What an opportunist. Serving in Viet Nam, and getting shot down, and captured and tortured, just to further his political career.
Why couldn’t he just drink his ass off down in Texas like a real Republican?
Wow. Way to accuse me of something I didn't do, say anything about his military career.
He did not serve just to foster his political career, and I have never heard that accusation, unlike a certain Democratic Presidential nominee in 2004.
And Jason defends a Republican. I'm buying Super Bowl tickets! The Eagles are going, because Hell has just frozen over!
Love him or hate him, I'm pretty sure Kerry didn't volunteer for one of the more dangerous jobs just to further his political career - but dear lord, let's not fight that argument all over again.
There are times when I like McCain (for reasons other than his name and subsequent very distant relation to me). Though I think the torture bill could have gone further, I applaud his efforts at bringing it to the forefront of public debate. I like his independant streak (what some call "opportunism," just as they did with Churchill). Some of it may even be opportunism, but let's face it...what good politician isn't an opportunist to some degree?
I have mixed feelings on McCain-Feingold. I tend to think his efforts were genuine, even if they were misguided and raise free speech questions.
As far as 2008 - its just to early to tell (but we sure do enjoy speculating, don't we?) I think if McCain can get through the primaries, there isn't really a Democrat who could beat him right now. However, a lot can change in 3 years.
I'll do my damnedest to make sure McCain doesn't get the nomination.
The Eagles were eliminated from the playoffs, instead of wasting your money, give it to Democrats in 08!
I also don't agree w/McCain on political speech. I'd challenge that in court all the way to the SCOTUS. However, I agree very much w/him on the torture issue, excepting in cases of imminent [major] attack. No one can tell me we wouldn't (and have the right to) torture a dude who had knowledge of an imminent nuke attack on a US city.
That being said, I'd vote for the man easily. You'll never agree with anyone 100%. And the man deserves the utmost respect after being in the HH for seven yrs. Surviving that tells an AWFUL lot about a man's mettle.
There are a lot of his policy stances with which I do not agree; that said, against certain Democrats....well, like I said, its too early to speculate (plus if I say too much I might get voted off my own blog 
).
If you haven't read his autobiography about his early years, however, I highly reccomend it. I read it in about two nights this past summer. Part of the reason I have trouble questioning his character and motives is because of what he's been through. He's def. a tough old man though and at the very least deserves the utmost respect for his service in that regard.
Hube & Mike McKain,
Those who serve heroically are now impervious to all criticism?
And I didn't say that I disagree with him on torture necessarily, I just think the way and how he did it was to maximize political advantage rather than effectiveness or ideals.
I never said he was or should be immune to criticism, only that his service influences my view of his character, which I hold in high regard, particularly relative to others in DC right now. I mean, isn't he one of the last Republicans NOT under investigation for some sort of corruption charge?
Well, as I posted, according to his own definition of 'appearance of corruption,' maybe he should be.
And we should be electing more people from outside 'the system.'
Actually, most Republicans are not under investigation or indictment; you just don't hear about those who aren't for the same reason you don't hear about planes that land safely.
That said, I don't really like McCain. I didn't care for him in 2000, and I don't now. His immigration proposals are disheartening. He wants a guest work program now, although the far more prudent thing to do would be to reform the system first and then introduce a guest worker program, which is a proposal before the House right now. A guest worker program is necessary, but it is not something we should do until we have made headway with the problems at hand. (Can you tell I sat in a legislative agenda meeting today?) As for McCain-Feingold, even if the intentions were good, it is an affront to free speech, which makes it abhorrent policy. Intentions don't make up for that.
If it's McCain vs. HRC in 2008, I'll have to kill myself.
HEY RYAN FROM THE AP GOV'T CLASS. ANALYZING YOUR BLOG FOR THE MEDIA SECTION OF THE COURSE.
Awesome! Hope you like! I'm going to put up an open post if you guys want to ask questions!
Hube & Mike McKain,
Those who serve heroically are now impervious to all criticism?
Now where did I claim that, Ryan? As Mike noted, no -- McCain is not immune to criticism. But his service -- and war experience, including keeping himself together after yrs. of being a POW -- warrant an immense amount of respect.
Here's a concept: you can respect someone you dislike and disagree with, in the sense that you respect all people and respect those in authority. To criticize does not indicate a lack of respect. I am not sure why you are insinuating that the author does not respect McCain's military service when there is not a single mention of it in the post. Additionally, the criticisms he makes are about McCain's policies and record in Congress. Based upon the defenses of Mr. McCain offered, I would find it necessary to ask the same question as well. It's a deflection to say, "He was in Vietnam" ad nauseum, as it had absolutely nothing to do with anything he wrote.
Thanks for backing me up on that one, Jess!
Um, Jess? Where did I imply Ryan doesn't respect McCain? I have a difference of opinion w/him, that's all. Maybe that I'm about twice Ryan's age and have a few relatives and friends who were in 'Nam has something to do w/it.
If you're looking to start some sort of flame war where there is no reason to, forget it.
Geez.
Scratch that -- poor choice of words. I AGREE w/Ryan on McCain's view on political speech. But overall, the man's a fairly consistent Republican, and when it comes to cojones I'd say there's no one better, based on his service.
I disagree w/Ryan about McCain not having principles, etc. I think he sees through a lot of the partisan bullshit, and rightly so. If this makes one an "opportunist," so be it, in my book. I may not agree w/some of his maverick ideas, but he has the balls to voice 'em.
Many of Ryan's points about McCain could be targeted to GW Bush and with much better aim, too!
Couldn't have put it better myself Hube.
That said, is this the first time we've agreed on something?
I often criticize Bush. He deserves it. I voted for Bush on one issue. Security.
Where was the 'maverick' who campaigned for Bush in 2004? Hmm?
And I find the
"'m about twice Ryan's age and have a few relatives and friends who were in 'Nam has something to do w/it." argument downright offensive. Do you think that no one in my family was affected by Vietnam? Do think I do not have friends who have been affected by Iraq?
Ryan: do you and Jess have hair trigger "offense" buttons or something? Cripes, I'm WITH you virtually all the time on various issues and postings and just once -- when I have a disagreement about another Republican, you guys take it personally. Gimme a break already.
I didn't mean to give offense about my 'Nam comment. But I was a young boy when the war was STILL going on, OK? I saw my uncle turned into a psycho and he got back and he brutalized my aunt. One of my dad's best friends had a similar deal. I was THERE as it went on. You weren't, OK? All you can do is hear the stories. In your book, if that equates to what I saw/heard/lived , so be it. But my experience leads me to grant a guy like McCain a tremendous amount of respect based on his ability to live through what he did and have his marbles intact. Got it?
Hube, you wrote:
"...his service -- and war experience, including keeping himself together after yrs. of being a POW -- warrant an immense amount of respect."
That was in response to his question:
"Those who serve heroically are now impervious to all criticism?"
That would be when you insinuated hat he does not respect McCain's service.
And you're missing my point anyway. For someone who is apparently sooooo much older and wiser, I would expect you to be able to comprehend what I was saying. I was simply pointing out that Mr. McCain's service had nothing to do with anything Ryan wrote, and yet all I keep reading is, "He was in Vietnam," rather than any real discussion of his policies.
I was NOT trying to start a flame war, but judging by your attack on Ryan's age, I take it you are.
What a jerk!
I wasn't offended. Again, I was just pointing out that he had never mentioned Vietnam, and yet, that's all you kept talking about.
Do you have some sort of "offense" trigger?
Also, just because you were alive at the time does not mean your opinion is more valuable than ours.
Calm down.
Mike: I've enjoyed your comments here quite a bit. I agree w/you more often then you may think. 
I put philosophy over party any day. That's gotten me into heated arguments w/fellow conservatives (although I tend more libertarian, honestly) and some have even stopped talking to me as a result (mostly due to my stance against the Iraq War). This is patently ridiculous. I'm hoping Ryan (and Jess) can accept differences of opinion w/in the party. I think they're barking up a tree that's not really worth the climb this time.
Ah, Jess. How I recall when I was a hotshot college jerkoff, too.
I'm offering my PERSONAL OPINION on McCain. I don't care if Ryan brought up 'Nam or not -- I did! Because it plays on my perspective of the man as a whole.
You're right though -- my opinion isn't more valuable than yours. Opinions are like a-holes anyway. You know the saying. Of course, you're still living in a dreamland that has little resemblance of the real world, but we all know how college undergrads "know" so much, don't we? Hardy-har-har.
But just keep in mind: while you were fresh out of the womb or still a dream in your parents' dirty minds, I was casting my first-ever vote for Ronald Reagan.
Woah, I am definately a Libertarian-Republican, and I respect your disagreements with the GOP. However, it seems that you are backing the party line on this one.
I wish you could respect my differences in philosophy with the Senator from Arizona, who has earned my spite by following popular opinion, which takes not courage, but poll numbers.
Popular opinion:
Supports campaign finance CHECK
Believes Global Warming CHECK
Belives torture is wrong CHECK
Went to Bush in 2004 CHECK
You are not reading at all what I wrote, Hube. I simply was saying that there was no need to bring up Vietnam as it had nothing to do with what Ryan wrote.
Additionally, I have been completely non-emotional in this. You clearly have been more than emotional, judging by your "I grew up during Vietnam" post. My mom lost a fiance to that war, but she also feels it appropriate to criticize McCain for his POLICIES.
I think you're barking up a tree that is not worth the climb by not acknowledging at all what we've written here and choosing to start what you earlier called a "flame war." This is NOT about John McCain's service, got it? You are using selective hearing (er, reading, in this case) and failing to respect at all what we're actually saying.
I have no problems with diversity in the party. Thank you for implying that I do without knowing a single thing that I believe. I probably know more gay Republicans than you. Hell, I probably know more gay people period than you.
I'm not in college, either. Graduated some time ago.
Hube, you realize Jess has been out of college for a while now, right?
And rather then dwell in the past, I choose to focus on the future, looking for the next great conservative to revolutionize this country, because we need it.
Hey Ryan -- where did I say I didn't respect your opinion about McCain? Can you show me, please?
Does McCain support the war in Iraq? Yep. Let's see ... that's against popular opinion!
Did he vote for Kyoto when it came to a vote? He couldn't have -- not a single senator did!
Manoman, I give up. You say I said this, I implied that, yada yada yada. Here it is, once and for all:
1) I disagree w/McCain on several [major] topics. This proves I certainly CAN see past his service and criticize his policies;
2) I respect the man immensely for his service and resolve, which proves the man's inner strength. This is a great attribute for a leader of men.
Well no, because President Clinton never sent Kyoto to Congress...but he is featured on this (I believe) Ted Turner-backed 'Stop Global Warming' website...http://www.stopglobalwarming.org/
marchers/?3
Yeah, I would've voted for Reagan if I could have. Stop implying that I wouldn't or that you're a better person than I because you could. You don't know me at all.
Unfortunately, I will never be cleansed of the stains that are my parents' votes for Carter and Mondale...
I stood in line five hours to walk by Reagan's casket, just to be as close to his greatness as I could ever hope to be for 30 seconds. Stop questioning my conservatism because I don't agree with a bitter man who is trapped in the past.
Also, about Bush- can't stand him. He's hardly a conservative. (Should've said that before to clear up any confusion.)
Do you get that, Jess? BTW, here's my first comment in this thread:
I also don't agree w/McCain on political speech. I'd challenge that in court all the way to the SCOTUS. However, I agree very much w/him on the torture issue, excepting in cases of imminent [major] attack. No one can tell me we wouldn't (and have the right to) torture a dude who had knowledge of an imminent nuke attack on a US city.
That being said, I'd vote for the man easily. You'll never agree with anyone 100%. And the man deserves the utmost respect after being in the HH for seven yrs. Surviving that tells an AWFUL lot about a man's mettle.
This most CERTAINLY acknowledges what Ryan wrote and offers my own personal opinion in addition. How you say "I think you're barking up a tree that is not worth the climb by not acknowledging at all what we've written here and choosing to start what you earlier called a "flame war" is just plain silly. Because it was Ryan who came back after my post with this: Hube & Mike McKain,
Those who serve heroically are now impervious to all criticism?
Now where in the f*** does that come from? And notice the absolute there -- "all." Ridiculous! How is that even extracted from what I (and Mike) wrote? Instead of asking, "Do you believe McCain's service somehow excuses him from criticism," we're "told" what we posted -- and "believe." The latter phrased question would still be quite silly based on what Mike and I wrote, but it'd be a helluva lot better than what I (we) got in return.
And you guys have a cow when I get miffed? Pot meet kettle!!
You don't know me, either Jess. Once again, pot meet kettle.
Ryan: the Byrd-Hagel resolution (S. RES. 9
passed 95-0, which stated the Senate would not ratify the Protocol unless rapidly developing countries such as China were included in its requirements to reduce greenhouse gases.
You knew that I thought....?
Oh, about the Iraq war, Hube, at the time it was voted on, it was "popular." That's sort of a misnomer to say he voted for it despite it being "against popular opinion." Arnold was wrong to claim Bush was "brave" for this at the Convention this summer as well. It is only fairly recently that it has become unpopular, meaning his continued support is despite public opinion, but his vote (which is what you stated) was not.
Also, Ryan, Kyoto did come up for a vote (sorry). It was defeated unanimously in the Senate, and then somehow, Gore signed something related, or something. I don't know; it never made sense after it being defeated.
See, we're not of one mind, so you can stop speaking to us collectively!
I ain't bitter, Jess. Hardly. I just expected a bit better from what I thought what was a user-friendly conservative site.
My error.
Last comment for the night: McCain still stands behind the war effort even though popular support is in the tank.
Hasta ... quién sabe....
Hube, calm down. You're the only one that worked up over this. In fact, prior to your last invectives towards me, I was ready to let it go, but now there's something I'm supposed to be "getting?" I am honestly not "having a cow" because it really doesn't matter to me )except that you insulted my friend) so I guess the pot won't be meeting the kettle after all.
Yes, I understand what you're saying. I still don't know where Ryan was out of line to ask what he did. And no one gave you anything wrong in return. I was being sincere in saying that, based on what I'd read, you'd acted very wrong towards him, and how I understood his comments. I didn't resort to insults until after you did, and although that was wrong of me, I will not apologize for sticking up for Ryan because I know he is a good and thoughtful person who didn't deserve what he got in return.
Note: Mike McKain has not carried on as you have. He responded to the question and didn't start attacking others' values and using foul language all over the place.
This would all be over if you'd stop with the personal attacks about age and with the accusations.
I'm sorry that this upsets you so much, and if you're offended by anything I wrote (although I can't think of anything other than calling you a jerk that was actually offensive), I'm sorry for that too. I was just commenting on what I viewed as an attack on my friend, who I respect as a very kind and thoughtful and decent person.
How is it not "user-friendly" to say we disagree with you?
Wow.
And yes, I said he supported the war after support dropped. Thank you for ignoring that.
Good night.
Wow, I watch a movie, do some studying, and I come back to find 42 posts - this blogging hobby is gonna end up a full time job. lol.
Just as an arbitrary comment, I think sometimes people can get offended by non-insults because things may not come across the way people intend in print.
Another, slightly more relevant comment: from what I've seen, McCain has the potential to really stir things up among Republicans if he runs. As much as I like to see the other side squabble, its something to consider heading into the 2008 nomination process.
Yes, he would cause some divisions within the party, Mike. In some ways, this is great, but not when you're trying to win an election, hence, why he worries me most. But that's just me. Others, I suspect, may be less political about it.
Jess: for the record, my immediate post right after Ryan's query about not being to question McCain b/c of his service was: Now where did I claim that, Ryan? As Mike noted, no -- McCain is not immune to criticism. But his service -- and war experience, including keeping himself together after yrs. of being a POW -- warrant an immense amount of respect.
I'm not gonna replay everything -- you can read -- but certainly what I wrote in reply above is NOT disrespectful to Ryan. Your immediate comment after mine indicates you thought I was "insinuating" Ryan didn't have a right to ask what he did. Wrong. I didn't. But, I guess I could have included "in my humble opinion" after my second comment, certainly.
So it goes to what Mike said above: obviously we were reading into each other's comments emotions that weren't there in the first place. Hell, I got an angry e-mail from a parent yesterday (I teach) because I [innocently] included the line "Have you checked out the internet grading system?" after she had asked numerous questions about her kid's grade. She retorted "Sorry to have have bothered you!" And all I really meant was to see if she had any problems accessing the account (b/c other parents had experienced such) and/or didn't understand aspects of it. (I quickly sent another e-mail stating it wasn't a bother at all, and indicated what I meant.)
So, yeah, at times the Internet medium can result in misunderstanding...!
I say, let bygones be bygones on this one, and agree to disagree.
Hube-
1) I was NOT emotional at all in this. You went ballistic. It's sort of funny that you assume it mattered so much to me.
2) I have read all the comments (stop assuming I haven't), and I stand by what I said. If that's not how you intended it, fine. But that is no reason for me to apologize as I was simply standing up for a friend.
3) You were still very wrong to use age to attack Ryan and myself.
OK, that said, I'm done. There's plenty to worry about right here in my apartment. 'Tis in the past.
49faa2 69bb5e6f65
Hey, I loved the information you gave blood pressure monitor
these are the sights that I most enjoy my computer for allergic to biaxin xanax drug classification seroquel trazodone
Commenting by HaloScan
