Posted on 08/16/2008 6:56:25 PM PDT by kristinn
Answering a question at the Saddleback Forum hosted by Rick Warren, presumptive Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain gave the names of four sitting Supreme Court justices that he would not have nominated were he president: Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer; David Souter and John Paul Stevens.
Those for justices, along with McCain's fellow Arizonan, the now-retired Sandra Day O'Connor, made up the majority that decided in 2003 in favor of the constitutionality of the sweeping abridgement of free speech known as McCain-Feingold, under the guise of limiting the perceived corruption of politics and politicians.
The bill was signed into law by President Bush in 2002 with a signing statement that elements of the bill were unconstitutional. The four Supreme Court justices McCain says he would not have nominated thought otherwise and approved his bill.
McCain has been trying to sway wary conservatives by speaking highly about Supreme Court Justice Alito and Chief Justice Roberts, as he did tonight.
A few highlights of McCain-Feingold that would not be law were it not for the four justices McCain says he would not nominate:
Prohibits national parties or candidates from accepting or soliciting "soft money," including donations from corporations and unions.
•Restricts election-time political ads by special-interest groups.
Bans political ads mentioning federal candidates in their districts a month before a primary election and two months before Election Day.
Source: AP via CNN
Hopefully this is a sign of McCain growing and learning the errors of his ways on the campaign trail.
Well, people here on FR have given Fred Thompson a pass on it and they still love Zell Miller, people here voted for W in 2004, who signed it into law even though he said he thought it was unconstitutional.
Maybe McCain regrets it.
McCain has never supported liberal judges. He was one of few Senators that came out and defended Judge Bork when Reagan nominated him. McCain is learning and he is not running as a Senator, he is running as an American Conservative. Obama is running as a Senator and Senators don’t win the Presidency.
Personally, I’m not convinced. He (and most politicians) will say anything during an election year that they believe will have the best chance of winning votes.
It’s what a politician says during a non-election year that holds more weight, and McCain’s already revealed his opinion of Alito, who according to McCain, “wears his conservatism on his sleeve”
That is not the remark of someone who has any intention of nominating conservative justices.
You need to check out this thread....all the way thru.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2063081/posts?q=1&;page=474#474
both parties are accepting soft money now.
I think most people like the idea of Campaign Finance reform the problem is the final form it arrived erred and most can say it failed. McCain, Thompson, and Bush all made a mistake on this and many others did also. I’d like to see McCain say it was a mistake. A great campaign finance bill would’ve been one that restricted campaign contributions to only those given by individuals and banned bundling and entity (union/corporate) contributions. If a CEO wants to give his own money to a candidate then the power to him or her. If a union member wants to volunteer money individually then that is great but when people at the top co-opt the will of those under them and use resources that should be used to build a competitive edge through better products and more productivity or serving their members in direct negotiations with the companies they work for instead use these resources in a cut-n-run effort around the average citizen garnering unfair favors and contracts, perks, protections, and advantages that no individual citizen has available to them then that is wrong. This is a nation of individuals and the sovereignity of the individual should be paramount in elections and public life. Instead we ended up with a campaign finance law that even further limited the will of the individual and ended up creating the notorious 527 entity.
Let people give what they will as long as we know they are giving it.
So, if McCain can learn the error of his ways after the damage is done, so can I.
McCain confirmed both Alito and Roberts. He fought for judge Bork. You not being convinced is a lacking on your part not McCain’s. Who do you think Obama is going to nominate? You want another Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Souter, Stevens, or Breyer?
Just replacing one of them we a bonified constitutionalist would change the court for years. I’m really getting tired of the whiny conservative who doesn’t bother looking at the big picture at all. Always playing I gotcha and ending up getting liberals elected because of their non-support. Why don’t you just vote for liberals since you won’t even support conservatives who are 95% in line with what you believe and you guys wonder why we end up with Rhinos.
It makes me sick. Go vote for Obama if you hate McCain so much.
If McCain does regret it, I haven’t heard about it.
You don't think Bruce Babbitt is a liberal?
McCain enthusiastically supported Babbitt, although Clinton deferred to the opposition and nominated Breyer, instead.
I just find it funny that McCain denounced the very justices he needed to approve his crowning legislative achievement.
What you say is so right. It would be nice to have the perfect candidate who will get our country back on track. None of the candidates, Thompson, Huckabee, Paul, etc have proven to be that man. I had thoughts of voting my conscience and doing a write-in for the first time in my life, but I’ve been around long enough to know that is, in the end, a vote for Obama. At this point, we have to work with what we’ve got and make sure that Obama is not elected President. McCain is not everything every Republican would like in a candidate, but he’s 100% better than the alternative.
It's the least he can do.
Maybe McCain regrets it."
I haven't given ANY of them a pass on it and don't intend to give McCain, Soros' water carrier, one either.
TODAY: Rev. Rick Warren puts Obama, McCain on the same stage
(LIVE thread)
The Seattle Times | 8/16/08 | Duke Helfand
Posted on Saturday, August 16, 2008 02:59:35 PM by XR7
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2062984/posts
Obama, McCain, and Rick Warren
- softball questions and easy passes?
PLB | 8/16/2008 | Ruben Obregon
Posted on Saturday, August 16, 2008 07:07:49 PM by UFC Pride K1
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2063064/posts
Obama, McCain, and Rick Warren
Posted on Saturday, August 16, 2008 07:57:08 PM by UFC Pride K1
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2063081/posts
Rick Warren Videos
YouTube | August 16, 2008 | alittleleaven’
Posted on Saturday, August 16, 2008 08:08:41 PM by PJ-Comix
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2063086/posts
Prior to CFR what was his "crowning legislative achievement" and who on the Supreme Court shot it down?
No, it is McCain’s problem. I have not forgotten the Gang of 14, or his numerable pushes for amnesty and his other betrayals of genuine conservatism.
I neither support Obama or McCain. Both are guides down the same road to destruction, and I will not march in step simply because others demand it.
If you choose to trot after the GOP, feel free, but the warning of John Adams rests too heavily on my conscience:
“In politics the middle way is none at all.”
John Adams
And attributed to John Adams in a letter to Abagail from Philadelphia on April 26, 1977:
“Posterity! You will never know, how much it cost the present Generation, to preserve your freedom! I hope you will make a good Use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in Heaven, that I ever took half the Pains to preserve it.”
Voting for either McCain or Obama is not a good use of my freedoms. Can you, with a good conscience, claim we will be freer under the presidency of either?
numberable=numerous
Someone tell the RNC, that JMcC - is NOT for Me!
|
that JMcC - is NOT for Me!
to be the GOP Nominee! In case the GOP quickly reaches the point, where they need ...
One, Two, Three, Four. How hard is that? 1. Conservatives, we've got to talk.
|
FYI - Ping / Reply: Posts # 21 and # 22
Your reasoned thoughts / response, please.
So if McCain is such a terrible Republican, how did he end up our candidate?? What about Thompson ~ a little too laid back during the primary, Huckabee ~ a little too religious, Paul ~ a little too isolationist? Were their list of negatives as extensive as McCain’s seems to be? It seems to me there are too many uninformed potential voters and too many uninterested citizens to have a universally worthwhile and supportable GOP candidate.
As I have renounced my 30 yr. membership in the Republican party, and no longer believe that summarily voting for the [R] at any level secures a Conservative government, and as I would sooner submit to having my eyes gouged out by a Case 580 backhoe than caste my vote for the traitorous bastard, John McCain, regardless of any circumstance, known or unknown, my thoughts wrt the RNC/GOP are rather without consequence.
I will be voting for the Reagan Conservative, Alan Keyes for POTUS, and will vote for known Conservatives of any party down ballot. For those offices where a Conservative option is not presented, or is not known, I will leave that office blank.
Thank you for the ping, all the same.
mccain was never my choice.
but now we have a job ahead of us,
to defeat a leftist that will cause significant damage to our country.
it’s too much to give a street activist the presidency, the house and senate.
even worse, there are several u.s. supreme court appointees on the horizon.
in sum, not voting for mccain threatens bringing back to life fdr and lbj.
The Correct Info is Here, per the original #10:
McCain confirmed both Alito and Roberts.
He fought FOR Judge Bork.
John McCain, while courageous, is only very slightly conservative:
Fiscally (spending) he is OK, but not great, tax wise he is wishy washy as he does not ALWAYS support tax cuts which ALWAYS work; he was involved in the Keating five and the unconstitutional CFR, which show great irresponsibility.
National security wise, he is only partly effective as as any terrorist or invader need only add iez to his name to get through the great warrior McCain's southern front.
As for judicial appointments, as a leader of the gang of fourteen, he will appoint "conservative" justices from a list prepared by Teddy (swimmer) Kennedy, being as he has not released a list of specific individuals by name.
McCain is pro life, but hasn't the balls to use executive orders and pardons to get anything done, so the question is moot, as the executive has little power otherwise here.
In all other areas McCain is a Rockefeller Republican liberal, and a pain in the ..., so I see no reason to vote for him.
Finally, if McCain is elected, every disaster in this century will obviously be the fault of "conservative" Republicans courtesy of the Lame Stream Media and DemoRat party pundits.
If "Osama"* Obama is elected, every disaster will have to be blamed on the ghosts of Republicans in the government, a little harder to do.
*Sen. Edward Kennedy
Ubewlievable that Obama would not have nominated Clarence Thomas for the Surpreme Court — citing Thomas’ inexperience.
Hope you will be happy voting for Obama and sending us into socialism if he wins.
I don’t think that will happen, however, I am predicting a McCain landslide.
Bingo.
The sure thing is that nObama will nominate extreme left-wing zealots to the courts at every level. McCain is not a sure thing. While I believe he means it when he says he will appoint conservative judges, he's betrayed us in the past without a second thought.
But, the only way we have a chance of conservative appointments is voting for Juan and then forcing him to stick to his promise. I'll take my odds with McCain over nObama. Who wouldn't?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.