![[Continue Farking]](http://img.fark.net/images/2007/site/continue.gif)
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support
style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.
 |
 |
McCain a third term of Bush? Votes with him 90 percent of the time? Horseshiat, say conservative, liberal AND centrist groups who track such things (philly.com) |  |
289 |
| More: Obvious | ||||
• • •
2991 clicks; posted to Politics » on 20 Sep 2008 at 7:41 AM |
Favorite
| share: 
more» | 
shirt it!
2991 clicks; posted to Politics » on 20 Sep 2008 at 7:41 AM |
Favorite
| share: more» | shirt it! 289 Comments (+0 »)
| Fark.com's Political
Inclination
Thermometric
Analyzer:
| |
 |
 |
Archived thread
mikemoto
![[TotalFark]](http://img.fark.net/images/2003/totalfark.gif "[TotalFark]"){kind=small} |
2008-09-19 08:26:40 PM |
A well written and intelligent article, meaning two things:
1. Unlikely to be greenlit
2. In the event that it is greenlit, many angry retorts from the Daily Kos crowd which has infiltrated fark.
1. Unlikely to be greenlit
2. In the event that it is greenlit, many angry retorts from the Daily Kos crowd which has infiltrated fark.
| cheshirecatsmileyface | 2008-09-19 08:32:55 PM |
In all fairness, didn't McCain himself say he voted with Bush 90% of the time? So...either McCain voted with Bush and therefore will probably continue his failed policies or McCain either lied about it for...well, some incomprehensible reason....or McCain has no idea how he voted and is completely inept.
| IrateShadow
|
2008-09-19 08:35:10 PM |
FTFA: Obama might want to be a little careful with these attacks, as the same measure has him voting with Democrats 97 percent of the time.
Who cares? The Democrats aren't associated with 8 years of failure, an unpopular war and the most unpopular president in recent history.
Who cares? The Democrats aren't associated with 8 years of failure, an unpopular war and the most unpopular president in recent history.
| Mordant
|
2008-09-19 08:39:13 PM |
The same folks who support McCain still feel compelled to defend the team and praise Bush, so what exactly is the point of these threads ?
| dgc360
|
2008-09-19 09:10:47 PM |
mikemoto: A well written and intelligent article, meaning two things:
1. Unlikely to be greenlit
2. In the event that it is greenlit, many angry retorts from the Daily Kos crowd which has infiltrated fark.
"On the August 6 editions of his radio and television shows, Fox News host Bill O'Reilly criticized an ad by the campaign of Sen. Barack Obama titled "Original" for including a May 22, 2003, statement from Sen. John McCain, in which McCain said: "The president and I agree on most issues. There was a recent study that showed that I voted with the president 90 percent of the time." O'Reilly asserted on his radio show that the "country was in a far different place" when McCain made those comments. However, O'Reilly did not note that, according to a 2008 study by Congressional Quarterly, a nonpartisan publication that tracks legislators' votes, McCain voted with the president 95 percent of the time in 2007. In a January 13 article (accessed via Nexis), Congressional Quarterly reported that "McCain's 95 percent support [for Bush] score for last year was the highest in the chamber." CQ found that McCain voted with President Bush 90 percent of the time in 2002."
Link (new window)
1. Unlikely to be greenlit
2. In the event that it is greenlit, many angry retorts from the Daily Kos crowd which has infiltrated fark.
"On the August 6 editions of his radio and television shows, Fox News host Bill O'Reilly criticized an ad by the campaign of Sen. Barack Obama titled "Original" for including a May 22, 2003, statement from Sen. John McCain, in which McCain said: "The president and I agree on most issues. There was a recent study that showed that I voted with the president 90 percent of the time." O'Reilly asserted on his radio show that the "country was in a far different place" when McCain made those comments. However, O'Reilly did not note that, according to a 2008 study by Congressional Quarterly, a nonpartisan publication that tracks legislators' votes, McCain voted with the president 95 percent of the time in 2007. In a January 13 article (accessed via Nexis), Congressional Quarterly reported that "McCain's 95 percent support [for Bush] score for last year was the highest in the chamber." CQ found that McCain voted with President Bush 90 percent of the time in 2002."
Link (new window)
| cameroncrazy1984
|
2008-09-19 10:05:06 PM |
IrateShadow: FTFA: Obama might want to be a little careful with these attacks, as the same measure has him voting with Democrats 97 percent of the time.
Who cares? The Democrats aren't associated with 8 years of failure, an unpopular war and the most unpopular president in recent history.
Yeah, I would actually consider that a good thing. The whole 90% with Bush attack isn't a partisan thing. It's an association with failure thing.
Who cares? The Democrats aren't associated with 8 years of failure, an unpopular war and the most unpopular president in recent history.
Yeah, I would actually consider that a good thing. The whole 90% with Bush attack isn't a partisan thing. It's an association with failure thing.
| Three Crooked Squirrels
|
2008-09-19 10:17:00 PM |
McCain missed too many votes campaigning in 2007 to be included in the National Journal ranking for that year, but it found that he voted conservatively 59.4 percent of the time from 2001 to 2006.
McCain 2001-2006 does not equal McCain 2007-2008. He's taken a turn for the worse.
McCain 2001-2006 does not equal McCain 2007-2008. He's taken a turn for the worse.
| beve
|
2008-09-19 10:32:49 PM |
dgc360: a May 22, 2003, statement from Sen. John McCain, in which McCain said: "The president and I agree on most issues. There was a recent study that showed that I voted with the president 90 percent of the time."
Liar liar pants on fire.
Liar liar pants on fire.
| Occam's Chainsaw
|
2008-09-19 10:32:55 PM |
From Factcheck.org: It's true that McCain's voting support for Bush policies has averaged slightly above 89 percent since Bush took office, according to Congressional Quarterly's vote studies. But it has ebbed and flowed. It reached a low of 77 percent in 2005. Last year it was 95 percent. By comparison, Obama's own record of supporting Bush policies has averaged slightly under 41 percent since the senator took office.
Sorry, failmitter.
Sorry, failmitter.
| bulldg4life
|
2008-09-19 10:35:15 PM |
submitter: Horseshiat, say conservative, liberal AND centrist groups who track such things
It's not horseshiat according to McCain. He was the one that said they agree.
================
Is this the same McCain who drove Republicans nuts on campaign finance, the environment, taxes, torture, immigration and more? Where has McCain not crossed swords with his own party?
Hey, those look like all the policies that McCain has abandoned over the past 5 years to align himself exactly with the view of George Bush.
As it's being used, the 90 percent figure, from Congressional Quarterly, is nonsensical. As Washington Post congressional reporter Jonathan Weisman explained, "The vast majority of those votes are procedural, and virtually every member of Congress votes with his or her leadership on procedural motions."
Obama might want to be a little careful with these attacks, as the same measure has him voting with Democrats 97 percent of the time.
Is Obama running as a maverick from his own party? No. He's running as a change candidate. And, correct me if I'm wrong, having a democrat in the white house would be a change.
This is a retarded response to the point Obama brings up that doesn't logically refute the argument.
McCain missed too many votes campaigning in 2007 to be included in the National Journal ranking for that year, but it found that he voted conservatively 59.4 percent of the time from 2001 to 2006.
Nobody is arguing that McCain was a decent choice from 1998-2003 time frame. But, over the past 5 years, he is not the Maverick McCain of the past. To ignore that is to be willfully ignorant of reality.
Environment. He opposed drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, supported compliance with the Kyoto global-warming treaty, supported requiring businesses to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, favored stricter mercury-emission rules for power plants, and supported stricter fuel-efficiency standards.
Hey, to prove your point about him being a liberal republican, you should use a few policy stances that he has changed recently. That'd be funny.
==================
It seems as though this article is clinging to a 2002 version of John McCain in the hopes that he's the one running for president.
That's not the case and this article does nothing to refute the original stance.
It pointed to a bunch of political stances that he has changed and it admits that he hasn't voted enough recently to be judged.
Good job on the greenlight.
It's not horseshiat according to McCain. He was the one that said they agree.
================
Is this the same McCain who drove Republicans nuts on campaign finance, the environment, taxes, torture, immigration and more? Where has McCain not crossed swords with his own party?
Hey, those look like all the policies that McCain has abandoned over the past 5 years to align himself exactly with the view of George Bush.
As it's being used, the 90 percent figure, from Congressional Quarterly, is nonsensical. As Washington Post congressional reporter Jonathan Weisman explained, "The vast majority of those votes are procedural, and virtually every member of Congress votes with his or her leadership on procedural motions."
Obama might want to be a little careful with these attacks, as the same measure has him voting with Democrats 97 percent of the time.
Is Obama running as a maverick from his own party? No. He's running as a change candidate. And, correct me if I'm wrong, having a democrat in the white house would be a change.
This is a retarded response to the point Obama brings up that doesn't logically refute the argument.
McCain missed too many votes campaigning in 2007 to be included in the National Journal ranking for that year, but it found that he voted conservatively 59.4 percent of the time from 2001 to 2006.
Nobody is arguing that McCain was a decent choice from 1998-2003 time frame. But, over the past 5 years, he is not the Maverick McCain of the past. To ignore that is to be willfully ignorant of reality.
Environment. He opposed drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, supported compliance with the Kyoto global-warming treaty, supported requiring businesses to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, favored stricter mercury-emission rules for power plants, and supported stricter fuel-efficiency standards.
Hey, to prove your point about him being a liberal republican, you should use a few policy stances that he has changed recently. That'd be funny.
==================
It seems as though this article is clinging to a 2002 version of John McCain in the hopes that he's the one running for president.
That's not the case and this article does nothing to refute the original stance.
It pointed to a bunch of political stances that he has changed and it admits that he hasn't voted enough recently to be judged.
Good job on the greenlight.
| NeverDrunk23 | 2008-09-19 10:56:54 PM |
Mordant: The same folks who support McCain still feel compelled to defend the team and praise Bush, so what exactly is the point of these threads ?
Trolls -> Flamewars -> Traffic -> Ad revenue
Trolls -> Flamewars -> Traffic -> Ad revenue
| skinbubble | 2008-09-19 11:32:28 PM |
This ought to be a well balanced and thought out discussion.
| sigdiamond2000
|
2008-09-19 11:33:43 PM |
Mordant: The same folks who support McCain still feel compelled to defend the team and praise Bush, so what exactly is the point of these threads ?
It gives them the opportunity to convince themselves that they're not partisan robots.
It gives them the opportunity to convince themselves that they're not partisan robots.
| DamnYankees
|
2008-09-19 11:43:55 PM |
IrateShadow: FTFA: Obama might want to be a little careful with these attacks, as the same measure has him voting with Democrats 97 percent of the time.
Who cares? The Democrats aren't associated with 8 years of failure, an unpopular war and the most unpopular president in recent history.
Seriously. This is like someone saying "you share 95% of your views with Hitler" and someone having a comeback saying "yeah, well you share 99% of your views with FDR!"
A little less extreme, but the point holds.
Who cares? The Democrats aren't associated with 8 years of failure, an unpopular war and the most unpopular president in recent history.
Seriously. This is like someone saying "you share 95% of your views with Hitler" and someone having a comeback saying "yeah, well you share 99% of your views with FDR!"
A little less extreme, but the point holds.
| lexshine
|
2008-09-20 12:08:28 AM |
it'll be like a Bush 3rd term, only stupider.
| bronyaur1
|
2008-09-20 12:12:44 AM |
I have seen video tape of McCAIN saying that he voted with Bush 90% if tge time.
| And-1 | 2008-09-20 12:20:36 AM |
submitter: McCain a third term of Bush?
Yes, he would be.
Votes with him 90 percent of the time?
Yes, he does. As the article admits.
Horseshiat, say conservative, liberal AND centrist groups who track such things
No, they don't. Also, as the article says.
Submitter bit of a huge mouthful of FAIL and really needs to chew a little more before opening his/her lying mouth to suck McBush's cock.
Yes, he would be.
Votes with him 90 percent of the time?
Yes, he does. As the article admits.
Horseshiat, say conservative, liberal AND centrist groups who track such things
No, they don't. Also, as the article says.
Submitter bit of a huge mouthful of FAIL and really needs to chew a little more before opening his/her lying mouth to suck McBush's cock.
| LosinMySenses
|
2008-09-20 12:38:37 AM |
I'm a little confused, On one hand MCCain has been quoted to saying he agreed 90% of the time. On the other We have records that say 95%
So here's my confusion, the difference is 5%, so why is people making a fuss if it's off by 5 % it's a near 100% that's hat matters.
So here's my confusion, the difference is 5%, so why is people making a fuss if it's off by 5 % it's a near 100% that's hat matters.
| Party Boy
|
2008-09-20 12:49:36 AM |
Repost
It is misleading to make the "McSame" criticism as it obfuscates the point that McCain followed the neoconservatives before Bush. McCain was already aligned with the neoconservatives in 2000 (like regime change in Iraq) while Bush held less aggressive positions in the 2000 primaries (and up to 2002) that originated from Colin Powell's camp. McCain's national security team currently features a strong neoconservative presence. Catchy slogans like "McSame" don't adequately capture the events of the last 8 years, and they certainly don't fully capture concerns about neoconservatives and McCain.
-----
USA Today 02/18/00
FOREIGN POLICY: McCain says he'd support, in some fashion, forces trying to overthrow regimes in 'rogue states' such as Iraq and North Korea. He'd also 'use our primacy in world affairs for humanity's benefit.'Bush, too, counsels against isolationism but has emphasized more than McCain that the United States should intervene in conflicts when it is in the nation's direct interest to do so.
Sometimes we forget that, while Bush held positions in the 2000 primaries (and up to 2002) that originated from Colin Powell's camp[1], McCain was already touting the neoconservative inspired model[1996][1998] of regime change in Iraq. In fact, the title "McSame" is a little disingenuous, as it forgets the actual struggle within the 43rd administration between the State Department and the neoconservatives, and the period up to the first part of 2002 where Bush followed Powell's advice[2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][1 5].
McCain, on the other hand, was already aligned with the neoconservatives in 2000[16], and in 2008, McCain's national security team still features a strong neoconservative presence[17]. Much as they proved problematic to Reagan[18], and Bush 43[see links above][19], (Bush 41 called them crazies in the basement and kept them out[20]), neoconservative advisers, like Randy Scheunemann is already posing problems for McCain, even before the election[21]. Slogans like 8 more years and McSame may be catchy, but they don't adequately capture the events of the last 8 years, and they certainly don't fully capture concerns about neoconservatives and McCain.
| The Onanist
|
2008-09-20 12:51:19 AM |
Also FTFA: "Obama might want to be a little careful with these attacks, as the same measure has him voting with Democrats 97 percent of the time."
Um, Obama's not the one tossing the term "Maverick" around, either.
Um, Obama's not the one tossing the term "Maverick" around, either.
| And-1 | 2008-09-20 12:57:11 AM |
Party Boy: [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15].
[citation needed]
[citation needed]
| Party Boy
|
2008-09-20 01:01:15 AM |
| SpaceyCat
|
2008-09-20 01:45:54 AM |
The biggest thing is who's claiming to be what.
Ms. Palin is the one who's claiming to be an earmark cutter, but her past behavior has shown she's gone looking for earmarks.
McCain is claiming he's a "Maverick", but he votes with the party/President 90% of the time.
Obama hasn't claimed he's a Maverick and he votes with his party 97% of the time. I don't have a problem with that because he's not claiming something that's not based in reality.
That'd be like me claiming I'm a man when all I have is a dildo.
Honesty, while not expected in politics, is nice. Reality is even better. Reality doesn't care about what party you vote for or what you believe or even if you believe in god.
Ms. Palin is the one who's claiming to be an earmark cutter, but her past behavior has shown she's gone looking for earmarks.
McCain is claiming he's a "Maverick", but he votes with the party/President 90% of the time.
Obama hasn't claimed he's a Maverick and he votes with his party 97% of the time. I don't have a problem with that because he's not claiming something that's not based in reality.
That'd be like me claiming I'm a man when all I have is a dildo.
Honesty, while not expected in politics, is nice. Reality is even better. Reality doesn't care about what party you vote for or what you believe or even if you believe in god.
| Iwouldhitit
|
2008-09-20 01:47:35 AM |
| FuturePastNow
|
2008-09-20 02:26:53 AM |
So McCain only voted with Bush 89% of the time? Oh, well, that's all right then. Maverick
| GAT_00
|
2008-09-20 03:58:44 AM |
Party Boy: [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15]
Don't you dare bring facts against he who has inherited the Throne of Reagan. Facts will destroy this country. Just sit down, think how he tells you to think, and on November 4th, vote Republican or the little white girl gets it.
Don't you dare bring facts against he who has inherited the Throne of Reagan. Facts will destroy this country. Just sit down, think how he tells you to think, and on November 4th, vote Republican or the little white girl gets it.
| propasaurus
|
2008-09-20 04:36:28 AM |
cheshirecatsmileyface: In all fairness, didn't McCain himself say he voted with Bush 90% of the time? So...either McCain voted with Bush and therefore will probably continue his failed policies or McCain either lied about it for...well, some incomprehensible reason....or McCain has no idea how he voted and is completely inept.
McCain would rather vote against his own bills than vote against Bush. He votes against his own self-interests just to be accepted by the Republicans. Of course, voting against their own best interests is what Republicans do.
McCain would rather vote against his own bills than vote against Bush. He votes against his own self-interests just to be accepted by the Republicans. Of course, voting against their own best interests is what Republicans do.
| ju66l3r
|
2008-09-20 05:33:46 AM |
Nevermind that the article quotes the fact that he previously voted against Bush on issues like...off-shore drilling...but doesn't go on to point out that one of the only issues he's taken a stand on is pushing for more offshore drilling.
| impaler
|
2008-09-20 06:52:18 AM |
Why is it that bushphiles supporting McCain are the ones trying to say he's so different?
| Kazuya | 2008-09-20 07:45:22 AM |
mikemoto [TotalFark] Quote 2008-09-19 08:26:40 PM
A well written and intelligent article, meaning two things:
1. Unlikely to be greenlit
2. In the event that it is greenlit, many angry retorts from the Daily Kos crowd which has infiltrated fark.
Ooooh Infiltrated! That Kos crowd are so sneaky, they didn't show up like everyone else.
A well written and intelligent article, meaning two things:
1. Unlikely to be greenlit
2. In the event that it is greenlit, many angry retorts from the Daily Kos crowd which has infiltrated fark.
Ooooh Infiltrated! That Kos crowd are so sneaky, they didn't show up like everyone else.
| bayoubruce | 2008-09-20 07:54:38 AM |
IrateShadow: FTFA: Obama might want to be a little careful with these attacks, as the same measure has him voting with Democrats 97 percent of the time.
Who cares? The Democrats aren't associated with 8 years of failure, an unpopular war and the most unpopular president in recent history.
Hmmm. Who was it that had the majority in both houses????
Who cares? The Democrats aren't associated with 8 years of failure, an unpopular war and the most unpopular president in recent history.
Hmmm. Who was it that had the majority in both houses????
| OttoDog | 2008-09-20 08:01:22 AM |
Remove all Republicans: DamnYankees: Seriously. This is like someone saying "you share 95% of your views with Hitler" and someone having a comeback saying "yeah, well you share 99% of your views with FDR!"
Hitler and FDR? What world do you live in? One tried to exterminate an entire race and the other got us out of another Republican economic disaster.
I agree, in part. But, while it's pretty clear that Hitler ended the Great Depression, what race did FDR try to exterminate (besides the Okies and the Japanese)?
Hitler and FDR? What world do you live in? One tried to exterminate an entire race and the other got us out of another Republican economic disaster.
I agree, in part. But, while it's pretty clear that Hitler ended the Great Depression, what race did FDR try to exterminate (besides the Okies and the Japanese)?
| Scrotar | 2008-09-20 08:04:58 AM |
mikemoto - From the looks of them profiles, many of those kos inflitrators have been entrenched here for a long time.
Ah, I see that you're from 2003. NOOB!
..I'm kidding, of course. You're no noob. You're probably one of the first astroturfers to grace these pages- quite an honor!
Insulted? Then stop being such a presumptuous dick.
Seriously: You don't know who's a kos infiltrator any more than I really know whether you're an astroturfer or not.
Ah, I see that you're from 2003. NOOB!
..I'm kidding, of course. You're no noob. You're probably one of the first astroturfers to grace these pages- quite an honor!
Insulted? Then stop being such a presumptuous dick.
Seriously: You don't know who's a kos infiltrator any more than I really know whether you're an astroturfer or not.
| OttoDog | 2008-09-20 08:05:43 AM |
The Onanist: Also FTFA: "Obama might want to be a little careful with these attacks, as the same measure has him voting with Democrats 97 percent of the time."
Um, Obama's not the one tossing the term "Maverick" around, either.
No, but promising "Change" and a new centrist governance model when you've been sucking Harry Reid's dick while fingerfarking Nancy Pelosi >97% of the time isn't very consistent, either.
Um, Obama's not the one tossing the term "Maverick" around, either.
No, but promising "Change" and a new centrist governance model when you've been sucking Harry Reid's dick while fingerfarking Nancy Pelosi >97% of the time isn't very consistent, either.
| jcooli09 | 2008-09-20 08:07:30 AM |
Please spare me.
Show me the differences in policy between McCain and bush. I don't really care about votes, and I turn the channel when the ads come on.
Show me the differences in policy between McCain and bush. I don't really care about votes, and I turn the channel when the ads come on.
| The Mavrick | 2008-09-20 08:07:38 AM |
bayoubruce: Who cares? The Democrats aren't associated with 8 years of failure, an unpopular war and the most unpopular president in recent history.
Hmmm. Who was it that had the majority in both houses????
Why, I believe it was the Republicans for 6 of 8 years. But, not to worry, you won't have that problem again for a very long time.
Own your legacy, Republicans. Own your failure.
Hmmm. Who was it that had the majority in both houses????
Why, I believe it was the Republicans for 6 of 8 years. But, not to worry, you won't have that problem again for a very long time.
Own your legacy, Republicans. Own your failure.
| stpickrell | 2008-09-20 08:08:13 AM |
BayouBruce
The GOP had majorities between 2001 and 2006. Try again.
The GOP had majorities between 2001 and 2006. Try again.
| notto | 2008-09-20 08:09:52 AM |
More gems from the author of this article.
Link (new window)
No Global Warming Crisis
Link (new window)
Link (new window)
In this rebuttal to FREAKONOMICS, John Lott examines both modern and historical economic theories to prove why the free market works and government-controlled programs and subsidies do not.
Link (new window)
No Global Warming Crisis
Link (new window)
Link (new window)
In this rebuttal to FREAKONOMICS, John Lott examines both modern and historical economic theories to prove why the free market works and government-controlled programs and subsidies do not.
| CanisNoir
|
2008-09-20 08:10:01 AM |
And how the faithful rise...
To those who think they are scoring points by stating "McCain himself said he voted blah blah blah", are completely ignoring the part of the article where it specifically states "the votes were mostly procedural..." So, no points there.
The simple truth is, McCain is truly the Centrist and Post Partisan candidate. Obama is far more Partisan and most of you Farkers wouldn't vote for an (R) no matter what.
Funny how quickly "Hope and Change" is replaced with "Payback and The Same."
McSame is Obama's main weapon against McCain, neither he nor his supporters will give that up easily regardless of how many facts are given them.
To those who think they are scoring points by stating "McCain himself said he voted blah blah blah", are completely ignoring the part of the article where it specifically states "the votes were mostly procedural..." So, no points there.
The simple truth is, McCain is truly the Centrist and Post Partisan candidate. Obama is far more Partisan and most of you Farkers wouldn't vote for an (R) no matter what.
Funny how quickly "Hope and Change" is replaced with "Payback and The Same."
McSame is Obama's main weapon against McCain, neither he nor his supporters will give that up easily regardless of how many facts are given them.
| jcooli09 | 2008-09-20 08:11:33 AM |
NeverDrunk23: Mordant: The same folks who support McCain still feel compelled to defend the team and praise Bush, so what exactly is the point of these threads ?
Trolls -> Flamewars -> Traffic -> Ad revenue
The more I see posts by Skookum or Darconix orHellbent for whatever his name is today I am convinced that these guys are employed by Drew.
Trolls -> Flamewars -> Traffic -> Ad revenue
The more I see posts by Skookum or Darconix orHellbent for whatever his name is today I am convinced that these guys are employed by Drew.
| Pixelvision | 2008-09-20 08:12:45 AM |
| The Mavrick | 2008-09-20 08:14:40 AM |
CanisNoir: To those who think they are scoring points by stating "McCain himself said he voted blah blah blah", are completely ignoring the part of the article where it specifically states "the votes were mostly procedural..." So, no points there.
The simple truth is, McCain is truly the Centrist and Post Partisan candidate. Obama is far more Partisan and most of you Farkers wouldn't vote for an (R) no matter what.
Ah, okay, well, if they were mostly procedural, then that doesn't matter. I'm sure when it comes to the transcendental issues of the day, he's much more moderate than Bush.
"No. No. I--the fact is that I'm different but the fact is that I have agreed with President Bush far more than I have disagreed. And on the transcendent issues, the most important issues of our day, I've been totally in agreement and support of President Bush."
Oh, well, I guess you were wrong. Being a Republican apologist, though, you should be used to that.
The simple truth is, McCain is truly the Centrist and Post Partisan candidate. Obama is far more Partisan and most of you Farkers wouldn't vote for an (R) no matter what.
Ah, okay, well, if they were mostly procedural, then that doesn't matter. I'm sure when it comes to the transcendental issues of the day, he's much more moderate than Bush.
"No. No. I--the fact is that I'm different but the fact is that I have agreed with President Bush far more than I have disagreed. And on the transcendent issues, the most important issues of our day, I've been totally in agreement and support of President Bush."
Oh, well, I guess you were wrong. Being a Republican apologist, though, you should be used to that.
| stpickrell | 2008-09-20 08:16:05 AM |
Is this the same guy who created alts online to agree with him in a gun control debate?
| soy_bomb | 2008-09-20 08:16:27 AM |
IrateShadow: Who cares? The Democrats aren't associated with 8 years of failure, an unpopular war and the most unpopular president in recent history.
And the best they can come up with is Barack Obama. A man who has the experience that barely eclipses an Alaskan Governor.
And the best they can come up with is Barack Obama. A man who has the experience that barely eclipses an Alaskan Governor.
| OttoDog | 2008-09-20 08:16:28 AM |
CanisNoir: And how the faithful rise...
To those who think they are scoring points by stating "McCain himself said he voted blah blah blah", are completely ignoring the part of the article where it specifically states "the votes were mostly procedural..." So, no points there.
The VAST MAJORITY of legislation is procedural stuff, from idiotic (and surprisingly numerous) bills to rename post offices to reaffirmations of existing budget appropriations. Less than 20% of all legislation has a truly partisan flavor, and that's where the evidence of being a party hack or independent-minded legislator comes out.
That being said, an overall of 90% is a FAR CRY from 97%.
To those who think they are scoring points by stating "McCain himself said he voted blah blah blah", are completely ignoring the part of the article where it specifically states "the votes were mostly procedural..." So, no points there.
The VAST MAJORITY of legislation is procedural stuff, from idiotic (and surprisingly numerous) bills to rename post offices to reaffirmations of existing budget appropriations. Less than 20% of all legislation has a truly partisan flavor, and that's where the evidence of being a party hack or independent-minded legislator comes out.
That being said, an overall of 90% is a FAR CRY from 97%.
| DeathByGeekSquad | 2008-09-20 08:17:40 AM |
The Onanist: Also FTFA: "Obama might want to be a little careful with these attacks, as the same measure has him voting with Democrats 97 percent of the time."
Um, Obama's not the one tossing the term "Maverick" around, either.
But he is tossing around 'change' and a step away from business as usual, which is what voting 97% in line with the party stance suggests he's doing. (Business as usual that is).
That being said, both parties do business as usual, and I really don't expect much to change regardless of who gets into office.
Um, Obama's not the one tossing the term "Maverick" around, either.
But he is tossing around 'change' and a step away from business as usual, which is what voting 97% in line with the party stance suggests he's doing. (Business as usual that is).
That being said, both parties do business as usual, and I really don't expect much to change regardless of who gets into office.
| soy_bomb | 2008-09-20 08:18:04 AM |
DamnYankees: Seriously. This is like someone saying "you share 95% of your views with Hitler" and someone having a comeback saying "yeah, well you share 99% of your views with FDR!"
Hitler was a community organizer, FDR was a governor.
Hitler was a community organizer, FDR was a governor.
| RussianPooper
|
2008-09-20 08:18:46 AM |
Epic Fail(mitter)
| JaMorg | 2008-09-20 08:19:14 AM |
cheshirecatsmileyface: In all fairness, didn't McCain himself say he voted with Bush 90% of the time? So...either McCain voted with Bush and therefore will probably continue his failed policies or McCain either lied about it for...well, some incomprehensible reason....or McCain has no idea how he voted and is completely inept.
or, a third option, he is trying to shore up support with a base who hasn't liked him in 30 years and lost him the 2000 primaries.
or, a third option, he is trying to shore up support with a base who hasn't liked him in 30 years and lost him the 2000 primaries.
| notto | 2008-09-20 08:19:30 AM |
Q: President Bush has talked about our staying in Iraq for 50 years
Maverick: Make it a hundred.
Maverick: Make it a hundred.
Displayed 50 of 289 comments
Tools
Community
Media Friends
Link To Us
Hosted by
Community
All Latest
Link Voting
Press/Publicity
Fark Blogs
Fark Book
Fark Travel Guide
Fark Forum
Sports Forum
Showbiz Forum
Geek Forum
Politics Forum
Photoshop Forum
Fark Chat
Fark Parties
Fark Party Forum
LeadersLink Voting
Press/Publicity
Fark Blogs
Fark Book
Fark Travel Guide
Fark Forum
Sports Forum
Showbiz Forum
Geek Forum
Politics Forum
Photoshop Forum
Fark Chat
Fark Parties
Fark Party Forum
Media Friends
Atom
Bob and Tom
Boortz
Colin Cowherd
Comedy Central
Doc Reno
Jim Kerr - Q104.3
Keith Olbermann
Oddly Enough
Opie and Anthony
Pravda.ru
Rolling Stone
SideReel
Spike
TheSmokingGun
The Sun
Twitch / Z103
UPI.com
Site FriendsBob and Tom
Boortz
Colin Cowherd
Comedy Central
Doc Reno
Jim Kerr - Q104.3
Keith Olbermann
Oddly Enough
Opie and Anthony
Pravda.ru
Rolling Stone
SideReel
Spike
TheSmokingGun
The Sun
Twitch / Z103
UPI.com
April Winchell
AskMen.com
BBspot
Bullz-Eye
Farktography
Fazed
I-Mockery
Mentally Incontinent
NinjaBurger
Retro CRUSH
SbB
WilWheaton.net
Zug
Fark onAskMen.com
BBspot
Bullz-Eye
Farktography
Fazed
I-Mockery
Mentally Incontinent
NinjaBurger
Retro CRUSH
SbB
WilWheaton.net
Zug
Link To Us
Hosted by
Advertise
 |
Fark :: Not News | Sports | Business | Geek | Showbiz | Politics | Music | Video | All Links TotalFark :: TotalFark | TF Discussion | All Submitted Links | All Commented Links | Link Voting Contests :: Photoshop | Farktography | VideoEdit | Caption | Headline of the Week FArQ :: About Us | Quick Answers | FarkIt | Posting Rules | Farkisms Fark Shop :: Headline Shirts | Fark Book |
Submit A Link »
Copyright © 1999-2009 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Thu Nov 26 10:14:23 2009 -- B
Contact us | Report a bug/error msg | Terms of service/legal/privacy policy
Runtime: 0.439 sec 