Even if that's so...I wish you and SF would keep your relationship more on the QT.
Grandpa McCain gets a girlfriend
- Thread starter Cypress
- Start date
Even if that's so...I wish you and SF would keep your relationship more on the QT.
Boy, do I ever agree with this post.
cawacko
Well-known member
I didn't know he and I had a relationship. It's good to be wanted.
Battleborne
Terminator
LMAO..............
This is a first for me...I have never in my life saw a guy so desparate for a date that he would take patronization to a new level...Gag me with a spoon already!
This is a first for me...I have never in my life saw a guy so desparate for a date that he would take patronization to a new level...Gag me with a spoon already!
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
LMAO... right, you got me. It is my MO to point out the fucking idiocy of the left.
If you are to ignorant to understand that the portion that said....
"yeah, Obama too.... yeah .... faux outrage for all!!!"
was friggin sarcasm, then I apologize. I forgot that it had to be pointed out to you every time it was used.
Whenever you decide you would like to discuss a real issue.... feel free and post something that isn't complete horseshit and I will respond with the appropriate level of dialogue. When you post a thread based on idiocy... you are going to get the appropriate level of dialogue there as well.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
How could you not know? After all the flowers and cards and warm cozy sentiments on this message board? I am so disappointed.
Lorax... the above is sarcasm as noted by the smiley.
This is a political message board, stupid. We talk about what is in the news on any given day. Today - it's McCain. And that means EVERYWHERE, including Fox & talk radio. How is a post about the most discussed political topic of the day "horseshit"?
And I'm not just talking about the Obama response. I'm talking about the 7,000 responses prior to that, as well. Or are all of your "Dems do it too!" posts "sarcastic"?
You've gotta work on that sense of humor, if so....
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Get a friggin grip on yourself. This is entire thread is a "gotcha" attempt based on 8 year old information. No evidence has been provided of any wrong going, of McCain having sex with her or anything to substantiate the bullshit from the Times.
It was nothing but rumor and inneundo. Period.
As for your "talking about the 7000 posts prior"... please. You know that is B.S.
This thread began by posting a story that, again, is EVERYWHERE. It is not an "attempt" at any kind of 'gotcha' (a la Superfreak). It is posting a political story on a political message board, that is running in virtually every news outlet.
I don't care if it was 8 years ago or 50 years ago; if McCain compromised his position as Senator by having a relationship with a lobbyist, that's news. You were pretty quick to incriminate Edwards based on nothing the other day (interesting that he hasn't made an endorsement yet, innit Freak? Could your hate-filled assumptions have possibly been WRONG?), but when people who actually worked on McCain's campaign say something, it's rumor & innuendo.
HACK.
It was…but I’m sorry to tell you it’s fast being eclipsed by the absolute ass-kicking SF is getting from Onceler
ha ha! True. I thought that Cypress used to be the king of Owning SF, but I have to say, Lorax is giving him a run for his money.
It was nothing but rumor and inneundo. Period.
John Weaver is not an anonymous source. He was McCain's former top political advisor.
This is a democracy. The press is supposed to report on corroborated claims of corruption, or even the mere perception of corruption. That's their freaking job, and this is a freaking legtimate news story, whether you want to cry about it or not. You've tried to make hay out lame stories about John Edwards and Al Gore's "hypocrisy", because a rich guy works on issue for poor people, and Al Gore has a house that isn't sufficiently green according to you.
You can take lame defense of your boyfriend McCain, and shove it up your @ss.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Yes, it is all over the place... imagine that the NY Times spouts off a bullshit article and then people discuss it. Either defending McCain or defending the Times. It does not change the CONTENT of the article.
Either bring out the evidence (meaning the Times or whomever) or don't print unsubstantiated bullshit behind anonymous sources all for the sake of "they didn't want to get scooped" bullshit.
As for Edwards... I said I thought he was a scumbag and a hypocrit.... and he is without question the latter, the former is my opinion.
Yeah, that's being glossed over every where, even in the media.
They have a source who went on record, and several who backed his story up off the record, but who spoke directly to them.
This is not a non-story.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Ahhh the king of spin returns....
1) Edwards being rich and working to promote issues for the poor does not make him a hypocrit. Something you continue to try to act like I have said, when that is not the case.
2) I also never said Al Gores home is not sufficiently green enough for me. I stated that it was funny that Bush's home is and has been greener and more environmentally friendly.
Awww... you said McCain is my boyfriend.... how special of you. "shove it up my ass??" You really should learn to work on your anger issues...
You were giggling like a little school girl over stories that Al Gore's house wasn't 100% Green, and that John Edwards got paid to give a speech about poverty.
And you continue to scream that this story of the perception of improprieity and possible corruption isn't merited, and totally unworthy of news coverage or discussion.
Laughable. You're a partisan hack. Don't ever come on here and try to display your "independent" credentials. You're married to defending McCain, the iraq war and the GOP.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
“Our political messaging during that time period centered around taking on the special interests and placing the nation’s interests before either personal or special interest,” Mr. Weaver continued. “Ms. Iseman’s involvement in the campaign, it was felt by us, could undermine that effort.”
Mr. Weaver added that the brief conversation was only about “her conduct and what she allegedly had told people, which made its way back to us.” He declined to elaborate.
It is not clear what effect the warnings had; the associates said their concerns receded in the heat of the campaign.
Ms. Iseman acknowledged meeting with Mr. Weaver, but disputed his account.
“I never discussed with him alleged things I had ‘told people,’ that had made their way ‘back to’ him,” she wrote in an e-mail message. She said she never received special treatment from Mr. McCain’s office."
So lets see...
Weaver said the involvement of a lobbyist in the campaign could damage the campaign. Ok... that is a no-shit statment. So what did they do? They had a meeting to get McCain to disassociate himself with her. Ok... again, good idea.
So where is Weaver stating that McCain did anything to favor her or the companies that she represented? Where does he or anyone state that McCain had an affair with her?
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Also.... from the article... the part the left wants to gloss over....
"He and Mr. Davis also said Mr. McCain had frequently denied requests from Ms. Iseman and the companies she represented. In 2006, Mr. McCain sought to break up cable subscription packages, which some of her clients opposed. And his proposals for satellite distribution of local television programs fell short of her clients’ hopes.
The McCain aides said the senator sided with Ms. Iseman’s clients only when their positions hewed to his principles.
A champion of deregulation, Mr. McCain wrote letters in 1998 and 1999 to the Federal Communications Commission urging it to uphold marketing agreements allowing a television company to control two stations in the same city, a crucial issue for Glencairn Ltd., one of Ms. Iseman’s clients. He introduced a bill to create tax incentives for minority ownership of stations; Ms. Iseman represented several businesses seeking such a program. And he twice tried to advance legislation that would permit a company to control television stations in overlapping markets, an important issue for Paxson.
In late 1999, Ms. Iseman asked Mr. McCain’s staff to send a letter to the commission to help Paxson, now Ion Media Networks, on another matter. Mr. Paxson was impatient for F.C.C. approval of a television deal, and Ms. Iseman acknowledged in an e-mail message to The Times that she had sent to Mr. McCain’s staff information for drafting a letter urging a swift decision.
Mr. McCain complied. He sent two letters to the commission, drawing a rare rebuke for interference from its chairman. In an embarrassing turn for the campaign, news reports invoked the Keating scandal, once again raising questions about intervening for a patron.
Mr. McCain’s aides released all of his letters to the F.C.C. to dispel accusations of favoritism, and aides said the campaign had properly accounted for four trips on the Paxson plane. But the campaign did not report the flight with Ms. Iseman. Mr. McCain’s advisers say he was not required to disclose the flight, but ethics lawyers dispute that.
Recalling the Paxson episode in his memoir, Mr. McCain said he was merely trying to push along a slow-moving bureaucracy, but added that he was not surprised by the criticism given his history.
“Any hint that I might have acted to reward a supporter,” he wrote, “would be taken as an egregious act of hypocrisy.”
"He and Mr. Davis also said Mr. McCain had frequently denied requests from Ms. Iseman and the companies she represented. In 2006, Mr. McCain sought to break up cable subscription packages, which some of her clients opposed. And his proposals for satellite distribution of local television programs fell short of her clients’ hopes.
The McCain aides said the senator sided with Ms. Iseman’s clients only when their positions hewed to his principles.
A champion of deregulation, Mr. McCain wrote letters in 1998 and 1999 to the Federal Communications Commission urging it to uphold marketing agreements allowing a television company to control two stations in the same city, a crucial issue for Glencairn Ltd., one of Ms. Iseman’s clients. He introduced a bill to create tax incentives for minority ownership of stations; Ms. Iseman represented several businesses seeking such a program. And he twice tried to advance legislation that would permit a company to control television stations in overlapping markets, an important issue for Paxson.
In late 1999, Ms. Iseman asked Mr. McCain’s staff to send a letter to the commission to help Paxson, now Ion Media Networks, on another matter. Mr. Paxson was impatient for F.C.C. approval of a television deal, and Ms. Iseman acknowledged in an e-mail message to The Times that she had sent to Mr. McCain’s staff information for drafting a letter urging a swift decision.
Mr. McCain complied. He sent two letters to the commission, drawing a rare rebuke for interference from its chairman. In an embarrassing turn for the campaign, news reports invoked the Keating scandal, once again raising questions about intervening for a patron.
Mr. McCain’s aides released all of his letters to the F.C.C. to dispel accusations of favoritism, and aides said the campaign had properly accounted for four trips on the Paxson plane. But the campaign did not report the flight with Ms. Iseman. Mr. McCain’s advisers say he was not required to disclose the flight, but ethics lawyers dispute that.
Recalling the Paxson episode in his memoir, Mr. McCain said he was merely trying to push along a slow-moving bureaucracy, but added that he was not surprised by the criticism given his history.
“Any hint that I might have acted to reward a supporter,” he wrote, “would be taken as an egregious act of hypocrisy.”
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Link to the thread that you are referring to with regards to Gore.
Yes, it is funny that Edwards got paid more than most people make in a year to speak about poverty.
Aw... ya called me a partisan hack... coming from you that is truly funny. But again you should work on your rage.