McCain wins FL

Darla said:
Superfreak said:
Right.... by lifting the sanctions.... and the only way the sanctions were going to be lifted????

Oh yeah, by compliance to the ceasefire agreement. TWELVE YEARS diplomacy failed, yet AGAIN you pretend that is somehow irrelevant and that THIS time was going to be the time it worked.

Or are you advocating that we should have simply lifted sanctions and done something else with regards to Saddam?????
Click to expand...

YES DUMBASS!
Click to expand...

ok....I'll bite.... What?
 
WRL said:
I doubt Rudy will be the VP pick, but your bias clearly shows.
Click to expand...

That is a War-Torture ticket. I would never in a million fucking years cast a ballot for that.

Give me a ticket that's fiscally conservative, respects civil liberties, and doesn't start wars and I'll vote for it, but that's DEFINITELY not the case with McCain or Guiliani.

Don't even begin to paint McCain as a fiscal conservative or I might seriously die laughing.

The only Republicans I could vote for this year would be Ron Paul or Mitt Romney. Ideally someone should tell Romney to tone it down on the war talk and adopt Guliani's Forbes Tax Plan and I would vote for him in a heartbeat.

Or Paul could just win. That would be best anyway.
 
Romney is a retard. He actually said last night that we have George Bush to that for the last 6 years being safe.
 
Epicurus said:
That is a War-Torture ticket. I would never in a million fucking years cast a ballot for that.

Give me a ticket that's fiscally conservative, respects civil liberties, and doesn't start wars and I'll vote for it, but that's DEFINITELY not the case with McCain or Guiliani.

Don't even begin to paint McCain as a fiscal conservative or I might seriously die laughing.

The only Republicans I could vote for this year would be Ron Paul or Mitt Romney. Ideally someone should tell Romney to tone it down on the war talk and adopt Guliani's Forbes Tax Plan and I would vote for him in a heartbeat.

Or Paul could just win. That would be best anyway.
Click to expand...

you would vote for a man who has changed his positions with every election?

telling...
 
Darla said:
Yes it is.

I don't want to have to be sitting in someone's living room three years from now, watching yet another documentary showing toddler writhing and dying.

It terrifies me.

Does it make you feel good? Do you get that special tingle?
Click to expand...

Tell me Darla... how many kids have died because of US bombs?

Didn't we just see a report that stated about 150k Iraqis have died and that about 90% were due to Iraqi on Iraqi violence or terrorist on Iraqi violence?

Yes, the death of a child (regardless of cause) is always tragic and we should do all we can to avoid causing a childs death. Yes, in war, the innocent will also suffer. But as you have noted, the innocent can suffer without war as well (as we saw with the sanctions).
 
Superfreak said:
How is he with regards to economic policy?
Click to expand...

Umm I could tell you that he talks a lot during dinner and sucks up to my dad, as most politicians do.

Seriously though, I do remember that even in highschool I thought he sounded like he supported a good bit of spending for a Republican. I don't live in Florida though, I just know the man. Might be better to ask Jarod for an objective analysis of his fiscal policy.
 
WRL said:
you would vote for a man who has changed his positions with every election?

telling...
Click to expand...

LOL!

You're right I should vote for "Against the Tax Cuts Yesterday, but For Them Today" "Citizenship Before Border Security Yesterday, but Border Security First, Today" John McCain.

That would really show true, principled consistency.
 
He voted against the tax cuts because they where not accompanied with spending cuts, which he said would lead to deficits, which it did. That makes him way more Conservative that Romney who will say anything whatever the moment. McCain took a principled stand, and Conservative stand, and now people think we are dumb enough to think he completely opposed the tax cuts as some liberal.

comprehensive immigration reform will eventually happen, people will pay their fines, they will get at the back of the line, and they will learn English, it's just we need border security first.
 
Superfreak said:
There is a big difference between "supporting military action to protect those that cannot protect themselves" and "supporting military action because you really really like war".

Bosnia and Kosovo were to stop genocide. We most certainly should not have stood on the sidelines. A lesson Clinton learned from Rwanda. A lesson we should take to heart as we continue to do nothing in the Sudan and Congo.
Click to expand...

There is no difference between believing that we should frequently use military force to police the world and being a war monger. You are employing a strawman. Of course, McCain will, in sober moments (i.e., when not talking to other warmongers and singing songs flippantly praising death and destruction), pretend that he hates war, but that it is necessary for some greater good. That's what all war mongers claim. He might even believe it, I don't know and I don't care. But HE IS a warmonger.
 
Last edited:
RStringfield said:
There is no difference between believing that we should frequently use military force to police the world and being a war monger. You are employing a strawman. Of course, McCain will, in sober moments (i.e., when not talking to other warmongers and singing songs flippantly praising death and destruction), pretend that he hates war, but that it is necessary for some greater good. That's what all war mongers claim. He might even believe it, I don't and I don't care. But HE IS a warmonger.
Click to expand...

So stopping genocide makes him a warmonger? Then we have very different ideas as to what makes someone a warmonger. Supporting military action when diplomacy fails to stop genocide is not warmongering to me.
 
Superfreak said:
So stopping genocide makes him a warmonger? Then we have very different ideas as to what makes someone a warmonger. Supporting military action when diplomacy fails to stop genocide is not warmongering to me.
Click to expand...

SF this is the most intellectually dishonest argument I have ever seen anyone give.

WE were the ones killing the Iraqis. We could have chosen to stop.

You really are so fucked on this thread that I have to stop reading it. It's making me sick.
 
What makes him a warmonger is that he supports every fucking war imagined. Make up as many bullshit excuses as you like, when has the guy EVER opposed war? He never fails to support military action, he supports using it to antagonize other nations and he is always out front and cheering for more. He's a warmonger.

I have argued this more than I should have. You have obviously drank the koolaid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top