An Endowed Chair: McCain's Campaign Finance Reform

[Warriorbird]

You have to reach back to find actual legitimate McCain coverage.

::

An Endowed Chair
Senator John McCain's push for campaign-finance reform has helped make him a presidential contender. Donations from special interests that appear before his Senate Commerce Committee haven't hurt, either
By Amy Silverman
Published on November 25, 1999

http://phoenixnewtimes.com/1999-11-25/news/an-endowed-chair/

[Back]

WB, we could spam the boards with this kind of bullshit. But that would make us people who spam negative bullshit on boards people. And that would be sad.

Its much more fun to poke holes in balloons than blowing them up.

[Gan]

How about posting the whole fucking article?

1999. Are you serious?

[Warriorbird]

Long article. I'll go back to wherever for actual McCain coverage. There isn't much for this campaign cycle at all (OMG, conspiracy to not say his greatness!)

[Gan]

Or it could be what some people have been saying all along. Anything conspiratorily to be known about McCain is already known.

Find current faux pas if you want a valid discussion. I say this because I cant think of any politician who's kept the same stance on the same issues over a span of years...

[crb]

Obama has done a good job brainwashing people into thinking lobbyists are evil.

[Warriorbird]

Notice the article date.

[crb]

I wasn't talking about the author, I was talking about the post. nod nod wink wink

[Tsa`ah]

Or it could be what some people have been saying all along. Anything conspiratorily to be known about McCain is already known.

You, and others, keep repeating this mantra and it's just not valid. Such information is not common knowledge.

It was hashed out 9 years ago to those who cared to follow the GOP primary process ... beyond that it wasn't news. McCain wasn't the candidate for the 2000 election and not many 17-27 year olds will agree with your position ... hell not many people between the ages of 28-35 will agree with your position.

The history that came out on McCain in 2k is only common knowledge to those who follow the GOP or followed politics in general that year. After the GOP primary ... that news wasn't even worth filing.


Find current faux pas if you want a valid discussion. I say this because I cant think of any politician who's kept the same stance on the same issues over a span of years...

A candidate's history is as valid as the present tense. After all, Wright and Ayers came up for Obama ... as well as his "lack" of experience .... as well as his admitted drug use.

A statute of limitations doesn't exist when it comes to candidates for public office.

[Mabus]

A candidate's history is as valid as the present tense. After all, Wright and Ayers came up for Obama ... as well as his "lack" of experience .... as well as his admitted drug use.
So you are not voting for Obama because of his nearly half of a life of association with a militant racist (Wright), a domestic terrorist (Ayers) or because he really has no experience to think of?

Racist!
;)

[Gan]

Notice the article date.
A current article about a past sin, especially one already covered, is pretty lame. Thats like re-wrapping a present to hand out. Let me know when you find a current article about a current sin. Then you'll get my attention.


You, and others, keep repeating this mantra and it's just not valid. Such information is not common knowledge.

It was hashed out 9 years ago to those who cared to follow the GOP primary process ... beyond that it wasn't news. McCain wasn't the candidate for the 2000 election and not many 17-27 year olds will agree with your position ... hell not many people between the ages of 28-35 will agree with your position.

The history that came out on McCain in 2k is only common knowledge to those who follow the GOP or followed politics in general that year. After the GOP primary ... that news wasn't even worth filing.



A candidate's history is as valid as the present tense. After all, Wright and Ayers came up for Obama ... as well as his "lack" of experience .... as well as his admitted drug use.

A statute of limitations doesn't exist when it comes to candidates for public office.

I agree that the statue of limitations is non-existant. However - if you're going to include past errors of by-gone days then you should include past rights in equanamity. Moreso than that - since we're not crucifying candidates for errors in judgement made in youth, or since we shouldnt crucify for that reason. Lets look at pertinent decisions made on policy or leadership over time doing the things that suggest qualification for the job they are running for now. :yes:

That you and the others still find it hard to find anything murderously slanderous to say about McCain that involves something recent usually leads a normal person to believe that there's nothing new on McCain 'dirt-wise', suggests something entirely different than a right-wing media bias.

I'm sure McCain has slipped up recently - its just beyond my ability to discover anything. And wisely so, he (McCain), appears (or has appeared) to keep his nose clean and do his job correctly since his failed attempt at the white house in 2000. It suggests that he's learned by his mistakes, IMO. That carries a lot of weight for me and helps also diffuse some of the doubts I have about McCain's leadership ability.

:shrug:

[Warriorbird]

That 'article date' comment was directed to crb's odd and nonsensical response.

If you're going to argue that 'all of these things are in his past' you shouldn't say anything about Obama's past.

There's a lack of coverage of McCain. I actually wish there was more.