to have another child are facing a future for that child of those things....being on welfare or being exposed to abuse and crime, or the pregnancy is a product of a crime and therefore by default you are saying you are pro rape resulting in a child.

I realize that the preceding paragraph probably makes little sense, for real, but I think it will to someone here who also make little sense with her postings....just sayin'......

__________________
GO NAVY WRESTLING!!BEAT ARMY!!!
RJB 3/18/60 - 5/22/04
We miss you, sweet brother
God Bless the USA!!!!! Praying for my Youngster son at United States Naval Academy, class of 2014!!

http://mylifeundertheabaya.blogspot.com/

Haven't we been over this before???? Pro-Choice is NOT Pro-Abortion, it is for (PRO) making your own decision (CHOICE). You can choose an abortion, or you can choose to continue the pregnancy. DUH!!!!!

You know, if some of you anti-choice Pro-Life ZEALOTS put half as much energy into helping women get affordable birth control, you might actually be doing some good.

__________________
Doing the right thing isn't always the same as doing the easy thing.

Women can get free birth control at Planned Parenthood.

A name change from 5 years ago does not change what it basically means. Changing the name to make it more acceptable. What will it be call in a few years? ( pro-me, pro-mylife, pro-noresponbilites, etc)

If someone is interested this is a good short book to read (pdf file... free) But, I am sure most "liberals" will not spend a few minutes to look at the other side.
http://files.meetup.com/504095/Ron%2...%20Liberty.pdf

You are under the impression that most "liberals" haven't already looked at the other side. I have, and I understand where ANTI-CHOICE people believe and feel that a conception begins a person's life. I just happen to disagree.

__________________
Mental that one, I'm telling you. ---Ron Weasley, "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets"

And the added benefit of protesters praying for their souls on the way in to pick up their meds.

I've never done that and never will. I don't think it's the right thing to do, especially when they drag their children along with them.

If a person is happy with their decision praying people shouldn't bother them! And i"m talking about non sign toting, non harrassing people.

Prochoice people are the ones who can't see the forest for the trees my dear.
I've heard all the arguments and I'm not going to point out all the flaws in your examples.
Prochoice means you are proabortion. It doesn't mean you personally would have one but it means you think women should have the legal right to decide to terminiate the growing life of their child in their womb. If a person thinks that should be legal then they agree that someone should be able to do that. Hence, they are really the same beliefs. You either think it's terminating a life or it isn't. Prochoice people want the option for women to terminate their childs life, which is in essence, proabortion.

Let's see, the title of this thread is Captain McLiar (aka John McCain) and there is so little support for the Captain that his fans are forced to discuss oral sex, President Clinton's schlong, birth control and, of course, choice.

Since the Captain is 71 years old and the last action he had was probably in the 90's a discussion of his transgressions is off limits since his fornicatin' days are long over. He was, of course, just joking when he offered poor Cindy up as a contestent in the Mrs. Cowpie contest in front of a bunch of biker supporters the other day. Thinking Mrs. O would have slapped the old goat silly but money can't buy a backbone.

Most, if not all women, that have had an abortion are not "Happy" about their decision. From my own personal experience it was an extremely difficult decision to make--but I wasn't "Happy" by any stretch of the imagination when I made my decision.

There was one lone woman in front of the clinic I went to--no sign, no harassing; But! Every time a someone walked in, she would stare at them until they looked at her. The look in her eyes was one of pure contempt! And once the person made eye contact the lady would began fingering her rosary and mouthing/saying prayers. That was intimidating to someone who's already struggled w/ a very difficult decision.

But, I know that talking to you is like talking to the wall--your mind is set and you do not have the capacity or are not willing to have the capacity to see anyone's point of view that is contradictory to you.
So, I'm pro-choice for people having the right to make the decision when to terminate their life when/if they have a terminal illness (and I mean euthanasia type ending), does that mean I'm pro-death? If that means I'm pro-death then I must want everyone to die....

*SIGH* I give up, you win...all of us who think that the only person who should have control of their womb is the womb owner (the woman) --well, we should just be taken out and flogged.

__________________
Mental that one, I'm telling you. ---Ron Weasley, "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets"

Oh, please point allllll the flaws in my examples, my dear. I would love to see them from your point of view.

__________________
GO NAVY WRESTLING!!BEAT ARMY!!!
RJB 3/18/60 - 5/22/04
We miss you, sweet brother
God Bless the USA!!!!! Praying for my Youngster son at United States Naval Academy, class of 2014!!

http://mylifeundertheabaya.blogspot.com/

Been there, done that, and I'm not doing it with you again!

[quote=marilynk;3027776]Most, if not all women, that have had an abortion are not "Happy" about their decision. From my own personal experience it was an extremely difficult decision to make--but I wasn't "Happy" by any stretch of the imagination when I made my decision.

Marilynk-I was actually referring to the ana21 quote reffering to free birth control at Planned Parenthood and protesters there. I don't think very many women would be happy with an abortion. I'm sorry that woman glared at you. Those are the things that make the nice prolife people look bad. My friends and I would NEVER do that. We usually give a warm smile if eye contact is made and don't say anything. We don't look down on anyone seeking an abortion. We only feel bad that they feel that is their only or best option. It's a love the sinner, hate the sin kind of thing. And we are all sinners so we can't judge anyone individually.

Nonsense, I have no recollection of you pointing out the flaws in MY argument above as I wrote it as I just wrote my post today. You can't point out the flaws in the argument because there aren't any. The word choice means that there is more than one option. I posted three options to having an unwanted pregnancy. Where is the flaw in that?

Many people that consider not bringing another child in this world do so because of their situation at home...... welfare (because people say "I don't believe that women who are on welfare should be allowed to have more babies as long as they are on welfare).......perhaps abuse. poverty, perhaps the pregnancy is a result of rape. They should have the choice whether to bring a child into that life or not. Now, that is my argument as posted above.

Where is the flaw in that argument? Point it out....or can you?

__________________
GO NAVY WRESTLING!!BEAT ARMY!!!
RJB 3/18/60 - 5/22/04
We miss you, sweet brother
God Bless the USA!!!!! Praying for my Youngster son at United States Naval Academy, class of 2014!!

http://mylifeundertheabaya.blogspot.com/

Maybe i haven't discussed this directly with you (I'm pretty sure we have before though). I'm referring more to the reasoning behind pro-choice people. I'm just not getting into a big debate with you.

Please share this book with people. It counters every argument that comes from the pro-choice side. Like I said before..most will not spend the couple of minutes to read, research and explore.
http://files.meetup.com/504095/Ron%2...%20Liberty.pdf

Speaking for myself, there is nothing is this world written or spoken that can change my mind. I'm sorry to see so much energy expended on this board arguing about it. But, as I type this it occurs to me that at least the local women's clinic isn't being picketed because you are (universal you) here. So, carry on -- what was that a poster said about not seeing the trees for the forest or the forest for the trees -- splain that to us again my dear and take your time.

Wow..that does sound very narrow, closed-minded to me. I am always open to reading, researching and expanding my knowledge.
Sometimes, I do change by mind when presented with better information. Other times my opinion gets more founded in facts and principles.
I really do not think I will change my mind on this issue but at least I am not afraid to read/research. I will take a few minutes and read anything that the other side will point out to me. With other subjects I have changed my opinion because of evidence/facts that have been pointed out.

I have appreciated many of your posts and especially the fact that you usually have links to back up your statements. We have, however, come to a parting of the ways on the choice subject. My narrow, close-minded self looks forward to reading your posts on other subjects.

As Ana said, where are the McCain supporters refuting the statements in the original post? Do you all simply concede that he is guilty of those lies or reversals?

__________________

Reading is Fundamental.

What Clinton did pales in comparison to little Bush. But that seems to still be a topic that won't die. If we can't discuss what McCain has done in the past then let's put a moratorium on what Clinton did while he was president.

Both current candidates are flip flopping but McCain seems to more often and more drastically. Obama is usually sort of vague in his comments on topics and that leaves whether he has indeed changed position open to different interpretations in some cases.

Like said above, people do change their minds for various reasons. I do think we need to figure out the reason for the change and not hold it against them if there is a non-partisan legitimate reason for the change. But changes made for purely political expediency are something else.

We don't concede them. But coming from your links, I'm sure they were far left and not to be taken too seriously. I was going to link one with all of Obama's flip-flops, reversals, lies, but it was too much for one thread!! It wouldn't post because it was too long. It said I had to shorten it! Seriously. So I didn't have time to redo it. Mr. O has a long long list and he hasn't even been in politics but a short period of time. And hardly no experience. But with Sen. McCain, you're going back years and years, so I would expect the libs to be pulling out all the links on him.

In other words, mom, you haven't got anything. Typical.

__________________

Reading is Fundamental.

BLAH, BLAH, BLAH......

Oh, ouch, the sting of shopper not liking what I say. My heart is utterly broken.

__________________

Reading is Fundamental.

Here's a link to a con approved newsite (World Net Daily) that lists a number of the Captain's fibs. Course the article was written before Mr. McCain won the nomination. The headline reads ""McCain's Straight Talk is Media Fiction".

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.p...w&pageId=45501

I'm sure many articles can be found at World Net and similar con sites that would reinforce the OP's list. The Captain was not treated kindly by Sean and Rush and Ann and Michelle during the campaign but alas now all is forgiven.

As BOrat would say" Great Success'! lol

NEVER EVER said McCain was a perfect person. Yes, he was much criticized by all of the above. Just like HIllary and Obama tried to beat each other in the primarys and now "all is forgiven" by Hillary. Works both ways baby!

So are you saying WND is not a reputable news source in your opinion and that what they printed about Senator McCain's record was false? It's been referenced by conservative posters on this forum as a reliable source. Was Hannity lying about what he said about Senator McCain on Fox?


Senator Clinton and Senator Obama were campaigning against each other just like Senator McCain and Governor Romney. None of them said complimentary things about their opponents in the heat of the campaign -- totally different then news sources IMO.

I don't think I said anything about WND, did I? Never been on that site so I don't know what to say about it. Of course McCain isn't perfect and has made mistakes. I don't think anyone has said he hasn't made mistakes. I don't always agree with Hannity either. I do believe that most conservatives and Republicans will jump on board for McCain in November because he is a better candidate than Obama. If I remember correctly, Hannity, Rush, etc.. were saying things against McCain during the primary campaigns. They are hosts of talk shows. That's what they do-discuss news of interest and give their opinions. Is McCain perfect? Heck no. Is his record perfect? Heck no. But I value his dedication to this country and his lifetime of service to our country enough to know that he is trying his best and will continue to put our country first. I can't say the same about Obamas record. He hasn't been in public service very long to hold the most powerful job in the world. We don't know enough about him- which is part of his appeal, you can believe all the "hope" crap he sends out there and drink his Kool-aid!

I was particularly impressed by McCain's service to the country during the Keating Five scandal. What a guy, sticking up for his friends.

I was impressed with the way he cheated on his first wife, who was disfigured in a car accident, and ditched her for a younger, blonder richer model.

I was impressed with the way he helped cover up the story of how that blonde trophy wife was a drug addict and stole from a charity to support her habit.

I was impressed with the way he refused to condemn flying the Confederate flag over the capitol in South Carolina.

__________________

Reading is Fundamental.

WND used to be a fairly well-respected news site. In the past few years, however, they've seemed to be rather 'out there' in a way that has, IMHO, hurt their credibility. They went from mainstreamish to more conspiracy-theory oriented. For many years they were the most highly read internet-only news site, but I can't imagine that's true anymore.

More well-known columnists (such as Bill O'Rielly) are no longer with them. That probably accounts for some of the drop in readership, but I also have to think that columnists left them because their position was moving increasingly out of the range of 'usual' for either political side.

I am quite serious -- when was WND ever a well-respected news site? As long as I can remember, it's been the equivalent of Pravda for the right.

__________________

Reading is Fundamental.

Early on, I believe they were. While Joseph Farah has always been right of center and the publication's position has always generally been right of center, initially the electronic publication tended to be more of a site full of links to other news websites. Little writing was done in-house, and they had both liberal and conservative editorialists. There were definitely more conservative columnists, no getting around that. But they were a site conservatives tended to feel at home reading.... and now, as a conservative, I ... well, I haven't read them for years. I quit because they seemed more interested in Area 51 type 'news' than I cared to raed.

[quote=truble2301;3028424]

I don't know what happened in his first marriage and I don't think you were there either.........
Fly that flag baby!!

[quote=kathytheshopper;3028605]What flying the flag have to do with anything? Does that comment somehow make sense on your planet?

Funny how not being in the Clintons' marriage, doesn't stop you from snarking about it . . . does this mean maybe you've been in a threesome with Bill and HIll??

__________________

Reading is Fundamental.

[quote=kathytheshopper;3028605]

The flag you are speaking about is the Southern Cross flag right? The flag that is thought to be a symbol of racism in the south. Is this the flag you want flown? Well, that answers a lot of questions for me about you....coupled with another post you have on another thread just makes everything so clear. You are racist which is certainly not in line with Catholicism. I will make a judgement call here....you are not a good Catholic. You might want to tell Ted Kennedy to save you a seat and I say that with my tongue firmly in cheek but I am sure that you would not if the tables were turned.

I send you lots of hugs, Kathy because I am sure that if you are anything IRL as you are on this board...you must not get any.

__________________
GO NAVY WRESTLING!!BEAT ARMY!!!
RJB 3/18/60 - 5/22/04
We miss you, sweet brother
God Bless the USA!!!!! Praying for my Youngster son at United States Naval Academy, class of 2014!!

http://mylifeundertheabaya.blogspot.com/

OMG, did you really mean the Confederate Flag, shopper? That's sick. Sick, sick, sick. No suprises there, I guess.

__________________

Reading is Fundamental.

Holy cow, talk about drinking kool-aid -- thinking you're sippin' on the hard lemonade. I admire your dedication to your candidate even if, as you say he and his record aren't perfect. What I find so interesting about you specifically and what I have noticed from a few others with a similar mindset is the lack of curiousity about the Senator. Goodness knows, no politician is perfect, mine included, but I find it stunning that so many McCain supporters are voting for him just because of his "service to the country".

To be perfectly honest I've had the thought that in a way it would be good if McCain won because a republican president should have to clean up this mess. We are in for some hard times and are going to have to face the consequences of what has happened both from the perspective of our massive deficit and what we've had taken away from us through the corruption of our justice system and our Constitution. I don't think some McCain supporters have a clue and, if you're an example, not interested in getting one. If, as it appears he plans on doing, McCain replicates the current administration goodness help us all.

To save you the time and trouble, let me anticipate your response. "Shopper says: "blah blah blah blah blah!!!!!!!!!!!"

[quote=kathytheshopper;3028605]Oops, Did I post that on the wrong thread? It was in reference to a list of McCain stuff and how he voted against a ban on that flag in the South. As usual it's so much fun to see all of you flip out with what I say. And then start the name calling, etc... I hope you know that I just sit here and laugh and laugh at how riled you all get. Since I know I won't be taken seriously on here anymore by several folks-and you know who you are -and will just be bashed I'm just feeding ya all and entertaining myself with your biased, judgmental rants! Keep them coming folks because laughter adds years to your life!!!
Really, I could case less about the Conferdate Flag. Never lived in the South, don't know about the local thoughts on it, etc... And unless I read the actual bill I won't make a judgment on whether he did the right thing or not. But I KNEW you would all be flying off the handle!!! Take your blood pressure pills ladies!!!! You are lowering mine with all my laughter!!!

[quote=usnamom;3028642]I would say I am 95% happy with my life. Great family, great faith, awesome kids, true girlfriends, fun job, etc... I really don't need any hugs but thanks for the offer. i am one content lady!!! I'm sure we are all different in real life but I am very loved by many people. Thanks for your concern though!!

Blah, blah, blah....I am very healthy... need no pills needed here...and you can use the "I was just joking" line over and over again when you see yourself in print and realize what a disgustingly pathetic, racist, bigoted ignorant and demented fool you are, but nobody is buying what you are trying to sell. Your packaging is very evident and transparent.

__________________
"Well-Behaved Women SELDOM make history."Laurel Thatcher Ulrich


"Yesterday is but a vision, and tomorrow is only a dream. But today well lived makes every yesterday a dream of happiness, and every tomorrow a dream of hope." Anonymous

"Your candle does not lose it's light by lighting another candle" Generosity

Have the courage to be yourself.

Amen to all that. She is one sick puppy.

__________________

Reading is Fundamental.

Whatever makes her world go round and she has to tell herself that to sleep at night. I don't believe for one minute that what she says is true....not one minute. I don't feel the need to tell everyone how great my life is to strangers. If her life is as wonderful as she states it is, her friends have those wonderful white sheets and pointy hats and they get together in secret and love God so much they make lovely crosses that they set on fire just to make sure that everyone can tell they all about Christ. Isn't that a lovely club? It makes me ashamed to be a Catholic since she claims to be one.

Her little tests of us are something she has come up with all on her own.

__________________
GO NAVY WRESTLING!!BEAT ARMY!!!
RJB 3/18/60 - 5/22/04
We miss you, sweet brother
God Bless the USA!!!!! Praying for my Youngster son at United States Naval Academy, class of 2014!!

http://mylifeundertheabaya.blogspot.com/

But any moment, KTS will decide to have this thread closed....it is not going her way and she has embarrassed herself and it is now over 50 posts (which will be her excuse).

__________________
GO NAVY WRESTLING!!BEAT ARMY!!!
RJB 3/18/60 - 5/22/04
We miss you, sweet brother
God Bless the USA!!!!! Praying for my Youngster son at United States Naval Academy, class of 2014!!

http://mylifeundertheabaya.blogspot.com/

I have no power whatsoever to close this thread but you folks sure must think I do. I love all the negative, judgmental things you say about me because YOU think YOU have the right to pick apart what I say and then call me names. Whatever gives you that right????? I only talked about how nice my life is-I'm very blessed-because of the post stating how I must need a hug, etc.. I wasn't doing it to brag, just to answer the post. Maybe you all should try to follow along a little bit better!!!
I wonder who is moderating this since it's wayyyyy past the 50 posts!!!!! lol lol lol

Yeah, it can be closed because of the number of posts....but your ranting bigotry, racism and deluded responses cannot be erased since you didn't start the thread. It will be long-living proof of just who you really are.....

__________________
"Well-Behaved Women SELDOM make history."Laurel Thatcher Ulrich


"Yesterday is but a vision, and tomorrow is only a dream. But today well lived makes every yesterday a dream of happiness, and every tomorrow a dream of hope." Anonymous

"Your candle does not lose it's light by lighting another candle" Generosity

Have the courage to be yourself.