What? No VP debate thread?

[thatmariolover]

Sorry that I misspoke regarding who he caved to.

The principle arguement still stands. He's opposed to the bill, yet he voted for it. How does that make any sense? And how is it commendable or deserving of respect? He's an elected official. He was elected to vote for what he believed, and he didn't.

[Teuthida]

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by thatmariolover

Sorry that I misspoke regarding who he caved to.

The principle arguement still stands. He's opposed to the bill, yet he voted for it. How does that make any sense? And how is it commendable or deserving of respect? He's an elected official. He was elected to vote for what he believed, and he didn't.

Please read my posts and watch the interview I posted in its entirety. I've already explained why this is a commendable act on his part. he acted out of what he thought was right, and didn;t care that those like you would try and twist his value's for partisan reasons. This conversation is getting very frustrating because of everyone's refusal to react to a situation with any kind of thoughtfulness, and just chalk it up to "Gotcha!".

1) McCain has always opposed pork in spending and has NEVEr accepted or asked for pork in exchange for his vote.

2) Economy about to collapse, congress needed to act in most economist's opinions, OTHER representatives push all kinds of pork in the bill but it still needs to pass out of fear that weeks of quibbling over pork will lead to the end of American as we know it. McCain chooses to lesser of two evils.

3) McCain is instrumental in pulling Republicans to vote for the bill.

4) McCain helps to pass the bill, and points out pork in the interview, and explains his nuanced stance on this issue, and why voted for the bill in this case but also how the pork almost ruined it.

What is there not to understand? Do you not recognize this bill as an extraordinary case that was very time sensitive? If you WANT to find all kinds of serious contradictions and "flip-flops" in this series of events, I'm sure you can, but that would make you no better than Keith Olberman who spends his career twisting words to fit his world view (like Rush on the right). The way you are behaving you would think McCain is the one who asked for pork or is receiving it. He isn't, and never has. It also ignores the fact that he has called for a line item veto for years, and that would have made this entire discussion moot and there wouldn't have been a series of events to overreact to if McCain's values had been put in place.

If you want to have a thoughtful opinion on this, you can do that, but you haven't. Everyone on the left wants to blow this out of purportion, and paint McCain as being something that he obviously isn't, and its shameful. Its up to you to decide how tot hink about this election, but to bring this up as some egregious case of McCain acting against his values is silly and extraordinarily partisan.

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by Professor S

If you want to have a thoughtful opinion on this, you can do that, but you haven't. Everyone on the left wants to blow this out of purportion, and paint McCain as being something that he obviously isn't, and its shameful. Its up to you to decide how tot hink about this election, but to bring this up as some egregious case of McCain acting against his values is silly and extraordinarily partisan.

I notice you switched gears and kinda ignored the last thing I said, though the last post you made was the closest thing to a responce I could see. The truth is, it still doesn't make sense how its commendable. I've noticed you put a lot of words into Mccains mouth when it comes to the issue, but the truth is Mccain failed to give an good explanation to why he votes yes even though he's against the pork.

He had a good platform here to criticize the government about it. He could have pointed out who added the pork, and made the famous in an attempt to start cleaning up washington one bill at a time, starting with this one. You make a change by not giving into fear, and pointing out this kinda crap is what got us where we are in the first place.

I would have gladly waited another week for another bill if it helped clean up the government starting NOW.

But no... he voted for it, and wasn't even trying to defend his reason for voting for it, just simply stating that its the kind of crap he'd veto if he were the president. He didn't say aything about the special circumstances, or say anything to the effect that "This time I had to let it slide for the safety of the country, but next time when I'm not scared of the results of NOT passing a bill, I'll vote no or veto it."

But I think we're both very aware how he came across on that interview was not very good. You can get on Olberman for making things sound different then they were, but there is no exert of the speech to speak of that he could have played in which Mccain really defended his choice. Mccain made >himself< sound bad by not explaining his actions and why he is against what he just voted for 24 hours ago.