All About McCain - Page 49

scaeagles · 09-03-2008, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tenigma

For Democrats, hypocrisy would be telling everyone they have to conserve natural resources... and then find out that the politician had a whole mountainside of pristine old growth oak cut down so he could get a new wooden house built. Or quietly supporting the tear-down of a homeless shelter so that he could help his friend build a high-class restaurant on the location.

So you would regard Gore as a hypocrit? Or Edwards? Or Streisand? Or Robert Redford? I can give specific examples of those things, and have, but am often told that I just don't get it.

Morrigoon · 09-03-2008, 10:35 AM

I have to agree with GD - some things I'd rather see remain empty promises

sleepyjeff · 09-03-2008, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tenigma

Hypocrisy is when you are a huge Bible-thumping born-again Christian who espouses the importance of motherhood and abstinence... but who leaves nannies to tend to their six-month-old special needs baby with Down Syndrome or who ignores her own house and pays too little attention to a daughter who then goes on and gets pregnant while still in high school.

That's hypocrisy for social conservatives. Not living what you preach to others.

I am a little confused here; what law has she signed or proposed that is at odds with her(not her daughters) behaviour?

Quote:

For Democrats, hypocrisy would be telling everyone they have to conserve natural resources... and then find out that the politician had a whole mountainside of pristine old growth oak cut down so he could get a new wooden house built. Or quietly supporting the tear-down of a homeless shelter so that he could help his friend build a high-class restaurant on the location.

The hypocrisy would not be on social things, but on things the liberals stand for. Protecting the environment, protecting natural resources, etc.

Sounds like Gore and Pelosi

sleepyjeff · 09-03-2008, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morrigoon

I have to agree with GD - some things I'd rather see remain empty promises

If one hopes they remain empty promises then why suggest people should vote for the person based on those promises?

Tenigma · 09-03-2008, 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Along the lines of how she can be a good mom and care for the newborn....why was it never an issue that John Edwards had a cancer stricken wife?

Actually I'm in agreement with you on that one.

Ghoulish Delight · 09-03-2008, 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Along the lines of how she can be a good mom and care for the newborn....why was it never an issue that John Edwards had a cancer stricken wife?

And for the record, I don't care if she and her husband work while raising kids. I do care if she claims that lack of traditional family values are leading to the demise of morals in this country while they do so.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleepyjeff

I am a little confused here; what law has she signed or proposed that is at odds with her(not her daughters) behaviour?

Most notably, her support of abstinence-only education. It's a policy that's proven to be ineffectual and is leading to an increase in the type of behavior it's purported to prevent. Her daughter's case is not proof of that trend, but it is indicative.

innerSpaceman · 09-03-2008, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scaeagles

When Biden lost his wife and newborn in 1972 in the automobile accident (indeed a tragedy), was he encouraged to stay closer to home to raise his young sons, or did he go ahead and swear in as a Senator?

Really stupid example, since: (1) He refused to leave his son's hospital bed to be sworn in, so they came to the hospital to swear him in, and (2) he is a Senator from Delaware, a few hours train ride from D.C. ... so he commuted to D.C., and still does, an an all-but daily basis.

Try again.

scaeagles · 09-03-2008, 11:04 AM

I realize that, ISM. Would it not follow, though, that her family would move to DC with her, making her much closer to her children than Biden was to his? And also there is another parent involved?

I don't see how that is stupid at all.

sleepyjeff · 09-03-2008, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Most notably, her support of abstinence-only education. It's a policy that's proven to be ineffectual and is leading to an increase in the type of behavior it's purported to prevent. Her daughter's case is not proof of that trend, but it is indicative.

But how is that 'hypocrisy"?

Morrigoon · 09-03-2008, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleepyjeff

If one hopes they remain empty promises then why suggest people should vote for the person based on those promises?

His tax policy is not why I prefer him over the other candidate. Just like someone could prefer McCain even if he doesn't support gay marriage. It takes more than one issue to make a candidate. You have to pick and choose which aspects of a candidate's position are most important to you, or which candidate falls more in line with your position than the other.

You could also call it the "two turds in the bowl" approach, although this year's crop are better candidates than we've been offered in the past.

09-03-2008, 10:35 AM	#482
Morrigoon I throw stones at houses Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Location: Location Posts: 9,534	I have to agree with GD - some things I'd rather see remain empty promises __________________ http://bash.org/?top "It is useless for sheep to pass a resolution in favor of vegetarianism while wolves remain of a different opinion." -- William Randolph Inge
	Submit to Quotes

09-03-2008, 11:04 AM	#488
scaeagles I LIKE! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,819	I realize that, ISM. Would it not follow, though, that her family would move to DC with her, making her much closer to her children than Biden was to his? And also there is another parent involved? I don't see how that is stupid at all.
	Submit to Quotes