McCain wins some respect from me on this:

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by saden1

I don't do guilt by association. I do guilt by conduct, policy, and speech. I don't think anyone in here is interested in me naming all the shady associates of the McCain/Palin ticket.

Ok, I'm intrested in all these shady people? Its not guilt its a question of his decision making. It one thing to be in a room with a people like this its another for one to be a big part of his life for 20 years and to kick off your political career at the persons home. Lets make it clear once again the guy is known for belonging to a group that is known to have bombed US targets.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Ok, I'm intrested in all these shady people? Its not guilt its a question of his decision making. It one thing to be in a room with a people like this its another for one to be a big part of his life for 20 years and to kick off your political career at the persons home. Lets make it clear once again the guy is known for belonging to a group that is known to have bombed US targets.

Here you go, have fun.

Palin:

• Thomas Muthee (a witch doctor extraordinaire, if you got the devil in you he can take care of it).
  
• Alaska Independence Party (crazy fringe party that really hates America).
  

McCain:

• Marylin Shannon (domestic terrorist who is pro abortion clinic bombing).
• G. Gordon Liddy (a first class bad guy).
• U.S. Council for World Freedom (McCain was a Board member and paled with Oliver North).
• Pastor John Hagee (this mofo is worse than Wright).
  
• Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson (meeting and pandering with batshit crazy people who think 911 was a punishment from god).
  
• Charles Keating (the guy who put many a grandma and grampa in the poor house with the help of McCain).
  

[JWsleep]

You forgot one, Saden:

George W. Bush

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by JWsleep

You forgot one, Saden:

George W. Bush

Not to digress, but since you brought up Bush, I thought this was interesting. Some comparisons are a bit of a stretch, but nonetheless...

Another Four Years?

[JWsleep]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Not to digress, but since you brought up Bush, I thought this was interesting. Some comparisons are a bit of a stretch, but nonetheless...

Another Four Years?

This is a guilt-by-association thing, not an argument! Just wanted to play a little rebulican-style ball here.

As for that CNN piece, I don't find it very compelling. The similarities are often very thin: they agree on abstinence? On national security? Really?

But let's say it's true. Doesn't that give lie to the claim by the McCain camp that Obama is a radical liberal out of touch with America? If he's basically in-step with Bush, he is not a liberal. Can't have it both ways, even in this nutty election season.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by JWsleep

This is a guilt-by-association thing, not an argument! Just wanted to play a little rebulican-style ball here.

As for that CNN piece, I don't find it very compelling. The similarities are often very thin: they agree on abstinence? On national security? Really?

But let's say it's true. Doesn't that give lie to the claim by the McCain camp that Obama is a radical liberal out of touch with America? If he's basically in-step with Bush, he is not a liberal. Can't have it both ways, even in this nutty election season.

Maybe Bush is a liberal?

[saden1]

You might be joking but according to some conservative I know Bush is a liberal because he spends like one, etc, etc, etc. They were happy to claim him when he first got into office but they're now ready to toss him overboard and tell people he plays for the other side. It would be funny if they weren't so serious. I of course drop some Joe-Six-Pack knowledge on them and tell them when it comes to Bush I go with the "one-drop rule."

[MTK]

Originally Posted by JWsleep

You forgot one, Saden:

George W. Bush

that's a creepy looking hug

[firstdown]

Thats not a very good job with your associations and I don't see the personal conections. On that abortion bill which it is allready against the law to bomb or harrass people but making it illegal to protest is protected by law. You know the one.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Thats not a very good job with your associations and I don't see the personal conections. On that abortion bill which it is allready against the law to bomb or harrass people but making it illegal to protest is protected by law. You know the one.

I think it's silly but if we are comparing associations then I think mine are as valid as yours if not more valid. You are entitled to your opinion though.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Thats not a very good job with your associations and I don't see the personal conections. On that abortion bill which it is allready against the law to bomb or harrass people but making it illegal to protest is protected by law. You know the one.

The Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE or the Access Act, Pub. L. No. 103-259, 108 Stat. 694) (May 26, 1994, 18 U.S.C. § 248), passed in 1994, prohibits the use of intimidation or physical force to prevent or discourage persons from (A) gaining access to a reproductive health care facility (which most notably includes abortion clinics), or (B) exercising freedom to worship at a religious facility. The law also creates specific penalties for the destruction of, or damage to, a reproductive health care facility or place of religious worship.

Also, the right to protest is not without limits. The US Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the government may impose certain time, place, and manner restrictions on protests.