93crawler

click on one of our sponsors! OR REMOVE ADS

I've heard from many people that McCain is more patriotic and "supports the troops," more than Obama, but do you really know that? Well, let me enlighten you in the fact that despite McSame saying that he "supports the troops," he in fact does quite the opposite in several instances over the years. The ones that get me, are the veterans benefits funding bills, and the health care bills, which he has consistently voted against. Having been on government health care since the day he was born (his grandfather, and father were both admirals in the Navy), and having been in the Navy himself, it puzzles me why he consistently votes against veterans benefits/health care funding of any form. I'm sure his campaign will try to dodge the issue, or simply not answer it, or say that there was a considerable amount of pork in the bills. See for yourself, here's the man's voting record of "supporting the troops," there are links to each vote in case you may not think this is factual or accurate, with the exception of the most recent GI Bill, which he took credit for, but was against from the beginning.

5/2008: McCain voted AGAINST the Webb GI Bill.

9/2007: McCain voted AGAINST bill to minimize periods of time between deployment of units sent to Iraq. http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/r...on=1&vote=00341

5/2006: McCain voted AGAINST $20 Million to VA for health care facilities. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/L...on=2&vote=00111

4/2006: McCain voted AGAINST $430,000,000 to VA for Medical Services. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/L...on=2&vote=00098

3/2006: McCain voted AGAINST increasing Vet-medical services $1.5 billion in FY2007. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/L...on=2&vote=00041

3/2004: McCain voted AGAINST increasing Vet-medical care by $1.8 billion. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/L...on=2&vote=00040

10/2003: McCain voted to TABLE an amendment for $322,000,000 for safety equipment for USforces. "Table"= vote never hits floor. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/L...on=1&vote=00376

10/2003: McCain voted to TABLE a vote for $1 Billion for National Guard and Reserve Equipment in Iraq dueto:shortage of helmets, tents, bullet-proof inserts, & tactical vests. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/L...on=1&vote=00116 http://capwiz.com/vva/e4/cinfo/?id=157301

fmb

Sometimes, a "no" vote may be cast because of the add-ons accompanying the original legislation. If the additional baggage makes supporting, moving forward, or passing the legislation impractical, the legislation will not go forward. This was something I asked about and learned while doing some work in DC late last year.

I haven't done any research into these items to see if anything may have been added, so I cannot say this was the case. It does bring some things up which should be investigated further.

Krasch

I was just about to say the same thing as fmb. It's not necessarily the main part of the bill that is at issue, but all the additions (many times seemingly unrelated) that get added to bills.

BackdoorJesus

With two sons active in the military I think it ludicrous to think that McCain does not support the troops.

One thing I am sure of however is that he does not support excessive spending and increased government entitlements, as any true republican would not.

The two posts before mine stated the most obvious counterpoint to your allegations - that the bills in question may likely have contained excess pork barrel legislation or were otherwise fiscally irresponsible.

Unlike his predecessor G.W.Bush and his current opponent O'Carter, I think that McCain actually believes in being responsible and pragmatic whenever possible when it comes to minding the checkbook.

I don't like McCain because he's a conservative, I like him because he is a fiscal conservative - which is something this country desperately needs.

___________________________________________

tsmo

(invoking a BOTH reply) He looks very close to being a Zombie... I cant vote for that... he is going to stroke out in office.

back to serious.. I was not aware he had two sons currently in the military.. but my guess would be along the lines of the other responses.. he probably shot down all those bills because of the "pork"

but.. Your next president also shot down a # of ( non miltary ) bills in somewhat the same fashion, he didnt vote them down but basically sent them back to be reviewed I believe.. or something to the like.

less than 100 days correct?

and please.. can mccains tv ads get any worse? it seems the old man is really diggin his own grave here..

___________________________________________
I'm a terminal non-achiever

CD

I pay no attention to him voting against those bills, just as I didn't give Kerry any shit for changing his vote. Stuff gets added to bills all the time, and until you know the specifics, it's hard to judge a person's voting record.

___________________________________________

93crawler

Yeah I agree, when is he going to actually talk about his positions on the issues? Typical Republican, doesn't have anything substantive to add, or his stances are very much at odds with the majority of the public, so he just attacks the other guy. As far as pork, there's almost always pork in virtually every bill passed or not, so saying that he votes down these bills merely on a basis of pork is a cop-out. What's funny, is that when the Republicans were in control, you didn't hear anything about pork, but now that the Democrats are in control... To further highlight my point, I'll post this article, about the grades the candidates were given by several veterans organizations. It's funny that the Republicans constantly state that they are the more patriotic of the two parties, but their grades certainly don't back those statements up. Here's the article, it's short and to the point.

Republicans often accuse Democrats in Congress of not supporting our troops. But is that true? Not according to the nonpartisan Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America.

In 2006, this group tallied every Congressional vote on troops and veteran issues for five years. John McCain's score by this group was a D, and Barack Obama's was a B+. Georgia's two Republican senators' scores were D- for Saxby Chambliss and F for Johnny Isakson. Colquitt County's Democratic representative Jim Marshall's score was a B+. Our former Democratic representative Sanford Bishop's score was an A.

In 2006, the Disabled Veterans of America issued a similar rating of the members of Congress's votes. Every Democrat except one (Ben Nelson of Nebraska) received a score of 80 to 100. Only one Republican (Wilson of Arizona) received a score higher than 66. John McCain's score was 20 and Obama's score was 80.

These two studies by these veterans' groups make it very clear that Democrats do indeed support our troops and veterans much more than do members of the Republican Party in Congress. Wearing a flag pin does nothing for our active duty military or for our veterans. What counts is how our Congressmen vote!

Krasch

Ahhhh, but it's in the nature of Republicans to avoid adding pork to bills as their typical solutions to problems is not necessarily more money but more results. It is therefore less likely to see as much pork programs added to bills by the Republicans.

I think both candidates certainly support the troops. However, McCain might (and one might say SHOULD) have a better idea of how to successfully deal with the war in Iraq--how to win it, and how to extricate the country from it in as painless a way as possible, having actual extensive experience in the military in a combat situation.

CD

Are you serious? No, really... are you serious? I even bet that last week you would have said it's not in the nature of Republicans to take money from the oil industry.

A lot of the stuff you say I will listen to and give you credit for, but that last stuff was the biggest joke I've heard in a while.

___________________________________________

Juan.©amaney

I wanted to pretty much say what BDJ put up. No need to repeat it. I will add that we cannot accurately tell what McCain thinks on the issue until he is in power. Basically, he and everyone else will say whatever is popular to gain votes. Once he is in, there is no telling what will happen. Look at all the flip flops all politicians, candidates, and even the president, do.

___________________________________________

93crawler

Yeah right, these last eight years have been the most pork-riddled years ever. Yes, I'm even including the almost two years the Democrats have been in control. Fact is though, the Democrats can't get much passed without adding pork into existing bills that the Republicans benefit from personally. Your boy Bush came in saying he would be the "compassionate conservative," but he's been the biggest spender in quite some time. I still have trouble seeing why you are so involved in US politics, but I guess I'm the only one who sees this. Are you even more involved in Canadian politics?

You didn't respond to the grade that McClone got from both veterans groups, and for that matter the Republicans in general. And saying that McClone is somehow better as a Commander-in-Chief simply because he has military experience is getting a little old. Some of the best Presidents have had no experience, or military background whatsoever. Take your boy Reagan for instance, I'm not saying he was a good President, but you Republicans certainly want to lather their faces with his man-juice. Just because he flew missions in Vietnam, crashed numerous planes, and ultimately crashed the one which led to him being a prisoner of war, doesn't mean he has the rationale to be President. Am I questioning his service, nope not at all, but I am indeed questioning his judgment and rational thought process.

BackdoorJesus

McClone? McSame? wow could you be more of a tool of left wing blog sites like HuffPost or Daily Kos?

Shocked you haven't thrown McBush out there yet - that's another big fave these days of the libbloggers as well I see. <yawn>

Make you a deal - if you want to discuss politics, stop using the tiresome and lame-ass LW nicknames & I will do the same for my part by avoiding the same tiresome and lame-ass RW nicknames comparing your guy to failed Demo presidencies (O'Carter - I'll cop to it), and then we can have a discussion.

Until then, I am not hearing a word you are parroting...sorry - saying.

I'm happy to debate ISSUES with you, but if we need to cut thru this name-calling crap in every thread you post I'm outta here.

___________________________________________

CD

Amen Backdoor.


I've noticed a lot of people using the names on both sides, but all it does is lower the standing of the side who uses them. And yes, I've noticed both sides use them, so I'm not calling out anyone in particular.

___________________________________________

93crawler

Ok I guess I'll do this if that's what it takes for you to stop talking shit all the time...this is the "serious" part of the forum right? I mean you're just as guilty as I am in this regard, with the O'Carter comment you already stated, and calling Obama supporters Obamabots and various other gems.

As far as what sources I get my news from, I have already stated this but again here goes---yep I do read the Huffington Post quite a bit, but also read Town Hall, that's a conservative forum, Politico, The Daily Show, and the Colbert Report, and I check Google news from time to time just because it's convenient. I have only went to the Daily Kos once, and thought it was terrible, don't read or check the New York Times, or any of the other "Liberal" forums or sites you seem to despise. As for television news, I really only watch Countdown with Keith Olbermann, and the other two I already stated---laugh all you want, I really could care less. I like news shows that actually ask tough questions, and call politicians out on their bull shit, by not letting them just avoid questions altogether.

When over 60% of the country is in favor of just about every "liberal" issue, from the economy, the war in Iraq, immigration, health care reform, taking care of the middle class, and poor as opposed to the rich and corporations, I think I'm where most of the country is on the issues, as well as the world. I mean when was the last time, aside from Obama's recent overseas trip, where a politician from America was greeted was open arms so to speak by the general public? You may continue to talk all the shit you'd like, I'm beginning to think you're far more of a Republican than a Democrat. You say you're a fiscally conservative Democrat right? What is it about Obama that you don't like, did you hate Clinton as much? You're basically stating in various posts that you're voting for McCain, solely on the basis of taxes and fiscal responsibility?

I just don't get it, I'm assuming you align yourself with the Democratic side on the other issues. I have stated some of the issues I have with Obama, for instance his vote for the warrant less wiretapping bill for telecom immunity, but he is still by leaps and bounds far better than the alternative. If you really care that much about fiscal responsibility, than Bob Barr is probably you man, if he's allowed onto the ballot in most states. He's a Libertarian, which I assume more closely resembles your stances on the issues than McCain ever could?

Much respect, babycakes...later.