Jon Stewart's The Daily Show: Indecision 2008 - McCain's Sweet Talk Express »
Posted By ybdogsct 5 months, 2 weeks ago in HumorJohn Hagee, whose endorsement McCain accepted, said "New Orleans had a level of sin that was offensive to God." Hagee's God doesn't "Damn America" like Jeremiah Wright's; Hagee's God just destroys the parts of America he doesn't like. You're not wearing a flag pin, McCain. How are you going to answer that question?
Read Full Story at thedailyshow.com »
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 216
-
0%
ybdogsct5 months, 2 weeks ago
Jon Stewart addresses inconsistencies in the media's treatment of McCain:
1) John Hagee, whose endorsement McCain accepted, believed God sent Hurricane Katrina to destroy New Orleans for an excessive level of sin. Hagee's God doesn't "Damn America" like Jeremiah Wright's; Hagee's God just destroys the parts of America he doesn't like.
2) An examination of McCain's interviews shows that, like Obama, McCain doesn't wear a flag pin on his lapel either.
3) McCain visited a predominantly black neighborhood in New Orleans to reach out to minority voters who are traditionally ignored, only to draw an audience that was almost entirely white.
LOL
Some like to boast how well McCain is running in head-to-head polls against Clinton and Obama. What they fail to realize, however, is that--the Democrats are currently divided, McCain has gotten a free pass--this is as good as it gets for McCain. Once the Democrats have their candidate settled, McCain will face a much tougher campaign.
Reply-
-
0%
ybdogsct5 months, 2 weeks ago
You mean, YOU will always be divided.
http://politics.propeller.com/story/2008/01/13/...
DROP: "Don't be surprised when McRINO, who is not supported by the vast majority of Republicans, wins in MI."
http://politics.propeller.com/story/2008/01/13/...
DROP: "McCain is the Democrats' Republican and given that Dems can vote in a number of Republican primaries, maybe he can get a few states before he loses at the Convention."
http://politics.propeller.com/story/2008/01/21/...
DROP: "I'll be glad to see a primary where Republicans actually choose their own candidate. After FL, bye, bye McRINO! Rudy too, I imagine."
Within a few months, you've gone from calling McCain "MCRINO" to becoming his biggest fan. I guess you're divided against yourself.
LOL.
Reply-
0%
Locky125 months, 2 weeks ago
Hagee endorsed John McCain.
Wright is Obama's way of life.
There's the difference.
Jon Stewart loves Obama just because he is a "black man running for president". He cites no other achievement or reason why Obama should be president other than he's a black man.
He's a radical racist black man who the superdelegates will nominate to their peril.
Reply-
0%
ybdogsct5 months, 2 weeks ago
LOCKY:
"Hagee endorsed John McCain. Wright is Obama's way of life. There's the difference."
Actually, the difference is that Obama has never been directly quoted as uttering racist slurs, while McCain has. You erroneously think Obama has adopted every idea of every person he happens to know, yet hypocritically refuse to apply the same standard to McCain.
http://news.propeller.com/story/2008/04/04/mcca...
"Speaking at a ceremony marking the 40th anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.'s death, John McCain said he was wrong to initially oppose a government holiday in memory of the civil rights leader. The comments were met with audible boos and interruptions from many in the audience, as he apologized for repeatedly opposing the creation of a holiday commemorating MLK."
Reply-
0%
DropkickaLib5 months, 2 weeks ago
At least he wasn't in the leadership of the Klan, like a former Senate Majority Leader from West Virginia. You guys love him now. What's your problem with McCain?
Reply-
0%
ybdogsct5 months, 2 weeks ago
DROP:
"At least he wasn't in the leadership of the Klan, like a former Senate Majority Leader from West Virginia"
LOL. Now, you're really reaching. Trying to change the topic by bringing up Byrd, are you?
Well, I wouldn't vote for Byrd for president either. However, it should be noted that:
(1) Byrd had been raised as a member into the KKK by his family -- influences which many psychiatrists agree is difficult to shake off, even though Byrd ultimately was successful shaking off his childhood racism.
(2) Byrd has apologized profusely for his involvement; McCain has not apologized for Richard Quinn's remarks.
(3) Byrd's actions speak louder than his words. Byrd has since suppported all 33 bills proposed by the NAACP, was given a 100% on the NAACP report card, and lobbied for a MLK monument in D.C. McCain, on the other hand, voted against an MLK holiday TWICE.
http://www.naacp.org/inc/docs/washington/108/10...
Reply-
0%
DropkickaLib5 months, 2 weeks ago
Byrd was a member until his late 20's...not just a member, he was in the leadership. He actually, gives the Klan credit for teaching him the leadership skills he needed for public office. McCain isn't responsible for Quinn's remarks, it's not like he attended the man's church for 20 years. Byrd votes for whatever keeps the pork barrel open at this point in his career.
Reply-
0%
Lurch5 months, 2 weeks ago
You have a lot of nerve complaining about Dem Congress member`s spending.
Byrd cannot touch the pork barrel handouts, entitlements, and corporate welfare of the no-good, rubber stamp spend like there`s no tomorrow Republican Congress.
Nobody spends and steals like the Republicans. Thats historical fact, not an opinion.
Reply-
0%
Goppy5 months, 2 weeks ago
Its just one more of our Christian Conservative Lies.
But see, if you say it LOUD enough, and LOOOONG enough, with enough anger and passion ... poeple believe you.
I just hope normal folk dont ever see THIS graph showin how BLATANT the lie really is.
http://www.uuforum.org/deficit.htm
Reply
-
-
0%
ybdogsct5 months, 2 weeks ago
DROP:
"Byrd was a member until his late 20's."
And Byrd had changed quite a bit SINCE THE 1940s, when he was encouraged into joining the KKK by his family. As I've noted before, his actions speak louder than his words: Byrd supported all 33 bills by the NAACP, the NAACP gave him a 100% on their report card, and Byrd lobbied for an MLK monument in D.C. Meanwhile, McCain voted AGAINST the MLK holiday TWICE and has been recently DIRECTLY quoted saying racist slurs. But this is all obfuscation anyway because, 1) Byrd is not running for president and 2) I told you I wouldn't vote for him anyway.
DROP:
"McCain isn't responsible for Quinn's remarks."
No, he only hired him to be his campaign manager. Quinn only refers to McCain as a "maverick politician"--the same label Quinn uses to describe KKK leader David Duke.
LOL.
Reply -
0%
ybdogsct5 months, 2 weeks ago
Here's your own precious John McCain defending Obama from Wright's remarks:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/04/28...
Despite his newfound willingness to make political hay out of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, John McCain insisted three separate times on Monday he does not believe Barack Obama shares Wright's extremist views. 'I've said again and again, I do not believe that Sen. Obama shares Rev. Wright's extremist views which he has stated, whether it be the United States Marine Corps or the flag or what,' McCain said."
Reply -
0%
ybdogsct5 months, 2 weeks ago
Here is your Mike Huckabee DEFENDING Wright and Obama.
http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article...
"'[Y]ou can't hold the candidate responsible for everything that people around him may say or do,' Huckabee says. 'Many times those were statements lifted out of the context of a larger sermon. Rev. Wright got caught up in the emotion of the moment. As easy as it is for those of us who are white to look back and say "That's a terrible statement!" I grew up in a very segregated South. And I think that you have to cut him some slack.'
Huckabee, who grew up in the segregated South, added that if he had experienced the kind of discrimination African Americans have in American history, he would probably have become bitter.
'Sometimes people do have a chip on their shoulder and resentment,' he said. 'And you have to just say, I probably would too. In fact, I may have had more of a chip on my shoulder had it been me.'"
Reply -
0%
ybdogsct5 months, 2 weeks ago
McCain is NOT the only one seeking the endorsement of these conservative Christians. In fact, Pat Robertson endorsed Giuliani. Jerry Falwell endorsed Huckabee. Bob Jones endorsed Romney.
Also, all of these individuals endorsed GW Bush, and yet I don't hear a PEEP from you--all very telling of your double standard.
And here are some choice excerpts from your own Christian conservative icons.
JERRY FALLWELL:
http://www.actupny.org/YELL/falwell.html
"FALWELL: I believe that pagans, abortionists, feminists, gays, lesbians, the ACLU, and People For the American Way -- all of them who have tried to secularize America -- I point the finger in their face and say "you helped 9/11 happen.
ROBERTSON: I totally concur."
PAT ROBERTSON:
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2005/08/0080695
"The Antichrist is probably a Jew alive in Israel today."
Reply -
0%
ybdogsct5 months, 2 weeks ago
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Pat_Robertson
"Many of those people involved with Adolph Hitler were Satanists, many of them were homosexuals; the two things seem to go together."
"You say you're supposed to be nice to the Episcopalians and the Presbyterians and the Methodists and this, that, and the other thing. Nonsense, I don't have to be nice to the spirit of the Antichrist"
MORE PAT ROBERTSON:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200706270005
"If [Chavez] thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it. It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war."
ANN COULTER:
http://hughesforamerica.typepad.com/hughes_for_...
"We need somebody to put rat poisoning in Justice Stevens' creme brulee."
http://www.newsbusters.org/node/13791
"If I'm going to say anything about John Edwards in the future, I'll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot.'"
Reply
-
-
-
0%
Radiofreeeuropa5 months, 2 weeks ago
McCain just said "there is no discrimination in paying women lower salaries than men, they need more training and education".... LOL!
His 2nd cousin didn't say it. Some guy in his church didn't say it. MCCain himself said it! He is a bigot. And the bigots will of course support him.
Reply -
0%
Radiofreeeuropa5 months, 2 weeks ago
Though I don't really want to respond to your bait and switch tactic. Looks like Byrd has a 100% rating from the NAACP...Do you know McCains??? It's 0! Not 1%, Not 2% Not 10% a flat out ZERO. It's one thing to have done something wrong many years ago, it's quite another to continue to do them over and over and over and never see the error.
Reply-
0%
DropkickaLib5 months, 2 weeks ago
Byrd is ridin' the pork train with the Libs, now that being a Conservative Dem isn't cool anymore. The NAACP is such a DNC-dominated organization, I doubt that Abe Lincoln would have received a good rating.
Reply-
0%
wtagg5 months, 2 weeks ago
You made an accusation. RFE countered with some evidence that outright dismisses your accusation. Is this the best response you have. It is nothing but opinion and conjecture, which is surely your right to have, but it does nothing to support your claim.
Reply-
0%
DropkickaLib5 months, 2 weeks ago
He didn't counter anything. Byrd hasn't changed his views. He just tows the party line so he can keep the pork flowing and keep getting everything in West Virginia named after him.
Reply-
0%
wtagg5 months, 2 weeks ago
His rating demonstrates that the perception of him has changed in the community of the NAACP. This would certainly indicate that that community has a different opinion of Byrd than the one you portrayed. It would seem that if Byrd is providing pork to the community of the NAACP that doesn't really support him currently being a leadership member of the KKK.
If you want to discuss the past transgressions of his life, you open the door for discussion for all. I'm not sure that would go well.
Though I am not a fan of his, he has certainly been very successful using the legal means provided by this country. Are you jealous of his success? I can provide countless pork gatherers from both parties. It isn't the bastion of one party.
Pork is a problem that needs to be solved at all levels, including those of the military, who tend to benefit the most from such practices. It would be great to make everything much more transparent at all levels and a conservative ideal.
Reply-
0%
DropkickaLib5 months, 2 weeks ago
He's the King of Pork and has had that reputation for many years. If Byrd had the same policy positions and called himself a Republican, the NAACP would rate him poorly. I'm not impressed by such a partisan organization.
Reply-
0%
ybdogsct5 months, 2 weeks ago
DROP:
"He's the King of Pork and has had that reputation for many years."
Your hypocrisy strikes again.
The Clinton admin averaged only $11.8 billion in earmarks. The Bush admin with the Republican-controlled 109th Congress averaged OVER DOUBLE this at $23.4 billion. The current Democratic-controlled 110th Congress has reduced Bush's average almost by half to a more reasonable $13.2 billion.
http://www.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=re...
CLINTON:
1993: $6.6 billion
1994: $7.8 billion
1995: $10 billion
1996: $12.5 billion
1997: $14.5 billion
1998: $13.2 billion
1999: $12 billion
2000: $17.7 billion
BUSH & Republican-controlled 109th Congress
2001: $18.5 billion
2002: $20.1 billion
2003: $22.5 billion
2004: $22.9 billion
2005: $27.3 billion
2006: $29.0 billion
Democrat-controlled 110th Congress
2007: $13.2 billion
Reply-
-
-
0%
ybdogsct5 months, 2 weeks ago
DROP:
"No, actually he carefully avoided providing Byrd's individual earmarks"
Byrd's earmarks PALES in comparison to the RECORD EARMARK SPENDING of the Republican-controlled Congress and Bush administration -- AS MY "CITIZENS AGAINST GOVERNMENTAL WASTE SOURCE EXPLAINS.
Reading comprehension is certainly not your forte. Your partisan hypocrisy strikes again.
LOL.
Reply-
-
0%
ybdogsct5 months, 2 weeks ago
Your obfuscation strikes again. You are completely avoiding the fact that:
1) this thread has nothing to do with Byrd
2) I've said I wouldn't vote for a Byrd presidential ticket anyway
3) if you're going to bring up Byrd's earmark spending, then YOU research it and YOU provide the governmental source; I'm certainly NOT going to do for you the homework you are too LAZY or INEPT to do yourself.
4) the record-breaking earmark spending by the Republican-controlled Congress and Bush administration FAR exceeds Byrd's requested earmarks.
LOL.
Keep spinning your wheels. You only serve to make yourself look even more foolish.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
0%
wtagg5 months, 2 weeks ago
And you haven't included the biggest earmark of all, the Iraq debacle.
Reply -
-
0%
ybdogsct5 months, 2 weeks ago
DROP:
"Nice way to avoid discussing Byrd. You broadened the discussion to get away from him and his individual earmarks."
That's a laughable charge considering it is YOU who is obfuscating by bringing Robert Byrd into a discussion about Obama and McCain.
FYI, Robert Byrd is NOT running for president, and I wouldn't vote for him even if he was.
LOL.
Pathetic.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
ybdogsct5 months, 2 weeks ago
And before you flip flop again and blame solely Bush for unprecedented levels of earmark spending, know that it was the Republican-controlled CONGRESS that crafted the pork-laden legislation. Bush simply caved in and signed them into law.
Even Alan Greenspan, a self-described life-long Republican, has blamed Republicans (not just Bush alone) for becoming the party of excessive federal spending.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...
"Greenspan levels harsh criticism at the Republican Party, arguing that Bush abandoned the conservative principle of fiscal restraint. 'My biggest frustration remained the president's unwillingness to wield his veto against out-of-control spending.' Greenspan accuses Republicans of being too eager to tolerate excessive federal spending in exchange for political opportunity."
Reply-
-
-
0%
wtagg5 months, 2 weeks ago
Isn't this an attempt to obfuscate the discussion? You complain when you think it occurs above, but are not afraid to use it to your advantage elsewhere. The irony is that pointed out that though Byrd has been very successful in bringing back funding to his state, as a party, the republicans have used the very tool the complain about very successfully to back their special interests.
Pork is a topic that gets much discussion against it, but very little action. Why is that? The republicans had the congress and the presidency for a solid 4 years. They had every opportunity to do something. They did nothing. Why?
Because it would destroy a tool that they enjoy using every bit as much as the democrats. It would also take away a platform battle cry used every election season.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
DropkickaLib5 months, 2 weeks ago
I agree with Greenspan regarding the abandonment of fiscal restraint. I don't defend out of control spending that results in inflationary pressures. Greenspan's primary goal was to control inflation but the war, couple with international economic forces such as China and India's increased oil and food purchases, have resulted in tremendous inflationary pressures.
Reply-
0%
wtagg5 months, 2 weeks ago
I am glad to hear that you believe the war (the Iraq war) was a mistake and ill-advised. Ironically, I think you will be hard pressed to find anyone here, including those that you have stereotyped as liberals at odds with the effort that occurred in Afghanistan in 2002. We abandoned Afghanistan to play soldier needlessly in Iraq.
Though China and India do bring a consumption pressure on oil and food, I have to wonder if it is anywhere near the pressure we bring upon it with our current efforts of keeping the mid-east region in disarray.
If we wanted oil, it would have been simpler to just buy if from Saddam. We probably could have gotten a good deal.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
0%
Lurch5 months, 2 weeks ago
> He didn't counter anything.
You try to make a point, he provides the facts that blow your talking point out of the water. Instead of admitting you are wrong and accepting the truth, you counter with another attempt at a diversionary attack, and you get owned again.
Any day now, waking up would be cool, really.
Reply-
-
0%
Lurch5 months, 2 weeks ago
Unfortunately, because of your history of ignoring facts, truth, and history, you have no credibility.
So whatever personal experience you THINK you may have, still don`t mean squat cause you cannot take the truth in writing, so why should any of us expect you will take the truth while acting as some Republican hack`s hack.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0%
Radiofreeeuropa5 months, 2 weeks ago
Maybe your way of life is whatever your preacher says.
But Not mine, Not anyone I know. Most people go to church for other reasons that have little to do with what opinions the pastor might have. To associate Senator Obama with remarks he never made, was not present when they were made, and flat out disowned is ludicrous, and disingenuous. What Obama himself has to say about racism is far more important and genuine.
Here - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWe7wTVbLUU
If you wish to criticize his words, that would be legitimate.
Do you dislike what OBAMA believes about race??
Reply
-
-
-
0%
ybdogsct5 months, 2 weeks ago
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,259282,00.html
"McCain used the term 'tar baby.' He said he hoped it wouldn't be viewed as a racial remark."
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/hongop.shtml
"On his campaign bus recently, Sen. John McCain told reporters, 'I hated the gooks. I will hate them as long as I live.'"
http://archive.salon.com/politics2000/feature/2...
"Richard Quinn, McCain's chief South Carolina advisor in 2000, who edits a racially controversial magazine called Southern Partisan called Nelson Mandela a 'terrorist' and King a man 'whose role in history was to lead his people into a perpetual dependence on the welfare state, a terrible bondage of body and soul.' In another piece, Quinn said of former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, 'What better way to reject politics as usual than to elect a maverick like David Duke?'"
Reply-
0%
DropkickaLib5 months, 2 weeks ago
Wasn't McCain tortured by the Vietnamese? Wonder why he would have bad memories? My grandfather wouldn't visit Europe again after WWII and nearly dying on the battlefield in Italy. Does that make him a bigot too?
Reply-
0%
ybdogsct5 months, 2 weeks ago
DROP:
"Wasn't McCain tortured by the Vietnamese?"
Wasn't Jeremiah Wright denied civil rights even after returning from military service in Vietnam? Can't you even fathom applying a CONSTANT standard to Wright, Obama, McCain, and your grandfather?
Spare me your partisan double standards.
Reply-
0%
DropkickaLib5 months, 2 weeks ago
Spare me your bullcrap. Being of Native American and Appalachian decent, I know what it is to be looked down upon. Take Obama's recent remark.
Reply-
0%
Goppy5 months, 2 weeks ago
I dont buy it Droppy.
If you had experience as a kid bein looked down upon, why would you persist in makin yourself so transparently without conscience?
UNLESS! You really WERE looked down on and you LIEK it! And now you look for ways to elicit poeple to look down on you.
You really are a tough nut to crack, Droppy. But a nut just the same.
Reply-
0%
DropkickaLib5 months, 2 weeks ago
I think the elitist Liberal posts found in the political threads alone prove that many here look down on others.
Reply-
0%
Radiofreeeuropa5 months, 2 weeks ago
umm. I may look down on idiocy, bigotry, malfeasance, hegemony, your basic evil, but I like people for the most part. I may look down on a comment you make, and indeed reply conversely but I assume you are a decent human being (despite being mislead) LOL. No, we disagree about policy, in particular we disagree about what integrity is and what it is not. We disagree but it is not personal. It seems that way sometimes when people believe strongly in something.
Reply -
0%
wtagg5 months, 2 weeks ago
Though I and many others are mistakenly portrayed as liberals, I think you would be surprised at how many "liberals" are really in the world of true conservatism. The liberal tag is much more about being contrary to the current administration than it is about liberalism.
I hate to break it to you, if you have or do support the current administration, you are a liberal in the true definition of the word.
Reply-
0%
Radiofreeeuropa5 months, 2 weeks ago
Most of the labeling is completely erroneous. I believe strongly in fiscal responsibility. I also don't want a bloated inefficient government. (The true bellwether of a conservative).
Yet I also believe in personal liberty, social justice and the rule of law. (liberal attributes). That places me firmly in the actual center. But actuality has nothing to do with the labels tossed around. It is all disinformation. These clowns who defended Bush like a cult are anything but conservative. They don't know what the term means. They think it means waving a flag, buying a made in China yellow bow that says "I support duh troops by buyin' a made in China yellow bow".
Reply-
0%
Radiofreeeuropa5 months, 2 weeks ago
The modern republicans have not pursued a conservative agenda and these shills and cheerleaders don't even see that. They have redefined the terms in such a way as to demonize the moderates and independents and indeed actual conservatives of their own party as " Dem LIBERULS".
The center has become their uninformed idea of communist and
they stomp on the Constitution of The United States and The Bill Of Rights wearing their flag pins, advocating torture, and claiming anyone not in lock step with them is unpatriotic and a "terrist". No they don't stand for conservatism at all. They stand for idiocy and corporatism.
Reply-
0%
DropkickaLib5 months, 2 weeks ago
Forgetting to remain true to the goal of minimal government intervention and curtailing the growth of government in general was a goal of the Conservative Movement. When I hear Republicans saying to forget Ronald Reagan, I know what they mean is to forget about controlling expenditures and government growth.
Reply
-
-
-
-
0%
wtagg5 months, 2 weeks ago
Then you should verbalize this at every opportunity. Have you taken advantage of those opportunities or have you remained silent?
It isn't about liberal vs. conservative as much is that it is about what will make our country right again. Do you think that continuing down the path we are on is going to magically make that happen?
Reply-
-
-
-
lovermanComment removed: User banned.
-
-
-
-
0%
wtagg5 months, 2 weeks ago
Then you shouldn't be happy with anything the current admin and the current or the congress of 2001-2005 have done. I personally do not like when congress and the administration are represented by the same party. The Clinton admin/Republican congress were much more successful in providing some semblance of fiscal restraint.
It is a shame that the effort of both of their contributions toward fiscal responsibility have been so easily squandered.
The Clinton admin, when compared to the current one, was infinitely more conservative fiscally speaking, though I do realize that isn't much of a benchmark.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0%
Radiofreeeuropa5 months, 2 weeks ago
Irony- McCain was tortured and told them anything they wanted him to say, whether it was true or not, which gave many of his fellow captors cause for suspicion. I think his defense was correct back then, if you are tortured you say anything the torturer wants you to say. But he forgot all about that didn't he. Now he claims truthful information can be gathered through torture. The man is a either insane, or has been tortured by the Chenybush to the point of breaking himself. In either case he lost any credibility he might have had.
Reply-
-
0%
Radiofreeeuropa5 months, 2 weeks ago
I genuinely liked McCain in the 90s and up to 2000. I thought he was an example of a decent republican and still believe he should have been your candidate in 2000. I even corresponded with him a few times about some issues. I have kept these letters. I did not know of his poor record on civil rights at the time. My thumbs down of the man is based on everything he has done since 2000. He has been bad for Veterans ironically.
And reversed his positions on most everything. When he caved on the torture issue that was the last straw for me. Torture and taste just don't set well together under any circumstance.
Reply -
-
0%
Radiofreeeuropa5 months, 2 weeks ago
Absolutely, and if he had run in 2000 as an independent or libertarian he would have received a lot of support from moderate dems, moderate repubs and independents. Enough to have been a serious contender. But alas I believe whatever happened broke the man, he is not at all the maverick straight talk guy anymore. He chose the lock step say anything to get elected path losing any integrity and credibility he once had.
Reply
-
-
-
-
0%
Lurch5 months, 2 weeks ago
My grandfather was shot down by the Japanese and bleed for decades from the wounds.
He realized after a few decades, that the hate and prejudice was only hurting himself and those he loved. The Japanese didn`t care or know and they had long since gotten over their wounds and moved on. He realized it was time for him to move on too.
McCain got the best treatment of any POW, and yet other POWs have gotten over it. Many Nam Vets married Vietnamese. If McVictim cannot get over the past and get over himself, what does that show about his emotional maturity and his ability to be president?
Reply
-
-
-
0%
ybdogsct5 months, 2 weeks ago
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?AC...
"In the 2000 presidential campaign, McCain reversed himself on the confederate flag first calling it 'a symbol of racism and slavery' but then pandering the very next day by calling it a 'symbol of heritage.'
McCain campaigned in Alabama for George Wallace Jr., a popular speaker the Council of Conservative Citizens, whose mission statement reads:
'We believe that the U.S. derives from and is an integral part of European civilization and the European people and that the American people and government should remain European in their composition and character. We also oppose all efforts to mix the races of mankind, to promote non-white races over the European-American people through so-called "affirmative action" and similar measures, to destroy or denigrate the European-American heritage, including the heritage of the Southern people, and to force the integration of the races.'"
Reply-
0%
DropkickaLib5 months, 2 weeks ago
Could it be because Europeans originated modern democracy and are it's most accomplished and dedicated adherents?
Reply-
-
-
0%
ybdogsct5 months, 2 weeks ago
It's laughable that you would accuse me of playing the "race card" when YOU are the one whose comments implied an opposition to interracial relationships.
LOL.
Pathetic.
Reply -
0%
Lurch5 months, 2 weeks ago
Yeah, the Republicans and their lemmings attack the black candidate and black preacher for saying hateful stuff while giving a pass to the white candidate and the white preacher for saying even worse stuff.
Yep, how dare we play the race card?!
Reply
-
-
-
0%
Lurch5 months, 2 weeks ago
> Could it be because Europeans originated modern democracy
And here I thought the American Revolution happened first.
> and are it's most accomplished and dedicated adherents?
I blame Babs for America losing top spot.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
ybdogsct5 months, 2 weeks ago
Of course, it's no surprise that LOCKY12 supports flip-flop McCain since LOCKY12 himself is a flipflopper. Apparently, LOCKY12 was against McCain before he was for McCain.
-
-
-
-
