|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: John McCain - 6/11/2008 11:14:35 AM
|
|
|
davemiller7
Posts: 825
Joined: 3/5/2008
From: NC via NY
Status: offline
|
First of all, I don't have the foggiest notion what "snarky" means, nor do I care, but I'm sure it isn't a complimentary term. Secondly, I don't think that having sex in the Oval Office rises to the level of an impeachable offense (high crimes and misdemeanors). It was the lying to a grand jury that was the impeachable offense. Any President, be he Republican, Democrat, or whatever else, having sex with an intern in the Oval Office is distasteful, adulterous, and demeaning of the Oval Office and the Presidency. He should be reprimanded and censured for it.
That's my take on the matter, OK? I'm not going to get into any more parsing of words and meanings with you.
-Dave
quote:
ORIGINAL: 1dblthnk02
quote:
ORIGINAL: davemiller7
The reason for impeachment was PERJURY, not adultery. Get your facts straight.
At ease, my snarky friend. I said, "righties think that adultery was more than enough reason to impeach Clinton." I didn't say that was the reason for his impeachment.
My point is that-- regardless of his actual charges-- if you think that Clinton's adulterous behavior was worthy of impeachment, then how can you in good conscience endorse a man who did something just as bad if not worse?
_____________________________
-Dave
The Prayer of Protection
The light of God surrounds me,
The love of God enfolds me,
The power of God protects me,
The presence of God watches over me.
Wherever I am, God is.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John McCain - 6/12/2008 9:58:49 AM
|
|
|
1dblthnk02
Posts: 647
Joined: 3/24/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: JimboFletch
No double standard. If McCain commits adultery and perjury in the White House with an employee, paid or unpaid, then he too deserves to be impeached.
But adultery outside of the White House with a non-employee is fair play? How do you figure?
quote:
You did excuse Chappaquiddick, correct?
I didn't even mention Chappaquiddick.
quote:
I consider that to be the lowest blow an armchair critic like yourself can make against any POW.
I think that McCain's lowness of character warrants it.
quote:
I put your jab on this point on the same level as someone justifying wife-abuse.
Then you are mistaken, for I never justified his treatment at the Hanoi Hilton. He was beaten severely.
So were many other POWs who apparently didn't give the level of cooperation to their captors that McCain did. They sure didn't get the same positive attention from N Vietnamese VIPs, anyway.
And believe me-- if John Kerry had been the one who spilled the beans after he had been captured and tortured, you would be the first "airmchair critic" to point out that this proved him unfit for the presidency during his campaign.
< Message edited by 1dblthnk02 -- 6/12/2008 10:37:01 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John McCain - 6/12/2008 10:06:31 AM
|
|
|
1dblthnk02
Posts: 647
Joined: 3/24/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: davemiller7
First of all, I don't have the foggiest notion what "snarky" means, nor do I care, but I'm sure it isn't a complimentary term.
It's not exactly an insult, either. It's like the term "curmudgeon": either you are one, or you aren't.
I am a curmudgeon: it's not a compliment, but it is the truth.
quote:
Any President, be he Republican, Democrat, or whatever else, having sex with an intern in the Oval Office is distasteful, adulterous, and demeaning of the Oval Office and the Presidency. He should be reprimanded and censured for it.
But what about what McCain did? Was that okay?
quote:
That's my take on the matter, OK? I'm not going to get into any more parsing of words and meanings with you.
snarky: adj. Slang
Irritable or short-tempered; irascible.
Either you are, or you aren't . . .
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John McCain - 6/12/2008 11:46:51 AM
|
|
|
davemiller7
Posts: 825
Joined: 3/5/2008
From: NC via NY
Status: offline
|
Here we go again. I probably should have underlined both "Any" and "President" so that you would understand more clearly. To answer your question: What McCain did was in poor taste, not morally right, and possibly adulterous (I don't know the facts about that). Was he President at the time? No. Was he in the Oval Office of the White House? No. And he did not lie about any of it under oath, to the best of my knowledge. End of discussion.
Plus, I'm not impressed by your command of obscure terms to describe people.
-Dave
quote:
ORIGINAL: 1dblthnk02
quote:
ORIGINAL: davemiller7
quote:
Any President, be he Republican, Democrat, or whatever else, having sex with an intern in the Oval Office is distasteful, adulterous, and demeaning of the Oval Office and the Presidency. He should be reprimanded and censured for it.
But what about what McCain did? Was that okay?
_____________________________
-Dave
The Prayer of Protection
The light of God surrounds me,
The love of God enfolds me,
The power of God protects me,
The presence of God watches over me.
Wherever I am, God is.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John McCain - 6/12/2008 1:35:34 PM
|
|
|
1dblthnk02
Posts: 647
Joined: 3/24/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: davemiller7
Was he President at the time? No. Was he in the Oval Office of the White House? No.
Does this make any difference? No.
quote:
And he did not lie about any of it under oath, to the best of my knowledge.
Again, the fact that he is more forthcoming about his indescretion does not make it any more right. Nor does the fact that he was not president matter.
Is it adultery only if you are a U.S. president at the time you do it?
quote:
Plus, I'm not impressed by your command of obscure terms to describe people.
Snarky is hardly an obscure term.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John McCain - 6/12/2008 5:48:56 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 7398
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: offline
|
quote:
Again, the fact that he is more forthcoming about his indescretion does not make it any more right. Nor does the fact that he was not president matter.
Is it adultery only if you are a U.S. president at the time you do it?
Actually, I don't think he claimed, nor is there anything to base it on but rumor, that he commited adultery. He may have, but you are basically going on hearsay here.
Indeed, that seems to be your primary modus operandi - hearsay, rumor, slander, and all around avoidance of substantive issues.
_____________________________
Jack
“I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth”
William F. Buckley Jr. 1925-2008
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John McCain - 6/13/2008 10:32:02 AM
|
|
|
1dblthnk02
Posts: 647
Joined: 3/24/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
Actually, I don't think he claimed, nor is there anything to base it on but rumor, that he commited adultery. He may have, but you are basically going on hearsay here.
Sometimes the hearsay is too condemnatory to ignore. After all, McCain-Bush-et al thought that hearsay was enough evidence to wage a military campaign against Iraq.
quote:
Indeed, that seems to be your primary modus operandi - hearsay, rumor, slander, and all around avoidance of substantive issues.
When it comes to a presidential candidate, a man's/woman's character is the most substantive issue of all. Isn't that your guys' primary argument against Obama? Or Hillary, for that matter?
quote:
ORIGINAL: JimboFletch
Uhmmm... why... that'd be a double standard.
Yep, it sure would. But this is the direction that your leaning towards, nonetheless:
"Well, maybe McCain cheated on his faithful wife and left her for a much younger, richer woman. But since he wasn't president and Cindy wasn't his employee, it's not as bad."
Try explaining this to Carol, or any other woman who has been cheated on for that matter, and see how far it gets you.
quote:
However, I did but you sidestepped it.
I sidestepped it because I wanted to avoid beating you over the head with it. But since you are obviously a glutton for punishment, here goes:
1. You mistakenly assumed that Ted Kennedy is my personal hero because you have conveniently labeled me a "liberal," and you have been brainwashed by the righties' meme that says that all liberals venerate Ted Kennedy.
2. At the very least, you have assumed that Ted Kennedy is some kind of personal embarrassment to me, since you have labeled me a "liberal," because the rightie's meme also states that bringing up Chappaquiddick "makes 'em squirm."
I can just see you, Jimbo: smirking smuggly after playing the Chappaquiddick ace-in-the-hole, then rocking back into your chair satisfyingly crowing to yourself, "Now I've got him."
No you don't.
3. Because, you see, Chappaquiddick happened a long time ago. It is a done deal for which you should be grateful because it effectively shut him out of the White House thereafter. It kept him from ever becoming a rallying leader because it showed everyone what he was really made of. Just like cheating on your wife and then dumping her shows everyone what you are really made of.
Ted Kennedy is not running for president, rather he is running out of time. The only thing that you have to look forward to with Ted Kennedy is his demise.
4. The Clinton-Lewinski affair is also a done deal. It happened, and now Bill Clinton is no longer president, nor can he be again.
5. Both Chappaquiddick and Monica Lewinski are in the past. Neither Bill Clinton nor Ted Kennedy are campaigning for our trust.
John McCain is campagning for our trust. John McCain is asking us to overlook his indiscretions and expect that he will just behave himself from now on. And maybe he will.
But why should I trust him?
quote:
Nothing excuses your remark. I resent it as a veteran of the period and an American.
Why? Did you cooperate with the enemy, and then later turn on your fellow POWs and their families like McCain did after he got home?
quote:
You miss my point. I consider a snide remark about his time as a POW as something a spineless slug would make.
I'm not being snide. It is not snide to point out the truth.
Look, you can resent what I say about McCain's war record and his actions as a POW all that you want. But I'm not just being mean. What John McCain has done as a soldier, a civilian, and a senator is matter of public record. I do not like what he has done, and I do not like him, no matter how many names you call me.
< Message edited by 1dblthnk02 -- 6/13/2008 10:39:23 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John McCain - 6/13/2008 11:09:07 AM
|
|
|
JimboFletch
Posts: 6386
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
1dblthnk02 opined:
Yep, it sure would. But this is the direction that your leaning towards, nonetheless:
"Well, maybe McCain cheated on his faithful wife and left her for a much younger, richer woman. But since he wasn't president and Cindy wasn't his employee, it's not as bad."
Try explaining this to Carol, or any other woman who has been cheated on for that matter, and see how far it gets you.
True or false, incest between siblings is the same as fornication between unrelated adults? True or false: Adultery between a man 30 and woman 30 is the same as adultery of a man 30 and a girl 12?
quote:
I'm not being snide. It is not snide to point out the truth.
And I consider a remark by someone without understanding to be snide at best.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John McCain - 6/13/2008 1:32:46 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 7398
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: offline
|
quote:
Sometimes the hearsay is too condemnatory to ignore. After all, McCain-Bush-et al thought that hearsay was enough evidence to wage a military campaign against Iraq.
Well, at least you admit it was hearsay.
And incidentally, the entire congress as well as the previous President considered the reports out of Iraq more than 'hearsay'.
quote:
When it comes to a presidential candidate, a man's/woman's character is the most substantive issue of all. Isn't that your guys' primary argument against Obama? Or Hillary, for that matter?
Well the character of the accuser is of import as well; and when the accuser relies on unfounded mudslinging, personal bias, and a series of red herrings, their accusations should be roundly disregarded.
_____________________________
Jack
“I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth”
William F. Buckley Jr. 1925-2008
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John McCain - 6/13/2008 3:58:26 PM
|
|
|
1dblthnk02
Posts: 647
Joined: 3/24/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: JimboFletch
True or false, incest between siblings is the same as fornication between unrelated adults? True or false: Adultery between a man 30 and woman 30 is the same as adultery of a man 30 and a girl 12?
You have avoided answering my one central question that I have posed to you several times now; therefore, I will not answer your two.
quote:
And I consider a remark by someone without understanding to be snide at best.
1. I am not "without understanding."
2. Ignorance is not a component of the definition of snide.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
Well, at least you admit it was hearsay.
No, a couple of facts are not hearsay:
1. John McCain did meet Cindy while he was still married to Carol.
2. John did leave Carol for Cindy.
Now, the "hearsay" comes in that there exists no photos nor videos (that I know of) that actually puts John and Cindy in bed together before he was divorced. However, to actually believe that John and Cindy's relationship was strictly platonic until after the McCains' divorce was finalized would be the absolute heighth, breadth, and depth of naiveté.
quote:
And incidentally, the entire congress as well as the previous President considered the reports out of Iraq more than 'hearsay'.
. . . and we are back to the absolute heighth, breadth, and depth of naiveté.
quote:
Well the character of the accuser is of import as well; and when the accuser relies on unfounded mudslinging, personal bias, and a series of red herrings, their accusations should be roundly disregarded.
This answer is what I call a "red herring." You can't address one point that I make, so instead you call my character into question.
Gee, there's a word for this, isn't there . . . ?
Oh, yeah-- ad hominem. You'd be speechless without it.
< Message edited by 1dblthnk02 -- 6/13/2008 4:07:05 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John McCain - 6/13/2008 4:07:22 PM
|
|
|
JimboFletch
Posts: 6386
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: 1dblthnk02
quote:
ORIGINAL: JimboFletch
True or false, incest between siblings is the same as fornication between unrelated adults? True or false: Adultery between a man 30 and woman 30 is the same as adultery of a man 30 and a girl 12?
You have avoided answering my one central question that I have posed to you several times now; therefore, I will not answer your two.
Untrue. Another sidestep, but not as effective as others.
If you are as smart as you think you are, you probably figured that by answering you'd disprove your own point.
Instead, by pretending to have been ignored, you show that you cannot answer without your house of cards crashing down.
There ARE differences in the two situations you harp on. It's obvious to everyone but you.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John McCain - 6/13/2008 4:29:22 PM
|
|
|
1dblthnk02
Posts: 647
Joined: 3/24/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: JimboFletch
Untrue.
True. I have asked you several times now how being President of the United States makes adultery more adulterous, and you have only responded with other irrelevant questions.
quote:
If you are as smart as you think you are, you probably figured that by answering you'd disprove your own point. Instead, by pretending to have been ignored, you show that you cannot answer without your house of cards crashing down.
You have just revealed why you are not answering my question.
quote:
There ARE differences in the two situations you harp on. It's obvious to everyone but you.
. . . Not different where the issue of cheating on one's wife is concerned.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John McCain - 6/13/2008 5:09:15 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 7398
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: offline
|
quote:
No, a couple of facts are not hearsay:
1. John McCain did meet Cindy while he was still married to Carol.
2. John did leave Carol for Cindy.
Now, the "hearsay" comes in that there exists no photos nor videos (that I know of) that actually puts John and Cindy in bed together before he was divorced. However, to actually believe that John and Cindy's relationship was strictly platonic until after the McCains' divorce was finalized would be the absolute heighth, breadth, and depth of naiveté.
I appreciate your acknowledgement that you have no facts to base your contention on; but such an admittance doesn’t diminish the fact that the entirety of your point is rumor-mongering and slanderous.
quote:
. . . and we are back to the absolute heighth, breadth, and depth of naiveté.
Preferable to your outright deception incidentally.
quote:
This answer is what I call a "red herring." You can't address one point that I make, so instead you call my character into question.
You made character an issue, not I.
A person who argues based on rumor, innuendo, and slander calls their own character into question; I am simply pointing out what your are doing.
_____________________________
Jack
“I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth”
William F. Buckley Jr. 1925-2008
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John McCain - 6/14/2008 11:19:05 AM
|
|
|
1dblthnk02
Posts: 647
Joined: 3/24/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
I appreciate your acknowledgement that you have no facts to base your contention on
Read again, Jhud: I pointed out two irrefutable facts.
quote:
doesn’t diminish the fact that the entirety of your point is rumor-mongering and slanderous
Look, prove me wrong. I dare you to dig up so much as one news source that reports how McCain never cheated on his first wife.
Nevermind-- you won't find it.
Dig up one news source that claims that McCain did not crack under pressure while a POW at the Hanoi Hilton, and never gave up information to the enemy.
Nevermind-- you won't find it.
Find me one news source that shows that as Senator of Arizona, McCain has lobbied for the Indians of the Black Mesa in order to find a viable resolution-- other than removal-- to resolve the Peabody Coal/Dineh-Hopi conflict.
Nevermind-- you won't find it.
Instead of trying to impugn my character in a vain attempt to cover the fact that you have no argument other than with me personally, try proving me wrong for once instead of your usual barrage of ad hominem
quote:
You made character an issue, not I.
. . . With a presidential candidate, not with you, me, or anyone else on this thread. You are the one who has stooped to making this personal.
quote:
A person who argues based on rumor, innuendo, and slander calls their own character into question; I am simply pointing out what your are doing.
Like I said, prove me wrong. There's got to be all kinds of truthful, well-researched news article out there that show the exact opposite of everything that I have contended.
Let's see it, Jhud.
You have insinuated that I am a liar of low character. Now, man-up and prove it. Any drooling dolt can bluster and insinuate over cyberspace; only someone with integrity can back it up.
< Message edited by 1dblthnk02 -- 6/14/2008 12:06:56 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John McCain - 6/14/2008 5:01:10 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 7398
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: offline
|
quote:
Read again, Jhud: I pointed out two irrefutable facts.
Neither 'fact' demonstrates adultery.
quote:
Look, prove me wrong. I dare you to dig up so much as one news source that reports how McCain never cheated on his first wife.
That's because there are no news sources about things that didn't happen.
I bet you can't find a news source proving Obama isn't an alien imposter who seeks to dominate humanity - Hah! by your own standard I have proved that he is, and therefore, we should conclude that we should vote against Obama for that very reason.
quote:
. . With a presidential candidate, not with you, me, or anyone else on this thread. You are the one who has stooped to making this personal
That's because personally speaking, you are a rumor monger and mudslinger, and almost never deal with reliable sources of information.
quote:
You have insinuated that I am a liar of low character. Now, man-up and prove it. Any drooling dolt can bluster and insinuate over cyberspace; only someone with integrity can back it up.
Well, like I said, you can't prove slime wrong, because it has no basis in fact to begin with.
_____________________________
Jack
“I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth”
William F. Buckley Jr. 1925-2008
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John McCain - 6/14/2008 6:30:51 PM
|
|
|
1dblthnk02
Posts: 647
Joined: 3/24/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
Neither 'fact' demonstrates adultery.
. . . Only if you are naive beyond all reason.
quote:
That's because there are no news sources about things that didn't happen.
Here's the funny thing: if you pull your head out of the clouds, you will find many, many articles and newstories that support what I am saying.
quote:
That's because personally speaking, you are a rumor monger and mudslinger, and almost never deal with reliable sources of information.
All sources of information back up my allegations.
So what do you consider "reliable": something that doesn't back me up? You will have to search very, very hard to find that kind of reliability.
quote:
Well, like I said, you can't prove slime wrong
I do it all of the time in our debates.
< Message edited by 1dblthnk02 -- 6/14/2008 6:39:31 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John McCain - 6/17/2008 10:08:56 AM
|
|
|
Beanteaser
Posts: 287
Joined: 6/23/2005
From: Minnesota
Status: offline
|
John McCain wants to lift the bans that prevent offshore drilling for oil. Well it's about time a presidential candidate wakes up.
I told a friend that I would vote for a candidate that would make drilling for oil legal again. It seems McCain is the only one that would support this. He may have just bought my vote.....we'll see.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
