NCDP v. McCain

Submitted by TarGator on Sat, 03/10/2007 - 9:39am

The North Carolina Democratic Party has this post calling out John McCain for his trip to Charlotte to raise the money that he claims to be against:

As the Washington Post recently reported, McCain, the presidential candidate is hypocritically employing the very same fundraising tactics he spent years criticizing and trying to change.

While I do think that John McCain is a power-hungry gumby-like politician who twists his views depending on whatever suits him, I do not think that this is a fair criticism and also have doubts about whether the state party should be getting into this.

First, the criticism is unfair because John McCain should not have to run for president with a hand tied behind his back just because he is closer to the sane, rational position of limitting campaign contributions than other Republicans. Secondly, should the state party make it a habit to comment on national Republican primary candidates? I know that the reason given will be is that John McCain will be in the state, but that is pretty weak. I can agree with this if the person coming is the president or a nominee, but not for a candidate that is clearly cratering.

Share on Facebook

I don't think it's terrible to point out the hypocrisy

Submitted by Betsy Muse on Sat, 03/10/2007 - 10:38am.

I wouldn't criticize him for raising money, but I think pointing out the hypocrisy is a valid point to make.

Ahem.....

While I do think that John McCain is a power-hungry gumby;like politician who twists his views depending on whatever suits him,....

Ouch....he he he

Robin Hayes lied. Nobody died, but thousands of folks lost their jobs.



***************************
Vote Democratic, the ass you save may be your own.

The man

Submitted by Dharma Pup on Sat, 03/10/2007 - 12:55pm.

is an embarrassment to himself.
Dharma Pup

Really This Guy?

Submitted by TarGator on Sat, 03/10/2007 - 12:55pm.

Follow me into the realm of "what if"

Submitted by momoaizo on Sat, 03/10/2007 - 11:09am.

What if McCain had gotten the GOP nomination in 2000 instead of the failure that's there now. Would he have been the type of leader that so many thought he could have been? I remember thinking then that I could vote for him, he was making a lot of centerist noises back then. Or do you think that he would have followed the same path that the failure-in-chief has?

No matter that patriotism is too often the refuge of scoundrels. Dissent, rebellion, and all-around hell-raising remain the true duty of patriots.

Progressive Discussions

NObody could have been as miserable as the Child King

Submitted by James on Sat, 03/10/2007 - 11:13am.

Not even McCain . . . though he might have been close.

Do good. Be nice. Have fun.

Bad as he might've been

Submitted by Dharma Pup on Sat, 03/10/2007 - 12:55pm.

I doubt he would've surrounded himself with the neocon contingent that Bush has, nor would he have picked the Dick as his VP. Bush is a political idiot; the real danger has been his dysfunctional entourage.
Dharma Pup

This Guy?

Submitted by TarGator on Sat, 03/10/2007 - 1:00pm.

McCain, however, has consistently supported the Bush Administration's failed strategy in Iraq. As his senior political adviser made clear less than a year ago, Senator McCain's position is "stay-the-course, no matter what." [Bloomberg News, 4/20/06] And when Rumsfeld resigned, McCain offered praise, saying "he deserves Americans' respect and gratitude for his many years of public service." [AP, 11/9/06] In fact, McCain spoke of Rumsfeld's "magnificent" leadership in 2003, later dubbed himself a "great admirer" of the Secretary of Defense, and refused to call for Rumsfeld's resignation saying just last year that the President "has the right...to appoint his team" and that the President has "confidence" in Rumsfeld. [Hannity and Colmes, 4/10/2003; "Buchanan & Press," MSNBC, 11/6/2003; Ventura County Star, 12/16/2004; East Valley Tribune (AZ), 4/15/2006]

Source/

Triangulation

Submitted by Robert P. on Sat, 03/10/2007 - 3:45pm.

McCain has been planning for this run since 2001, so of course he has been sucking up to the people that got Bush elected.

In my mind, that is what will cost him the election. He should have remained a moderate, independent in the Senate. It would have hurt him in the short-run, but now they would be flocking towards him.

That's what you get for selling-out.

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

For background on why I think McCain will say anything

Submitted by TarGator on Sat, 03/10/2007 - 12:45pm.

The Real John McCain.

You mean the guy

Submitted by Blue South on Sat, 03/10/2007 - 1:11pm.

who said soft money should be banned and then went and raised hundreds of thousands in soft money for other people? You can win a senate seat in arizona without raising money for someone in Virginia or wheverever else.

Draft Brad Miller -- NC Sen ActBlue :::Petition

"Keep the Faith"

I lost all respect for McCain in 2000

Submitted by loftT on Sat, 03/10/2007 - 2:54pm.

After the smear campaign waged against Mc Cain by Dubya's brain, Rove, in the 2000 SC primary, how could anyone calling himself a man grovel and slobber over Bush the way he did. It still turns my stomach.

I don't have a problem with Democrats speaking out at this stage. After all we'd be stuck with him too if he ever got into the White House.

Progressives are the true conservatives.