John McCain: Flip-flop or Sell-out? [Archive] - Debate Policy

Joe Steel

08-03-2008, 08:34 AM

Why did McCain flip-flop on offshore drilling?

Jun 17th, 2008

Yesterday, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) offered “a bit of a capitulation to the oil companies” by announcing that he would end the federal ban on offshore oil drilling. Not only is McCain’s move a break with environmental activist, but it is also “a reversal of the position he took in his 2000 presidential campaign.” The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank writes:

During his last run for the presidency, in 1999, McCain supported the drilling moratorium, and he scolded the “special interests in Washington” that sought offshore drilling leases. Yesterday, he announced that those very same “moratoria should be lifted” and proposed incentives for the states “in the form of tangible financial rewards, if the states decide to lift those moratoriums.”

In 2000, McCain promised to “never lose sight” of fundamental principles on the issue.

McCain flip-flops on offshore drilling moratorium (http://thinkprogress.org/2008/06/17/mccain-flip-flops-on-offshore-drilling-moratorium/)

Could it be for the money?

Jul 31st, 2008

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) has made his complete reversal on offshore drilling a centerpiece of his presidential campaign, insisting that expanding offshore drilling into protected areas would lead to more oil supply on the market “within a matter of months” — regardless of the Energy Information Agency’s projection that oil would not reach the market for nearly a decade and “would not have a significant impact” on oil prices.

Though more drilling won’t help Americans save money at the gas pump, it has certainly helped McCain win massive campaign donations from Big Oil. A new report by Campaign Money Watch shows that contributions to McCain from Big Oil skyrocketed directly following his June speech in Houston, when he pledged his support of offshore drilling before an audience oil executives. The report notes:

In Texas alone, June oil and gas-connected donations to McCain’s Victory ’08 Fund, his hybrid fundraising venture with the RNC and state committees, reached $1,214,100.

Of that total, $881,450, or 73 percent, came after June 15. McCain announced his position in favor of offshore drilling on June 16.

Report: McCain Received $881,450 From Big Oil Since He Announced Support For Offshore Drilling (http://thinkprogress.org/2008/07/31/mccain-oil-donations/)

McCain has no honor or integrity or maybe he's just so confused he can't remember he was against offshore drilling before he was for it.

Dilloduck

08-03-2008, 08:39 AM

avatar4321

08-03-2008, 09:31 AM

He didn't flip flop on off shore drilling. He was opposed to it when we didn't need it. Gas prices demonstrate we need it and now he is for it.

It's not unreasonable to change positions to fix problems that occur. Is it a flip flop when a politician concludes there is no need to hire more police when the crime rate is very low but then there is a need to hire more police when there is a high crime rate?

Is it a flip flop to say you don't want to open a mine when we are getting plenty of resources from another mine, then saying you want to open a mine when that mine dries up?

It's not flip flopping when you change positions to address different problems facing your stewardship. If flip flopping when you change your positions back and forth depending on whom you are talking to solely for political points.

hjmick

08-03-2008, 10:23 AM

Why did McCain flip-flop on offshore drilling?

Could it be for the money?

McCain has no honor or integrity or maybe he's just so confused he can't remember he was against offshore drilling before he was for it.

Report: Obama Receives more than $213,000 From Big Oil then Announces Support For Offshore Drilling (http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/obamas_oil_spill.html)

Obama has no honor or integrity or maybe he's just so confused he can't remember he was against offshore drilling before he was for it.

Barack Obama: If you don't like his positions, wait five minutes. Or write a check.

Joe Steel

08-03-2008, 10:23 AM

Joe Steel

08-03-2008, 10:26 AM

Report: Obama Receives more than $213,000 From Big Oil then Announces Support For Offshore Drilling (http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/obamas_oil_spill.html)

Obama has no honor or integrity or maybe he's just so confused he can't remember he was against offshore drilling before he was for it.

Barack Obama: If you don't like his positions, wait five minutes. Or write a check.

Sorry, no.

Obama got the money before he switched. McCain got the money after he switched.

Looks like you're confused.

Dilloduck

08-03-2008, 10:29 AM

So you're saying there's no such thing as a "flip-flop" because all of them result from a rational process?

Why the flip flop? Political gain or was there an actual change in circumstances. If there was a change in circumstances, what were they?

Dilloduck

08-03-2008, 10:31 AM

Sorry, no.

Obama got the money before he switched. McCain got the money after he switched.

Looks like you're confused.

Exactly, Which is why it appears that Obama made sure he got paid before he switched his stance.

PostmodernProphet

08-03-2008, 10:38 AM

Why did McCain flip-flop on offshore drilling?
Could it be for the money?

I certainly think so.....gas at $4 plus a gallon?.....It was for the money.....ours.....

hjmick

08-03-2008, 11:18 AM

Sorry, no.

Obama got the money before he switched. McCain got the money after he switched.

Looks like you're confused.

I'm not remotely confused. It would appear as though you are the one who is confused. Perhaps it is due to a lack of reading comprehension?

You see, in the sentence that starts my post, I state that he recieved the money and THEN changed his position.

Report: Obama Receives more than $213,000 From Big Oil then Announces Support For Offshore Drilling

I then follow that with a near duplicate of your statement about McCain. I do this because if your conclusions about this issue are good for McCain, they are certainly good for and apply to Obama.

Obama has no honor or integrity or maybe he's just so confused he can't remember he was against offshore drilling before he was for it.

I then follow that with a statement making fun of Obama's tendency to talk out of both sides of his mouth. Hell, he's been known to say two different things about the same topic within twenty four hours.

He told America's Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) that he supports a two-state solution, with Jerusalem as the sole, undivided capital of Israel. The Palestinians immediately cried, "Foul!" and said there would be no discussions with that stipulation! Hamas called him no different from Bush. The next day, Obama said that, well, "obviously" the issue of Jerusalem should be decided by the Israelis and Palestinians. The same position of the Bush administration.

When Sen. Clinton voted to declare the Revolutionary Guard a terror organization, Obama criticized her, and deemed the vote irresponsibly militant. Yet he told AIPAC that Iran's Revolutionary Guard is, indeed, a terror organization. So why did he vote otherwise, and attack Clinton? Well, said Obama at the time, it was an unnecessarily belligerent move. But apparently, now they are terrorists because, well, it isn't as belligerent to say so today as it was to say so yesterday.

These are just a couple of examples, there are more. Make no mistake, Barack Obama is just a typical politician. Nothing more.

Barack Obama: If you don't like his positions, wait five minutes. Or write a check.

Yurt

08-03-2008, 11:22 AM

Sorry, no.

Obama got the money before he switched. McCain got the money after he switched.

Looks like you're confused.

ummmm, yeah....usually get the money to make a switch...you have the money...now you switch

but if you switch and then get money, it can't be said you switched for the money (maybe, but no proof) because you already switched before money.

Joe Steel

08-03-2008, 01:47 PM

Why the flip flop? Political gain or was there an actual change in circumstances. If there was a change in circumstances, what were they?

McCain is desperate for money so he sold his "principles."

Kathianne

08-03-2008, 01:49 PM

McCain is desperate for money so he sold his "principles."

So JS, what's the reason that Obama has flipped? If drilling was so wrong, how can he now 'compromise' to get things done? It's either wrong or it isn't.

retiredman

08-03-2008, 02:46 PM

So JS, what's the reason that Obama has flipped? If drilling was so wrong, how can he now 'compromise' to get things done? It's either wrong or it isn't.

what part of this do you willfully refuse to understand?

"What I don't want is for the best to be the enemy of the good here, and if we can come up with a genuine, bipartisan compromise in which I have to accept some things I don't like, or the Democrats have to accept some things that they don't like, in exchange for moving us in the direction of energy independence, than that's something I'm open to,"

Joe Steel

08-03-2008, 02:49 PM

I'm not remotely confused. It would appear as though you are the one who is confused. Perhaps it is due to a lack of reading comprehension?

You see, in the sentence that starts my post, I state that he recieved the money and THEN changed his position.

I then follow that with a near duplicate of your statement about McCain. I do this because if your conclusions about this issue are good for McCain, they are certainly good for and apply to Obama.

You should read linked articles before posting. You'd be less-likely to embarrass yourself.

Obama's contributions are the normal contributions received by politicians and, in this case, they were received well in advance of the change of position. There's no reason to believe the two are connected.

McCain's contributions skyrocketed immediately after pledging his loyalty to Big Oil in a speech to oil company executives.

If you need help with the articles, try to find someone to explain them to you.

Kathianne

08-03-2008, 02:49 PM

what part of this do you willfully refuse to understand?

"What I don't want is for the best to be the enemy of the good here, and if we can come up with a genuine, bipartisan compromise in which I have to accept some things I don't like, or the Democrats have to accept some things that they don't like, in exchange for moving us in the direction of energy independence, than that's something I'm open to,"

I understand it fine. He's flipped because of polling. You and he want to cast the flip in as good as light as possible, which is certainly understandable.

As I said, one cannot hold that drilling is 'bad', but will use it to compromise. Either the statements against drilling were disingenuous or he really doesn't care about the consequences. That's a problem.

retiredman

08-03-2008, 02:58 PM

I understand it fine. He's flipped because of polling. You and he want to cast the flip in as good as light as possible, which is certainly understandable.

As I said, one cannot hold that drilling is 'bad', but will use it to compromise. Either the statements against drilling were disingenuous or he really doesn't care about the consequences. That's a problem.

you have nothing to base that on except your irrational dislike of him.

no sense continuing this discussion. His statement is quite clear. you chose not to understand it. That's too bad.

Kathianne

08-03-2008, 03:01 PM

you have nothing to base that on except your irrational dislike of him.

no sense continuing this discussion. His statement is quite clear. you chose not to understand it. That's too bad.

Denigrate the messenger, that doesn't make you correct. No doubt, we'll never agree with this.

My 'dislike' for him is not irrational, but based upon my thinking of what's best for my country. He's not it.

stephanie

08-03-2008, 03:05 PM

hjmick

08-03-2008, 03:27 PM

You should read linked articles before posting. You'd be less-likely to embarrass yourself.

Obama's contributions are the normal contributions received by politicians and, in this case, they were received well in advance of the change of position. There's no reason to believe the two are connected.

McCain's contributions skyrocketed immediately after pledging his loyalty to Big Oil in a speech to oil company executives.

If you need help with the articles, try to find someone to explain them to you.[/QUOTE]

I read it completely and fully comprehended it to boot. As a result, I am not the least bit embarrassed. You, however, should consider opening your eyes to reality and recognize that Obama is just another politician, which is what this exercise has been all about. He will say and do whatever is politically expedient in order to get elected.

The fact is, neither candidate has "taken" money from Big Oil, because there is a law on the books, and has been for more than a hundred years, that prohibits any corporation from giving money directly to any federal candidate.

If McCain has received money from Big Oil, so has Obama.

Thank you for playing.

retiredman

08-03-2008, 05:04 PM

:lol:wow..how friggen big of him to consider us American citizens..

and if he didn't you'd whine.... what a surprise!:lame2:

Kathianne

08-03-2008, 05:08 PM

and if he didn't you'd whine.... what a surprise!:lame2:

Oh yeah, that would be unjustified? Hello!!!

retiredman

08-03-2008, 05:11 PM

Oh yeah, that would be unjustified? Hello!!!

he acts in the people's best interest, she whines.

THAT's justifiied?????? HELLO????

Kathianne

08-03-2008, 05:13 PM

he acts in the people's best interest, she whines.

THAT's justifiied?????? HELLO????

Gonna sound like PB, others vehemently disagree with that take. Can you dig it?

retiredman

08-03-2008, 05:15 PM

Gonna sound like PB, others vehemently disagree with that take. Can you dig it?

what is YOUR take on post#19?

so I can dig it....

Kathianne

08-03-2008, 05:17 PM

what is YOUR take on post#19?

so I can dig it....

I think she's alluding to the fact that Obama agreed that others have a different point of view.

That however has zip to do with our discussion.

retiredman

08-03-2008, 05:19 PM

I think she's alluding to the fact that Obama agreed that others have a different point of view.

That however has zip to do with our discussion.

she made a sarcastic remark that he had considered American citizens...

I responded that she would be equally sarcastic if he did not.

you, true to form, jumped in and attacked MY sarcastic comment but completely accepted hers.

why? and you say party has nothing to do with it????? :laugh2:

Kathianne

08-03-2008, 05:23 PM

she made a sarcastic remark that he had considered American citizens...

I responded that she would be equally sarcastic if he did not.

you, true to form, jumped in and attacked MY sarcastic comment but completely accepted hers.

why? and you say party has nothing to do with it????? :laugh2:

Moving along, party really has nothing to do with me. I'm not swooning over McCain, as you are Obama. I know McCain's tendencies, for good and bad. I've noticed you totally have avoided the Kurtz post, not surprised. Like Obama chickening out of town hall meetings.

avatar4321

08-03-2008, 07:24 PM

So you're saying there's no such thing as a "flip-flop" because all of them result from a rational process?

Nope. not saying that at all.

avatar4321

08-03-2008, 07:25 PM

Sorry, no.

Obama got the money before he switched. McCain got the money after he switched.

Looks like you're confused.

Seems to me that's exactly what he was saying. Obama got money to switch his position. McCain didnt get the money to switch his position.

retiredman

08-03-2008, 08:52 PM

Moving along, party really has nothing to do with me. I'm not swooning over McCain, as you are Obama. I know McCain's tendencies, for good and bad. I've noticed you totally have avoided the Kurtz post, not surprised. Like Obama chickening out of town hall meetings.

please link me to ONE post where I have EVER "swooned" over Obama. As I have said all along, he was not my first, nor second nor even third choice for the democratic nomination. I am impressed by his candidacy but am leery of the downside of running a young first term senator - especially a black one - and expecting America to wholeheartedly embrace him.

Joe Steel

08-04-2008, 07:54 AM

Nope. not saying that at all.

Sounds like it to me. You said McCain's flip-flip was OK because he changed his mind. He looked at his position and decided he'd rather pursue some other outcome. That's a rational process.

The flip-flop could have been for other reasons, though. He might have decided changing his position would bring him more money. That's a rational process, too.

mundame

08-04-2008, 09:02 AM

You said McCain's flip-flip was OK because he changed his mind. He looked at his position and decided he'd rather pursue some other outcome. That's a rational process.

The flip-flop could have been for other reasons, though. He might have decided changing his position would bring him more money. That's a rational process, too.

Both candidates are changing their minds quite a lot --- about drilling, and about the Iraq War.

Neither one of them are worth spit, IMO. They'll both say whatever they think will get them elected, and then do exactly as they want no matter how much it harms the people, just like Bush did.

Bush is their teacher: say anything, get elected, do whatever you want, screw the people.

bullypulpit

08-04-2008, 12:44 PM

theHawk

08-04-2008, 02:35 PM

Why did McCain flip-flop on offshore drilling?

Could it be for the money?

McCain has no honor or integrity or maybe he's just so confused he can't remember he was against offshore drilling before he was for it.

In Texas alone, June oil and gas-connected donations to McCain’s Victory ’08 Fund, his hybrid fundraising venture with the RNC and state committees, reached $1,214,100.

Of that total, $881,450, or 73 percent, came after June 15. McCain announced his position in favor of offshore drilling on June 16.

Considering the article you posted says most of the donations came in after he came out in favor of drilling offshore it pretty much debunks your "sell out" theory.

It couldn't possibly be because McCain's stance on the issue makes perfect sense and Obama's is completely assinine could it?

And oh by the way Obama recieved quite a bit from oil folks as well, and now he is caving on the drilling issue. :laugh2:

retiredman

08-04-2008, 02:39 PM

Considering the article you posted says most of the donations came in after he came out in favor of drilling offshore it pretty much debunks your "sell out" theory.

It couldn't possibly be because McCain's stance on the issue makes perfect sense and Obama's is completely assinine could it?

And oh by the way Obama recieved quite a bit from oil folks as well, and now he is caving on the drilling issue. :laugh2:

you don't think that he could have easily been told: "switch your position and the oil boys will dump a bunch of cash into your campaign"? the timing debunks NOTHING.

theHawk

08-04-2008, 03:08 PM

you don't think that he could have easily been told: "switch your position and the oil boys will dump a bunch of cash into your campaign"? the timing debunks NOTHING.

You do realize that no "corporation" can donate to a campaign right? They are all inviduals from those different companies and they can each only donate up to the maxium allowed for an individual. So you think hundreds of these people made a secret pact with McCain and all dumped cash after he did as they told him? You are a joke.... :lame2:

red states rule

08-04-2008, 03:11 PM

you don't think that he could have easily been told: "switch your position and the oil boys will dump a bunch of cash into your campaign"? the timing debunks NOTHING.

"We could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could save just as much."

48 hours later the messiah is for drilling

I guess he was against drilling before he was for it :laugh2:

retiredman

08-04-2008, 03:36 PM

You do realize that no "corporation" can donate to a campaign right? They are all inviduals from those different companies and they can each only donate up to the maxium allowed for an individual. So you think hundreds of these people made a secret pact with McCain and all dumped cash after he did as they told him? You are a joke.... :lame2:

So you don't think that big corporations direct contributions from their senior officers?:laugh2: You don't think that companies fund PACS?? that really IS a joke. I KNOW that happens and it happens often.

Sitarro

08-04-2008, 03:39 PM

you have nothing to base that on except your irrational dislike of him.

no sense continuing this discussion. His statement is quite clear. you chose not to understand it. That's too bad.

I have to ask, how have you lived as long as you have while being so incredibly naive........ if you actually believe Obama has a sincere bone in his homo-sexually thin, mixed race body, you are one of the most naive adults I have ever heard of. He is less sincere than the famously slick Willie, that is saying something.

red states rule

08-04-2008, 03:44 PM

I have to ask, how have you lived as long as you have while being so incredibly naive........ if you actually believe Obama has a sincere bone in his homo-sexually thin, mixed race body, you are one of the most naive adults I have ever heard of. He is less sincere than the famously slick Willie, that is saying something.

http://www.liberalrapture.com/uploaded_images/waffle-717963.jpg

retiredman

08-04-2008, 07:13 PM

I have to ask, how have you lived as long as you have while being so incredibly naive........ if you actually believe Obama has a sincere bone in his homo-sexually thin, mixed race body, you are one of the most naive adults I have ever heard of. He is less sincere than the famously slick Willie, that is saying something.

We'll just have to agree to disagree. I think your description of him contains enough irrational venom to rule you out as an objective critic.

red states rule

08-04-2008, 07:15 PM

http://www.usatoday.com/life/gallery/animal-actors/flipper.jpg

Yurt

08-04-2008, 10:57 PM

how can you agree to disagree?

red states rule

08-05-2008, 07:04 AM

We'll just have to agree to disagree. I think your description of him contains enough irrational venom to rule you out as an objective critic.

Once again, anyone who dares to disagree with your messiah is either a racist or hate filled

It could NEVER be that people disagree with his liberal tax and spend policy. To you, who would be stupid enough to disagree with liberalism??????

bullypulpit

08-05-2008, 07:13 AM

Once again, anyone who dares to disagree with your messiah is either a racist or hate filled

It could NEVER be that people disagree with his liberal tax and spend policy. To you, who would be stupid enough to disagree with liberalism??????

The only ones declaring Obama a "messiah" are the right wing pundits and assorted right wing-nuts. Simply another case of the right wing using polite euphemisms for their real feelings about Obama...They feel he's just an uppity nigger.

red states rule

08-05-2008, 07:15 AM

The only ones declaring Obama a "messiah" are the right wing pundits and assorted right wing-nuts. Simply another case of the right wing using polite euphemisms for their real feelings about Obama...They feel he's just an uppity nigger.

We are responding to how the liberal media describes him. The liberal media runs photos with the glow around his head, for example

Libs are seeing the flip flopping and indecisiveness of their guy, so they toss out the race card to explain the shift in the polls