Voting records speak for themselves, page 3

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 14 times

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 01:56 PM by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by poet1b
The web site the op does link to has a lot of information but, who created the web site,

I've been using it for years to see where the various candidates stand on the issues. It's comprehensive, non-partisan and very accurate.

About On The Issues

Our mission is to provide non-partisan information for voters in the Presidential election, so that votes can be based on issues rather than on personalities and popularity.

We get our information daily from newspapers, speeches, press releases, and the Internet -- it is a labor-intensive process that requires countless volunteer hours.

For some reason on that page Obama's postions are not listed.

Yes, they are. You need to look around the site a little. It's HUGE.

HERE are Obama's positions on the Economy.

What I do know is the the op cherry picked his data to make Obama look good and McCain look bad.

He picked several issues, showed how the candidates voted on them (using "on the issues" as his source) and then gave his personal opinion about where the particular candidates stand on these issues.

That's what the thread asks people to do. NOT argue with what others think, but to provide what YOU think about the candidates positions on various issues. In other words, what issues are important to you? How does McCain feel about it? How does Obama feel about it? Whom do you agree with and why. THAT is the point of the thread.

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 03:34 PM by poet1b

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

All very slickly packaged with the obvious objective of leading any who bothered to read the material to the same conclusion. If you are going to compare the candidates on the issues, then you should compare their positions on the same issues, not meander through cherry picked subjects avoiding actually comparing both candidates positions.

It is clear that someone went to a lot of effort to produce this presentation, which is what it is. Did the Obama camp pay for this advertisement? maybe ATS should be looking into collecting a fee for the use of their site to spread campaign material.

Just expressing my opinion.

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 03:55 PM by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by poet1b
If you are going to compare the candidates on the issues, then you should compare their positions on the same issues,

WE DID!!! You are not getting it. READ the words without looking for some like of "cheating" and you might understand.

The OP ( and I) used this layout:

Issue #1
John McCain
-Pro
-Con

Barack Obama
-Pro
-Con

Issue #2
John McCain
-Pro
-Con

Barack Obama
-Pro
-Con

Issue #3
John McCain
-Pro
-Con

Barack Obama
-Pro
-Con

This is what he said about Barack Obama on Immigration:

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin
IMMIGRATION

Barack Obama
...
Con -- Dont deputize Americans to turn in illegal immigrants. (Dec 2007)
-- Support granting drivers licenses to illegal immigrants. (Nov 2007)
--Immigration system is broken for legal immigrants. (Sep 2007)
--Voted YES on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security. (May 2006)

This is his personal opinion and commentary on the above:

1.) This is our country. They are here ILLEGALLY! So he's saying "dont report criminals" Yeah...thats REAL nobel of ya, barack.

2.) The second one just makes me laugh. What a maroon. Giving people who have no right to be here, rights of american people.

3.) Really? Because i so happen to live in a town with a big gigantic University (The university of illinois) and the student body population is 15% foriegn asian. Thats a lot of people. There are millions of immigrants that got here legally. If they can - so can everyone else.

4.) This is hilarious!! If you let them participate in Social Security - then you know where they live and work. You should kick their butts back to whence they came, until they can do what everyone else had to do, and come here legally. Its unfair to say "you can break the law, but americans cannot" absolute ignorance in its ever-shining glory.

Does that look like he's trying to make Obama look good??? I'm done explaining this to you. You should read it.

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 04:31 PM by Andrew E. Wiggin

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

thank you for covering that BH

But what i think is going on here is someone trolling

if poet had taken 2 seconds to read our posts, he'd see we're comparing the issues

nothing is cherry picked
sorry - but poet doesnt have an objective opinion. he's anti-obama because he's in the presence of obama fans

Poet

come back when you want to participate
stop derailing other peoples threads just because you can't keep up.

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 04:50 PM by poet1b

No, that is not what the opening presentation does.

First issue abortion, basically does compare both candidates positions on the same issue to give appearance of an impartial discussion.

Second issue, talks about McCain wanting to bailout Bear Stearns but not home owners who speculated, but does not talk about Obama's position on this issue. Talks about Obama wanting to protect credit card owners and getting minorities mortgages, which are completely different issues.

Third issue goes through a list of each candidates position on various aspects of immigration without ever matching the candidates positions against each other. Goes into attack mode against McCain.

By the second issue it was obvious who was being supported. You can pretend to be for someone while making them look bad, and that is what is being done here using what seems to be a well developed technique.

Then you show up and do a good job of imitating the technique while praising the first post. The whole thing looks like a power point presentation out of some propaganda seminar.

USE Colors to make opinions look like facts
Looks like a headline from an ariticle
Makes it look like material is well researched
Distracts from weakness of the ideas

Create Subject Headers
Looks like you will be comparing apples to apples
Allows you to stream your presentation along a well planned line.
Seems like you are trying to be fair.

Post positions as pro and con
[color=Yellow]Gives the appearance you are representing both sides equally.
Allows you to drift while looking consistent.
Don't really have to provide logic to back your claims.
[/color]

Sorry, I see slick sales brochure.

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 04:56 PM by Andrew E. Wiggin

reply to post by poet1b

Ok. So you are insinuating that i am not to have an opinion on whos policies i agree with?

Did you not see that i agreed with mccain policies and disagreed with obama policies as well?

Did i write this post in greek?
Because you seem to have a hard time reading it...

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 04:56 PM by Andrew E. Wiggin

if you have nothing intelligent to contribute to this discussion

then please see your way back whence you came.

This is about comparing voting records of the candidates

yes

i support obama. You deserve a medal for figuring that one out (its in the mail)

If you disagree with me, then challenge me

since you can't seem to do this, then please head back to whatever it is you do best, and leave us to our own conversation

stop trolling
stop derailing.

[edit on 22-6-2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 05:08 PM by poet1b

My first posts clearly show how McCains position on the mortgage crisis is far superior to Obama's position. Got any counters, or would you rather just keep on complaining because I have pointed out what a slick package lacking in substance your first posts were. I came here looking for a legitimate discussion and was insulted by the slick presentation.

If you don't support helping home owners who made bad buying decisions, how can you support Obama's World Charity Program sending trillions of dollar to the U.N. to spend over seas?

I'm not trolling, I'm calling out what I see as nothing but an advertisement for Obama.

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 05:29 PM by Andrew E. Wiggin

reply to post by poet1b

you are trolling

i pointed out that its hipocritical that Mccain wants to bailout the bank that is under FEDERAL INVESTIGATION for fraudulent practices

but he doesnt want to bail out people who can't afford their houses

i ask you again
can you read english?

Yes, i am for obama, and i gave my reasons why.
I gave the issues
pros
cons
and my conclusions

you, so far, have only given perfect examples of why ignorance has run amuck on these political boards

you have yet to contribute one piece of valuable information to this thread, or to these boards.
im still waiting

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 05:35 PM by Andrew E. Wiggin

I'm sorry that i clearly pointed out several reasons that one person should vote for obama over mccain

im sorry that our work in this thread makes you angry, as it challanges the very foundations of your ignorance.

But that is what you are spewing: Ignorance.

You claim its propaganda?

Explain that to me

The title is "voting records speak for themselves"
and all we talk about is voting records

i used voting records to clarify my choice

even in your own diluted world, how can you not see that.
Im truely curious

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 09:00 PM by poet1b

reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin

Wrong, go back and read my earlier post.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

McCain's reason for bailing out Bear and Stern is very legitimate, as McCain himself stated, " On the issue of Bear Stearns, every financial expert I know says that if it had failed, it would have rippled throughout the entire financial community and would have caused greater problems which eventually would have come down on the average citizen if our economy continues to decline the way that it's been doing"

I think McCain is stating it lightly, the big fish have already bailed out with their money, and the small investors, it is the people with their 401k money in Bears and Stearn and related companies that will wind up losing the most, and the 401k investors didn't do anything wrong, they don't get to control their investments, and are only given a limited number of funds. Also, McCain didn't say that he wasn't willing to bailout homeowners trying to keep their home, he said he wasn't going to bailout speculators, and that is not the same thing. McCain then talks about getting government involved in re-negotiating the loans, it's not like McCain plans on leaving home owners twisting in the wind. In addition, the fed is already prosecuting Bears and Stearn execs who broke the laws, and McCain certainly is not talking about letting them get by with their crimes.

Sorry, but your analysis fails completely, as you ignore the whole picture.

Obama wants to bailout home owners, but not do anything to protect investors. In addition, Obama wants to make it even easier for people to borrow money, which is a foolish policy. Considering how deep in debt this nation is, why would Obama be encouraging taking on more debt as he states he wants to do.

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 11:21 PM by Andrew E. Wiggin

reply to post by poet1b

No
im not wrong

McCain said to bail out B&stearns

and said not to bail out people who are loosing their homes.

You said, "It's not the duty of government to bail out and reward those who act irresponsibly, whether they're big banks or small borrowers." What about Bear-Stearns?
A: On the issue of Bear Stearns, every financial expert I know says that if it had failed, it would have rippled throughout the entire financial community and would have caused greater problems which eventually would have come down on the average citizen if our economy continues to decline the way that it's been doing.

and his statements on people who bought homes

A: Look, Americans are hurting right now. They don't know if they have to get another job. The challenges are enormous right now. The key to it is not to bail out people who speculated or people who engaged in unsavory practices. The key to it is get the lender and the borrower together. We know how hard that is because of identifying the lender, but there's ways to do it. Of course there's a role for government, but it's not to reward greedy speculators. It is not to reward people who misbehave. And it certainly isn't a huge expenditure of taxpayers' dollars which, in the long run, could exacerbate the problems that exist

So he's saying "lets bail out big business" and "lets leave it up to the big business rather or not these people keep their homes"

oh, and since you keep avoiding it, McCain keeps condoning bailing out a Criminal organization

but i suppose you have some 1/2 attempt for an excuse for that as well?

Its like arguing with a brick wall
you stand the way your creators built you
you never move, your opinion can never sway, regardless of how much fact is thrown at you.

you are forever set in your ignorance, and you are happy there.
You are the poster child for 'ignorance is bliss'
not because you dont support obama

but because you say im using propaganda for supporting obama

i gave pros' and con's of each

but since you fail to comprehend the english language.

Ich sprach über die guten und die schlechten. Sie gerade gesprochen

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 11:39 PM by jetxnet

You mean Obama actually has a voting record? Even after voting only "Present" more than 120 times and more times than his actual votes in his three years as Senator?

Sounds like someone only wants to take a stand on Africa and Muslims when in their favor.

Other than that, change and hope .. but nothing to show for it but weak deception.

You were against Obama and now for him? What a shame. You should seriously think about re-evaluating your postion and not blaming the MSM which is mostly pro-Obama in the first place!

How many more blatent acts of disrespect to your country and what it stands for will it take before you come to the right conclusion?

Read the Obama changing the Presidential Seal thread ..just yet another blazing Red Flag indicating Obama doesn't care about this country in any way shape or form. He is just telling you what you want to hear, but not backing it up at all. Only messages and symbols, sounds like a cult to me.

reply posted on 23-6-2008 @ 12:57 AM by Andrew E. Wiggin

reply to post by jetxnet

what is so offensive about obama using the seal in his new logo?

You make it sound like the man has intentions of changing the national identity and putting his face on the 5 dollar bill.

How is what he did any different than

This

Or This

or Bush's manipulation of the star field in the flag Here

Whats the difference?
Oh thats right - there are laws that say you can't manipulate and desecreate the flag

there arent laws that say you can't use the eagle from the federal seal in any imagery

he's embracing the image
not disgracing it.

When i read that post about "OMGZORZZZZ!!!11!!! Obama used the seal !!!!111one111!!!one" i feel like im listening to a sub for the rush limbaugh show

Why a sub?

Because Rush would have thought out his argument a little better, and realized that there is really nothing there to flame someone on

[edit on 23-6-2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]

reply posted on 23-6-2008 @ 01:04 PM by poet1b

reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin

No, McCain said he would not bailout SPECULATORS and people who engaged in UNSAVORY practices.

The key to it is not to bail out people who speculated or people who engaged in unsavory practices.

Bears and Stearns is a corporation, not an individual, and like all corporations is owned by investors, many of whom own a share through their 401k plans, and would unfairly loose large amounts of money if Bear and Stearns would go under. Are you incapable of grasping this reality.

You position on this is wrong. Obama wants to help people borrow more money, people who borrow against their paychecks weekly, do you really think that is a good idea?

reply posted on 23-6-2008 @ 01:16 PM by Andrew E. Wiggin

reply to post by poet1b

people who speculated

lets define speculation

to engage in any business transaction involving considerable risk or the chance of large gains, esp. to buy and sell commodities, stocks, etc., in the expectation of a quick or very large profit.

Source

people who borrowed money on a high-risk loan SPECULATED that they'd be able to pay for it.

The key is to not bail out speculators, but to get ledner and borrower to talk to each other.

That gives the decision to the lender to do with that they please. Which i agree with.

But he says to bail out bear and stearns is key to economy.

So he's saying

lets bail out the bank
but leave the decision up to the bank rather or not to kick people out of their houses

if you see it any other way, then you're blind and can't comprehend what you're reading.

And stop dancing around the fact that he supports a criminal organization.

Lets bail out criminals

ya. ok. vote for mccain if you want 4 more years of Bush.

McCain:

reply posted on 23-6-2008 @ 03:55 PM by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by jetxnet
You mean Obama actually has a voting record? Even after voting only "Present" more than 120 times

In his 8 years as State Senator, Obama voted "present" 129 out of 4,000 votes he cast. That's 3.2%. He introduced 800 bills during those 8 years. Take a moment and educate yourself. Or at least try.

See: What does voting "present" mean? www.abovetopsecret.com...

and more times than his actual votes in his three years as Senator?

What?

reply posted on 23-6-2008 @ 04:41 PM by Andrew E. Wiggin

regardless of how one interprets voting "present" (and i agree with BH on this one)

voting "present" is always, 10 times out of 10, 100% of the time, better than not voting at all

Its funny how easy it is to dispell any notion that neocons throw out in the wind.

its like there is a factory somewhere pumping out randomly generated insults towards obama, trying to discredit him....and every single one of them (thus far) either

A.) Has zero credibility
B.) Is easily debunked despite "credibility"
C.) Talks about issues that have nothing to do with being POTUS:
1.) Skin Color
2.) Religion

Isnt it hilarious what people do out of overwhelming, and paralyzing fear?

reply posted on 23-6-2008 @ 08:30 PM by poet1b

reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin

"lets bail out the bank
but leave the decision up to the bank rather or not to kick people out of their houses"

No, he isn't saying that, you have grossly distorted his position.

First of all, McCain felt that Bear and Stearns needed to be bailed out, not every bank in the country, and the reason was because if Bear and Stearn's had gone bankrupt, it would have had a severe effect on the economy.

In addition, no where does McCain say he wants to leave homeowners at the mercy of the mortgage holders. You are just making up stuff. Why don't you go to McCain's website and see what his real position is instead of telling lies here on the forum.

www.johnmccain.com...

John McCain Is Proposing A New "HOME Plan" To Provide Robust, Timely And Targeted Help To Those Hurt By The Housing Crisis. Under his HOME Plan, every deserving American family or homeowner will be afforded the opportunity to trade a burdensome mortgage for a manageable loan that reflects their home's market value.

John McCain Calls For The Immediate Formation Of A Justice Department Mortgage Abuse Task Force. The Task Force will aggressively investigate potential criminal wrongdoing in the mortgage industry and bring to justice any who violated the law. The DOJ Task Force will offer assistance to State Attorneys General who are investigating abusive lending practices.

Gee, let me use your technique on Obama.

Obama doesn't want to help real estate investors, but he wants to force banks to loan money to people who have to borrow money against their next pay check because they can't budget their money.

Talk about a stupid policy.

reply posted on 23-6-2008 @ 08:46 PM by semperfortis

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

Well this looks disheartening..

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) "has missed the most votes of any Democratic presidential hopeful in the Senate over the last two months, including a vote on an Iran resolution he has blasted Sen. Hillary Clinton for supporting," CNN reported November 2, 2007.[1] Since September 2007, Obama has missed 80 percent of Senate votes.

Glenn Thrush reported September 24, 2007, in Newsday "Since January 2007, Obama "has racked up three times as many missed votes" as Hillary Clinton, who has missed 28 votes or 8.3 percent, "according to roll call records."[2]

Source Watch

And this

Barack Obama missed 268 of 1240 votes (22%) since Jan 6, 2005. (Exceedingly Poor relative to peers).

Statistics: Barack Obama has sponsored 132 bills since Jan 4, 2005, of which 119 haven't made it out of committee (Average) and 2 were successfully enacted (Average, relative to peers). Obama has co-sponsored 630 bills during the same time period (Average, relative to peers). [On 4/2/08, the numbers were updated to consider companion bills in the other chamber identified as "identical" by the Congressional Research Service when determining if a bill was enacted or made it past the introduction stage.]

GOV Track

Semper

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >> ^^TOP^^