mccain vows change

mccain vows change

There are 239 comments on the Akron Beacon Journal story from Sep 4, 2008, titled mccain vows change. In it, Akron Beacon Journal reports that:

ST. PAUL, MINN.: John McCain, a POW turned political rebel, vowed Thursday night to vanquish the ''constant partisan rancor'' that grips Washington as he launched his fall campaign for the White House.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Akron Beacon Journal.

Disgusted

Anniston, AL

#85 Sep 5, 2008
They ought hold the DEBATES between McCain and Obama in Spanish on the Mexican Border so they could wave at the Illegal Aliens crossing the Border into the USA and both of them have an equal chance to ask for their Votes.

McCain not long ago said we was all Georgians, Cheney to busy to attend the Republican Convention then headed to Georgia with a BILLION DOLLARS of Unborn USA Tax Payers Money borrowed from Red China, Europe, Islamic Countries, Mexico, Isreal etc to give Georgia-----some how Cheney wound up in a little country near Russia named Georgia instead of the State of Georgia in the Southeastern part of the USA.

Heard one of them Right Wing Preacher told his flock to Pray for a flooding rain on Obama Convention Speech.

Then a storm cause the Republicans to change their Convention times around and etc----

But whatever the confusion is understandable as THE WORD REPUBLICAN on signs at the Republican Convention was in SMALL PRINT if you looked real hard and found one---PLUS the word Republican was rarely spoken by the Convention attendee---as rare as the WORDS Bush and Cheney was spoken!!!

McCain for Change and Obama for Change---what a bunch of BS!!!

What are we today Georgians, Polish, Isreal? What hat are we wearing?

What the chant for today
ERS

Michigan City, IN

#86 Sep 5, 2008
The Big Lebowski wrote:
<quoted text>
Seems to me that Obama's record of voting with the Democrats 97% of the time is more of a positive for him than McCain's record of voting over 90% with our current unpopular president.
So your point is what, Obama is a good leader because he consistently supports a more "popular" position?

That isn't a definition of leadership, it's a definition of a panderer.
DaveP

Erie, PA

#87 Sep 5, 2008
Funny, the republicans are saying they are for change. That's basically saying "We screwed everything up, but we're the only ones that can fix it so give us another chance". They really insult the intelligence of the voters. People like Obama's change platform, so let's use it ourselves!

“At least I'm housebroken.”

Since: Jun 07

Canton, OH

#88 Sep 5, 2008
ERS wrote:
<quoted text>
So your point is what, Obama is a good leader because he consistently supports a more "popular" position?
That isn't a definition of leadership, it's a definition of a panderer.
I'll let you in on a little secret -- politics is nothing more than the art of pandering.
DaveP

Erie, PA

#89 Sep 5, 2008
ERS wrote:
<quoted text>
He did? I heard the typical Democrat talking points - alternative "clean/renewable" energy - but nothing on how he will lower my eneregy bill tomorrow, next month, next year, etc.
ERS, there is no energy plan that can lower your bill right now. The only way to do that is to stop the price gouging that is going on with the oil companies. With democrats in total power, that can actually happen. There is no evidence that offshore drilling will lower gas prices by more the ten cents in about ten years. It's not a solution, it's a political chant.

“Put the Kool-Aid down!!”

Since: Jun 08

Louisville, KY

#90 Sep 5, 2008
ERS wrote:
<quoted text>
So your point is what, Obama is a good leader because he consistently supports a more "popular" position?
That isn't a definition of leadership, it's a definition of a panderer.
Bush voted with Bush 90% of the time (that is...when he decided to show up). Bush has been WRONG.....at minimum...90% of the time. If Obama voted the other way....that means Obama was CORRECT 90% on the time. Quite a smart fellow..I would say.

“At least I'm housebroken.”

Since: Jun 07

Canton, OH

#91 Sep 5, 2008
DaveP wrote:
<quoted text>
ERS, there is no energy plan that can lower your bill right now. The only way to do that is to stop the price gouging that is going on with the oil companies. With democrats in total power, that can actually happen. There is no evidence that offshore drilling will lower gas prices by more the ten cents in about ten years. It's not a solution, it's a political chant.
You are 100% correct. Drilling isn't going to solve anything in the short-term, because we are refining at capacity right now. We don't have a supply problem as much as we have a production problem. However, the politically expedient answer is to placate the voters by telling them we will drill for more oil domestically and that will fix our problems. The reality is that we need more refineries, but you can't build those overnight, and that doesn't make for a good soundbite in a convention speech.
kathyd

Cuyahoga Falls, OH

#92 Sep 5, 2008
I believe that Palin will get "kick backs" from the oil companies when they do off shore drilling from her Alaskan shore lines.
ERS

Michigan City, IN

#93 Sep 5, 2008
Truth -Sought wrote:
<quoted text> Bush voted with Bush 90% of the time (that is...when he decided to show up). Bush has been WRONG.....at minimum...90% of the time. If Obama voted the other way....that means Obama was CORRECT 90% on the time. Quite a smart fellow..I would say.
Do you really want to get into discussion about: 1. showing up to vote
2. voting for, against or "present"

Do you?

How about FISA? How did ZERObama vote on that one and did he support Bush's position?
mark worrell

Marble Falls, TX

#94 Sep 5, 2008
Thinking out Loud 2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Clinton- a boom economy he had nothing to do with due to the tech boom as the internet exploded. Unless you believe Al Gore invented the internet. LOL And a chance to get Bin Laden that he refused to take.
Bush- Tech boom declining as internet infrastucture is basically completed. 9-11 terror attact planned by Bin Laden sends country and much of the world into economic decline. This led us to war...which costs.
Who is to blame? Truely hard to say as we could keep going back in history looking for cause/effect lines to follow. Point is we are we are today...and need to find a way to turn us around.
while al gore may not invented the internet, he did develop the programming that makes it accessible to illiterate morons like yourself who laugh and ridicule based on errant information

you couldn't show us today how stupid and unaware you are without al gore's work way back when

you should be grateful we now know who is dumb and who isn't..by the way, what have you done in your life that has improved any community you have ever lived in?

we already know the answer.
Hagen

Cranberry Twp, PA

#95 Sep 5, 2008
Beetle_Juice wrote:
<quoted text>Did anyone email Obama yet and tell him there aren't 57 states?
Or that if he's going to tell black men they need to man up when it comes to their kids, NOT to tell them, "but leave the pregnant 17 year old white girl alone..."
Or that he's supposed to stand at attention and salute the Flag during the National Anthem....no matter HOW bad the singing is??
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/384763
Talk about making a FOOL of oneself.....
On THAT count, Obama has ALREADY beaten McCain.
Only military personnel IN UNIFORM are required to salute the flag during the playing of the national anthem. If no flag is visible, then you turn, face and salute the orgigination of the music.

Military personnel NOT in uniform are required to have their hand over their heart during playing of the national anthem. Whether its played in person, or on TV, radio, or any other live broadcast.

Its considered good manners for anyone else to do the above, but not required. Its also good manners for men to remove and headwear while the national anthem is played.

Before you start knocking people around and acting like an ignorant republican parrot, think about what you are spewing up BEFORE it comes out of your mouth.
mark worrell

Marble Falls, TX

#96 Sep 5, 2008
Truth -Sought wrote:
All that was missing the last two nights were the robes...masks...and torches. Ladies and gentlemen...we officially have a new "brownshirt" party in the good old US of A. The Kooks on the right are on to something...something that's been happening for the past 8 years. This country has crossed over into a post-rational society that cares little about FACTS and REALITY or serious policy ideas and respectful debate...but rather is a nation moved by anger and ridicule, fear and nationalism. Sad...our founding are rolling in their graves.
i agree...if you watch the police reaction outside the hall with legitimate protestors who were not rioting, you can see the change mccain offers, which is just a world identical to the one richard nixon gave us

the peppering spraying of the lady trying to speak calmly is john mccin's legacy to change
ERS

Michigan City, IN

#97 Sep 5, 2008
The Big Lebowski wrote:
<quoted text>
You are 100% correct. Drilling isn't going to solve anything in the short-term, because we are refining at capacity right now. We don't have a supply problem as much as we have a production problem. However, the politically expedient answer is to placate the voters by telling them we will drill for more oil domestically and that will fix our problems. The reality is that we need more refineries, but you can't build those overnight, and that doesn't make for a good soundbite in a convention speech.
So we should do what? Wait for some pie in the sky "renewable energy" source(s) to solve our energy problems? They all have significant development and distribution challenges that have not been solved and may never be solved, yet the liberals are ready to hang their hat on this elusive goal instead of an "all of the above" approach?

Iran is not happy with the drop in global oil prices and is planning to ask OPEC to cut producton in order to prop the price back up. If they are successful in convincing the others to follow along, then what will our response be? Increase taxes? Sue OPEC? close down the commodities markets? Start walking everywhere? Yeah, these will all work.
Gerry

Findlay, OH

#98 Sep 5, 2008
DaveP wrote:
<quoted text>
ERS, there is no energy plan that can lower your bill right now. The only way to do that is to stop the price gouging that is going on with the oil companies. With democrats in total power, that can actually happen. There is no evidence that offshore drilling will lower gas prices by more the ten cents in about ten years. It's not a solution, it's a political chant.
We use oil and we need oil. Don't know if it will lower prices, as we have to dig deeper and costs go up. We don't know what is under the water unless we look for it. We got hit by the price this time around. Everyone wants more oil and China will be a big buyer of it. The only thing saving us right now is a slowing world economy, but if demand keeps going up and China resumes 10% growth, then you will have a squeeze on supply and prices.

We have not had an energy policy and we have been going through the same arguments over and over for 35 years. We do need an energy council and an energy plan and look for alternative energy.

Being energy independent will save our country from geopolitical disruptions. You can pay off deficits and debt with the royalties. You will create jobs. You will spur economic growth. We can be a leader in the world for alternative sources. We can get away from OPEC and Venezuela. All this means putting everything on the table. And have a government Manhattan style project. But to get from here to there, you still need oil. It is better to drill than to recessions or wars over oil.
ha ha

Akron, OH

#99 Sep 5, 2008
The Big Lebowski wrote:
I'm sorry, but when I look at a 72 year-old white male Republican, the last thing I think is change.
change the depends, again and again and again....

“Stupidity should be painful”

Since: Jun 08

Akron Area

#100 Sep 5, 2008
The McInsanes continued last night to be the Mr and Mrs McFake that we suspected. Nothing new on how they want to be in office with Mom Palin to kick butts and butt heads. Do you really think that the resistence will cause any change? Rather they will meet with so much ire that their accomplishments will be nil...sjt
DaveP

Erie, PA

#101 Sep 5, 2008
A question for conservatives...When Obama carves up McCain in the debates, are you going to change your mind or will you reluctantly still vote for McCain simply because there is an "R" in front of his name? Do the speeches and debates mean anything to you or will you just vote for McCain because he's a republican?
mark worrell

Marble Falls, TX

#102 Sep 5, 2008
to all republicans, read and weep:
http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccain.c...
Gerry

Findlay, OH

#103 Sep 5, 2008
The Big Lebowski wrote:
<quoted text>
You are 100% correct. Drilling isn't going to solve anything in the short-term, because we are refining at capacity right now. We don't have a supply problem as much as we have a production problem. However, the politically expedient answer is to placate the voters by telling them we will drill for more oil domestically and that will fix our problems. The reality is that we need more refineries, but you can't build those overnight, and that doesn't make for a good soundbite in a convention speech.
We are running around 90% capacity. Marathon Oil has built a new plant in Louisiana and upgrading a Detroit facility. If you don't drill for oil, then there is no demand for refineries. Drill for oil.
Hagen

Cranberry Twp, PA

#104 Sep 5, 2008
DaveP wrote:
Funny, the republicans are saying they are for change. That's basically saying "We screwed everything up, but we're the only ones that can fix it so give us another chance". They really insult the intelligence of the voters. People like Obama's change platform, so let's use it ourselves!
Yeah, I dont get it myself. I always thought the BASIC PRINCIPLE to Repubicans were that they were CONSERVATIVE.

Is it me or is a conservative person somewhat AGAINST change? Thats why they are conservative. A liberal or progressive is by definition someone who wants....<drumroll CHANGE!

Definitions of conservative on the Web:

-resistant to change
-having social or political views favoring conservatism
-cautious: avoiding excess; "a conservative estimate"
-button-down: unimaginatively conventional; "a colorful character in the buttoned-down, dull-grey world of business"- Newsweek
-a person who is reluctant to accept changes and new ideas

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Akron Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News New college graduates want to live in big cities 14 hr Pale Rider 2
News Member of violent Akron gang sentenced to prison 14 hr Pale Rider 2
News Three charged in connection with Akron gambling... 18 hr Fred Rogers 1
News Man vindicated in 1993 Akron murder charged for... Sun Warden jones 1
News Welcome Stan Piatt Jul 2 Westside Steve 6
News Akron council to select at-large replacement fo... Jul 1 Comma 1
Shawn Ford says he acted in New Franklin slayin... Jul 1 Focylinda Foad 2
More from around the web

Akron People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Akron Mortgages