Rewind 10 months!! Mccain is president!!!

[nodoginnafight]

I never saw that type of disrespect aimed at McCain by the left, though I'm sure there were a few classless jerks and I'd have called them on it (unlike the fact that the right wing loons are relentless toward obama and there are maybe three righties who have the guts to say it's pathetic). McCain just wasn't equipped to be president and his choice of a running made pretty much made it impossible to consider him. I still think if he'd chosen Romney, he'd have won.

I'd also point out that the vilest things ever said about McCain were said by Karl Rove and the Bush campaign... why he ever sucked up to them after is beyond me.

You'll get no argument from me on the highlighted point.

I don't know if you ever went to the old MSNBC boards but the left wing loons were particulary cruel in that they did make fun of McCain's war injuries and called his wife just about every name in the book...(see VaYanks post earlier in this thread)

never saw the MSNBC boards... but every party has its loons... i had huge respect for McCain the first time he ran and might have voted for him this time if he didn't trade who he was to be bush lite.

I couldn't agree more - the John McCain of 2000 was an infinitely more attractive candidate to me than McCain 2008. I've often said that if McCain 2000 had seen McCain 2008 on the street, he would have punched him in the mouth.

 

[DiamondDave]

I don't think we would be in much of a different position than we are right now. I think McCain would have fought just as hard for the stimulus package. We'd be discussing Health Care Reform except that today, the conservatives would be supporting the idea of a public option as the only answer to our problems and liberals would be decrying it as totalitarianism; the government taking over our basic rights.

Maybe one difference is that we would not be talking about how many rounds of golf President McCain had played since taking office?

Immie

I think we would still be talking various ways of health care reform... but not to the government takeover and uber-power that we are seeing in the leftist options being set forth today... reform does not inherently mean big government control or the government providing it

I fully would expect conservatives to still be against a public option or a government supplied system.. no matter if it were the REPs, DEMs, or anyone else proposing it....

I don't believe that McCain would do anything significantly different than President Obama has done so far... except most likely salute our fallen heroes at Arlington and elsewhere.

I do think Republicans would support his plan even if it included a "public option". Now, of course, if the House and Senate were held by the Democrats, things might be different if this "plan" were seen as theirs.

Immie

Some blinded republicans may have... but conservatives will not support a public option... as it is against the principles themselves

 

[Immanuel]

I think we would still be talking various ways of health care reform... but not to the government takeover and uber-power that we are seeing in the leftist options being set forth today... reform does not inherently mean big government control or the government providing it

I fully would expect conservatives to still be against a public option or a government supplied system.. no matter if it were the REPs, DEMs, or anyone else proposing it....

I don't believe that McCain would do anything significantly different than President Obama has done so far... except most likely salute our fallen heroes at Arlington and elsewhere.

I do think Republicans would support his plan even if it included a "public option". Now, of course, if the House and Senate were held by the Democrats, things might be different if this "plan" were seen as theirs.

Immie

Do you really think the far right would have embraced McCain or would he still be a RINO? Does winning really cure everything?

The far right? Do you mean the Religious Right as in Pat Robertson? No, I don't think they would embrace anyone except for maybe someone like Pat Robertson.

But they are not the Republican Party. They may be a voice in the party, and a loud one, but they are not the Republican Party. Bush Republicans would embrace him without thinking twice about it.

I think we would still be talking various ways of health care reform... but not to the government takeover and uber-power that we are seeing in the leftist options being set forth today... reform does not inherently mean big government control or the government providing it

I fully would expect conservatives to still be against a public option or a government supplied system.. no matter if it were the REPs, DEMs, or anyone else proposing it....

I don't believe that McCain would do anything significantly different than President Obama has done so far... except most likely salute our fallen heroes at Arlington and elsewhere.

I do think Republicans would support his plan even if it included a "public option". Now, of course, if the House and Senate were held by the Democrats, things might be different if this "plan" were seen as theirs.

Immie

Some blinded republicans may have... but conservatives will not support a public option... as it is against the principles themselves

So was the Patriot Act, NSA Wiretapping, Torture of prisoners etc. but many supported President Bush wholeheartedly.

This is nothing more than my opinion and I can tell that you disagree. I simply think that these things were very much against conservative thought and when President Bush said, "I am a compassionate conservative" and "I am only doing this for your good", conservatives believed him without so much as a "Huh?".

Immie

 

[DiamondDave]

1) Patriot Act/Wiretapping... we have had interception of enemy communications without warrant during every conflict and war in our history.. that is not going against conservative principles
2) What you and sensationalists deem as torture does not inherently mean it is truly torture.. there are zero documented cases of government sanctioned torture... we have had individual acts (like those that have been put to trial)... but there has been no standing order, nor execution of any such order, for torture

Many republicans did support everything Bush did.. including his BS bailouts and various other things... many did not.. and most true conservatives did not... many MANY republicans, independents, libertarians, conservatives and the like did recognize and complain about Bush's questionable moves and more centrist approach.. and would do the same if McCain would have been elected

 

[Immanuel]

1) Patriot Act/Wiretapping... we have had interception of enemy communications without warrant during every conflict and war in our history.. that is not going against conservative principles

The Patriot Act was an infringement upon our civil rights. That most certainly goes against conservative principles.

NSA Wiretapping warrantless wiretapping of citizens is another infringement upon our civil rights and the fact that it may or may not have been done in the past does not change the fact that it was an infringement upon our civil rights nor does it make it a conservative principle.

2) What you and sensationalists deem as torture does not inherently mean it is truly torture.. there are zero documented cases of government sanctioned torture... we have had individual acts (like those that have been put to trial)... but there has been no standing order, nor execution of any such order, for torture

Whether or not it (waterboarding) was truly torture is again besides the fact. Bush's supporters would have supported it even if in included castration or God forbid beheadings simply because, those terrorists did it first edit: they have no constitutional rights. How many times did I hear that shit?

Many republicans did support everything Bush did.. including his BS bailouts and various other things... many did not.. and most true conservatives did not... many MANY republicans, independents, libertarians, conservatives and the like did recognize and complain about Bush's questionable moves and more centrist approach..

You are right... I am one of them.

and would do the same if McCain would have been elected

And many would still support everything he did simply because he is a Republican.

I do not believe I said, "all" anywhere in this discussion.

Immie

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Yes, I'm trying to stir the pot. My father and I got into this awhile ago. What would the US be like today if McCain would have won? What would the world be like? Any different? I'm thinking it wouldn't be that much different than it is today, the economy would still be in the crapper (it's a world problem), but the media wouldn't be talking about health care as much, they would be covering the war. WAR WAR WAR!! Or should I say BOMB BOMB BOMB!!!

I agree, the only difference would be...ummm....wait there really isn't much difference between the repubs and the dems.

One is progressive the other is progressive light.

 

[xsited1]

Yes, I'm trying to stir the pot. My father and I got into this awhile ago. What would the US be like today if McCain would have won? What would the world be like? Any different? I'm thinking it wouldn't be that much different than it is today, the economy would still be in the crapper (it's a world problem), but the media wouldn't be talking about health care as much, they would be covering the war. WAR WAR WAR!! Or should I say BOMB BOMB BOMB!!!

Let's see... McCain is white and Obama is black. Aside from that, there are no significant differences.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Rewind and present a subjective and partisan view of what McCain might have done? Okay, I'll bite.
First, McCain admitted he was not strong on economic policy and economics in general; and, second, "Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran".

McCain would have been lead to conclude that the 'markets' would self correct and taken a Hoover approach to the economic crisis in January 2009. Our economy would have collapsed and, as have other nations in similar crisis, McCain&Co would need to blame someone.
The perfect target was Ahmadinejad and the Iranian Theocracy. He would be smarter than Bush and not call his invasion and occupation of Iran a "Crusade" - but a crusade it would be in the eyes of the entire world of Islam.
Two bullets fired on a Sarajevo street on a sunny June morning in 1914 set in motion a series of events that shaped the world we live in today. An invasion of Iran might very well ignite a similar series of events, the consequences of which no one can predict.

 

[DiamondDave]

1) Patriot Act/Wiretapping... we have had interception of enemy communications without warrant during every conflict and war in our history.. that is not going against conservative principles

The Patriot Act was an infringement upon our civil rights. That most certainly goes against conservative principles.

NSA Wiretapping warrantless wiretapping of citizens is another infringement upon our civil rights and the fact that it may or may not have been done in the past does not change the fact that it was an infringement upon our civil rights nor does it make it a conservative principle.

2) What you and sensationalists deem as torture does not inherently mean it is truly torture.. there are zero documented cases of government sanctioned torture... we have had individual acts (like those that have been put to trial)... but there has been no standing order, nor execution of any such order, for torture

Whether or not it (waterboarding) was truly torture is again besides the fact. Bush's supporters would have supported it even if in included castration or God forbid beheadings simply because, those terrorists did it first edit: they have no constitutional rights. How many times did I hear that shit?

Many republicans did support everything Bush did.. including his BS bailouts and various other things... many did not.. and most true conservatives did not... many MANY republicans, independents, libertarians, conservatives and the like did recognize and complain about Bush's questionable moves and more centrist approach..

You are right... I am one of them.

and would do the same if McCain would have been elected

And many would still support everything he did simply because he is a Republican.

I do not believe I said, "all" anywhere in this discussion.

Immie

Immie

1) It is not against anyone's civil rights... even if you state it numerous times... interception of enemy communication in combat or war cannot nor should not wait on warrants... no intercepted communication was used to bring any charges or grief upon citizens who were not involved in aid to the enemy.... sorry Immie, this one does not fly
2) When something is not deemed torture, you cannot try and use it as your proof of torture... does not work that way.. even if you wish it were deemed torture.. and even if you believe in the pit of your stomach that certain people would support it even if it were used when deemed as torture
3) Captured non-military combatants do not receive Geneva convention rights, nor do they receive the protections of the constitution like a citizen would or a legal visitor to the US would.... that part you are indeed correct on

 

[Immanuel]

1) Patriot Act/Wiretapping... we have had interception of enemy communications without warrant during every conflict and war in our history.. that is not going against conservative principles

The Patriot Act was an infringement upon our civil rights. That most certainly goes against conservative principles.

NSA Wiretapping warrantless wiretapping of citizens is another infringement upon our civil rights and the fact that it may or may not have been done in the past does not change the fact that it was an infringement upon our civil rights nor does it make it a conservative principle.



Whether or not it (waterboarding) was truly torture is again besides the fact. Bush's supporters would have supported it even if in included castration or God forbid beheadings simply because, those terrorists did it first edit: they have no constitutional rights. How many times did I hear that shit?



You are right... I am one of them.

and would do the same if McCain would have been elected

And many would still support everything he did simply because he is a Republican.

I do not believe I said, "all" anywhere in this discussion.

Immie

Immie

1) It is not against anyone's civil rights... even if you state it numerous times... interception of enemy communication in combat or war cannot nor should not wait on warrants... no intercepted communication was used to bring any charges or grief upon citizens who were not involved in aid to the enemy.... sorry Immie, this one does not fly

This would be true if they only intercepted enemy communications. What about the communications between Americans and their families in the Middle East that are not enemies of the state? It does not matter whether or not they are used against innocent citizens. They could be. It is the innocent communications that concern me and it is the innocents who stand to suffer from an overly agressive government.

Sorry, it does fly.

[2) When something is not deemed torture, you cannot try and use it as your proof of torture... does not work that way.. even if you wish it were deemed torture.. and even if you believe in the pit of your stomach that certain people would support it even if it were used when deemed as torture

I didn't use it as proof of torture. I said that Bush supporters would have supported it whether it was torture or not. If it had included castration of so called terrorists they would have backed it 100%.

See the difference? We are talking about Bush Supporters and whether or not they would support torture of terrorists. I am fully convinced they would without a doubt.

[3) Captured non-military combatants do not receive Geneva convention rights, nor do they receive the protections of the constitution like a citizen would or a legal visitor to the US would.... that part you are indeed correct on

I am sure you have heard of human rights and having read (and agreed with) your point of view on so many things, I am sure you believe in treating people (especially possibly innocent people) like human beings. In my opinion people are innocent until proven guilty and until they are proven guilty they deserve to be treated like human beings.

Immie

 

[DiamondDave]

The Patriot Act was an infringement upon our civil rights. That most certainly goes against conservative principles.

NSA Wiretapping warrantless wiretapping of citizens is another infringement upon our civil rights and the fact that it may or may not have been done in the past does not change the fact that it was an infringement upon our civil rights nor does it make it a conservative principle.



Whether or not it (waterboarding) was truly torture is again besides the fact. Bush's supporters would have supported it even if in included castration or God forbid beheadings simply because, those terrorists did it first edit: they have no constitutional rights. How many times did I hear that shit?



You are right... I am one of them.




And many would still support everything he did simply because he is a Republican.

I do not believe I said, "all" anywhere in this discussion.

Immie

Immie

1) It is not against anyone's civil rights... even if you state it numerous times... interception of enemy communication in combat or war cannot nor should not wait on warrants... no intercepted communication was used to bring any charges or grief upon citizens who were not involved in aid to the enemy.... sorry Immie, this one does not fly

This would be true if they only intercepted enemy communications. What about the communications between Americans and their families in the Middle East that are not enemies of the state? It does not matter whether or not they are used against innocent citizens. They could be. It is the innocent communications that concern me and it is the innocents who stand to suffer from an overly agressive government.

Sorry, it does fly.

[2) When something is not deemed torture, you cannot try and use it as your proof of torture... does not work that way.. even if you wish it were deemed torture.. and even if you believe in the pit of your stomach that certain people would support it even if it were used when deemed as torture

I didn't use it as proof of torture. I said that Bush supporters would have supported it whether it was torture or not. If it had included castration of so called terrorists they would have backed it 100%.

See the difference? We are talking about Bush Supporters and whether or not they would support torture of terrorists. I am fully convinced they would without a doubt.

[3) Captured non-military combatants do not receive Geneva convention rights, nor do they receive the protections of the constitution like a citizen would or a legal visitor to the US would.... that part you are indeed correct on

I am sure you have heard of human rights and having read (and agreed with) your point of view on so many things, I am sure you believe in treating people (especially possibly innocent people) like human beings. In my opinion people are innocent until proven guilty and until they are proven guilty they deserve to be treated like human beings.

Immie

1) No, it does not fly... when intercepting communications to known enemy regions or suspected persons/entities tied to the enemy, you cannot wait until you are certain it is not a shopping list or a happy birthday call... if it were not a military or wartime/combat-time situation, I would agree with you.. but in cases such as war and combat, it has always be done and should always be done.... now if one of these intercepted communications were indeed used to arrest and try someone on tax charges or fraud charges or the like, then I would be up in arms (no pun intended)... this has not been the case though
2) You believe they would have.... no different than someone like KMAN believing that Obama supporters would support the confiscation of all wealth of individuals making 250+K a year to pay for health care... there is no basis for it, just your 'feeling'... it don't work that way Immie.. and you know that
3) Do I think maybe there should be additional laws written for this type of case, now that we will see it more with terrorism being more prevalent?? Possibly.... right now they are in LaLa land in terms of legalities.... but I, in no way, believe they should be afforded the same treatment of a soldier and I in no way believe they should be protected under our Constitution as citizens and legal visitors are... as for how they are treated, I do not think that the GITMO prison is any worse in it's treatment than a place like Leavenworth.. and in certain ways the facilities and treatment is better than the average US soldier is getting on a regular basis... where the improvement needs to be is set rules of how they will be tried and (hopefully) convicted as prisoner non-military-combatants from off of US soil

 

[amrchaos]

Yes, I'm trying to stir the pot. My father and I got into this awhile ago. What would the US be like today if McCain would have won? What would the world be like? Any different? I'm thinking it wouldn't be that much different than it is today, the economy would still be in the crapper (it's a world problem), but the media wouldn't be talking about health care as much, they would be covering the war. WAR WAR WAR!! Or should I say BOMB BOMB BOMB!!!

The left wing loons would have a grand time making fun of McCain's war injuries, bitching because he gets a military retirement check from the government and finding faults in his wife.

I never saw that type of disrespect aimed at McCain by the left, though I'm sure there were a few classless jerks and I'd have called them on it (unlike the fact that the right wing loons are relentless toward obama and there are maybe three righties who have the guts to say it's pathetic). McCain just wasn't equipped to be president and his choice of a running made pretty much made it impossible to consider him. I still think if he'd chosen Romney, he'd have won.

I'd also point out that the vilest things ever said about McCain were said by Karl Rove and the Bush campaign... why he ever sucked up to them after is beyond me.

I have--and at times, it even reached to his age and some lefties used to say that since McCain was born in Panama, that he could not be president.

Left wing Birthers!! They were ready!! Kind of why I do not spend that much time arguing with the birthers. Lefties were going to do the same thing as well.

 

[Immanuel]

Immie

1) It is not against anyone's civil rights... even if you state it numerous times... interception of enemy communication in combat or war cannot nor should not wait on warrants... no intercepted communication was used to bring any charges or grief upon citizens who were not involved in aid to the enemy.... sorry Immie, this one does not fly

This would be true if they only intercepted enemy communications. What about the communications between Americans and their families in the Middle East that are not enemies of the state? It does not matter whether or not they are used against innocent citizens. They could be. It is the innocent communications that concern me and it is the innocents who stand to suffer from an overly agressive government.

Sorry, it does fly.




I didn't use it as proof of torture. I said that Bush supporters would have supported it whether it was torture or not. If it had included castration of so called terrorists they would have backed it 100%.

See the difference? We are talking about Bush Supporters and whether or not they would support torture of terrorists. I am fully convinced they would without a doubt.

[3) Captured non-military combatants do not receive Geneva convention rights, nor do they receive the protections of the constitution like a citizen would or a legal visitor to the US would.... that part you are indeed correct on

I am sure you have heard of human rights and having read (and agreed with) your point of view on so many things, I am sure you believe in treating people (especially possibly innocent people) like human beings. In my opinion people are innocent until proven guilty and until they are proven guilty they deserve to be treated like human beings.

Immie

1) No, it does not fly... when intercepting communications to known enemy regions or suspected persons/entities tied to the enemy, you cannot wait until you are certain it is not a shopping list or a happy birthday call... if it were not a military or wartime/combat-time situation, I would agree with you.. but in cases such as war and combat, it has always be done and should always be done.... now if one of these intercepted communications were indeed used to arrest and try someone on tax charges or fraud charges or the like, then I would be up in arms (no pun intended)... this has not been the case though
2) You believe they would have.... no different than someone like KMAN believing that Obama supporters would support the confiscation of all wealth of individuals making 250+K a year to pay for health care... there is no basis for it, just your 'feeling'... it don't work that way Immie.. and you know that
3) Do I think maybe there should be additional laws written for this type of case, now that we will see it more with terrorism being more prevalent?? Possibly.... right now they are in LaLa land in terms of legalities.... but I, in no way, believe they should be afforded the same treatment of a soldier and I in no way believe they should be protected under our Constitution as citizens and legal visitors are... as for how they are treated, I do not think that the GITMO prison is any worse in it's treatment than a place like Leavenworth.. and in certain ways the facilities and treatment is better than the average US soldier is getting on a regular basis... where the improvement needs to be is set rules of how they will be tried and (hopefully) convicted as prisoner non-military-combatants from off of US soil

We are going around and around in a circle.

On this subject, we will have to disagree.

What was that Jefferson quote about a government big enough to give you everything?

Immie