McCain booed at CPAC.
By on Feb 7th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
McCain booed at CPAC.
Speaking to a right-wing crowd at CPAC today, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) was loudly booed when he mentioned his push for comprehensive immigration reform last year. (A position he has since given up.)
McCAIN: Surely, I have held other positions that have not met with widespread agreement from conservatives. I won’t pretend otherwise, nor would you permit me to forget it. On — on the issue of illegal immigration, a position which –
CROWD: Boo! Boo!
Watch it:
This morning, Politico reported that CPAC organizers had instructed conference attendees not to boo McCain. Last year, McCain was the only major Republican presidential candidate to skip CPAC.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
Reports
In depth studies on select topics
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Conservatives = Anti-American!
Fact.
February 7th, 2008 at 3:53 pmthe certifiably insane far right won’t vote for him… its the uninformed and slightly crazy we have to worry about…
February 7th, 2008 at 3:56 pmWell, its good to see they have finally resisted the hive brain.
February 7th, 2008 at 3:56 pmI love it. The organizers have to tell the audience not to boo? Maybe that would have been a clue not to invite McCain in the first place.
February 7th, 2008 at 3:57 pmRomney has shown that he will abandon his convictions by letting the Repub. Party dictate his decision to suspend.
February 7th, 2008 at 3:58 pmMcCain abandoned his convictions a long time ago. Despite his speech today, which included mostly lies about democrats, he was unable to win his audience over as you could obviously tell from the muted applause.
So.. this is the legendary cohesiveness of the Republican Party???
February 7th, 2008 at 3:58 pm“I stood my ground, aware that my position would imperil my campaign.”
Like your temper, warmongering or age would not?
February 7th, 2008 at 4:00 pmLook at that picture. If this nation is stupid enough to vote McCain into the White House (I suppose anything is possible after two terms of the Chimp), that’s the look he’ll have every time he’s grilled on something.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:01 pmCPAC organizers had instructed conference attendees not to boo McCain
he’s lucky he didn’t get tarred and feathered.
This is going to be fun.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:02 pmIts obvious that McCain will continue the failed policies of Bush. And his asinine Reagan Footsoldier stuff is a Waterloo. Just who brought us the worse bank failure in history? Hidden until after Bush I was elected. Who brought us Iran-Contra? The list is out there and will be picked apart throughout this election process.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:04 pmThat’s a smile that only a golden retriever could love.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:04 pmListen to the sheeple clapping to override the booing… lol
February 7th, 2008 at 4:05 pmWith Mitt dropping out, McJowls will probably be the GOP nominee. And this is how he’s greeted by the most extremist wing of the neo-Nazi, and ravaged by Rush Limpdick on the airwaves.
This is REALLY gonna be good. I’m getting the popcorn, laden with lots of extra butter. I don’t want to miss any of this - Watching the GOP implode This will be better than sex. (:-D)
February 7th, 2008 at 4:05 pmThe four horsemen of the CPAC:
http://www.comics.com/ editoons/ luckovich/ archive/ luckovich-20080202.html
February 7th, 2008 at 4:07 pmConservatives (at least the CPAC variety) continue to cling to the belief that the best way to deal with illegal immigrants is to deport them all back to where they came from. They have yet to address the cost of such a measure, and their only response to the argument that “they’ll just come back” is to insist on a fence along the border. Never mind that fences have been scaled, and tunnels have been dug.
Conservatives also have benefited from undocumented workers. How are they going to explain how houses are going to be built, hotels run, lawns mowed, and children taken care of without them? Yes, we would ultimately manage, of course. But not without taking a huge economic hit.
Republicans from border states (Bush and McCain) know this. But the xenophobes have to be appeased.
Conservatives also think that health insurance in this country would be affordable to everyone if we just eliminated malpractice lawsuits, too.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:09 pmI don’t really think McCain has to worry about the far right. They’ll vote for him anyway, because they would rather do that than allow Hillary or Obama to be elected.
Unless they come up with a rabid right-wing third party candidate. Which would be the Democrats’ ultimate wet dream.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:12 pmThe GOP has demonstrated a complete meltdown. If this party were debating the Founding Father’s Constitution in 1787 they would have voted against it.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:16 pmAs usual, any third party candidate will probably take more votes from the democratic nominee than the republican nominee. Ralph Nader, stay away.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:16 pm#16, I don’t think they will. I think a lot of them will stay home.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:17 pmWatching the GOP implode This will be better than sex. (:-D)
Comment by Uncle Ho — February 7, 2008 @ 4:05 pm
I think maybe you need a new girlfriend then,maybe =D
February 7th, 2008 at 4:17 pmThe GOP just lost Independents if they had any.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:17 pmThe illegals come over for the jobs and having worked for Republicans [many many business owners are] they have no problem hiring cheap illegal labor as thats a ‘free-market’ ideology that increases profits. Ironically they squeal like stuck pigs about how man illegals the US has.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:19 pmRomney is a sell-out demonstrating no conviction within his conviction.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:19 pmRomney is a sell-out demonstrating no conviction within his conviction.
Comment by leftcoast
I wonder if he will sell his conviction [Bain/clear channel] now.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:22 pmWayne; I’m happily single and unattached since my divorce some 12 years ago.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:23 pmConservatives (at least the CPAC variety) continue to cling to the belief that the best way to deal with illegal immigrants is to deport them all back to where they came from. They have yet to address the cost of such a measure, and their only response to the argument that “they’ll just come back†is to insist on a fence along the border. Never mind that fences have been scaled, and tunnels have been dug.
Comment by missmolly — February 7, 2008 @ 4:09 pm
These conservatives will also be the first to forget about the whole issue of immigration as soon as the economy gets better. They don’t actually want to *fix* the problem - that’s too complicated and worky. They just use immigration to rally the xenophobic base and shift the real economic problems facing the country to the back burner.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:23 pmI will be very curious to see what happens with the hardcore Conservatives. Some may elect not to vote at all, which is pretty much how the Religious Right used to behave. If McCain selects a “real” conservative as his running mate, someone like Huckabee, the conservatives will probably hold their noses, vote for McCain, and pray for an early heart attack.
I think the Republican elite will resist that idea very strongly; the last thing they want is a true Evangelical in the White House, especially one with populist tendencies.
I don’t think Huckabee would be interested in a third party campaign, but there is always the possibility that the Religious Right would run someone else, specifically to deny votes to McCain. I’m convinced that a number of them would rather have a Democrat in the White House than McCain.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:26 pmAtlantis ascended into space today. So did the GOP.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:27 pmgummitch- McCain is a one-term pres. This is a set-up for 2012.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:28 pmThat has to be one scary crowd, what with everyone frothing at the mouth and pissing their drawers simultaneously.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:29 pmWayne; I’m happily single and unattached since my divorce some 12 years ago.
Comment by Uncle Ho — February 7, 2008 @ 4:23 pm
5 years divorced, but currently dating a firedancer/bellydancer.
heh
not planning on getting married again, either
February 7th, 2008 at 4:30 pmRomney will have the green light in 2012 with the backing of today’s decision by the GOP to ask him to drop.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:30 pmI’m convinced that a number of them would rather have a Democrat in the White House than McCain.
Comment by gummitch — February 7, 2008 @ 4:26 pm
As I was saying yesterday - UNLESS it is Hillary. Obama will completely shred McCain. A Hillary nomination makes it a race.
And you were right Gummitch, the talk show hosts would love a Hillary presidency, but their listeners wouldn’t. Half of them are already backing off of their McCain criticism. With Romney dropping out…Mac is all they have.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:31 pmI love it when republicans fight each other…..popcorn please…lol.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:32 pmBoooo, Booooo, Booooo, Hissss, Boooo….(rotten veggies throw) splat, splish, squish, Boooooo, Booooo, Hisssss.
You’re wasting your and our time running Mc100yearWars, your never gonna win the White House.
Buck Fush
February 7th, 2008 at 4:33 pmComment by gummitch — February 7, 2008 @ 4:26 pm
Ron Paul may run as a third party candidate. Bloomberg seems to have dropped his third party exploratory committee.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:34 pmin a perfect world an asteroid the size of a VW bug would have slammed into wherever the hell they were having there little CCRAP fiesta.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:35 pmFirst of all, I CAN’T STAND Mc Cain!!! ANd I will NOT vote for him BUT your description of him being booed was absurd! Sure, some people did boo him for a few seconds but he was MOSTLY cheered (by the way, to MY disgust!) throughout the speech!
You libs never give up do you!
February 7th, 2008 at 4:36 pmMcCain won big in the blue states, not in the red ones which would make a presidenial win more difficult.
The GOP, seems to me, ‘maybe’ wants to hand this disaster off to the Democrats so they can regroup for 2012.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:37 pmJohn Kerry Loves McCain!!
Heh.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:41 pmThe GOP knows it has lost this. What they are counting on is a Carter effect. Four in and then out. Romney will carry their banner later. But I’m thoroughly not a campaign guy. Just sort of thinking this through one synaptic firing at a time.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:41 pmYou libs never give up do you!
Comment by John KerryLibs
February 7th, 2008 at 4:42 pmLibs don’t give up, but republicans obviously have.
Wasn’t somebody maybe ct. trying to make some weird case about Ms. Clinton not being able to draw 50% of her parties votes over on another thread? Seems this party can’t figure out who their obvious candidate is let alone get behind him.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:43 pmDid JK even listen to the video?
#38, First of all, I CAN’T STAND Mc Cain!!! ANd I will NOT vote for him BUT your description of him being booed was absurd!
It appears to be schizo-affective, to some degree.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:46 pmAll these years winning the GWOT was “number 1″ when castigating liberals who worked for America’s defeat in the Middle East. Now you’re anxious to put a CIC in the WH that has vowed to abandon the war in place just to punish the country for not bowing to Rush’s instruction and your “purity”.
And you approve of booing someone you disagree with off the stage. So tell me how “conservatives” differ from MoveOn or the Kos-sacks? Conservatism will from now on be rightfully associated with bombast and stupidity.
Good luck with that.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:47 pmIsn’t interesting that the only name republicans can call dems is liberals despite the relentless attempts of dems to abide by the Constitution.
February 7th, 2008 at 4:48 pmRepubs would seem to be liberals when it concerns adherence to the Founding Fathers.
You libs never give up do you!
Comment by John Kerry
No we don’t. Our country is far too important to give up. Your side obviously have given up. I am waiting for you to nominate Tom Metzger or some other delusional nut job.
Sucks to be you!
February 7th, 2008 at 4:51 pmYou know you watch too much Stargate Atlantis when you read the phrase ‘Atlantis ascended into space today’ and instead of the space shuttle, you immediately think of the snowflake shaped city-ship of the Ancients.
Though I would love Bush, Cheney, and McCain to all have a close encounter with the business end of a Drone…
February 7th, 2008 at 4:58 pmStratRat-ditto,
February 7th, 2008 at 5:00 pmThese destroyers of the Constitution should be arrested without habeas corpus.
Romney
February 7th, 2008 at 5:04 pm“I would have aided the surrender to terror. So I will give the task to someone else.”
What complete unmitigated crapola!
These destroyers of the Constitution should be arrested without habeas corpus.
Anyone else love the irony?
February 7th, 2008 at 5:04 pmYou know you watch too much Stargate Atlantis when you read the phrase ‘Atlantis ascended into space today’ and instead of the space shuttle, you immediately think of the snowflake shaped city-ship of the Ancients.
Comment by Jeremy in Denver — February 7, 2008 @ 4:58 pm
Space shuttle? They named a space shuttle after SG-1?
February 7th, 2008 at 5:05 pmWASHINGTON - Senate Republicans and Democrats agreed Thursday to add rebates for 20 million older people and 250,000 disabled veterans to a House-passed economic aid plan, ending a partisan stalemate.
The breakthrough came when Democrats, under pressure from party colleagues in the House, agreed to drop their insistence on adding jobless benefits, heating aid for the poor and business subsidies. Senate Democrats said they would allow a vote on a proposal that extends the tax rebates to Social Security retirees and disabled veterans.”
So - Senate Democrats stick to their guns just long enough to create the basis for a good attack add on McCain, then cave the same day. Good politics (like we discussed on the earlier MacThread) but they overestimate the memory of the American public. They’ll remember getting the check, and Mac will be sure to vote “Yes” on the final version that comes out of the conference committee. Another day at the office.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:05 pmRomney and McCain: Today they both said that they are for warrantless wiretaps.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:10 pmThat smile? He laughs at the Conservative base.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:11 pmSo, is this the “big tent reich-wing” we hear so much about?
February 7th, 2008 at 5:16 pmFirst of all, I CAN’T STAND Mc Cain!!! ANd I will NOT vote for him BUT your description of him being booed was absurd! Sure, some people did boo him for a few seconds but he was MOSTLY cheered (by the way, to MY disgust!) throughout the speech!
Comment by John Kerry — February 7, 2008 @ 4:36 pm
You are in complete denial if you think they were cheering for McLame because they are on his side. They were cheering the crowd that were booing him, you nitwit….it’s called jeering.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:18 pmVery soon the main stream media will begin their process of convincing the American public that McCain is a “moderate” and there is little difference between his policies and those of the Democratic candidate. I hope the Dems remember to bring back videos of his speech today to put that myth to rest. The media played that game in 2000. Dems better not let them play it again this year.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:23 pmThat’s funny- he got boo’ed at my house, too - but then again I boo the whole idea of CPAC.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:23 pmRomney and McCain: Today they both said that they are for warrantless wiretaps.
Uh, habeas corpus is part of the Constitution (Article One, Section 9). You said that Romney and McCain should be arrested without habeas corpus for being destroyers of the Constitution.
So, like, do you or don’t you like all this Constitution stuff or do you just trot it out when it’s in agreement with your politics?
February 7th, 2008 at 5:27 pmLeftcoast, I’m not sure why you think McCain can beat either of the two Dem frontrunners. Remember the structural imbalance that Dems have gained this year. Turnout is at times 75% greater than it is for Repubs. Remember that Latinos have gone over to Dems in great numbers. If it’s Clinton, the Latino vote will get Dems the Southwest and possibly Colorado. Remember that McCain continues most of the Bush policies which over 70% of the public wants to change. Keep in mind that McCain has openly said he doesn’t care if we’re in Iraq for 100 years, a policy that over 70% of the public doesn’t agree with. Also keep in mind that 72% of Dems are fine with either candidate and the soft supporters are not likely to pick a warmonger like McCain over either of them. The same goes for independents, 70% of whom want us out of Iraq. I think you’re buying into some media myths here. Remember, the media wants it tight. They sell more political ads and get higher ratings in a tight race, so they’ll do everything they can to convince you it’s a race.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:27 pmHey tamdar, I hope you aren’t a Bush supporter because respect for the constitution and support of Bush are mutually exculsive concepts.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:29 pmConservatives also think that health insurance in this country would be affordable to everyone if we just eliminated malpractice lawsuits, too.
Comment by missmolly
No missmolly. In order for health insurance in this country to be affordable we have to both eliminate malpractice lawsuits and an undocumented worker’s ability to get health care. This is the mantra of the Republicans.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:32 pmRipper - I support Bush in some things, not in others. I didn’t vote for him in case you’re wondering. Kneejerk disagreement is as inaccurate as kneejerk agreement, but few people get that.
By the way, so long as you’re policing people’s Constitutional purity, leftcoast want us to arrest Romney and McCain without habeas corpus, because he thinks they dissed the Constitution. You know what habeas corpus is, right? Isn’t that rich???
February 7th, 2008 at 5:33 pmTamdar, I’m sure there are a few things I disagree with leftcoast on, but I’m just as sure he isn’t serious when he implies we should suspend consitutional protection for people with whom we disagree. Actually, it’s not a crime in this country to “diss the constitution” so I agree with you that we shouldn’t get carried away here. Now, what I think is that Bush, Cheney and other members of the Bush administration actually have committed constitutional crimes for which they could rightfully be arrested, but that’s another subject.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:38 pmAs usual, any third party candidate will probably take more votes from the democratic nominee than the republican nominee. Ralph Nader, stay away.
Comment by Ike_Skelton
You haven’t a clue what you are talking about. Many on your side of the fence think that if Ross Perot is the reason why Clinton won in 1992. Also, if Bloomberg enters the race, as he keeps threatening to do, that will pull many more Republican votes than Democratic votes.
The truth is that unless the Democrats do something really, really stupid, there isn’t a chance in hell that the Republicans will win in November. They will lose, and lose big.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:44 pmYes, it’s another subject. But I’m certain that for the rest of this election cycle, millions of people, just like yourself, will immediately trot out Bush no matter who or what the subjects of conversation are. You can’t talk about a set of tires without someone using it to run through a Bush diatribe.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:45 pmthey’re not booing.
they’re yelling “bruce! bruce!”
(maccain’s nick name is bruce.)
February 7th, 2008 at 5:46 pmBy the way, so long as you’re policing people’s Constitutional purity, leftcoast want us to arrest Romney and McCain without habeas corpus, because he thinks they dissed the Constitution. You know what habeas corpus is, right? Isn’t that rich???
Comment by tamdar
This person obviously has no idea what the world irony means. I believe that leftcoast was pointing out the irony of the situation by saying that they should be arrested and denied their habeas corpus rights. I have never met a conservative that had a sense of humor, understands irony, or understands what hypocrisy means.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:48 pmYes, it’s another subject. But I’m certain that for the rest of this election cycle, millions of people, just like yourself, will immediately trot out Bush no matter who or what the subjects of conversation are. You can’t talk about a set of tires without someone using it to run through a Bush diatribe.
Comment by tamdar
Sorry but you and your ilk will not get your most fervently wish that Bush simply fades into oblivion in our memories. I know that won’t happen to me. Bush comes up frequently in my conversations with friends because we are all horrified with what that man and his enablers (I suspect you are one) have done to this once great country. Also I and my friends are really worried about what else this madman will do to this country, like creating a false-flag incident and suspending the election.
Bush will be brought up frequently in the election because McCain supports most of what Bush has done to destroy this country.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:51 pmWho says I’m a conservative? And where’s your sense of humor?
I never met a liberal yet who didn’t accuse someone else of not knowing what “the world” [sick] irony is or failed to accuse them of hypocrisy.
Learn to spell - or retire from pedantry.
February 7th, 2008 at 5:52 pmAs I was saying yesterday - UNLESS it is Hillary. Obama will completely shred McCain. A Hillary nomination makes it a race.
Comment by Keltoi
You are dreaming if you think that McCain can beat Senator Clinton. Do you really think any of the 70% of the people in this country who want us out of Iraq are going to vote for McCain? Besides, he’s going to end up looking like a total fool once the Democratic nominee starts running ads featuring McCain’s numerous flip-flops over the last 7 years. That will show the world that he is nothing more than a typical Republiscum opportunist.
Here’s just a short list of his flip-flops:
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/9111.html
February 7th, 2008 at 5:58 pmWho says I’m a conservative? And where’s your sense of humor?
I never met a liberal yet who didn’t accuse someone else of not knowing what “the world†[sick] irony is or failed to accuse them of hypocrisy.
Learn to spell - or retire from pedantry.
Comment by tamdar
My, my, hit a nerve did we? My spelling’s just fine thank you. My typing sometimes is not.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:01 pmAh - sun was in your eyes. Public school?
February 7th, 2008 at 6:01 pmMy, my, hit a nerve did we?
Trust me - you’re a rank amateur when it comes to nerve hitting. But don’t give up!
February 7th, 2008 at 6:04 pmYou can’t talk about a set of tires without someone using it to run through a Bush diatribe.
Comment by tamdar — February 7, 2008 @ 5:45 pm
Clinton hasn’t been in office over 7 years and that doesn’t stop you reich-wing extremists to invoke his name at all costs. Hypocrite.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:06 pmMore proof that reich-wingers do not support freedom of speech.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:07 pmMemo to Tamdar: you’re not fooling anyone around here so why don’t you just give it a rest. I can spot a fundamentally dishonest Bush supporter a mile away. Yes, Bush will be on everyone’s mind and for very good reasons. He’s trashed the constitution, destroyed the economy, ruined our standing in the world, made the world more dangerous and destroyed the modern conservative movement in the process. Along the way, he’s accomplished nothing but getting 75% of the country’s historians to agree that he’ll be remembered as the worst president in history. Congradulations on supporting him you idiot.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:15 pmClinton hasn’t been in office over 7 years and that doesn’t stop you reich-wing extremists to invoke his name at all costs. Hypocrite.
I’m a right winger? And who said anything about Clinton? Or did you just want any old excuse to call someone a hypocrite, like a hypocrite would?
I’ll wait for you to find my post about Clinton or where I described my political affiliation.
I’ll wait …
chirp…chirp…chirp
February 7th, 2008 at 6:17 pmAh - sun was in your eyes. Public school?
Comment by tamdar — February 7, 2008 @ 6:01 pm
Oooh, a shiny lure! Like the Colonel said, you’re not fooling anyone, troll.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:18 pmI’ll wait …
chirp…chirp…chirp
Comment by tamdar — February 7, 2008 @ 6:17 pm
a chirping troll, how cute. you’re outed, tamdar, as easy as that.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:20 pmI can spot a fundamentally dishonest Bush supporter a mile away.
Ripper, unfortunately for us both, you and tens of millions just like you, cannot grasp the notion that we all don’t fit into these nice neat little boxes that you must have us in in order to know which tired little rant to trot out.
You really don’t know much about me or what I think or why, but you can’t quite understand why that matters. You’ve already got your nifty list of stuff to say without having to think.
Your spotter is malfunctioning. I’d get it to an armorer right away and see what’s wrong.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:21 pmYou know what habeas corpus is, right? Isn’t that rich???
Comment by tamdar — February 7, 2008 @ 5:33 pm
homeschooled?
February 7th, 2008 at 6:21 pmYour spotter is malfunctioning. I’d get it to an armorer right away and see what’s wrong.
Comment by tamdar — February 7, 2008 @ 6:21 pm
No, Ripper is 100% on the money. You’re another goose-stepping little rightwing clone without an idea to call your own.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:22 pmOuted??? I’m gay?????? My wife will be so surprised?
In the meanwhile, no one has pointed out a single post anyone made except for the poster accusing me, or “my ilk”, or whatever, of still blaming stuff on Clinton, which hasn’t happened here that I’ve seen.
Any interest in actually dealing with what people say? Or is it too much to expect people to step outside of their little canned systems of statements and opinions and think a little bit on their own?
February 7th, 2008 at 6:23 pmTamdar: “Ripper - I support Bush in some things, not in others.”
So, tell us oh independent-minded one. Which of Bush’s “things” do you support?
February 7th, 2008 at 6:24 pmAny interest in actually dealing with what people say? Or is it too much to expect people to step outside of their little canned systems of statements and opinions and think a little bit on their own?
Comment by tamdar — February 7, 2008 @ 6:23 pm
Still no ideas of your own? And, your wife will probably not be suprised at all, if you’re as impotent with her as you are here.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:25 pmNo, Ripper is 100% on the money. You’re another goose-stepping little rightwing clone without an idea to call your own.
Man - you guys are just lazy. Really. You make these encompassing conclusions about things you don’t know and can’t know and you don’t bother asking a single question first.
I guess it’s much easier to just assign to someone attributes for which one has a canned little saying to dismiss them with. No need to think that way.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:25 pmI guess it’s much easier to just assign to someone attributes for which one has a canned little saying to dismiss them with. No need to think that way.
Comment by tamdar — February 7, 2008 @ 6:25 pm
Still no answer. I guess that’s the best you can do. Dismissal is appropriate.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:27 pmtamdar: “You’ve already got your nifty list of stuff to say without having to think.”
OK, so why don’t you “think” of any argument to refute anything on my “list” instead of sitting there being obtuse and arrogant.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:29 pmSo, tell us oh independent-minded one. Which of Bush’s “things†do you support?
Clearly a question asked in the spirit of interest, no?
Nevertheless, I’ll give a short but honest answer, knowing full well that such questions are asked only to give an excuse to read off more worn out insults and not to inform.
I supported going into Afghanistan, I supported tax cuts but would have maybe preferred them to go more to the middle class. There’s a couple of things. Otherwise, I think we should be more thoughtful about getting out of Iraq than we were getting into it, otherwise the mess later will be even worse - but I did not support going in there to begin with.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:30 pmStill no answer. I guess that’s the best you can do. Dismissal is appropriate.
You don’t wait for an answer because you really don’t want one. You’ve already got your canned diatribes lined up.
I’ll give you 4.3 seconds to respond before I accuse you of not being able to.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:32 pmNo response - just as I thought
February 7th, 2008 at 6:32 pmOur new little troll tamdar is having a meltdown. This is fun to watch. I have to say that watching trolls make total fools of themselves can be quite entertaining.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:33 pmNo response - just as I thought
Comment by tamdar — February 7, 2008 @ 6:32 pm
Thought? You?
Schoolboy games. Really weak. If that’s you’re best effort, you’ve already bored everybody here.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:35 pmWhat meltdown?
I think you’re losing it. Nothing to say but call someone a troll.
Is that really all you have to contribute? No, I don’t know, like - “thoughts”?
Or maybe you’re just here to troll????
February 7th, 2008 at 6:35 pmtamdar: “I supported going into Afghanistan, I supported tax cuts but would have maybe preferred them to go more to the middle class.”
Would you say that those two things you support have led to success? Have we achieved any of our stated goals in Afganistan? And since you would have preferred a tax cut that you didn’t get, the only logical conclusion is that you DIDN’T support Bush’s tax cuts since the overall tax bite for people in the middle class has gone up and not down.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:35 pmOr maybe you’re just here to troll????
Comment by tamdar — February 7, 2008 @ 6:35 pm
Careful, your meltdown will wear out your ? key.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:36 pmSchoolboy games. Really weak. If that’s you’re best effort, you’ve already bored everybody here.
Man - now THERE’S a statement that makes us all ponder stuff. Don’t hurt yourself reaching around to slap yourself on the back.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:37 pmCareful, your meltdown will wear out your ? key.
Another one - man you guys are so deep!
February 7th, 2008 at 6:37 pmTamdar, you stated clearly that you supported tax cuts, but wish they would have been aimed at the middle class - clearly, they were not aimed there. As we all know, the vast bulk of cuts went to the top 2%. You say you supported invading Afganistan, but we now know that the Taliban is stronger today than it was before the original invasion. So, the two things you say you support have been an abject failure, but you still have nothing but derision for anyone with the temerity to suggest that Bush has been a complete failure. I hate to break it to you, but you’re not making much sense.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:40 pmAnother one - man you guys are so deep!
Comment by tamdar — February 7, 2008 @ 6:37 pm
and still you have nothing. why am I unsurprised? You’re as big a failure as Bush is.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:42 pmMore thoughtful about leaving than going into Iraq.
OK.
Done.
Let’s get the hell out and leave the Iraqis some self determination.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:42 pmHave we achieved any of our stated goals in Afganistan?
The Taliban is displaced, I’m guessing most of the AQ training bases are no longer in service. We didn’t get OBL. I don’t have a list of stated goals in front of me, but I’m guessing the current situation isn’t much like anyone wanted, so I’d say the answer to your question is no.
And since you would have preferred a tax cut that you didn’t get,
Why do you keep insisting on arguing against things you couldn’t possibly know?
the only logical conclusion is that you DIDN’T support Bush’s tax cuts since the overall tax bite for people in the middle class has gone up and not down.
Your logic is based on your preconceived, poorly researched notions about who you’ve constructed me to be, rather than who I am. To be honest, I don’t know if I got a tax cut or not. I make pretty good money. But I give a lot of it away and generally think our “system” is designed to make mules out of the middle class.
I don’t really NEED a tax break. I’m doing fine thank you. But not everyone I know can say the same, and I come from a background of poverty. So I think the middle class needs a break.
Now, what’s wrong with that?
February 7th, 2008 at 6:43 pmYou say you supported invading Afganistan, but we now know that the Taliban is stronger today than it was before the original invasion.
I don’t know that. They’re not running the government in Kabul the last I heard. I’m guessing things in Afghanistan aren’t exactly the way they want them to be or the US troops wouldn’t be there, would they?
So, the two things you say you support have been an abject failure, but you still have nothing but derision for anyone with the temerity to suggest that Bush has been a complete failure.
No - I have derision for people who take four ounces of information and use it to generate six tons of wrong conclusions about someone and then just shovel canned garbage.
I hate to break it to you, but you’re not making much sense.
I hate to break THIS to you, but I’m sure you were already prepared to say that before I posted any of my views. Not exactly an intellectually curious crowd.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:47 pmTamdar: “The Taliban is displaced, I’m guessing most of the AQ training bases are no longer in service.”
OK, you need to keep up on the news. Since you’re so willfully ignorant of the current situation in Afganistan, there may not be any point in going on, but here it is: According to our own Pentagon, al Qaeda and the Taliban are stronger in Afganistan and Pakistan today than they were in the months following the attack on Afganistan. Our own State Department agrees with that assessment.
As far as the tax cut is concerned, whether or not you got one or needed one is irrelevant. You said you wanted them to go to the middle class and the vast bulk of them didn’t. Therefore, by definition, you are saying you supported a policy that didn’t happen. Does that make any sense to you at all?
February 7th, 2008 at 6:50 pmTamdar: “I don’t know that. They’re not running the government in Kabul the last I heard.”
Anyone who knows thing one about what’s happening in Afganistan knows that the government IN Kabul is simply the government OF Kabul and has little or no authority in the country as a whole.
Tamdar: “I hate to break THIS to you, but I’m sure you were already prepared to say that before I posted any of my views.”
Your sure, huh. Evidently mind-reading is another one of your skills.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:53 pmYeah, yours too.
What was my taxable income last year?
February 7th, 2008 at 6:54 pmWhat meltdown?
I think you’re losing it. Nothing to say but call someone a troll.
Is that really all you have to contribute? No, I don’t know, like - “thoughts�
Or maybe you’re just here to troll????
Comment by tamdar
You are crying like a baby about how people here are mistreating you. I have plenty of thoughts, none I care to share with you. I only share my thoughts with people who have an open mind and an ability to think for themselves. You don’t appear to be one of those people. You will notice that this is the first time I have addressed you directly. It will also be the last because I don’t validate trolls by talking to them, I just talk about them.
The only “thoughts” you have contributed to this thread are defending Bush or whining about how people are treating you.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:56 pmAs far as the tax cut is concerned, whether or not you got one or needed one is irrelevant. You said you wanted them to go to the middle class and the vast bulk of them didn’t. Therefore, by definition, you are saying you supported a policy that didn’t happen. Does that make any sense to you at all?
By definition, you’re (as expected) purposefully posing my view in a way that you can trash. I supported tax cuts - but I thought they should go to the middle class. You trash that if you want - you guys aren’t exactly honest discussion partners.
Everytime I suspect I can find common ground with people further to the left than I am, I am reminded that I don’t want to have to truncate so many useful intellectual qualities.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:58 pm“What was my taxable income last year?”???!!!!
Dude, I think the others here are right. You ARE having a meltdown. That’s about the most obtuse and irrelevant thing anyone in your position could possibly post.
February 7th, 2008 at 6:59 pmNice little bit of tap dancing, Tammy.
How much more thought should we put into leaving Iraq?
A couple of decades?
February 7th, 2008 at 7:01 pmYou are crying like a baby about how people here are mistreating you.
Where did I ever say I was being mistreated? You can force all sorts of opinions on me that you couldn’t know, but don’t force victimhood on me. It never happened. You guys can’t hurt my feelings, but you can ruin a good conversation by failing to escape your simple but irreducible prejudices.
I have plenty of thoughts, none I care to share with you.
I can see that.
I only share my thoughts with people who have an open mind and an ability to think for themselves. You don’t appear to be one of those people.
Likewise. But you couldn’t possibly know that or be more wrong - but, and this has been my point, you don’t have any desire to learn enough about a person to know this. You set up that which you can most easily dismiss whether that’s what’s really there or not.
Whatever - your problem not mine.
February 7th, 2008 at 7:03 pmTandar: “By definition, you’re (as expected) purposefully posing my view in a way that you can trash. I supported tax cuts - but I thought they should go to the middle class. You trash that if you want - you guys aren’t exactly honest discussion partners.”
Translation: Boo hoo, boo hoo, I can saunter on to these boards, be obtuse and arrogant, deride people for “not knowing the definition of habeus corpus,” and when someone challenges me with standard debating technique, all I can do is cry big wet tears and complain that they’re not being fair.
Too funny.
February 7th, 2008 at 7:03 pmOK, Tammy, why don’t we find out more about you}
Where were you born?
What schools did you attend?
Which elementary school teacher beat the crap out of you the most?
Jeebutz.
February 7th, 2008 at 7:04 pmOf course, Democrats may very well squander all this ill-will towards McCain by nominated Hillary Clinton!
February 7th, 2008 at 7:05 pmCorrection: nominatING Hillary Clinton
February 7th, 2008 at 7:05 pmDude, I think the others here are right. You ARE having a meltdown. That’s about the most obtuse and irrelevant thing anyone in your position could possibly post.
Obtuse and irrelevant? You’re the one who claimed to know whether or not I got a tax cut. Remember? Probably not.
Hint; if tax cuts go to people with higher incomes, and you claim to know that I got a tax cut, or not, then you’re claiming to know about my income level.
Irrelevant?
February 7th, 2008 at 7:06 pmTranslation: Boo hoo, boo hoo, I can saunter on to these boards, be obtuse and arrogant, deride people for “not knowing the definition of habeus corpus,†and when someone challenges me with standard debating technique, all I can do is cry big wet tears and complain that they’re not being fair.
That’s really what you think? Big difference between pointing out intellectual dishonesty and whining, but you wouldn’t know that.
I notice you have to make up stuff I didn’t say. Why? Can’t you respond to anything I HAVE said?
February 7th, 2008 at 7:08 pmTamdar, you seem to think I claimed I knew whether or not you got a tax cut. As usual, that’s completely irrelevant, but let’s review. Here’s what I originally posted (it’s right there above in black and white): “Tamdar, you stated clearly that you supported tax cuts, but wish they would have been aimed at the middle class - clearly, they were not aimed there. As we all know, the vast bulk of cuts went to the top 2%.”
How do you construe out of that sentence that I claim to know whether of not you got a tax cut? Again, and as I said before, you’re not making sense.
February 7th, 2008 at 7:09 pmTranslation: Boo hoo, boo hoo, I can saunter on to these boards, be obtuse and arrogant, deride people for “not knowing the definition of habeus corpus,†and when someone challenges me with standard debating technique, all I can do is cry big wet tears and complain that they’re not being fair.
Translation: I really want to get someone all flustered, but I can’t, so I just say they’re flustered anyway.
Too fun!
February 7th, 2008 at 7:11 pmTwo posts above that you said
And since you would have preferred a tax cut that you didn’t get, the only logical conclusion is that you DIDN’T support Bush’s tax cuts since the overall tax bite for people in the middle class has gone up and not down.
Right there where you said “a tax cut that you didn’t get”. That’s you saying “I didn’t get a tax cut”.
How many ways are there to interpret that?
February 7th, 2008 at 7:12 pmTamdar: “I notice you have to make up stuff I didn’t say. Why? Can’t you respond to anything I HAVE said?”
Maybe you should scroll up and read the posts again. That’s pretty much all that I’ve been doing. To review, I asked you what Bush did that you supported. You said the invasion of Afganistan and tax cuts (though you wish they would have gone to the middle class). I then proceeded to make arguments. I argued that the invasion of Afganistan has been a failure and that the tax cuts went to the top 2% so they weren’t really what you said you wanted. My point was that the two things you supported were either illusionary or failure. My question is: why does this have to be spelled out for you? Anyone reading through the last 20 or so posts should understand what’s going on here. Why don’t you?
February 7th, 2008 at 7:13 pmtandar: “And since you would have preferred a tax cut that you didn’t get, the only logical conclusion is that you DIDN’T support Bush’s tax cuts since the overall tax bite for people in the middle class has gone up and not down.
Right there where you said “a tax cut that you didn’t getâ€. That’s you saying “I didn’t get a tax cutâ€.
How many ways are there to interpret that?”
There are two ways to interpret that: The first is to personalize it as you did. The second is to realize that we were talking about public policy and you as well as everyone else in the country didn’t get meaningful tax cuts for the middle class. Only a juvenile, self-absorbed jackass would construe a personal declaration on an annonymous discussion board when someone is obviously talking about public policy we didn’t get, but now I understand your problem - your a juvenile, self-absorbed jackass who has an annoying penchant for being obtuse and arrogant.
February 7th, 2008 at 7:17 pmOh - you DIDN’T say “a tax cut you didn’t get”. My bad. Computer must be acting up.
On this board disagreeing and whining are indistinguishable. But to me they are. Why doesn’t anyone else around here?
So I claimed to be mistreated? Where? (Didn’t happen).
This is all dishonest. Attribute statements and positions people don’t take, and then pretend they did.
Have fun - I’m going home to spend my tax cut!
February 7th, 2008 at 7:18 pmPoor Tamdar. He assumed I was talking about his personal situation on a public, annonymous discussion board when he had given no information at all about himself. Since he is so self-absorbed, he naturally assumed a personal connection rather than a discussion about public policy. This was a mistake he made which was a product of his arrogance. And, to top it all off he ends with an arrogant declaration that he’s going to spend his tax cut!
Folks, this is the current state of the Bush supporter: too intellectually dishonest to simply admit to being a supporter, self-aborbed to a pathological extent and completely unable to deal with the realities of cogent arguments concerning the abject failure of his positions. And then, when completely unable to stand up for his own absurd positions, he makes a parting shot and runs off to have a good cry. It’s just all too “dishonest” for him! Poor, poor Tamdar. God speed, Tamdar!
February 7th, 2008 at 7:26 pmIt seems like “tax cut you didn’t get” might mean you didn’t get the bill you wanted, although you may have very well gotten some tax cut. I don’t think there’s an assumption made about whether you got your taxes cut personally; I think he’s just saying you didn’t get the legislation you wanted. I might be wrong, but I’m just sayin’ that’s my impression.
February 7th, 2008 at 7:38 pmThank you, thirdparty. Of course, on an annonymous, public discussion board that deals with political and social arguments, I was talking about public policy. Maybe I should have worded it “tax cut that WE didn’t get,” but the reason I worded it that way was because he said HE would have preferred a tax cut that went to the middle classes. Or, maybe I should have posted “tax cut POLICY that YOU didn’t get.” The point is, he’s a self-aborbed person who was being challenged on his support for GW Bush. Since he couldn’t really defend Bush’s record, he had to personalize the discussion and be obtuse. I see that happening a lot and I’m probably too hard on people who do that.
February 7th, 2008 at 7:48 pmIt never gets old to see a good ‘ol troll ass whoopin’! Loved it!
February 7th, 2008 at 9:05 pmGREAT speech by John McCain.
http://osi-speaks.blogspot.com/ 2008/ 02/ john-mccain-addresses-cpac-speech-that.html#links
February 7th, 2008 at 9:32 pmI’ve been coming to this site for awhile now - my first ever comment.
THANK YOU!!! THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH!
OH MY GOD THANK YOU SO MUCH!!!
February 7th, 2008 at 10:34 pmConservatives…If they’re not smearing war veterans they’re booing them.
February 7th, 2008 at 11:17 pmNo wonder they’re self destructing, these people are wack-jobs.
Tancredo/George Allen ‘08, for the Macaca party.
John Bolton for S of Defense, Jonah Goldberg for State.
February 8th, 2008 at 12:12 amI’d contribute to someone who could take the vote of the most paranoid conservatives over McCain.
February 8th, 2008 at 12:32 amwow. I love all the people saying that the conservatives are nazis, especially since it stands for “National Socialists,” which is more than likely closer to what most of you are. I think we need a new label for the porky horrible warmongering pieces of crap that call themselves conservatives. Maybe neo-Democrats. That is, spend/tax like a democrat, but also pander to the religious fanatics, racists, and self-righteous authoritarians.
Please stop comparing all conservatives to Nazis. Maybe some of you should look up Godwin’s Law. It may help when you engage in arguments. We’re not all that bad. In fact, there are growing numbers of us that agree with the defacto ‘Democrat” social beliefs (abortion, gay marriage, anti-war (even though none of your candidates are non-interventionist except Gravel and Kucinich, but you won’t vote for them), less government control, and more liberty). The only thing we disagree on is taxation, spending, and other economic policy. You can usually pick us out pretty easily - we never say “islamo-fascist.”
Neither major party has supported the Constitution for a long time. FDR outlawed gold. Nothing is more unconstitutional than that. Enough said. As far as habeas corpus, you all should read this article: Here is an excerpt:
Here you are making your case weaker yet again:
Also, while I detest your prejudices against those who don’t share your beliefs, I apologize for those on the right that do the same to your party. You are giving the crazies permission to say “islamo-fascist” when you compare them to fascists, so unless you support all this prejudice stereotyping, grow up a little. If you can’t be constructive, don’t comment at all.
Oh, and this is an awesome video. Down with McCain.
February 8th, 2008 at 2:13 amBoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
February 8th, 2008 at 2:38 amJohn McFlipFlopper.
A Solid American Hero but not solid on the issues.
hw; Read for yourself this book, and tell me again about how this administration and their fanatical foaming-at-the-mouth supporters are not like Nazis.
The End of America by Naomi Wolf.
February 8th, 2008 at 9:29 amhw; while you’re at it, add these 2 books by John Dean to your reading list-
Worse Than Watergate & Conservatives Without Conscience.
February 8th, 2008 at 9:35 amVietnam Vets against McCain…
http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccain.com/
This guy is toast once this site gets out. His past is EXTREMELY SHADY.
Chalk it up for the Dems.
February 8th, 2008 at 10:13 amHow IS Mitt Romney doing today?
February 8th, 2008 at 1:25 pmHe’s doing really well, he’s still worth about $170 million dollars, is happily married with 5 children and 23 grandchildren. I don’t know if you know this yet, but he selflessly suspended his Presidential campaign to help unite the Republican party in their efforts to fight against terrorism and liberalism, which are almost the same thing at this point. I’m sorry I had to tell you of his sacrifice over e-mail, but I know you’re really disconnected from the media and don’t have the inside scoop.
February 8th, 2008 at 1:26 pmTB; you MUST be a troll. Only a rabid-foaming-at-the-mouth neo-Nazi fascist pig would equate liberals to terrorists.
February 8th, 2008 at 2:16 pmThey have yet to address the cost of such a measure, and their only response to the argument that “they’ll just come back” is to insist on a fence along the border. Never mind that fences have been scaled, and tunnels have been dug.
Conservatives also have benefited from undocumented workers. How are they going to explain how houses are going to be built, hotels run, lawns mowed, and children taken care of without them? Yes, we would ultimately asus a32-u5 battery,asus u5a battery manage, of course. But not without taking a huge economic hit.
Republicans from border states (Bush and McCain) know this. But the xenophobes have to be appeased.
October 15th, 2008 at 3:49 am