tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post8946826238877770171..comments2020-04-11T03:30:02.282-05:00Gary R. Welshhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15185079937305083438noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-50116064713081306722008-08-17T23:13:00.000-05:002008-08-17T23:13:00.000-05:00gary, if you are so disposed please check out http://hoosiersformccain.blogspot.com and http://reasonbellpundit.blogspot.com (Porter County Politics site)Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10848952073180198356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-71288282900768879542008-08-17T15:20:00.000-05:002008-08-17T15:20:00.000-05:00Ruth Bader Ginsberg is not the most liberal justice on the court. John Paul Stevens is generally considered the most liberal, and he was appointed by Gerald Ford. While Obama's appointees will certainly be somewhat to the left of McCain's, I doubt we'll see an true liberal appointments during the next four years. I would anticipate a moderate appointment from either side. Ralph Nader for Supreme Court Justice--that's liberal!Eclecticvibehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15848437748997209589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-74233411372146883512008-08-17T09:20:00.000-05:002008-08-17T09:20:00.000-05:00Traditionally, there has been bipartisan support in the Senate for a president's Supreme Court nominees as long as they are qualified for the job. Souter and Ginsburg were both qualified candidates. McCain voting against Clinton's nomination of Ginsburg would not have yielded a more conservative nominee from Clinton. In the spirit of bipartisanship, McCain supported her nomination. You have it wrong on McCain's position on torture techniques in interrogations. He cited that last night as a point on which he has differed from the Bush administration.Gary R. Welshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15185079937305083438noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-83161323680943962122008-08-17T09:07:00.000-05:002008-08-17T09:07:00.000-05:00Ok. Even though Gary appears slightly disinterested in objective analysis, I'm going to ask a few questions related to last night's debate.<BR/><BR/>1. If McCain said that he wouldn't have nominated Souter and Ginsburg to the Supreme Court, why did he vote to confirm them to begin with?<BR/><BR/>2. I've noticed that he's pointedly invoked Christianity as part of his Georgia spiels. His rather evasive answer about Sudan/Darfur makes me wonder if a country's religious nature is what makes it worthy of US support.<BR/><BR/>3. For someone who likes to tell torture stories about the Viet Cong, he's remarkably silent about US torture policies in Guantanamo. Why is that?<BR/><BR/>4. This is the comment that raised my eyebrow the most. McCain said that the moral failure of the US was its failure to put aside self-interest for a "greater service". What EXACTLY was he getting at there? Was he implying that torturing Guantanamo prisoners in the name of 9/11 was morally correct? Did he mean that lying about Iraq's involvement in 9/11 (see Ron Suskind's book) was actually a moral thing to do? Does this mean that the GOP's unfortunate tendency to label political opponents as being traitors to the US is a "Christian" thing to do.<BR/><BR/>I think both candidates did well. However, I think some of McCain's more blatant pandering to the religious right has the possibility to erode his support in the center.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-61744717113543475472008-08-17T08:58:00.000-05:002008-08-17T08:58:00.000-05:00Are you actually trying to claim that Obama is gay?<BR/><BR/>Wow, we've really suck to a low point on this blog.<BR/><BR/>Gary, good question on the gay marriage issue. What do you think of the two responses?<BR/><BR/>And yeah, in that setting, I think Obama did his best. I really don't want a President who strikes off an answer before reflecting about it. <BR/><BR/>And did McCain ever identify who would be in his cabinet?<BR/><BR/>BTW, I can't wait until McCain chooses Ridge or Lieberman for VP.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-19368543656875142392008-08-17T08:24:00.000-05:002008-08-17T08:24:00.000-05:00Dan, I believe the candidates were told in advance the four general areas of questioning. On that point, I think Warren may have spoken on that issue of the number of children in orphanages around the world in the past. I think that's what Obama meant when he said he cheated a little. I'm sure someone on his campaign researched topics which Warren would likely want to discuss.Gary R. Welshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15185079937305083438noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-35712979991371059912008-08-17T07:12:00.000-05:002008-08-17T07:12:00.000-05:00And the pro Obama supporters can think of nothing good to say about his performance? Vox, There's nothing like a complete mischaracterization of his divorce from his first wife, but if that's what you have to do ... at least he just doesn't pretend to be heterosexual.Gary R. Welshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15185079937305083438noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-55109460104417032842008-08-17T07:10:00.000-05:002008-08-17T07:10:00.000-05:00Excuse me for asking this, but I believe the American public MIGHT<BR/>have been duped by Pastor Rick, who looks silly in that goatee of his,<BR/>and he could lose some weight too......but what I am talking about is<BR/>this: you didn't mention it and nobody else, but I have a very strong<BR/>suspicion that the questions that Pastor Rick asked the two candidates<BR/>were GIVEN to both Obama and McCain in advance of the<BR/>"show"........why do I suspect this? because at one point Obama said<BR/>"I cheated here and did some research before hand.....I actually<BR/>looked at this idea ahead of time...."<BR/><BR/>he said this in response at first to one of Rick's question around the<BR/>45 minute time....DANIELBLOOMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05130493903696077379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-5552119945427796652008-08-17T05:43:00.000-05:002008-08-17T05:43:00.000-05:00Does AI have any opinions about the answers on "gay marriage" or are LGBT topics too icky for this Republican blog nowadays?Wilson46201https://www.blogger.com/profile/14214029150233485312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-78189345703755514692008-08-17T01:13:00.000-05:002008-08-17T01:13:00.000-05:00I think most people would say they both did well, Gary. I would have been a little more interested in hearing from McCain about what led him to cheat on his wheelchair-bound wife and dump her for a beer heiress 20 years his junior, but I guess that wasn't the forum.<BR/><BR/>And seriously, let's look at the things where McCain "opposed" his party. In his pre-2000 congressional career he was pro-tax cuts. When George Bush put forward his tax cuts, McCain voted against him. When McCain decided to run for president again he decided he should have voted for the tax cuts.<BR/><BR/>McCain supported George Bush on allowing amnesty for illegal aliens before flopping when he decided to run for president. Now he wants the border fence and says he was wrong to support amnesty.<BR/><BR/>McCain was against offshore drilling, and has made comments as recently as this spring about how we can't drill ourselves out of the current situation. But suddenly, offshore drilling is the entire answer to fixing our energy situation? If that's the case, why doesn't he flip-flop on his opposition to drilling in ANWR?<BR/><BR/>I really don't comprehend how Republicans can support John McCain. The man has become a shadow of his former self. He is a serial panderer and a liar to boot. He makes John Kerry look competent.Vox Populihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09174941325997674801noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-85447076954159141562008-08-17T01:08:00.000-05:002008-08-17T01:08:00.000-05:00I guess the person who posted that article thinks s/he is "objective" in their reporting, huh?!??!/IslandGyalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12167668946499262184noreply@blogger.com