McCain's view on Wasilla earmarks circa 2001

cubbieblue82

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/10/palin.earmarks/index.html

Seems that the pre-reformed John McCain didn't think much of Sarah Palin and her 27 million in earmarks for a town of 5,500 people.

Funny how things change... :rolleyes:

spyguy

are you for or against earmarks?

cubbieblue82

spyguy wrote:

are you for or against earmarks?

I think that cutting government spending is key, but that isn't the point, as I know that Obama also requested quite a lot of earmarks for IL.

Just trying to point out the rampant hypocrisy in the McCain camp that's all.

QuestionAuthority

spyguy wrote:

are you for or against earmarks?

How about are you for or against hypocrisy?

spyguy

cubbieblue82 wrote:

I think that cutting government spending is key, but that isn't the point,

political bs aside, obama will increase spending, mccain wants to cut it.

cubbieblue82 wrote:

as I know that Obama also requested quite a lot of earmarks for IL.

is that ok?

cubbieblue82 wrote:

Just trying to point out the ramant hypocrisy in the McCain camp that's all.

super. great spin job.

spyguy

QuestionAuthority wrote:

How about are you for or against hypocrisy?

I'm against it.

but I'd rather have a person who wants to cut spending then someone who will promise to raise spending.

QuestionAuthority

spyguy wrote:

I'm against it.

but I'd rather have a person who wants to cut spending then someone who will promise to raise spending.

So you a perfectly fine with McCain's stance to keep us in a pointless war that is costing us 350 million each and every day that we are there?

That seems like a HUGE spending reduction to me..

spyguy

QuestionAuthority wrote:

So you a perfectly fine with McCain's stance to keep us in a pointless war that is costing us 350 million each and every day that we are there?

That seems like a HUGE spending reduction to me..

no I'm not. and I'm very interested to see what he says about Iraq during the debates.

right now I dont see much difference in obama and mccains stance. when its all said and done, obama would probably have them home quicker but both stick to the stand of "depends on conditions on the ground"

jimed14

spyguy wrote:

I'm against it.

but I'd rather have a person who wants to cut spending then someone who will promise to raise spending.

so, you're a believer in trickle down economics? there's no attack behind this question ... you answer yes or no. I have no snarky comment after you answer.

Wobbie

spyguy wrote:

political bs aside, obama will increase spending, mccain wants to cut it.

"political bs aside"....... yeah, right.

cubbieblue82

spyguy wrote:

political bs aside, obama will increase spending, mccain wants to cut it.

Damn you sound like McCain himself!

How exactly will McCain cut spending? I haven't heard anything from him other than that pathetic line he keeps repeating over and over again.

Obama has actually detailed programs where the money will come from. As mentioned, ending our occupation of Iraq will save something like 8 billion dollars a week that McCain would have us continue to waste. I do NOT think their positions are the same, but of course McCain's people would have you believe that they are so that they take away one of his biggest weaknesses.

Sounds like it is you who are putting spin on the issue.

I'm just repeating the fact that McCain is a total hypocrite.