For those who don't know, I am posting questions to McCain supporters, since he told us nothing during the convention and isn't discussing issues in the public forum. I hoped that his supporters would be able to explain his positions to the rest of us. So far, that isn't happening.
But I'm a dreamer. I'll keep on publishing questions a few at a time, and move on when you have provided answers, or enough time has passed that I am sure you don't have the answers.
Â
Questions for McCain Supporters #1 still need answersÂ
Questions for McCain Supporters #2 still need answers Â
Â
Question set #3:
Â
John McCain believes Roe v. Wade is a flawed decision that must be overturned, and as president he will nominate judges who understand that courts should not be in the business of legislating from the bench.
Â
- What makes John McCain think he is more qualified than the justices who made this decision?
- What does “not be in the business of legislating from the bench” mean, and how does it apply here?
- Did he get his maverick reputation by wanting to be more like Bill Clinton (Meanwhile, back in the baby-killing camp, presidential candidate William Jefferson Clinton and his sidekick, Tonto, were quite candid about their litmus test for judicial nominees. During the 1992 campaign, Clinton told PBS interviewer Bill Moyers point blank that he has a litmus test for judges.) than members of his own party (When Republican primary voters next set their minds to finding an "electable" presidential candidate, they came up with Sen. Robert Dole (R.-Kan.). Like the "electable" Bush Senior before him, Dole explicitly swore off litmus tests. "I don't believe in litmus tests. I'm trying to expand the Republican Party. . . I've said, to the chagrin of some, that I don't believe in a litmus test. I refused to sign a pledge earlier this year in the primary-or last year in the primaries.... I'm not going to use that as a test for anybody I appoint to the court.")Â source for quotesÂ
- On June 14, 2008, in a Town Hall meeting, John McCain said, “I will not impose a litmus test on any nominee.”
      McCain in 2000: Somewhat surprisingly, McCain had the support of Gary Bauer, the social conservative, who had dropped out of the race by that time. 'I wanted a commitment from either George Bush or John McCain that if elected he would appoint pro-life judges to the Supreme Court,' Bauer told me. 'Bush said he had no litmus test, and his judges would be strict constructionists. But McCain, in private, assured me he would appoint pro-life judges.'" [New Yorker, 5/30/05] SourceÂ
And now he promises to appoint judges with an agenda.
Does this mean
a)Â Â Â Â Â that he is a flip flopper?
b)Â Â Â Â Â that he is confused?
c)Â Â Â Â Â that he canÂ’t remember what he says from one day to the next?
d)Â Â Â Â this is the change he keeps talking about? (at least since he realized people were really getting into ObamaÂ’s message of change)
5. Have the National Right to Life Committee, the National Rifle Association, Americans for Tax Reform, and others, cleared these allegations and made formal apologies to John McCain: “There were allegations that McCain had fathered a black child (he and Cindy have an adopted daughter, Bridget, who is Bangladeshi); that McCain had committed treason in Hanoi, or was crazed from his captivity. This subterranean campaign was supplemented separately by attack ads and direct mail paid for by the National Right to Life Committee, the National Rifle Association, Americans for Tax Reform, and others.”
6.  What’s up with this?
a)     “John did not want to be a professional P.O.W. That night, at the party, everybody started telling stories about their incarceration. Not John.”
b)     He learned to use the press, in a way that was mutually beneficial. Gullett said, “John’s theory was ‘I’m going to talk it to death. I don’t have anything to hide—I might have made a mistake, but this is what I thought. So I’ll answer every question.’ That’s him: Straight Talk Express!
Â
I apologize for the formatting.




Comments: 28
I can't figure out what is going on right now. The LA TImes, which is not a Right Wing rag, is falling all over itself praising McCain and Palin and saying how the Dems are in "disarray."
Is it true? If so, the Dems deserve to lose. They have allowed the major issue of this campaign...THE WAR...to be shunted to the background, while the media prattles on about how wonderful Palin's speech was, and how Joe Biden is silent. It's crazy. It's a nightmare. I am hoping that I will wake up on election night and find out that the talking heads who are trying to distract us from the real problems our nation faces are all full of shit...which I think they are.
2. How can Supreme Court Justices be "legislating from the bench"? (a favored term of Republican nominees and incumbents) Their entire purpose is to interpret and rule upon the constitutionality of the law enacted by the two houses of Congress and signed into law by the President.
Should the Supreme Court find, as a result of subsequent court cases, that such law is in violation of the Constitution, it is not only their purpose, but their responsibility, to strike it down.
3. I think he got his reputation by watching episodes of "Maverick."
4. Whether he flip-flops (a favorite accusation of his party against their opponents), simply forgets his statements, or just, in the finest tradition of his (he hopes) predecessor George W. gets things wrong, he cannot be trusted.
5. The NRA, the National Right to Life Coalition and others operate in their own reality.
6. For a man who doesn't want to be a professional POW, he really needs to find another reason why people should vote for him - and Fundamentalist Christian Barbie isn't it.
Did the McSame/Pain group pass a vow of silence off to all their devotees?
Looks like it from here. I didn't get the memo that said "do not speak of election issues."
Only mud-dobbing issues, slinging arrows and name calling, issues and they can't pick on Pain-non-issues?
Bert, I think the talking heads who are trying to distract us from the real problems our nation faces are all full of shit and they are going to find out just how much the internet and grassroots organizations have replaced them.
Speaking of proud Papa, Shoshana, is that blond (with the childish website) the adopted daughter?
Lea, it's sad, isn't it? Those darned videos aren't doing him any favors.
1. As the Republican Nominee he shares the divine power of Infallibility along with the Pope, the Supreme Ayatollah, Jesus Christ, Muhammed, and YWVH/God/Allah.
2. Choosing judges who will not "legislate from the bench" applies to his stated desire to overturn Roe vs Wade, in that it is a BS lie to get him through the election season so that he doesn't have to suffer the consequences of his stated beliefs. His only shot at becoming president is to continue to lie, present Rovian/Shakespearian drama, and do anything possible to take the focus off the issues.
3. He got his Maverick reputation by having opposed the ideals he seems to support today. FREE JOHN MCCAIN
4. None of the above. He has invoked the Republican Virtue of having it both ways. YES WE Republi-CAN
5. Being Republican is never having to say you're sorry and clutching to your men of the moment no matter what, whether they be John McCain, Ho Chi Minh, Pervez Musharraf, Saddam Hussein, the Taliban, or Osama Bin Laden.
6. Going from Point A to Point B, John McCain picked up an oft used tool among the dishonest and chicanerous called "Exploitation."
You do a great job of presenting issues, despite the fact you already have made your choice, with an open forum.
My questions back to the forum are:
1. Why is the playing field so unbalanced?
2. Why does it always boil down to Republican or Democrat?
3. Why is the media allowed to highlight candidates based on a glamour and popularity basis?
In other countries, we have seen the results of media and (in some cases, militarial pressure) to sway the public to 'vote this way'. It is always presented as "oh, how could anyone live in a country like that? It's so 'un-free'..."
I remain independently categorized until election day. Why? Because if I say I'm dem, then the reps will struggle to sway me and vice-versa.
I like a clear mind, no pressure and time to make my OWN decisions.
For example, if I were going to hire someone to work for me...you can *bet* I will dig up everything I can to be sure you will be a good investment.
In the guise of a teacher, I would not present anything but generalizations to the students and then assign *them* to do the research to be presented in the form of a presentation of pro-con exposition with background and footnotes.
Teachers that hand students their own views fail to teach the student how to decide for themselves.
At the end of the semester, we will all be called upon to present our findings in the form of a vote.
God help us if the students have not done their homework!
Sandy is not doing such a thing consciously.
What happened is that people tend to shy away from confrontation that requires research and thought. Those folks are not as sure of their candidate as Sandy is about her candidate.
Not only that, but many shy away from people who are firm about their convictions.
The average person is afraid to confront those who have knowledge, for fear they - themselves - might be proved a fool.
You go, Sandy!
WHen asked "what about all the other candidates running for office?"
The response was, "Well, if I cast a vote for anyone other than McCain, then I have wasted my vote, because none of the others have a chance of winning."
My analysis has been proved that people are generally still voting on what is placed in front of them, rather than taking some of their video-game time and doing a little homework on the up coming election.
The truth is, there are about 10 other options available as candidates - not that I point towards anyone in particular - who should be researched and argued prior to election time.
THe media is pretty much running the show, so Americans need to get on with their homework so when they walk out of the polls, they can be comfortable in knowing they made an educated choice, regardless of who the sheep vote for.
When I walk out of the polls, you can bet I will breathe a sigh of relief that my 'term paper' has been handed in, confident that I have done the research to make me satisfied I didn't vote based on popularity or media hype.
How does "she's photogenic" fit into an election? ;o)
Another No CON/ No Show?
Sandy,
me thinks they do not know anything about
their candidate except the negative sh*t which
Turd Blossom passes off as a campaign.
Did you see that?
Eric, the media is unbalanced and, as you can see here, one side won’t look any farther. It boils down to the choice between a Republican and a Democrat because no one else offers reasonable candidates. The other parties need to get on the ball and start at the bottom. I don’t understand why they think they can go into Presidential races without building a solid foundation at lower levels.
It is always presented as "oh, how could anyone live in a country like that? It's so 'un-free'..." For the most part, Americans are egotistical, delusional, hypocrites. It cringe when I hear the, “We are the free-est, biggest, bestest . . .”
What happened is that people tend to shy away from confrontation that requires research and thought. You got it, Eric! This little experiment proves what I have thought for a while. They have nothing to say. We need to stop entertaining their garbage on other threads and talk around them unless they stay on topic and present some facts.
I agree that a vote for anyone other than Obama or McCain is a wasted vote. (Actually, I think a vote for McCain is a waste.) The stakes are too high to cast a “making a statement” vote.
Turd Blossom Why isn’t he in jail?
Barbara, the Daily Show and the Colbert Report are my favorite shows.
And DARN! I love Letterman and Obama and missed that, Robert. I’ll see if I can find it.
Shrub would've pardoned him to be sure, but he should have faced a jury trial
which would have outed him to the American public who largely do not know his evil works.
Good work Sandy!
Still a CON No Show?
Or should I say the CONS show they KNOW nothing.
I thought I'd just rehighlight this.
I admit that my 100% certainty that Barack Obama is the best choice for the world is emotional – gut instinct and trust. I know my gut instinct has served me well, but can’t expect anyone else to make a decision based on that, and would be foolish to make my decision based only on that. So, in addition to that, and with admitted bias because of that, I have studied his positions, his personality, his life, and his record. Most everything I’ve seen supports my emotional commitment. What comforts me most is that I completely trust this man to investigate and make informed decisions instead of the knee-jerk, self-serving reactions we’ve seen in this administration. And I believe he will be honest with us, even when if it is something he knows we don’t want to hear. I expected McCain supporters would be emotionally committed to him as well, and wanted to find out if they had also studied his positions and record and decided they are consistent with the persona he presents. I don’t see it and honestly hoped someone would convince me otherwise. There’s no way it will change my vote, but I would like to feel less disgust for the man.
Francis H., Sep 11, 2008, 4:47am EDT "
That is exactly why you won't get GOP supporters to respond, Sandy. They lack the critical thinking and analytical skills required to actually formulate intelligent responses. NOw, if you had attacked Palin's daughter's pregnancy, you'd probably be worthy of a Home Depot gift card.
I think it's a little of both.
The more rabid CONS haven't a brain.
Some do have a brain and choose
to stick their heads in the sand.
Surfs up!
McCain Supports Fascist Contra Terrorists
Note how the news media, talk radio, and TV conveniently ignore this fact.