McCain supporters...

jallman · Apr 28, 2008

independent_thinker2002 said:
It doesn't sound like a plan when he is looking to brainstorm about the subject. What is his plan for New Orleans?

First off, he's not required to have a plan for New Orleans. New Orleans should have a plan for New Orleans. McCain is required to have a plan for disaster relief anywhere at a national level. The only plan he needs to have is how/when to call out the military to assist and to make sure that they do so.

What I mean is that he is trying to portray himself to be "Johnny on the spot" if he were President when that isn't the case. He has been running for a year. He has been speaking plenty about Iraq and Iran but Katrina did more damage in this country than those two countries could ever hope to do. Mother nature is a more imminent threat that terrorism.

I am sure the 3000 corpses from ground zero might beg to diiffer with your assessment. They didn't really have an evacuation plan in the event of a plane crashing into the building whereas New Orleans was warned for days.

It's been three years since Katrina. Now, that he has the nomination locked up he wants to look like he is on point.

He is on point. It's his job to make sure FEMA response and national response to natural disaster is at an acceptable level. You didn't think an Arizona senator had much obligation to go rebuild New Orleans before, did you?

It's phony to me. It reminds me of the whole Texas primary/Hagee endorsement charade.

True, in that it is being blown up and spun into something it's not rather than debating the man on issues. :bravo: You've managed to keep it down in the mud where democrats campaign best.

It's an illusion. That's what I mean by playing politics. He is misrepresenting himself. He waited until it was safe to blast Bush. That's not leadership IMO. It smacks of lip service.

Wasn't his place to blast anyone before, though he did speak against the president and the Republican party on many occasions in the past. You conveniently forget the reputation the man has had his entire career. Instead, you want to scream "it's fake, it's an illuuuuusion" because to approach the real issues honestly is the political death of the liberal messiah.

Well, three years after the hurricane and McCain found rubble for a photo op. People needed help or else the legislation he voted down wouldn't have been put up to a vote.

The legislation that got put before him included "wasteful, pork barrel spending" with projects that did not go through congress for normal review. I like that. I like that he didn't let pork projects go ride the Katrina pity party. He has also stated that he is always willing to reform legislation that holds up help being delivered to Katrina.

Thorgasm · Apr 28, 2008

jallman said:
First off, he's not required to have a plan for New Orleans. New Orleans should have a plan for New Orleans. McCain is required to have a plan for disaster relief anywhere at a national level. The only plan he needs to have is how/when to call out the military to assist and to make sure that they do so.

So what if New Orleans never has a plan? Shouldn't the leader of the country show some leadership and help them come up with a plan. New Orleans is a port city. There are national interests there. Sometimes a leader needs to step in and set the agenda. I believe this is one of those times.

jallman said:
I am sure the 3000 corpses from ground zero might beg to diiffer with your assessment. They didn't really have an evacuation plan in the event of a plane crashing into the building whereas New Orleans was warned for days.

True, they told the people in the second tower to go back to work after the first tower got hit. But I wasn't talking about deaths. I was talking about things we can rebuild. The warning has nothing to do with the rebuilding.

jallman said:
He is on point. It's his job to make sure FEMA response and national response to natural disaster is at an acceptable level. You didn't think an Arizona senator had much obligation to go rebuild New Orleans before, did you?

A national shipping port is everyone's interest. He has been running for a year now. As for the previous two years, no it wasn't his obligation.

jallman said:
True, in that it is being blown up and spun into something it's not rather than debating the man on issues. :bravo: You've managed to keep it down in the mud where democrats campaign best.

I'm sorry that I found the timing of things questionable. Just like it's questionable how he thought it was a mistake to seek the endorsement yet he was happy to have it as he stated to George Stephanapolous recently.

jallman said:
The legislation that got put before him included "wasteful, pork barrel spending" with projects that did not go through congress for normal review. I like that. I like that he didn't let pork projects go ride the Katrina pity party. He has also stated that he is always willing to reform legislation that holds up help being delivered to Katrina.

Why didn't he reform legislation then? He could have sponsored a new bill minus the pork.

Butters Stotch · Apr 29, 2008

Navy Pride said:
Someone said he was pro life, I was just pointing out that he is not.......

We have a forum for abortion....If you want to debate that issue that is the proper format for it.........

I agree there are bad Republicans and Democrats......I am glad I am not a Republican or a Democrat............

An interesting post sir. I thought by reading your posts that you were Republcian. You fooled me! If you're not a Democrat or Republican are you a Libertarian? A Socialist? An Independent?

I for one am a Liberal and I can unashamedly stand up and get counted as a long time progressive with a strong social conscience. I believe strongly in individual rights and will fiercely defend someone's right to decide for themselves what is best for them within our existing laws. One of the worst character flaws I detect in certain Americans is their desire to control other Americans.

Ever hear this statement? "To Thine Own Self Be True." These are words that I live by.

rsixing · Apr 29, 2008

Butters Stotch said:
An interesting post sir. I thought by reading your posts that you were Republcian. You fooled me! If you're not a Democrat or Republican are you a Libertarian? A Socialist? An Independent?

I for one am a Liberal and I can unashamedly stand up and get counted as a long time progressive with a strong social conscience. I believe strongly in individual rights and will fiercely defend someone's right to decide for themselves what is best for them within our existing laws. One of the worst character flaws I detect in certain Americans is their desire to control other Americans.

Ever hear this statement? "To Thine Own Self Be True." These are words that I live by.

NP claims to be whatever fits his "argument" at the moment. :roll:

But definitely an ultra-far-right-Limbaugh-loving-Obama-hating conservative. Don't let him fool you.

ps. Welcome to the board Butters Stotch

Navy Pride · Apr 29, 2008

Butters Stotch said:
An interesting post sir. I thought by reading your posts that you were Republcian. You fooled me! If you're not a Democrat or Republican are you a Libertarian? A Socialist? An Independent?

I for one am a Liberal and I can unashamedly stand up and get counted as a long time progressive with a strong social conscience. I believe strongly in individual rights and will fiercely defend someone's right to decide for themselves what is best for them within our existing laws. One of the worst character flaws I detect in certain Americans is their desire to control other Americans.

Ever hear this statement? "To Thine Own Self Be True." These are words that I live by.

First I want to apologize to you because I have been a little hard on you and your new here..........Welcome to the forum............As far as my political stance I belong to no party and consider myself a Conservative......I vote for the candidate who I agree closest to the issues on............In this era it is usually the Republicans but in a lot of ways they are just as screwed up as the Democrats............I do vote for a Democrat every 2 years who is my congressman Norm Dicks.........I disagree with him on a lot of issues but he is strong on defense and the military...........

Now we should probably get back on topic..........

Thorgasm · Apr 29, 2008

galenrox said:
Why should he have a plan for New Orleans? I'm looking at my calendar and I'm confused, because it doesn't say "2005".

First you said that he was there to discuss his plan and now you say he doesn't need one? It may not be required, but anyone who is presidential material should be able to come in with a plan where one is needed. And what does 2005 have to do with it. Are you saying that since things weren't solved in 2005 that we should just give up?

galenrox said:
He blasted Bush for Rumsfeld in an election year. He blasted Bush for his strategy during the run up to the war. If you're going to try to paint a picture that McCain's afraid to take on Bush you're going to have to hope people have a VERY short memory.

He wasn't running for President in that election year he criticized Rummy. He said that we would win the war in Iraq "easily". I'm not saying that he is afraid to take on Bush. I am noticing the political opportunism of the timing of it.

galenrox said:
People don't need anymore legislation, if legislation were the cure New Orleans would've been up and running almost immediately. When you treat adults like children the result is adults acting like children. There are neighborhoods where people just sit around in squalor doing nothing to clean it up, instead ******* and moaning about the federal government and waiting for their "FEMA moneys" like children refusing to clean their room until they get their allowance.
If you want to talk about playing politics with Katrina, look to John Edwards. Look to the Democratic party. Look at yourself. What are you doing right now?

Blame the victims. That will get things done. Legislation frees up money to help rebuild the city. You don't really expect the poor unskilled, uneducated to rebuild the infrastructure do you?

I'm not running for President. Thanks.

galenrox said:
It would be worse than a symbolic gesture, a symbolic gesture at the expense of the humanity of the people of New Orleans.

What would be worse than a symbolic gesture? Helping people whose lives were destoyed? I still am not clear what you mean.

Thorgasm · Apr 29, 2008

galenrox said:
Where did I say he was there to discuss his plan? Can you find a quote?

Post #61.

galenrox said:
He was talking about his plan for the city, but he was clearly at that point in time talking about how we need to be open to a broad array of approaches.

galenrox said:
He was gearing up for a Presidential run.
Once again, it takes a pretty short memory to see his criticism of Rumsfeld as an act of political opportunism.

No, that was a slam dunk.

galenrox said:
"Blame the victim" is worthless rhetoric. Do you dispute that reality?
And yes, I don't think it takes an engineering degree to figure out how to pick up all the **** in your yard (but then again you'd think it wouldn't require an engineering degree to figure out it's a bad idea to live in a city beneath sea level that is on a hurricane prone coast line).

Way to simplify the situation. The problem with New Orleans is a little deeper than trash in the yards.

galenrox said:
You have political ambitions, to aid Obama in his election. You're welcome.

So if I don't abandon my family and clean up yards in New Orleans I am not helping Obama?

galenrox said:
It's not helping them. No one benefits from treating adults like children, and the legislation that we've seen has been nothing more than trying to force adults back into the womb based on the assumption that because you're poor you're ****ing stupid (which is something I refuse to accept in my own analysis). You get more of what you subsidize, and when you subsidize wasting your life you're destroying the lives of those who will now waste their lives as a product of the subsidy.

Not everyone on welfare is wasting their life. I know you don't pity the poor and unfortunate. I know that people abuse the system. Should we eliminate defense spending because that gets abused? 500 dollar hammers and 100 dollar toilet seats? I think you focus on the abuse and deny the people that truly need help. A good portion of the people declaring bankruptcy these days are due to hospital bills and they even had insurance.

Thorgasm · Apr 29, 2008

galenrox said:
Clearly I misspoke. I don't think he has a plan for New Orleans, nor do I think anybody else does.

I agree with you 100%.

galenrox said:
How so? Do you remember 2004 at all? For doing that he got asked to be the Democratic Vice Presidential candidate (and I know you're an outsider to the Republican party, so I'll let you in on a secret, getting offered the Dem VP slot is not endearing to us). So please, do tell how it was an act of political expediency.

Why is that not endearing to you? You would have had a tiebreaking vote in the Senate if he would have been elected. I understand party unity is extremely important to your party. I would argue that is why Bush didn't find his veto pen until 2007.

galenrox said:
You're right, it's **** in the yards and a prevailing attitude of helpless dependency that has been thrust upon the poor by symbolic gestures of legislators trying to make people like you think they care about the people of New Orleans.

People haven't come back to those homes and neighborhoods. You live in Chicago. You should know it takes the government to reclaim and rebuild neighborhoods.

galenrox said:
Is that anything close to what I said? I said you're playing politics with New Orleans.

Sorry, I misunderstood you. I expect someone to have a plan. If Obama goes to New Orleans and says "never again will this happen" and he doesn't have a plan I expect you will jump on it.

galenrox said:
If money is spent inefficiently to the end of defense the end we receive is still something good, defense, it just costs more. If money is spent inefficiently on welfare then nothing good is accomplished by any standard, as any good accomplished by helping the genuinely helpless is outweighed by the number of people who have a culture of dependence thrust upon them, leading them to waste their lives.

So what about the genuinely helpless? We can agree on reform. I don't think the system is perfect. We can't say, "Sorry helpless people, people abused the system so you are screwed."

galenrox said:
You're 100% wrong about saying I don't pity the poor and unfortunate, I'm quite confident I'm more concerned with their wellbeing then you are (as I am not constrained by a need for people who don't know what they're talking about to think I care about the poor and unfortunate). It's ****ing sickening to see human beings live like that. I don't adhere to the racist beliefs that black people are less capable of succeeding in a system of economic freedom, I don't adhere to what Bush articulated (with the assistance of a skilled speech writer) as the soft bigotry of low expectations. I want them to succeed, and I recognize that they can, which distinguishes my position from yours.

Black people aren't the only ones on welfare. I don't know why you inject race into this. If you are more concerned about the poor and unfortunate than me, what do you propose to do to help them? Remember, you aren't constrained here.

I would also add that one extended hospital stay insures that you cannot succeed. Adjusted for inflation, people make $1000 less a year than they did 8 years ago. I am not sure that people can succeed in all situations. We do differ on that. In spite of the people that abuse the system, we can't let those who don't suffer. People with poor education and low intelligence can't make it on minimum wage or next to it. I think it's unfair to try to paint me as not recognizing that people can succeed. Sure many can, but are lazy or playing into a victimhood mentality. But not all can. Your words focus on the abuse and not the helpless. Forgive me if I don't sense your concern as your words are all I have to go by.

Thorgasm · Apr 29, 2008

galenrox said:
The crippled. The mentally retarded. That's it.

What about the children of irresponsible parents? What about the widowed? What about single parents?

galenrox said:
I'm injecting race into the issues of Katrina, are you kidding me? Did you see the videos, because I might not be a statistician but I can notice basic patterns like damn near everyone who was up **** creek was black. And I live in Chicago where it's reaffirmed that our system is deliberately forcing infancy upon black adults by telling them that there's no point in growing up, we'll support you if you don't and the American dream is bullshit. What the **** do you expect?

What you know about Katrina is through the media's eye. I am sure there were plenty of other races screwed too. Your neighborhood in Chicago is that way, but there are plenty of people of other races with the same issue, in Chicago and downstate. Now, you may say that it is disproportionately a black issue and that is where racial history and systemic injustice come into play.

galenrox said:
If someone is able bodied and of able mind (meaning the brain functions properly) it is impossible to consider them genuinely helpless.

Yes, unless they have a felony. Then they can't make a decent living. Yes, that is their fault, but their family suffers for it.

Thorgasm · Apr 30, 2008

galenrox said:
The children of irresponsible parents are still 100% capable of making something of themselves and aren't going to do any better by you telling them that they aren't. Are the widowed able bodied and of able mind? What exactly makes you think single mothers aren't of able body and able mind?

Until those children are able to make something of themselves, they shouldn't suffer. I never said that they couldn't make something of themselves. But until that time state assistance makes sure that they are educated, fed, and healthy. That is done through welfare.

galenrox said:
I'm sure there are too, but in terms of proportion of victims as compared to proportion of the general population it's impossible to ignore the statistical significance of the amount of African Americans who stuck around. It's obviously a poor thing instead of a black thing, but it's like any poverty issue, it's made a race issue as long as African Americans are disproportionately impoverished.

Yes, which comes down to why are they disproportionately impoverished.

galenrox said:
That's not true, I've worked with ex-felons before, and I saw my paychecks and knew they were getting the same wage and got more hours than me. I'm all about providing inroads for ex-felons and anyone else who's willing to work to earn a living, but you're not going to convince me that we should be supporting the able bodied and able-minded.

Many ex-felons lie about their status as a felon because they have to. They are a background check away from starting over. I don't necessarily feel bad for them, but their family suffers too. That is where I aim my pity. Your anecdotal evidence may be true, but it's irrelevant when we look at the bigger picture.

McCain supporters...

jallman

Thorgasm

Bus Driver to Hell

Butters Stotch

rsixing

Sportbike Fanatic

Navy Pride

Thorgasm

Bus Driver to Hell

Thorgasm

Bus Driver to Hell

Thorgasm

Bus Driver to Hell

Thorgasm

Bus Driver to Hell

Thorgasm

Bus Driver to Hell