McCain Supporters: Where do you differ from your candidate?

uh....?

T
K
O

Sorry, I've been away from the controls, had to epoxy some things. Anyway, I'm a Libertarian, and I am nationalistic as are most Libertarians, just that for the sake of nationalism I'd rather take the scenic route, and our lad McCain is a conservative. Like the Republicans I see him as a loose fit for Republican, but conservative alone, if made to be a thing in-and-of-itself carries some baggage for me, as does being a politician at all. He supports the sanctity of various things, don't want to drill in the ANWR, says hail-hail to folks whining about climate change - blah, blah, blah.


It's like, fullsize Chevy's usually have four-on-the-tree. The new ones have the shifter on the center-console even though there's no driveline underneath it. Ostensibly the new ones are superior because they're at least trying to be stompy, but then the old ones usually had 10-bolt pumpkins. Wouldn't mean jack **** in a luxury car or a classic, and that for many people, many more I think than can manage a Vette or a Caddy or some such thing, is reason enough, not to ignore cheap cars, but to take the center-console-shift on face value. Yet if we understand that failure is a fact of life, and look at the car in terms of possible modes of failure... The point being the old/mid-year one's excelled in such a manner as to partially negate the ill-effects of a non-standard transmission, rather'n just try and sugar-coat it.

I say that to say this - we can't win for losing - must look at it in terms of self-perpetuating or self-correcting issues. This ain't like Santa-Claus, you don't get to sit on his lap and ask for things, that's what your self is for, and betwixt that and the federal/executive there are several intermediate strata of government, wherein I for one much prefer to do my votin', this is a resolution. People get them 'don't blame me I voted for...' bumper stickers make me sick - that's not to say 'love it or leave it' just buy the ticket, take the ride. Thus, even as a proponent of the Libertarian agenda, what do I want at the helm? Someone who could settle **** down about climate change without giving technology to the Reds. If people that are into the sanctity-of-things feel good about him, I believe he will make the decision in terms of business, like economic stability, and since I'm not out to square anyone's vibe... ANWR - I believe him that he's like TR on that, a conservationist, and I can dig it, and I can also dig switching to ethanol hard and fast so we don't have time to care who we starve. I mean, it's not despite his not being a Libertarian that I want McCain in, it's because of the ways in which he's not my thing, not with respect to what other folk want, but because other folk go so far as to want it.

As opposed to, and this is not at all as-opposed-to dependent, someone who'll turn our asses in - sell everyone out to everyone and think he's orchestrating compromise as opposed to say, forging-in the high-energy interstitials of the new century...

I used to be a McCain fan when I thought his ethics were first rate, and he even went against the GOP and Bush when he thought it was best for the country.

Since then, he's made too many gaffs about the Middle East and his "experience" over Obama. He couldn't even identify the correct tribes after returning from Iraq, and his comments after his first visit was shear ignorance; saying it was "safe" in Baghdad.

McCain's hawk stance scares the bejeezus out of me!~ We don't need another war to sacrifice and men and women and our treasure. Diplomacy with our allies is best to let treacherous regimes know that the world community is against the development of WMDs, and aggression against other countries.

McCain doesn't provide any assurance that he'll work with our allies or not start a war with Iran, and his "100 years in Iraq" is a real deal-breaker.

I am glad McCain isn't trying to do the easy thing and capitalize on the war weariness felt by much of the nation in regards to Iraq. The war's current unpopularity should not be the primary force behind its strategy.

But if there was one single reason I can't support his candidacy it is because he fails to recognize that invading Iraq was a mistake and strongly supports that initial decision. I like the guy, but have no desire to see another guy who thinks that was a good idea running the show.

It was a very bad idea. And being on the right side on things like the "surge" and withdrawal doesn't matter if you support the nonsense that made the mess to begin with.

RG, Well said.

Well, I just do not call everyone "friend." Simply because I do not believe in friendship for adults. It is nice as a child and adolescent, but I believe we should grow out of it.

Society of Freinds

I suppose the lack of replies here suggests either that all of the McCain supporters are in total agreement with their candidate's positions, or else there are no McCain supporters on A2K.

I think most are gun-shy after Bush.

I think it's funny after all the Obama supporter bashing. I feel more and more everyday that the republicans (at least on A2K) are drowning in their pride. It's too much to admit that McCain has flaws. Revealing kinks in his armor may reveal that the armor itself it made of kinks.

Thanks to Hanno for making a stop by though.
K
O

Apples to oranges. The mode of civilization in which McCain and myself make sense is more reserved - there's less to split hairs over - we're men of action. To some of you critters public bitching is a thing in and of itself, it's tied into the douchebag social-order. McCain's is a different walk of life you see - more inclusive - like that one can do well to count on a person, for what it's worth, as being the person whom he or she happens to be. I'm reminded of a the clash of Islam and Hinduism in India - the ass-kickers were egalitarian while the pansies were igniting their widows with melted-butter as the accelerant. The trend of liberal-isolationism, as novel as it may seem from the inside, is no coincidence. McCain is something in and of himself, one can dig it or one can not, whereas Obama is a social construct...

Is he still hoping to reduce gas taxes for the summer? I would have to call this a move in the wrong direction.

roger, It's quite obvious that people who support candidate X has some blind spots.

I hadn't thought it through as such, as issues go I've had the whole thing down as a self-corrector, but I'm with you. I don't like the idea of subsidizing the juice - or backing off taxes like it's nothing, I mean, tax or don't tax - we've always had to TCB to get it what with the cartel-type supplier - like a lot of things I'd like to see states handle it as they please and the Fed just make sure it gets here good-and-plenty. If we go in the G's pocket for it though, next thing it'll be like England where they tax displacement - depending on ones level of douchebaggery that might sound like a great idea in itself, you know, seeing as how it would eliminate the onus to succeed in the manner of personal carsmanship thus freeing more time to perfect one's emo-hairstyle - but it all comes to bear, gas mileage is gas mileage, not displacement - none of which, in turn, as much fun as it would be, by any feat of platitudery can be neatly related to the GDP, confidence, security, or the environment. In that way, the tax cut could be part of something very unfortunate.

I'm thinking the move is flawed in the same manner as most liberal policy, the idea that if somethings important it should be handed over to the G as opposed left in the private sector - but to my mind McCain's foreign policy vindicates it, like to settle the score between OPEC and the American free-market. I mean, I think it'll be alright because he'll be addressing the problem in the manner of a national executive, but, indeed, just taking the hit would be more to my liking.

Or they didn't come across this thread or weren't interested in responding?

Which is a whole other tell. It's not McCain who lacks anything, it's his supporters.

T
K
O

Whether he's flip flopped or simply see the light, McCain's current positions are not far off the mark from my own.

It's tough to pin any candidate down to consistent positions in all areas, and McCain is not an exception, but there seem to be some positions he's held for quite some time with which I disagree:

He has expressed the opinion for a number of years that the teaching of creationism should be up to local school districts. I disagree.

Creationism is not a serious alternative theory to evolution, and should not be taught by public schools in any context other than comparative religion. If churches wish to attempt to convince the children of their parishioners that Creationism, not evolution explains life on earth, let them try, but it is absurd to assume it has co-equal status, as a scientific truth, with evolution.

He has also expressed a fairly consistent opinion that schools should teach family values - whatever they are. I disagree.

The concept of values can easily be addressed and debated (if the environment is open) within the context of virtually any subject, but there should never be values indoctrination in our public schools. It is as wrong to insist upon the teaching of values that comport with a conservative philosophy as it is to so in terms of a liberal philosophy. In fact what we need is less indoctrination in this area, not more. Right now the suggestion that schools should teach "family values" probably causes the hair of liberals to hurt, but the reality is that public schools are right now teaching "liberal values."

We should be able to discuss with our children classical concepts of virtues, both Western and Eastern without directing them how to apply such virtues to the contemporary issues that face our society.

Since such skilled teaching is in short supply in our public schools, I would prefer to ban rather than require the teaching of values.

He is pro-death penalty. I am not.

I have no moralistic problem with the death penalty. I am not worried that by exterminating murders we somehow debase ourselves. I am not worried about taking the power of God into our hands. I simply cannot come to terms with our granting the State the power to kill us.

McCain is a proponent of the criminalization of drug use. I am not.

I believe all drugs use should be legalized tomorrow. The reduction in crime will be dramatic and immediate. If we insist on spending the same vast sums of money now expended on drug law enforcement, we can direct it to education and more effective rehabilitation methods.

He has accepted that Global Warming is a fact and that human activity is largely behind it. I have not.

The other day I heard an interview with some Global Warming guru (an accredited "expert" with all sorts of scientific credentials) on NPR who actually suggested that the matter was so settled that criminal charges should be brought against those who try to argue it is not, because they are sowing doubt where there should not be any.

Now I read in the NYT that perhaps the ice ain't melting so precipitously as folks like the guy on NPR would have us believe (and imprisoned for not conceding). Times Article

McCain has consistently been opposed to drilling for oil in ANWR. That may yet change, but I disagree.

That's about it. Certainly no reason not to vote for the man considering the number of issues upon which we agree far outweigh those upon which we disagree. I'm more in sync with this guy than I have been with a candidate for whom i've voted, in many a year.

A silly response.

Then grow a pair and post your complaints.
K
O