PDA

View Full Version : A neocon's response to "McCain = Obama"




Matt Collins
10-06-2009, 04:47 PM
So I sent this list of similarities between McCain and Obama (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=169668) to someone that I know is a neocon. This individual's identity will be kept anonymous.


Here is their response to the list (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=169668):




I cannot argue with the facts you've presented below, Matt, but I offer the following as important areas/facts to consider about John McCain:



We would have lost the war in Iraq without McCain's leadership. Hindsight makes it easier to say we shouldn't be there in the first place, but my thinking is that, to quote Colin Powell, "we broke it so we bought it." Congress authorized this war. It is our war. We should not leave a country to be ravaged like VietNam was when we quit there.




McCain is strong in opposing abortion on demand policies. He would not endorse paying tax dollars for them here or, incredibly, like we are now doing overseas.




McCain supports a balanced budget amendment. He is strong in opposing ear marks and, for the most part, tax increases.




McCain has spoken out forcefully against the Obama healthcare proposals and is leading the fight to defeat them.


We don't live in a world where we can pick a combo of Ayn Rand, George Washington and Ron Paul to face our political opposition. We choose the best we have available. I maintain that for that point in time, McCain was a stronger choice than his Republican primary opponents and is a vastly superior choice to Barak Obama.

Thanks, though, for the thought-provoking list.

ForLiberty-RonPaul
10-06-2009, 04:59 PM
1: Congress did not authorize the Iraq War. We left Vietnam and we now trade with them. They are our ally. By staying in Iraq we are radicalizing a whole new generation of Muslims. An alcoholic does not become sober by drinking more alcohol. The main reason given to us by Osama Bin Laden for the 9/11 terrorist attacks is the fact that we are over there. We've been bombing the Middle East for over a decade.

Matt Collins
10-06-2009, 05:12 PM
1: Congress did not authorize the Iraq War. We left Vietnam and we now trade with them. They are our ally. By staying in Iraq we are radicalizing a whole new generation of Muslims. An alcoholic does not become sober by drinking more alcohol. The main reason given to us by Osama Bin Laden for the 9/11 terrorist attacks is the fact that we are over there. We've been bombing the Middle East for over a decade.
I agree, there was no war because there was no Declaration of War as the Constitution requires. It was an invasion upon a sovereign state. Is it any wonder why Iran wants a nuke? They too are scared of being invaded.

Bman
10-06-2009, 05:15 PM
They too are scared of being invaded.

Which will happen sometime soon.

cswake
10-06-2009, 05:26 PM
I'll give the anonymous person credit for reading and considering your argument as well as recognizing that he was voting for the lesser of two evils.

emazur
10-06-2009, 05:41 PM
We would have lost the war in Iraq without McCain's leadership.
That doesn't make any sense - unless something changed since this article, Bush signed for a withdrawal in 2011
"In reversal, Bush to accept Iraq withdrawal timetable"
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gvY_Ug0eO-Dbwsrq2xpeNbjGqPZQ


* McCain supports a balanced budget amendment. He is strong in opposing ear marks and, for the most part, tax increases.

He voted for the bailout and called for a stimulus (just not the same one Obama wanted - I've got a clip if anyone wants it). Those have to be paid for either by increasing taxes, or cutting services w/o cutting taxes (a de facto tax increase IMO).

angelatc
10-06-2009, 05:47 PM
I'm not even convinced we "won" the war in Iraq. "We broke it, we bought it" is a better Pottery Barn policy than American Foreign policy.

Todd
10-06-2009, 06:25 PM
Doesn't sound like a total neocon...just someone who's apathetic and has settled for the lesser of two evils baloney

bunklocoempire
10-06-2009, 07:03 PM
We don't live in a world where we can pick a combo of Ayn Rand, George Washington and Ron Paul to face our political opposition. We choose the best we have available. I maintain that for that point in time, McCain was a stronger choice than his Republican primary opponents and is a vastly superior choice to Barak Obama.



Ameri-can't.

Bunkloco

Matt Collins
10-07-2009, 09:35 AM
Which will happen sometime soon.That would be the end of Obama and the Dems for a while if it does.

pcosmar
10-07-2009, 09:43 AM
I'll give the anonymous person credit for reading and considering your argument as well as recognizing that he was voting for the lesser of two evils.

Correction,

as well as recognizing that he was voting for the lesser of two evils
What he thought was the Lesser.
assumes facts not in evidence.
McCain could have been much more evil.

JeNNiF00F00
10-07-2009, 10:15 AM
I'm not even convinced we "won" the war in Iraq. "We broke it, we bought it" is a better Pottery Barn policy than American Foreign policy.

"WIN" What? :) Thats always what I ask. What was/is the objective? There are still "terrorists".

Elwar
10-07-2009, 10:48 AM
We don't live in a world where we can pick a combo of Ayn Rand, George Washington and Ron Paul to face our political opposition.

Umm..yes we do...and his name is Ron Paul...

TinCanToNA
10-07-2009, 01:36 PM
That would be the end of Obama and the Dems for a while if it does.

Nah, war is cool when Democrats do it.

Matt Collins
10-07-2009, 09:22 PM
Drafting my response now. Any last minute ideas?