McCain's trend

[Intrepidation]

I for one greatly appreciate this thread as it's given me much more info about the candidates than I knew about before, pertaining to the ones with actual sources.

[Intrepidation]

Also...

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

[A Horse With No Name]

:rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:

Where do you sign up for the RNC talking points email distribution? I can just have it autopost here and save you the time.

Chris

[Drew Dowdell]

"Yesterday, John McCain actually said that if he's president that he'll take on, and I quote, 'the old boys network in Washington.' Now I'm not making this up. This is somebody who's been in Congress for twenty-six years, who put seven of the most powerful Washington lobbyists in charge of his campaign. And now he tells us that he's the one who's gonna' to take on the old boys network. The old boys network? In the McCain campaign that's called a staff meeting. Come, on!"

Barack Obama, on the stump today.

[gm4life]

Barack enjoyed a night in Hollywood at a 28K a plate dinner while John McCain was talking about the issues and real American's in Ohio. That speaks volume about him and "where he is". So much for being a man of the people, the Hollywood elite sure.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

Gun control and anti-gun are two very different things. I believe Americans have the right to own a gun...but I also favor strict regulation of that for safety purposes.

Yeah but a lot of the regulations do jack for crime as a total (perhaps slightly for gun related crimes, but given that criminals don't usually follow regulations...). The real solutions are solving the problems behind the crimes in the first place.

Its like if you have an emo kid, they will cut themselves with a knife, so you take the knife away, but they will just find other things to cut themselves with.

IMO underlying problems are the problem, not things on the surface.

[Drew Dowdell]

Barack enjoyed a night in Hollywood at a 28K a plate dinner while John McCain was talking about the issues and real American's in Ohio. That speaks volume about him and "where he is". So much for being a man of the people, the Hollywood elite sure.

I didn't realize McCain had a house in Ohio... did he invite the town over for a BBQ on the south lawn of the estate? What issues did he discuss? How about the one where the economy is fundamentally sound? Did he fiddle while AIG burned? I heard that Phill Gramm, the McCain campaign's financial issues adviser, the one who wrote the legislation that made this whole Lehman/Merrill/AIG/WaMu mess possible was going to speak also... but he was suddenly called away on account of rain.

[Drew Dowdell]

Yeah but a lot of the regulations do jack for crime as a total (perhaps slightly for gun related crimes, but given that criminals don't usually follow regulations...). The real solutions are solving the problems behind the crimes in the first place.

Its like if you have an emo kid, they will cut themselves with a knife, so you take the knife away, but they will just find other things to cut themselves with.

IMO underlying problems are the problem, not things on the surface.

i wish my lawn was emo so it would cut itself.

[vonVeezelsnider]

i wish my lawn was emo so it would cut itself.

:rotflmao:

[Croc]

Barack enjoyed a night in Hollywood at a 28K a plate dinner.

When and where was this? And what's your source?

EDIT: This isn't entirely accurate. RNC Talking Points Memo spin for sure.

Facts: DNC Fundraiser in Beverly Hills. 250 on invite list. $28.5K per plate. Followed by a $2.5K per ticket performance by Barbara Streisand. Majority of fundraising goes to DNC. Obama will get a smaller portion of the proceeds.

Source: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13471.html

So, some wealthy donors are having a fundraiser, yet somehow this makes Obama "out of touch" because he's a guest of honor and some of the funds will go to his campaign? Let me tell you a little secret, gm4life: Obama isn't paying a cent for this, let alone $28.5k... Fundraisers are funny things--look at all the articles (I found the same information in a conservative blog as I did on Politico) and note something: $9M is the projected amount fundraised by the event. That's for DNC and Obama. Do the math. 250 ( 28,500 + 2,500) = 250 ( 31,000) = 7.75M . That per person plate cost is over 86% of the total projected funds to be raised.

So who's out of touch? The guy who knows how to fundraise and is running a VERY financially impressive campaign, or the spinmeisters over at RNC who think Americans are too stupid to understand how a basic fundraiser works?

And now for "fair and balanced": McCain has also had many high-dollar fundraisers, so glass houses and stones should apply.

Edited September 17, 2008 by Croc

[siegen]

Barack enjoyed a night in Hollywood at a 28K a plate dinner while John McCain was talking about the issues and real American's in Ohio. That speaks volume about him and "where he is". So much for being a man of the people, the Hollywood elite sure.

Who cares what one candidate does while the other is doing something else?

Really, who cares?

If it becomes a trend then perhaps you can nit pick at it, but otherwise there is nothing to comment on.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

http://www.nypost.com/seven/09152008/posto...awal_129150.htm

Apparently Obama was trying to delay our troops withdrawal from Iraq. Not sure why, seems odd.

[Croc]

http://www.nypost.com/seven/09152008/posto...awal_129150.htm

Apparently Obama was trying to delay our troops withdrawal from Iraq. Not sure why, seems odd.

Huh?? I read the article...he wasn't delaying troop withdrawal; he was wanting to delay making a plan for withdrawal until after November because Congress should be involved, and the Bush administration has shown its blatant disregard for Congress.

Frankly, that's smart. Would you REALLY want Bush to screw up one more thing on the eve of his moving day?

The only way this could reasonably be interpreted as a withrawal delay is if you truly believed that sll the troops were coming home within the next year. No matter what party wins, that ain't happening (nor should it, as that would be irresponsible politics).

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

Well you know, Obama is also a proponent of attacking Al Quaeda in Pakistan without their governments permission. Now Bush has gone along and done just this, and now we face a Pakistani army that has shoot on sight orders on US troops.

So clearly Obama is no better than Bush in making bad foreign policy decisions

Edited September 17, 2008 by Teh Ricer Civic!

[trinacriabob]

I like McCain but not Palin. Like I said earlier, it should have been an "Elizabeth Dole type" on the ticket with him.

Have you noticed all the Hollywood Elite routinely courts the Democrats, unless the Republican is/was an actor/actress? I guess it's easy to be a "limousine liberal."

[Satty]

I wonder if Bush is going to attack someone (Iran? Syria? Guatemala? Haiti? Denmark?) between election day and inauguration day.

[Satty]

Hey, what about McCain's $50,000/plate fundraiser? Is he out of touch?

[gm4life]

I didn't realize McCain had a house in Ohio... did he invite the town over for a BBQ on the south lawn of the estate? What issues did he discuss? How about the one where the economy is fundamentally sound? Did he fiddle while AIG burned? I heard that Phill Gramm, the McCain campaign's financial issues adviser, the one who wrote the legislation that made this whole Lehman/Merrill/AIG/WaMu mess possible was going to speak also... but he was suddenly called away on account of rain.

I am just pointing out how "in touch" Obama is with the folks. He is not the kind of politican I want in office. As for the homes thing it was an honest mistake, Obama has no idea that people are having problems filling up there tanks and he is blowing 28K on a dinner. Sure believe what you want.

Edited September 17, 2008 by gm4life

[Satty]

So the community organizer is out of touch with people while the guy whose wife if worth $100,000,000 knows what the average American is going through.

Which is it? Is Obama a community organizer with no government experience, unfit to lead because he's done nothing more than work with a few South Siders who have lost their jobs, or is he the uppity, rich politician who cannot comprehend the problems of the average person? Those seem mutually exclusive to me.

Do you really think either of these guys has to take a chunk out of their Wednesday evening to set the budget to make sure the mortgage payment doesn't drain the checking account so the utility payment doesn't bounce?

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080917/ap_on_..._clinton_backer

Top hillary fundraiser throws her support behing McCain.

[Croc]

Well you know, Obama is also a proponent of attacking Al Quaeda in Pakistan without their governments permission. Now Bush has gone along and done just this, and now we face a Pakistani army that has shoot on sight orders on US troops.

So clearly Obama is no better than Bush in making bad foreign policy decisions

WHAT? That's a large leap in logic. I only recall Obama mentioning the U.S. must be willing to strike Pakistan in pursuit of Al Quaeda, and this was over a year ago. I even found a source: http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNew...132206420070801

[Croc]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080917/ap_on_..._clinton_backer

Top hillary fundraiser throws her support behing McCain.

OK this was funny...when I read "top hillary fundraiser" I was thinking how relative that must be, because Hillary never raised much money, and I believe is still very much in debt. Then I read the article, and this "top fundraiser" only managed to raise $100,000 for Hillary.

And as noted above, Obama will be one of the beneficiaries of a $28,500/plate fundraiser for 250 people. Hmmm.

[siegen]

I am just pointing out how "in touch" Obama is with the folks. He is not the kind of politican I want in office. As for the homes thing it was an honest mistake, Obama has no idea that people are having problems filling up there tanks and he is blowing 28K on a dinner. Sure believe what you want.

Neither of these candidates, nor most politicians for that matter, are going to be "in touch" anymore than Obama is or McCain is. Do you think McCain has to worry about filling up his fuel tank? Do you think McCain has to pick up the tab when he eats at a restaurant?

I admire McCain's military service and record, and he is certainly "in touch" with military folks. He has been moving around his entire life due to the military, and it likely wasn't easy at times.

Reading both candidate's biographies, and it is clear to me that Obama has lived a life far more inline with most lower and middle class non-military Americans. He started in a broken household and worked his way through school and college, mostly without his parents around.

[Croc]

While I respect McCain's service, it gave me great pause to learn that Veteran's Groups give McCain a lower ranking on Vet issues than Obama. McCain fought the new GI Bill until it was politically untenable to do so.

[Satty]

I saw a poll over the summer that put Obama ahead significantly among voters 65+ most of whom cited McCain's age as a factor. I'll have to see if I can find that one, because if anyone knows how ill-prepared a 72 year old is to handle the pressure of the presidency, its a 72 year old who cant get off the couch, pee, and get back before the commercial break ends and The Price is Right is back on.

[Robert Hall]

I wonder if Bush is going to attack someone (Iran? Syria? Guatemala? Haiti? Denmark?) between election day and inauguration day.

He might...or starting a new war before Election Day would be one way to seal it for McCain, since he wants to continue the all war, all the time approach of the Bush regime and it's supporters.

[Enzora]

I wonder if Bush is going to attack someone (Iran? Syria? Guatemala? Haiti? Denmark?) between election day and inauguration day.

Nah. If Obama is elected, Cheney will have Bush assassinated, take over, and declare himself president for life.

Edited September 18, 2008 by Enzora

[Robert Hall]

Nah. If Obama is elected, Cheney will have Bush assassinated, take over, and declare himself president for life.

I'm surprised that hasn't happened yet... I keep expecting a coup attempt by the evangelicals to create a theocracy..The United States of Jesus..

[siegen]

I'm surprised that hasn't happened yet... I keep expecting a coup attempt by the evangelicals to create a theocracy..The United States of Jesus..

You mean United States of Juses, right?

[Drew Dowdell]

It's as if the last two weeks never happened.....

[loki]

It's as if the last two weeks never happened.....

to be fair, what are the 07 stats based on...straw polls? i find it unlikely those stats are very real , pre-08.

[Drew Dowdell]

to be fair, I don't care either way. There were 14 candidates in the field back then... the poles were irrelevant unless you were comparing intra-party.

[loki]

I wouldn't spend the money quite like that. I would spend the money on the R&D to develop more advanced and efficient and safer forms of non-dinosaur based energy. Basic rotor design, basic photovoltaic chemistry, basic reactor design hasn't changed in 30 years.

After that, then I would spend the money on installations.

To pay for this (because I believe in balancing the budget), I would increase the taxes on non-renewable <not counting nuclear> energy.

sorry to bring up an older post. finally looked at them.

Don't your links show that "radical" or new designs are being made without your proposed R&D grants? PBMRs are becoming an "old idea", just hasn't been put into place yet.

doesn't it usually cost the most to put these idea into production... like why GM is changing to "flex" assembly lines, so change overs are much quicker and less costly?

i could see how a tax on non-renewables would help the transition, but with that new tax would come more bureaucracy. the gov. is already the biggest employer, maybe in the world, why would you want to even just shift employees around in it? to start to address the debt, you'd have to start cutting something.

[loki]

to be fair, I don't care either way. There were 14 candidates in the field back then... the poles were irrelevant unless you were comparing intra-party.

true. but it's just silly to say one chart is fine, if the chart could have been fudged at any point... "inconvenient truth" comes to mind (never seen it though), and the P&T's BS: global warming episode comes to mind.

[Drew Dowdell]

sorry to bring up an older post. finally looked at them.

Don't your links show that "radical" or new designs are being made without your proposed R&D grants? PBMRs are becoming an "old idea", just hasn't been put into place yet.

doesn't it usually cost the most to put these idea into production... like why GM is changing to "flex" assembly lines, so change overs are much quicker and less costly?

i could see how a tax on non-renewables would help the transition, but with that new tax would come more bureaucracy. the gov. is already the biggest employer, maybe in the world, why would you want to even just shift employees around in it? to start to address the debt, you'd have to start cutting something.

The development is coming at a snails pace in university research labs. Put the R&D of Honda, GM, Ford, or Toyota behind it and it'll go much faster.

You're right about PBMRs not being new technology, but they require a large upfront investment (and the changing of U.S. law) in order to come to fruition.

Cutting government spending is a different thread entirely. We already collect tax on non-renewable energy. I would increase that tax and dedicate that increase to spending on renewable energy development.

[Drew Dowdell]

true. but it's just silly to say one chart is fine, if the chart could have been fudged at any point... "inconvenient truth" comes to mind (never seen it though), and the P&T's BS: global warming episode comes to mind.

Pollster.com agregates all of the polls released, weights them, and comes up with a number based on that. The old polls include rammussan, ARG, etc. But prior to Super Tuesday, I don't much care.

[Drew Dowdell]

Clearly Sen. John S. McCain III is the most qualified to serve our country, as he served our country in a war, and was a POW. He will protect us from terrorist-sponsoring countries like Iran, Syria, and Spain. He knows the threat of the Russian bear, and he has dispatched Palin the Hunter to kill it. He understands that the fundamentals of this economy are stronger than ever, and that $12 trillion debt is an inconsequential, peripheral detail. He understands the threat of lobbyists to Washington, which is why the employs them as a majority of his staff (keep your enemies close!)

Geezer/Giget 'O8

</sarcasm>

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

Why are both candidates still talking about soaring energy costs? They are hardly soaring, they are tumbling.

We've actually had DEFLATION through last quarter of -0.1% thanks to the falling costs of energy.

As it pertains to the economy, it is beneficial for lenders and if this trend continues it will greatly help our financial institutions get back on track. HOWEVER, its terrible for borrowers. Its bad for our government in our efforts to reduce debts (although it may become possible to refinance our debt to lower interest rates).

The economy will correct itself in time as it always does. Deflation should help to contribute to a strengthening of the dollar. All in all we have decent conditions for an economic recovery in my opinion. Perhaps this time around we can do something novel like keeping very tight controls on money supply to keep inflation very low.

[Drew Dowdell]

Why are both candidates still talking about soaring energy costs? They are hardly soaring, they are tumbling.

We've actually had DEFLATION through last quarter of -0.1% thanks to the falling costs of energy.

As it pertains to the economy, it is beneficial for lenders and if this trend continues it will greatly help our financial institutions get back on track. HOWEVER, its terrible for borrowers. Its bad for our government in our efforts to reduce debts (although it may become possible to refinance our debt to lower interest rates).

The economy will correct itself in time as it always does. Deflation should help to contribute to a strengthening of the dollar. All in all we have decent conditions for an economic recovery in my opinion. Perhaps this time around we can do something novel like keeping very tight controls on money supply to keep inflation very low.

I think they are mis-wording the call for energy independence.... but the pocketbook is the best way to connect to most voters.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

found this on another board

Biden has been speaking that his wife and child were killed by a drunk tractor trailer driver. His words "the man chose to drink his lunch instead of eat it". Well, the records show that the tractor trailer driver was cleared of any traffic violations and was not drinking. He actually tried to avoid Biden's wife when she pulled directly out in front of him by turning his truck over.

They just showed it on TV and the man's (rig driver) daughter is very upset. It showed Biden twice telling the same lie to different audiences.

He's trying to milk his own family tragedy for sympathy & votes! This man has no shame and no honor.

Not sure if its true or not, but if it is that's pretty bad to lie about something like that.

[Drew Dowdell]

if he is lying about something so easily verifiable, that's just as bad as McCain/Palin.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

Yawn: this presidential race only has 2 important issues.

1. The national debt, which neither candidate effectively has a solution to (McCain cuts taxes with little to no reduction in government spending). Obama moderately increases revenue through taxes, somewhat stifles the economy, and vastly increases government spending.

2. Enforcing the constitution. Neither candidate has very good records when it comes to the first amendment when it comes to the patriot act, and obama is of course good at attempting to keep people who write negative books about him off of radiowaves, and im quite sure that the McCain camp has done a few things in violation of the 1st amendment too. However, Obama is far more prone to appoint supreme court judges who are not constructionists.

Point 2 is actually why i had made the gun right argument. Because in Heller, the winning opinion only barely won, and the reason they stated for choosing it was wrong. The dissenting opinion, MISSTATES history in decisions. But the main point is, that the dissenting opinion obviously has no regard for the constitution the case, while controversial for sure, should have EASILY passed in the supreme court as it deals with an issue thats STATED rather clearly in the document... and that sort of behavior from the supreme court scares me far more than what a president can do by himself. And i know your probably thinking, well what about abortion? but the point is abortion isn't something that's actually stated in the constitution and thus is at the very least up for debate.

I leave out the economy because honestly regardless of whoever is president, the economy will drag itself out of this and im sure they will slap a few regulations on it, spin off the national holdings as quickly as possible and hope it never happens again like they always do.

Edited September 18, 2008 by Teh Ricer Civic!

[A Horse With No Name]

I'm surprised that hasn't happened yet... I keep expecting a coup attempt by the evangelicals to create a theocracy..The United States of Jesus..

The really nice thing about Theocracy is that it is self curing. Iran has a lot of people who really no longer want to live under Sharia law.

The best thing to do would be to abolish religious thinking altogether, but good luck with that idea.

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

Yawn: this presidential race only has 2 important issues.

1. The national debt, which neither candidate effectively has a solution to (

But the number 1 issue for me is the Debt-Deficit, and I don't trust the republicans after being lied to by Reagan, Lied to by Bush Sr, and Lied to by Bush Jr.

For 30 years they've been saying they arewanting to do something about it, but the debt always seems to go up faster under the Republicans.

Republicans will reduce deficit spending about the time Toyota builds a 455 Powered 442 Droptop Cutlass with a 4 speed and an 8 track.

Chris

Edited September 18, 2008 by 66Stang

[A Horse With No Name]

Nah. If Obama is elected, Cheney will have Bush assassinated, take over, and declare himself president for life.

Methinks its really Cheney and verious other factions in the party running the nation anyhow, WTF would change if this did happen?

Chris

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

% of GDP is whats important, as it decides how easily it can be refinanced and carried forward (charts that just show the monetary amounts are completely worthless because there's more money floating around now than 5 years ago). a government with a good GDP can, in theory, roll over its debt infinitely. The theory is similar to if you have 100 friends. You go to friend A and ask if you can borrow $5, he lends it to you. A week later you ask friend B if you can borrow $5, you use that $5 to repay friend A. A week after that you go to friend C and ask to borrow $5 which you use to repay friend B and so on. Eventually you can go back to Friend A and borrow another $5 in order to repay your 100th friend and the cycle continues. Of course in real life the government has to pay interest on this borrowing.

But yes, reducing it is good because thats less taxpayer money that's tied up in interest costs. And as the war cools off and as spending on the war falls, we should begin to see reductions in the deficit so long as we dont go starting another war regardless of who is president.

Additionally, charts that show TOTAL debt, which includes medicare etc, are rather unfair to look at too because of the different structural makeup of our society now. Those old Depression era programs are no longer sustainable in their current forms and contribute to skyrocketing debt.

Edited September 18, 2008 by Teh Ricer Civic!

[Enzora]

Methinks its really Cheney and verious other factions in the party running the nation anyhow, WTF would change if this did happen?

Chris

Well, I know that the current presidency doesn't hold much stock in the Constitution, but there are a few pesky sections that keep hindering them.

The 22nd Amendment, for example:

Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.

[Satty]

One thing I've noticed, nobody has really given a good reason to vote for McCain, they're just spouting some bs about why to vote against Obama. Remember 2004? Kerry tried running as "not George Bush" and it didn't work, does anyone think that McCain running as the "not Barack Obama" candidate will work?

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

One thing I've noticed, nobody has really given a good reason to vote for McCain, they're just spouting some bs about why to vote against Obama. Remember 2004? Kerry tried running as "not George Bush" and it didn't work, does anyone think that McCain running as the "not Barack Obama" candidate will work?

Vote for McCain. Why? Because as he has grown older he has seen the need to put others before himself. As a result he will probably be more inclined to disregard his own party in order to get things done because what the hell, he probably wont have to run for re-election (and hell if he ends up being really popular he can probably just run as an independent and still win if the republicans wont have him on a ticket). Think of your grandparents, in their old age they probably don't spend a whole lot or do too much, they end up thinking of their families more and helping them out. Well think of McCain as this nations grandfather, a man who will think of other before himself. His stance on the surge proves this, everyone said this would kill any chances he had of being a presidential nominee, that he would be committing political suicide by backing such an unpopular thing. But here we are now, the Surge has for all intents and purposes been an success. It is through this that i believe McCain will truly put the interests of our nation before any personal or Republican interest of his own. He is a strong supporter of Capitalism and deregulation, he has also seen how deregulation can go wrong and i believe McCain is the type who learns from him mistakes, so you can expect him to walk the fine line between economic freedom and government regulations.

McCain's ideas for educational reform seem like they may actually have some merit behind them. McCain's ideas would foster an air of competition between schools, his proponetism of school vouchers is rather odd cause thats usually against republican stance on that issue, however the way he has portrayed it as being a tool to increase overall educational value does seem like it may very well prove to be effective. This seems to be a better plan than has been carried out under the last 2 presidencies, which is essentially just to keep throwing money at the education system which, since this is still a problem, clearly has not worked.

McCain has said that he would install constructionist judges into the supreme court. These selections are vital if we wish to remain being ruled under our constitution.

McCain would offer plenty of experience in the realm of foreign relations. Despite how the media has portrayed him, he is not a warmonger. He will ensure that we leave Iraq honorably and victoriously. I HIGHLY doubt he would seek a war with Iran unilaterally. He would likely considerably step up efforts to stabilize Afghanistan and to go after Osama through somewhat more legal means than just barging into Pakistan uninvited. McCain has seen war, he knows how devastating it is to both soldiers and their families. He will work to ensure that our military remains the strongest in the world, able to confront any problem that is needed. This military, of course, never actually needs to see conflict, but the mere presence of it is enough to have leverage in foreign policy.

McCain brings to the presidency the ability to work between parties. Now you may say that his record when it comes to passing bills that he has worked with democrats with is poor, well that is true, but the legislature was also dominated by Republicans at that time who would have nothing to do with anything that wasn't strictly on their agenda. McCain will take into consideration good ideas from both Democrats, Republicans and Independents.

McCain may not be an economic genius, but he did point out 2 or so years ago that Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac would cause havoc on the financial industry if regulations weren't enforced and if nothing was done about them. Well here we are 2 years later with Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac on the taxpayers dime, maybe someone should have listened to the committee he was on. Additionally McCains tax plan would pave the way to increased investing, something that will be greatly needed in the upcoming months and years. Lower tax rates on capital investments equals more people investing. Of course, this investing needs to be carefully monitored least we end up with another housing/energy bubble. McCain's tax cuts will promote increased job growth as those with money tend to be the ones that spearhead new businesses. In 1980, when the top tax bracket was 70%, the top 1% of Americans contributed a mere 20% of our governments total revenue. Now that same top 1% contributes 60% of our governments total revenue with a top tax bracket of 39% i believe. Although in all honestly, i cant see McCain giving any more tax cuts, he will probably just re-instate the Bush tax cuts in order to start lowering the debt.

Since Alternative energy and sustainable fuels seems to be a hot topic this year, McCain is rather odd in that he is a republican that would like to preserve our planet, i wouldn't say he is so much an environmentalist as he is a naturalist. He, like Obama, calls for a Cap and trade system to reduce our emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and a further goal of 60% below 1990 emissions by 2050. McCain is an "all of the above" type when it comes to energy, he is a supporter of Nuclear energy as we transition ourselves (or perhaps develop better nuclear power) to a sustainable, clean energy system. Additionally, McCain has promised to increase government investment into creating Clean Coal power plants, while they may not be quite as clean as other alternative energy types, they will help to preserve America's use of our most abundant energy source in a clean and somewhat environmentally fashion.

Finally, McCain is committed to the free market. Although he has seen first hand the problems that deregulation can cause, he is still committed to creating an efficient marketplace with the minimum possible regulations in order to protect America's citizens. McCain realizes that government bailouts does nothing but encourage inefficient business practices (although it has come to my attention that he apparently supports giving the Big 3 loans??) and as such does not believe that the government should be bailing out any more failed financial systems.

McCain believes that Americans should be more active within our nation, whether that means community service, joining the army, peace core, etc. However, he believes that these programs should be created by the citizenry as private insitutions, because anything the government can do, the private sector can likely do better. As such he would help foster the creation of these programs, but not as a direct government program. These would be programs that are driven by volunteers and private donations, not programs that are created by coercing citizens to pay for them (in the form of tax dollars).

Country First.

There you go Satty, a purely positive post on what i find some of McCains strong points. I could probably come up with more, but seeing as how this is basically the first positive post in this entire thread (that directly related to one of the candidates) i find this a sufficient start.

Edited September 19, 2008 by Teh Ricer Civic!

[Satty]

I haven't read it all yet (eating right now) but from the first paragraph, it seems a lot more mature and better laid out than:

"Thinking people will vote for McCain"

"NOBAMA"

and

"He's a liberal"

as the reasons anyone should vote for McCain.