Don’t trust McCain on pro-choice issue.

Froma Harrop seems to have it in for Barack Obama, now presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. She grouses that as that Illinois Senator, he preferred to vote “present” on anti-choice legislation rather than take a stand and vote no. As Ms. Harrop noted, he obviously had greater political ambitions. Unfortunately for Ms. Harrop, so does John McCain.

Senator McCain has quite a storied Senate career without a doubt. In the Senate, even if you are a Republican, compromise in order to pass legislation and get something of what you want. To confirm judicial nominees, as Ms. Harrop detailed in her column. But as a presidential nominee, McCain has sold his soul to religious activists. And we all know how they would refuse to allow any sort of “compromise.” McCain would have to do their bidding to become president. And for that reason, I would refuse to vote for him because he actively courts anti-choice religious radicals. The type who say that government is only bad at least and until it can grant them some special favors. So while Harrop was dissing Obama, she didn’t take as close a look at what McCain is prepared to flip and flop on. But the clue is there. McCain figures that Roe v Wade is a settled matter in the U.S. Supreme Court and therefore won’t overturn Roe as president, in 2000. He also lost the nomination to Mr. Disaster of a president, G.W. because of it. From the election year 2000 to election year 2008, McCain had plenty of time to discover where his political ambitions lay. What he said in 2000, what he said while in the Senate, isn’t what he’ll say on the campaign trail today.

Senator Obama undoubtedly has the sort of political ambitions in which he as that African-American and thinking about his future political goals will indeed vote “present” in order to appeal to a wider audience among the electorate than just a narrow band of special interest groups. Is that really a problem? I guess it got him to the U.S. Senate without any problem. And he got enough pledged and super delegates in the long Dem primary season to now be the presumptive nominee. Then I guess it really isn’t a problem for people who’d see in a guy a “uniter” a fellow who votes “present” on controversial bills rather than a divider. A fellow such as G.W. who doesn’t listen much period and we’ve all seen what he has done with naked political ambitions. Dividing the nation up into an ever shrinking core of supporters whom McCain wants to get behind him in the fall. And wouldn’t that put McCain into the “divider” category because he will say and do anything to get elected?

On judicial appointments in particular, McCain’s “gang of 14,” 7 Dems and 7 GOP including McCain himself who compromised on judicial nominees and McCain was pummeled for not working harder to put the pc judicial activists in place that would get the religious activists what they really wanted, namely: The overturning of Roe v Wade. And the ones who did get the Senate confirmations, had also at times, worked GW himself into a lather for not tamely supporting his “Global War on Terror” ambitions 100% of the time. But that is the Senate. McCain hasn’t been “reaching across the aisle” as he campaigned for the presidency. Certainly his ads don’t reflect such thinking. And I would pay attention to his ads. Bringing up in a republished editorial (Spokesman-Review, Spokane, Washington) what McCain did as Senator is completely in opposition to how McCain has fashioned himself as presidential nominee. Even Paul Mulshine noted that. Quite frankly, this pro-choice Republican would rather vote for the guy who voted “present” than for a guy who turns himself into a cypher. You can’t be sure of what you are getting.


In other news

It has been on the various news channels that the latest food poisoning scare is Salmonella in the tomatoes.  When had we heard this tune before?  Oh yeah, the FDA fails to have inspectors at various food processing plants, fails to have inspectors at various farms where the produce is initially grown, because of the anti-regulatory ideology of the GOP.  “The market will correct itself.”  Sure thing, right after people get poisoned, get sick and die from what they eat or brush their teeth with.  Which is why some regulations would be deemed necessary if the food industry is to survive not having to recall:  Hamburger, lettuce, spinach, green onions, apples, etc. on the basis of how they were handled, and how contaminated were the conditions during the time of harvest to processing.  If you don’t regulate, why would anyone bother to “clean up” after every food processing run?  Why would they even care?  For the information of my fellow Republicans, if you don’t want the voters getting sick or dying from what’s on their plate, I think that you should at least care, or surrender the federal gvt completely to the Dems this year.

Advertisements

7 Responses to “Don’t trust McCain on pro-choice issue.”

  1. sasderwn Says:

    Hello World

  2. Dannie Epley Says:

    Buenas Tenia ganas de

  3. Darwin Grupa Says:

    Hi,Tenia ganas de

  4. anal Says:

    I bookmarked this link . Thank you for good job !

  5. Steven Peru Says:

    I really like your website. Thanks, great share.

  6. friteuse sans huile seb Says:

    Very interesting points you have mentioned, regards for posting.

  7. digital camera review Says:

    Thank you, this is the worst thing I’ve read

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: