Has McCain actually already LOST?(Yes he has)

View threads from the forum's history which have been deemed important, noteworthy, or which do a good job of covering frequently raised issues.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

Locked
User avatar
Knife
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15769
Joined: 2002-08-30 02:40pm
Location: Behind the Zion Curtain

Re: Has McCain actually already LOST?

Post by Knife »

I am all for Charity but how is being force at the point of a gun to support someone else ethical?
Who said anything about charity? Why do we as a society not have a responsibility to take care of those who came before us? They built the damn world we prosper off of and you feel you don't owe a debt to them? You really are a 'got mine, fuck you' type aren't you?


On a side note and something that tie's this tangent with the OT; one of the things that drove me out of the GOP years ago, is the notion of the right to think of success as a hustle. To be successful (my perception of their ideals) you must make your cash in anyway possible except crime. Basically you must hustle people all the time for every penny. Housing boom? Start flipping houses and making a killing. Who cares if it drags prices up, since every little house now has the most expensive crap from Home depot in it. Who care's if those houses are out of reach for the people buying them, hell the banks are running the same scam. But fuck it, I made mine.

I don't measure success that way and the libertarian bent drove me further and further out of the GOP. Which to tie it up to the OT, I'm voting Obama so yeah, McCain already lost IMO.
They say, "the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots." I suppose it never occurred to them that they are the tyrants, not the patriots. Those weapons are not being used to fight some kind of tyranny; they are bringing them to an event where people are getting together to talk. -Mike Wong

But as far as board culture in general, I do think that young male overaggression is a contributing factor to the general atmosphere of hostility. It's not SOS and the Mess throwing hand grenades all over the forum- Red
chr335
Youngling
Posts: 55
Joined: 2008-10-13 03:06pm

Re: Has McCain actually already LOST?

Post by chr335 »

Knife wrote:
chr335 wrote: I believe that since I fucking paid money into Social Security I should get some Social Security benefits. Do I expect direct and personal benefits from paying all taxes no I don't just the ones that promise direct and personal benifits.
What are these promises you keep speaking of? Or are they more campaign like promises you've converted into rights you want to demand? Considering it takes all the workers can do now to pay the SS of the retired, what part of the program is going to allow for it to continue with your right to have money later if the retiree's outnumber the workers? It is your right to demand money from your children and grandchildren?

Why is it you MUST get something out of SS, even if you don't need it? Not saying you won't but let's explore this demand for 'what's yours' you have with SS. Do you believe you own some sort of surface area on some part of the large freeway system that was set up with your tax money? Would you demand to use it even if it was broken up and underivable since it was your tax money that went into that particular square footage? Do you demand that some particular tank or perhaps a particular police car defend you since YOUR tax money went ito buying that particular item?

Programs that benifit Society are supposed to benifit society in whole and not necessarily every individual. If SS is broken and by and large won't be able to live up to its commitments, why shouldn't those in society who 'qualify' but don't need it take a hit for society even if they 'put their money' into it.
I am sorry I must be really stupid today but I can't tell where you are coming from man. Why would I feel entitled to part of the interstate or part of a police car both of those are used by all and paid by all. Social Security is only paid by workers but used only by retirees and only if they live to retirement age. Why should I be excited to pay into a system most of my life with the possibly I will never use the benefits?

And as I said before I am all for Voluntarily helping others but is it really helping when you force someone else to pay at the point of a gun?
swift death to evil
ninja>>>pirates>>>zombies the natural order
User avatar
SirNitram
Rest in Peace, Black Mage
Posts: 28367
Joined: 2002-07-03 04:48pm
Location: Somewhere between nowhere and everywhere

Re: Has McCain actually already LOST?

Post by SirNitram »

chr335, I will put this simply: If I put a CBO monthly report on the trust fund in front of you in this thread, can you show me how it leads to the coffers being completely, totally empty for when you retire?

If you can, I will do so. And then you can continue talking about the need to massively change Social Security.

If, however, you either stare blankly at such a report and run to copy-paste your favorite right wing propaganda, or worse, pretend the 100/100 rule is some kind of sacrosanct one, I will mock you.

However, there are bonus points for anyone who can point out why the 2008 projections for Low Cost is an economic apocalypse in the exact opposite direction of shortfall.
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.

Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.

Shadowy Overlord - BMs/Black Mage Monkey - BOTM/Jetfire - Cybertron's Finest/General Miscreant/ASVS/Supermoderator Emeritus

Debator Classification: Trollhunter
User avatar
ArcturusMengsk
Padawan Learner
Posts: 416
Joined: 2007-07-31 04:59pm
Location: Illinois

Re: Has McCain actually already LOST?

Post by ArcturusMengsk »

chr335 wrote:I am sorry I must be really stupid today but I can't tell where you are coming from man.
Don't worry. I doubt you're any less intelligent than you were yesterday, or will be tomorrow.
Why would I feel entitled to part of the interstate or part of a police car both of those are used by all and paid by all. Social Security is only paid by workers but used only by retirees and only if they live to retirement age. Why should I be excited to pay into a system most of my life with the possibly I will never use the benefits?
Because the odds of you "possibly (never using) the benefits" are virtually zilch. Under a Democratic administration we will see an injection of money into the Social Security system.
And as I said before I am all for Voluntarily helping others but is it really helping when you force someone else to pay at the point of a gun?
If you don't like it, pick your log cabin in the Rockies.
Diocletian had the right idea.
User avatar
General Zod
Never Shuts Up
Posts: 29205
Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
Location: The Clearance Rack
Contact:

Re: Has McCain actually already LOST?

Post by General Zod »

chr335 wrote: I am sorry I must be really stupid today but I can't tell where you are coming from man. Why would I feel entitled to part of the interstate or part of a police car both of those are used by all and paid by all. Social Security is only paid by workers but used only by retirees and only if they live to retirement age. Why should I be excited to pay into a system most of my life with the possibly I will never use the benefits?
Do you ever order anything over the internet or have packages delivered at all? How about buying any food that wasn't produced locally? The vast majority of them will arrive by ground shipping. I'll give you three guesses what pays for the infrastructure to allow for them to transport it around the country, and the fact that you seem to think you don't directly benefit from this shows you're either an idiot or you haven't thought it through at all.
And as I said before I am all for Voluntarily helping others but is it really helping when you force someone else to pay at the point of a gun?
Please don't tell me you're another idiot that subscribes to the "voluntaryism" thought process.
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
User avatar
starfury
Jedi Master
Posts: 1297
Joined: 2002-07-03 08:28pm
Location: aboard the ISD II Broadsword

Re: Has McCain actually already LOST?

Post by starfury »

I am sorry I must be really stupid today but I can't tell where you are coming from man. Why would I feel entitled to part of the interstate or part of a police car both of those are used by all and paid by all. Social Security is only paid by workers but used only by retirees and only if they live to retirement age. Why should I be excited to pay into a system most of my life with the possibly I will never use the benefits?

And as I said before I am all for Voluntarily helping others but is it really helping when you force someone else to pay at the point of a gun?
Because alot of people don't and have to forced into, some would happy to remove the police and replace it with private contractors, and there are plenty who want do just that. and good beyond, go look at the coliesum and read all the way through the debate there.
"a single death is a tragedy, a million deaths are a statistic"-Joseph Stalin

"No plan survives contact with the enemy"-Helmuth Von Moltke

"Women prefer stories about one person dying slowly. Men prefer stories of many people dying quickly."-Niles from Frasier.
chr335
Youngling
Posts: 55
Joined: 2008-10-13 03:06pm

Re: Has McCain actually already LOST?

Post by chr335 »

SirNitram wrote:chr335, I will put this simply: If I put a CBO monthly report on the trust fund in front of you in this thread, can you show me how it leads to the coffers being completely, totally empty for when you retire?

If you can, I will do so. And then you can continue talking about the need to massively change Social Security.

If, however, you either stare blankly at such a report and run to copy-paste your favorite right wing propaganda, or worse, pretend the 100/100 rule is some kind of sacrosanct one, I will mock you.

However, there are bonus points for anyone who can point out why the 2008 projections for Low Cost is an economic apocalypse in the exact opposite direction of shortfall.
Well from what I have found herehttp://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TR/TR07/VI_OASD ... l#wp150920 the estimates by sometime around 2025 the social security trust fund will have a negative cash flow, but up the the last date there is still money in the fund so I may be wrong but I still got forty one years till I am able to retire so there is lots of time for me to get ready.
swift death to evil
ninja>>>pirates>>>zombies the natural order
chr335
Youngling
Posts: 55
Joined: 2008-10-13 03:06pm

Re: Has McCain actually already LOST?

Post by chr335 »

General Zod wrote:
chr335 wrote: I am sorry I must be really stupid today but I can't tell where you are coming from man. Why would I feel entitled to part of the interstate or part of a police car both of those are used by all and paid by all. Social Security is only paid by workers but used only by retirees and only if they live to retirement age. Why should I be excited to pay into a system most of my life with the possibly I will never use the benefits?
Do you ever order anything over the internet or have packages delivered at all? How about buying any food that wasn't produced locally? The vast majority of them will arrive by ground shipping. I'll give you three guesses what pays for the infrastructure to allow for them to transport it around the country, and the fact that you seem to think you don't directly benefit from this shows you're either an idiot or you haven't thought it through at all.
And as I said before I am all for Voluntarily helping others but is it really helping when you force someone else to pay at the point of a gun?
Please don't tell me you're another idiot that subscribes to the "voluntaryism" thought process.
no that is anarchism and will only lead to chaos. I think you miss understood me I understand the direct importants of roads I just don't understand how they can compare to Social Security as with police and roads everyone pays and everyone uses, where as with social security those who pay can't use it until they turn 65 I think it is.
swift death to evil
ninja>>>pirates>>>zombies the natural order
User avatar
Covenant
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4451
Joined: 2006-04-11 07:43am

Re: Has McCain actually already LOST?

Post by Covenant »

chr335 wrote:
ArcturusMengsk wrote: Because being concerned about the elderly is the ethical thing to do, unless you're a rightard sociopath (as you appear to be).
I am all for Charity but how is being force at the point of a gun to support someone else ethical?
Because it is more ethical to force someone to benefit everyone than allow them to choose not to, and have the entire system collapse. Social security will pay out to you more than you're putting in now if we stabilize the amount of money going into it, as well as encourage a stronger middle-class economy at home. Right-wing attempts to gut the middle class at the expense of the bloated top further stress the majority of America to pay the Social Security, but the solution is not to nuke the SS tax, but to get people back employed, making money, being profitable, and so forth.

What happens when these people get elderly? Do you throw them on the street like a callous, evil person? Do you say "Sorry mom, you shoulda' considered your retirement earlier--sorry that you had me and I got into a good school that was more expensive than you thought. But you shoulda' fucking planned for that before I decided to cut my ties." Who would do that? That's ethical?

Or do you force families to take the full cost of this on their own? So now you're turning around and putting that entire inflated cost right back on the taxpayers directly--like an Elderly Tax. Taking care of old people is hard fucking work, especially after they develop dementia or have a stroke or break a hip. Besides, these are still people, and they deserve to live with some dignity. Privitization will insure that the low-class live lower, the high-class live higher, and the middle class are incredibly more stretched to care for their children and their parents at the same time, all while attempting to save enough money so that when they get old, they'll be able to survive on their own. But since Social Security is nuked, good fucking luck.
User avatar
SirNitram
Rest in Peace, Black Mage
Posts: 28367
Joined: 2002-07-03 04:48pm
Location: Somewhere between nowhere and everywhere

Re: Has McCain actually already LOST?

Post by SirNitram »

chr335 wrote:
SirNitram wrote:chr335, I will put this simply: If I put a CBO monthly report on the trust fund in front of you in this thread, can you show me how it leads to the coffers being completely, totally empty for when you retire?

If you can, I will do so. And then you can continue talking about the need to massively change Social Security.

If, however, you either stare blankly at such a report and run to copy-paste your favorite right wing propaganda, or worse, pretend the 100/100 rule is some kind of sacrosanct one, I will mock you.

However, there are bonus points for anyone who can point out why the 2008 projections for Low Cost is an economic apocalypse in the exact opposite direction of shortfall.
Well from what I have found herehttp://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TR/TR07/VI_OASD ... l#wp150920 the estimates by sometime around 2025 the social security trust fund will have a negative cash flow, but up the the last date there is still money in the fund so I may be wrong but I still got forty one years till I am able to retire so there is lots of time for me to get ready.
I'll use the 2008 report. Link And not just one snapshot of the appendixes of the entire report.

Examine this for a good showing of the projections of the various Cost methods: Link Look carefully. Intermediate Cost requires a permenant crash from 2009 onwards. Not a crash like right now, a crash that never, ever recovers no matter what. Low Cost shows a drop from 2008-2009(Hey, that sounds familiar..), and the far more realistic notion of the market being elastic and having ups and downs. Similarly, Intermediate and High Cost assume permenant unemployment rates of 5.5 up to 6.5%, never dropping.

Just for shits and giggles, though, we'll pretend Intermediate is likely without a basic restructuring of the USA on every level as the 50% permenant GDP crash would suggest happens. Here's the graph for Intermediate Cost, Long Range:

Image

Yes, Virginia, while it's not fully paid, you will be paid long into 2085. Let's even look at the projected tax rate and cost, and an answer reveals itself:

Image

Remove the 250k cap on the SS tax, and I'm willing to bet the lines match up again. Then again, here's a question: Why are we assuming the Baby Boombers are still alive in 2085? That's gonna bother me forever about these.

As I drive home there will be no point of 'Total emptying' well into the future, I will end with the graph that shows precisely the apocalypse I alluded to.

Image

In 2050, if Low Cost proves right, we must begin raiding the Trust Fund literally.
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.

Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.

Shadowy Overlord - BMs/Black Mage Monkey - BOTM/Jetfire - Cybertron's Finest/General Miscreant/ASVS/Supermoderator Emeritus

Debator Classification: Trollhunter
chr335
Youngling
Posts: 55
Joined: 2008-10-13 03:06pm

Re: Has McCain actually already LOST?

Post by chr335 »

Well that looks good lets just hope the money hungry congress hasn't raided the trust fund cookie jar too much and there is still a healthy collection of money in there. I bow to your superior research skills Sir Nitram

However to be safe I am not planning on Social Security to be there when I retire and thus will save accordingly.
swift death to evil
ninja>>>pirates>>>zombies the natural order
User avatar
General Zod
Never Shuts Up
Posts: 29205
Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
Location: The Clearance Rack
Contact:

Re: Has McCain actually already LOST?

Post by General Zod »

chr335 wrote: no that is anarchism and will only lead to chaos. I think you miss understood me I understand the direct importants of roads I just don't understand how they can compare to Social Security as with police and roads everyone pays and everyone uses, where as with social security those who pay can't use it until they turn 65 I think it is.
You don't get the benefits from roads and public services until they are built or instated, there's always the possibility of projects being scrapped. So how the fuck is "I don't get to use social security until I retire" fundamentally any different?
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
User avatar
SirNitram
Rest in Peace, Black Mage
Posts: 28367
Joined: 2002-07-03 04:48pm
Location: Somewhere between nowhere and everywhere

Re: Has McCain actually already LOST?

Post by SirNitram »

chr335 wrote:Well that looks good lets just hope the money hungry congress hasn't raided the trust fund cookie jar too much and there is still a healthy collection of money in there. I bow to your superior research skills Sir Nitram
Evidence this has ever effected the program in reality. Surely you can point to the relevent historical data in the 2008 report I helpfully gave you the entirity of, instead of sticking to one table in one appendix of 2007's, as you did?

When you fail to produce evidence of this claim, I will be unsurprised.
However to be safe I am not planning on Social Security to be there when I retire and thus will save accordingly.
And no doubt continue to pretend the social contract is non-existant.
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.

Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.

Shadowy Overlord - BMs/Black Mage Monkey - BOTM/Jetfire - Cybertron's Finest/General Miscreant/ASVS/Supermoderator Emeritus

Debator Classification: Trollhunter
chr335
Youngling
Posts: 55
Joined: 2008-10-13 03:06pm

Re: Has McCain actually already LOST?

Post by chr335 »

SirNitram wrote:
chr335 wrote:Well that looks good lets just hope the money hungry congress hasn't raided the trust fund cookie jar too much and there is still a healthy collection of money in there. I bow to your superior research skills Sir Nitram
Evidence this has ever effected the program in reality. Surely you can point to the relevent historical data in the 2008 report I helpfully gave you the entirity of, instead of sticking to one table in one appendix of 2007's, as you did?

When you fail to produce evidence of this claim, I will be unsurprised.
However to be safe I am not planning on Social Security to be there when I retire and thus will save accordingly.
And no doubt continue to pretend the social contract is non-existant.
My first sentence was a joke sir not meant to be taken seriously
swift death to evil
ninja>>>pirates>>>zombies the natural order
chr335
Youngling
Posts: 55
Joined: 2008-10-13 03:06pm

Re: Has McCain actually already LOST?

Post by chr335 »

General Zod wrote:
chr335 wrote: no that is anarchism and will only lead to chaos. I think you miss understood me I understand the direct importants of roads I just don't understand how they can compare to Social Security as with police and roads everyone pays and everyone uses, where as with social security those who pay can't use it until they turn 65 I think it is.
You don't get the benefits from roads and public services until they are built or instated, there's always the possibility of projects being scrapped. So how the fuck is "I don't get to use social security until I retire" fundamentally any different?
Hmm I don't think I have ever though of it that way.
swift death to evil
ninja>>>pirates>>>zombies the natural order
User avatar
Ender
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 11323
Joined: 2002-07-30 11:12pm
Location: Illinois

Re: Has McCain actually already LOST?

Post by Ender »

SirNitram wrote:
chr335 wrote:However to be safe I am not planning on Social Security to be there when I retire and thus will save accordingly.
And no doubt continue to pretend the social contract is non-existant.
:? How exactly do you go from "I will keep my own savings portfolio as well" to "I refuse to acknowledge the social contract"? And how does having independent savings violate the social contract? How is the idea of saving apparently a bad thing, instead of being prudent?
بيرني كان سيفوز
*
Nuclear Navy Warwolf
*
in omnibus requiem quaesivi, et nusquam inveni nisi in angulo cum libro
*
ipsa scientia potestas est
User avatar
General Zod
Never Shuts Up
Posts: 29205
Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
Location: The Clearance Rack
Contact:

Re: Has McCain actually already LOST?

Post by General Zod »

Ender wrote:
SirNitram wrote:
chr335 wrote:However to be safe I am not planning on Social Security to be there when I retire and thus will save accordingly.
And no doubt continue to pretend the social contract is non-existant.
:? How exactly do you go from "I will keep my own savings portfolio as well" to "I refuse to acknowledge the social contract"? And how does having independent savings violate the social contract? How is the idea of saving apparently a bad thing, instead of being prudent?
Scroll up. He thinks paying into social security is unethical.
chr335 wrote:I am all for Charity but how is being force at the point of a gun to support someone else ethical?
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
User avatar
ArcturusMengsk
Padawan Learner
Posts: 416
Joined: 2007-07-31 04:59pm
Location: Illinois

Re: Has McCain actually already LOST?

Post by ArcturusMengsk »

Ender wrote:
SirNitram wrote:
chr335 wrote:However to be safe I am not planning on Social Security to be there when I retire and thus will save accordingly.
And no doubt continue to pretend the social contract is non-existant.
:? How exactly do you go from "I will keep my own savings portfolio as well" to "I refuse to acknowledge the social contract"? And how does having independent savings violate the social contract? How is the idea of saving apparently a bad thing, instead of being prudent?
Red herring. SirNitram said:
And no doubt continue to pretend the social contract is non-existant
not
That's like saying the social contract is non-existant!
or some derivation thereof. He was chastising chr335 for his earlier sociopathic behavior, not remarking on that particular idea of saving.
Diocletian had the right idea.
User avatar
Ender
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 11323
Joined: 2002-07-30 11:12pm
Location: Illinois

Re: Has McCain actually already LOST?

Post by Ender »

General Zod wrote: Scroll up. He thinks paying into social security is unethical.
Yes, but in that very post he conceded the argument. So unless Nitram was just harping on him after he admitted he was wrong my questions still stand.
بيرني كان سيفوز
*
Nuclear Navy Warwolf
*
in omnibus requiem quaesivi, et nusquam inveni nisi in angulo cum libro
*
ipsa scientia potestas est
User avatar
Ender
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 11323
Joined: 2002-07-30 11:12pm
Location: Illinois

Re: Has McCain actually already LOST?

Post by Ender »

Haruko wrote:Remember when McCain said to supporters that he's going to kick Obama's "you know what" in the final debate? Looks like there's a note to append to the end of that story:
CNN wrote:Ayers will come up at debate, McCain says

(CNN) – John McCain and Sarah Palin appear to have dropped the subject of Barack Obama's connection to 1960's radical Bill Ayers from the campaign trail, but the Arizona senator said in an interview that aired Tuesday he'll likely bring it up at the third and final presidential debate Wednesday night.

The comments, during an interview with St. Louis radio station KMOX, come after Obama and Democratic VP candidate Joe Biden were sharply critical of McCain for targeting the Illinois senator over Ayers at campaign rallies, but not when the two last met for a presidential debate.

"I was astonished to hear him say that he was surprised I 'didn’t have the guts' to do that, because the fact is the question didn't come up in that fashion," McCain said of the last debate. "I think he's probably ensured it will come up this time."

McCain and Palin stepped up their criticism of Obama's past relationship with Ayers last week, as the GOP ticket's poll numbers continued to slide in the homestretch to Election Day. The campaign also released a string of ads that questioned Obama's truthfulness on the matter, in an effort to raise doubts about the Illinois senator's political origins and character. But the subject of Ayers was noticeably absent from both McCain and Palin's stump speeches Sunday and Monday, leading many political observers to conclude the campaign had deemed that line of attack ineffective.

Watch: Palin Renews Obama Attack

In the radio interview, McCain made clear he still thinks it's an issue.

"It’s not that I give a damn about some old washed up terrorist and his terrorist wife, who in 2001 said they wish they'd bombed more — what I care about, and what the American people care about, is whether he's being truthful," McCain told the St. Louis radio station.
I think I might have pop corn ready this time around.
Heh, ok John, you go right ahead and do that.

link
William Timmons, the Washington lobbyist who John McCain has named to head his presidential transition team, aided an influence effort on behalf of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein to ease international sanctions against his regime.

The two lobbyists who Timmons worked closely with over a five year period on the lobbying campaign later either pleaded guilty to or were convicted of federal criminal charges that they had acted as unregistered agents of Saddam Hussein's government.

During the same period beginning in 1992, Timmons worked closely with the two lobbyists, Samir Vincent and Tongsun Park, on a previously unreported prospective deal with the Iraqis in which they hoped to be awarded a contract to purchase and resell Iraqi oil. Timmons, Vincent, and Park stood to share at least $45 million if the business deal went through.

Timmons' activities occurred in the years following the first Gulf War, when Washington considered Iraq to be a rogue enemy state and a sponsor of terrorism. His dealings on behalf of the deceased Iraqi leader stand in stark contrast to the views his current employer held at the time.

John McCain strongly supported the 1991 military action against Iraq, and as recently as Sunday described Saddam Hussein as a one-time menace to the region who had "stated categorically that he would acquire weapons of mass destruction, and he would use them wherever he could."

Timmons declined to comment for this story. An office manager who works for him said that he has made it his practice during his public career to never speak to the press. Timmons previously told investigators that he did not know that either Vincent or Park were acting as unregistered agents of Iraq. He also insisted that he did not fully understand just how closely the two men were tied to Saddam's regime while they collaborated.

But testimony and records made public during Park's criminal trial, as well as other information uncovered during a United Nations investigation, suggest just the opposite. Virtually everything Timmons did while working on the lobbying campaign was within days conveyed by Vincent to either one or both of Saddam Hussein's top aides, Tariq Aziz and Nizar Hamdoon. Vincent also testified that he almost always relayed input from the Iraqi aides back to Timmons.

Talking points that Timmons produced for the lobbyists to help ease the sanctions, for example, were reviewed ahead of time by Aziz, Vincent testified in court. Proposals that Timmons himself circulated to U.S. officials as part of the effort were written with the assistance of the Iraqi officials, and were also sent ahead of time with Timmons' approval to Aziz, other records show.

Moreover, there was a major financial incentive at play for Timmons. The multi-million dollar oil deal that he was pursuing with the two other lobbyists would only be possible if their efforts to ease sanctions against Iraq were successful.

Vincent, an Iraqi-born American citizen with whom Timmons worked most closely, pleaded guilty to federal criminal charges in January 2005 that he had acted as an unregistered agent of Saddam Hussein's regime. Tongsun Park, the second lobbyist who Timmons worked closely with, was convicted by a federal jury in July 2006 on charges that he too violated the Foreign Agent Registration Act.

As part of a plea bargain agreement with the Justice Department, Vincent agreed to testify against Park and others in exchange for a reduced prison sentence. He was the government's chief witness against Park during Park's trial. Park was sentenced to five years in prison after his conviction.

A U.N commission headed by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker conducted an exhaustive investigation of the oil-for-food program, in which various individuals were found to have paid illegal kickbacks to Saddam Hussein. The findings of the Volcker Commission detail the roles of Vincent, Park and Timmons in trying to ease the sanctions.

* * * * *
Timmons testified that he first introduced Vincent to Tongsun Park and encouraged him to hire Park to work on the deal.

At the time Timmons introduced the two men, Park's notorious background was well known:

In the 1970s, Park had admitted to making hundreds of thousands in payments and illegal campaign contributions to U.S. congressmen on behalf of the South Korean government. Park was indicted on 36 counts by a federal grand jury, but fled to South Korea before he could face trial. All of the charges were later dismissed in exchange for Park providing information about which public officials received funds from the South Korean government.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, not long after Timmons suggested that Vincent hire Park to assist their influence, lobbying, and back-channel diplomatic efforts on behalf of Saddam Hussein's government, much of that effort became increasingly bizarre, corrupt, and - on occasion - illegal.

Vincent testified that Park covertly received millions of dollars from Saddam's government that was supposed to be used to bribe then-U.N. Secretary General Boutros Boutros Ghali to ease international sanctions against Iraq. But both men simply pocketed the money, according to Vincent. (There is no evidence that Boutros Ghali even knew of Iraq's intention to bribe him.)

Investigations by the Justice Department and the Volcker commission disclosed that Park also served as the middleman for a million dollar payment that investigators believed was a bribe for another senior United Nations official. That official in fact admitted receiving the money from Park, but said he did not know that the funds originated with Saddam's regime.

Timmons told federal investigators that he was unaware of these particular activities, and investigators were unable to uncover any evidence to contradict that claim.

Timmons also claimed that he was motivated to push forward with the lobbying campaign with Vincent and Park not only to assist Saddam's regime but also because he believed that his actions would serve U.S. interests, that they would help the people of Iraq obtain needed medicine and food being denied them by sanctions, and would serve to facilitate a rapprochement of relations between Hussein and the U.S. that would be beneficial to both countries.

But there was a financial incentive in play as well. During the same period, Vincent was hard at work obtaining contracts with Iraq to purchase and resell Iraqi oil allowed under international sanctions; Timmons would have stood to benefit financially from those contracts.

Timmons claimed to investigators that any contracts offered to him, Vincent, and Park would be awarded solely on merit, and had nothing to do with their lobbying efforts.

But Vincent told investigators that their work clearly gave them an inside track. And in other instances, in which Timmons was not involved, Vincent profited from lucrative oil-for-food contracts awarded by Iraq as compensation for his effort to buy influence in the U.S. and at the U.N. for Saddam's regime.

At Park's trial, Vincent testified that he, Park, and Timmons stood to make as much as $45 million in profits from one particular oil venture with Saddam's regime had it gone forward. Park testified that he was unsure exactly what percentage of the proceeds each of the three men would have personally received. The deal ultimately fell through.

An investigator who worked on the U.N. investigation of the oil-for-food program told me that Timmons clearly should have or did understand that he was the possible recipient of oil contracts from the Iraqi government because of his lobbying and back channel diplomatic efforts on behalf of Saddam: "He would have to be the most naive person in the world to believe that was not the case," the official told me. "I guess William Timmons is just a natural born oilman. He is either deceiving himself to rationalize what he has done or taking the rest of us for fools."

Between 1997 and 2001, according to the Volcker report, Vincent received five such contracts from Saddam's regime.

In his guilty plea agreement with the Justice Department, Vincent admitted: "I received those allocations because of the work I had done on behalf of the Government of Iraq in helping set up the oil-for-food program."

* * * * *
Samir Vincent was well positioned for the task at hand when he began his influence and back channel diplomacy campaign with the Iraqis; he had been boyhood friends of two of Saddam Hussein's closest advisers, Nizaar Hamdoon and Tariq Aziz.

Hamdoon, who died in 2003, was Saddam's foreign minister, and Tariq Aziz had variously served as Baghdad's ambassador to the United States, ambassador to the United States, and Iraq's deputy prime minister.

But Vincent also sought to enlist the help of a Washington insider or lobbyist if his efforts were to have any chance of success.

His initial plan to purchase Iraqi oil through the American Red Cross faced opposition from the U.S. government. Vincent's partner at the time, an American businessman named John Venners, suggested that they needed "help from some people that he knew very well" who "used to be high up in the government." Venners recommended William Timmons.

As Time magazine's Michael Scherer recently reported, Timmons is "a Washington institution," having worked as a senior aide to every Republican president since Richard Nixon. He also serves as chairman emeritus of Timmons and Company, "a small but influential lobbying firm he founded in 1975 shortly after leaving the White House."

According to Vincent's testimony, Timmons immediately opened doors for the Iraqi-American lobbyist. He talked to then-Deputy Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger on Vincent's behalf. He also contacted then-Sen. Bob Dole and John Bolton, then-undersecretary of state for international affairs, to discuss Vincent's plan.

In a meeting with U.N. officials, Vincent pressed his case armed with "talking points" that Timmons had written for him. Before using them, Vincent said that he first sent the talking points to Nizaar Hamdoon and Tariq Aziz, with Timmons' approval.

After the meeting, Vincent traveled all the way to Baghdad to report back to Tariq Aziz what had occurred. Later, he had another meeting with Hamdoon and Aziz at the United Nations mission in New York to plan on next steps. Vincent testified he made formal minutes of that meeting, typed them up, and then traveled to Washington to personally give them to Timmons. This was routine practice as Vincent, Timmons, and the Iraqis worked together.

Timmons himself was apparently loathe to meet with Hamdoon or Aziz personally. But virtually the entire time they worked together, Vincent would relay to Timmons what the Iraqis had to say and vice versa.

After Vincent's first meeting with U.N. officials, Aziz and Hamdoon suggested that something called a "non-paper" be presented the next time Vincent met with the same officials. Non-papers are diplomatic communications in which parties can propose positions in writing, but do not have to fear if they leak to the public or press, because they do not officially represent positions of the government.

At the request of Aziz and Hamdoon, Timmons authored the non-paper which Vincent could rely on for that second meeting. Both Aziz and Hamdoon also reviewed the paper before Vincent used it.

On March 15, 1995, Timmons wrote a memo (which is a matter of public record as an exhibit in the case) advocating that they and the Iraqis should enlist the assistance of U.S. oil companies to make their case.

Timmons once again apparently understood that his audience was the Iraqi government. Vincent testified that Timmons gave him the memo knowing that the document was "supposed to solicit the thoughts of the Iraqi government, if this is something they would seriously consider." Vincent dutifully passed Timmons' memo on to Nizaar Hamdoon, he testified.

Weeks later, in April 1995, Vincent was summoned to Iraq to meet with Saddam Hussein in Baghdad.

As to Timmons' claims that he kept his distance from Vincent and Park and did not know much about what they and the Iraqis were up to, this exchange between a federal prosecutor and Vincent once again suggests otherwise:

Q: And when you returned to the United States, did you tell anyone about your visit with Saddam Hussein?

A: I told Bill Timmons and Tongsun Park.

Q: Why did you tell Bill Timmons about your visit with Saddam?

A: To let him know that we were talking to the leader of Iraq, and in essence we have access and assure him that any messages we were relaying between Iraqi and Tariq Aziz and anyone else, it was being transmitted to the president, Saddam Hussein, in Iraq.


* * * * *
Presciently, Time's Scherer noted that McCain's own staffers had early concerns that appointing Timmons could prove detrimental to the Arizona Senator's presidential ambitions:

His [lobbying] registrations include work on a number of issues that have become flashpoints in the presidential campaign. He has registered to work on bills that deal with the regulations of troubled mortgage lenders Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, a bill to provide farm subsidies and bills that regulate domestic oil-drilling.

By tapping Timmons, McCain has turned to one of Washington's steadiest and most senior inside players to guide him in the event of a victory -- but also to someone who represents the antithesis of the kind of outside-of-Washington change he has recently been promising. One Republican familiar with the process said the decision to involve Timmons could become a political liability for the campaign's reformist image, especially in the wake of the controversies over the lobbying backgrounds of other McCain staffers, including campaign manager Rick Davis. "It's one more blind spot for Rick Davis and John McCain," the person said.


Timmons' work to relax international sanctions against Iraq, as well as to benefit financially from Saddam Hussein's regime, may be another such flashpoint.

The Volcker report makes clear that when Timmons first got involved with Vincent and the Iraqis, the lure of millions of dollars was at least one incentive. By early 1992, Timmons and his associates were already "pursu[ing] the purchase of sale of Iraqi oil and the exploration by a consortium of companies of the Manjoon field in Iraq," the report said.

According to the report, the venture was dependent on Vincent's belief "that sanctions against Iraq would be lifted immediately and that the Iraqi government might grant a long-term concession to an American oil company."

Later, when Timmons pressed the case even more aggressively that sanctions against Saddam's regime be eased, he, Vincent and Park hoped to profit as well, according to the Volcker report. "Continuing through 1994 and 1995, Mr. Vincent and Mr. Park, along with Mr. Timmons and others, persisted in their efforts to establish a foothold in the Iraqi oil business," the report stated.

At one point, Timmons even boasted to investigators that it was his ideas that later became the basis for the United Nations' oil-for-food program.

Under that program, the United Nations allowed Iraq to sell its oil under U.N. supervision, with the proceeds placed in U.N. escrow accounts to buy food, medicine, and other humanitarian goods for the Iraqi people.

However, a major flaw in the program was that Saddam Hussein's regime was allowed to play a role in the selection of oil companies awarded contracts. Because of lax oversight of the program, Saddam's government was able to demand that foreign oil companies -- including American ones -- provide more than $1.7 billion in kickbacks to his regime.

One of the most outspoken critics in the U.S. Senate of the oil-for-food program was John McCain:

"We need to have a full and complete cooperation on the part of the U.N. about this whole oil-for-food program, which stinks to high heaven," McCain told Fox News in Dec. 2004. "We're talking about billions and billions of dollars here that were diverted for many wrong purposes. And this is an example of corruption.

"And by the way, it's an argument, maybe a small one, but maybe an argument that justifies our action in Iraq. Because clearly the sanctions and the framework of those sanctions was completely eroded."
No wonder Obama and Biden's response was basically "I fucking dare you". Seeing John-boy respond to this will be funny.
بيرني كان سيفوز
*
Nuclear Navy Warwolf
*
in omnibus requiem quaesivi, et nusquam inveni nisi in angulo cum libro
*
ipsa scientia potestas est
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: Has McCain actually already LOST?

Post by Darth Wong »

Ender wrote:
SirNitram wrote:
chr335 wrote:However to be safe I am not planning on Social Security to be there when I retire and thus will save accordingly.
And no doubt continue to pretend the social contract is non-existant.
:? How exactly do you go from "I will keep my own savings portfolio as well" to "I refuse to acknowledge the social contract"? And how does having independent savings violate the social contract? How is the idea of saving apparently a bad thing, instead of being prudent?
I'm no mind reader, but I think he misinterpreted your "I don't plan on SS being there when I retire" statement as "I don't support the continued existence of SS". Mistaking a prediction for a prescription.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
User avatar
SirNitram
Rest in Peace, Black Mage
Posts: 28367
Joined: 2002-07-03 04:48pm
Location: Somewhere between nowhere and everywhere

Re: Has McCain actually already LOST?

Post by SirNitram »

Ender wrote:
SirNitram wrote:
chr335 wrote:However to be safe I am not planning on Social Security to be there when I retire and thus will save accordingly.
And no doubt continue to pretend the social contract is non-existant.
:? How exactly do you go from "I will keep my own savings portfolio as well" to "I refuse to acknowledge the social contract"? And how does having independent savings violate the social contract? How is the idea of saving apparently a bad thing, instead of being prudent?
Less from his statement there, more from the attitude of 'Why am I paying for society's old people, if I might not see the money directly come to me?' he's expressed previously. It was a little hot off the trigger, and that was a mistake I made by being, simply, foolish.
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.

Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.

Shadowy Overlord - BMs/Black Mage Monkey - BOTM/Jetfire - Cybertron's Finest/General Miscreant/ASVS/Supermoderator Emeritus

Debator Classification: Trollhunter
User avatar
CaptJodan
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2217
Joined: 2003-05-27 09:57pm
Location: Orlando, Florida

Re: Has McCain actually already LOST?

Post by CaptJodan »

Olberman delivers the smack-down on McCain's rally shit tonight in a special comment.
It's Jodan, not Jordan. If you can't quote it right, I will mock you.
Fleet Admiral JD
Jedi Master
Posts: 1162
Joined: 2004-12-27 08:58pm
Location: GO BU!
Contact:

Re: Has McCain actually already LOST?

Post by Fleet Admiral JD »

I was just going to ask if anyone had heard Olbermann's comment. That was poetry. This man is a fantastic journalist.
Parrothead | CINC HABNAV | Black Mage In Training (Invited by Lady T)

The Acta Diurna: My blog on politics, history, theatre tech, music, and more!
User avatar
CmdrWilkens
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 9093
Joined: 2002-07-06 01:24am
Location: Land of the Crabcake
Contact:

Re: Has McCain actually already LOST?

Post by CmdrWilkens »

So McCain has basically said: "Here si my attack, please come up with a response," to which Obama's team has dug up awhopper of a response. Now the question comes back as to whether McCain will actually liveup to his statement (and get bombed by Obama in return) or whether he will shrink down and get hammered for backing off. Its basically a heads we win tails you lose from Obama's perspective because he can either be high minded and let Republicans eat their own with McCain backing down or he can hammer McCain forcefully and eloguently making McCain's complaints seem small by comparison to agents of the McCain camp literally working for Saddam.

Oh yes and with CBS now polling a 12-14 point Obama advanage the ceiling for his numbers and the floor for Mccain's keep slipping further apart. We are looking at an honest to god 8 point naitonal lead with 3 weeks to go...there just aren't enough undecideds left to shift the election outside of those bounds so McCain HAS to change the narrative and he has to change it now. One day of the DOW going up (followed by a drop) won't be enough.
Image
SDNet World Nation: Wilkonia
Armourer of the WARWOLVES
ASVS Vet's Association (Class of 2000)
Former C.S. Strowbridge Gold Ego Award Winner
MEMBER of the Anti-PETA Anti-Facist LEAGUE

"I put no stock in religion. By the word religion I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called the will of god. I have seen too much religion in the eyes of too many murderers. Holiness is in right action, and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves, and goodness. "
-Kingdom of Heaven
Locked