PDA

View Full Version : Newsflash - McCain invents BlackBerry!


Sodas
09-16-2008, 01:40 PM
http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0908/HoltzEakin_McCain_helped_create_BlackBerry.html?sh owall
"He did this," Douglas Holtz-Eakin told reporters this morning, holding up his BlackBerry. "Telecommunications of the United States is a premier innovation in the past 15 years, comes right through the Commerce Committee. So you're looking at the miracle John McCain helped create and that's what he did."
Funny thing is, Research in Motion - the company that invented the BlackBerry - is Canadian.

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a81/kos102/2008/Obama/Colorado/Cover%20Art/Hillary-Barack.jpg

Crispin's Crispian
09-16-2008, 01:43 PM
Basically he's making the same claim that Gore did--and it looks like it's being misconstrued just like Gore's.

Gore took credit for driving telecommunications reform through Congress, which lead to the widespread adoption of the Internet/WWW as it is today. And he does deserve a lot of credit for that.

I'm sure McCain has been a supporter of telecommucations too.

Sodas
09-16-2008, 01:46 PM
Then maybe the McCain people should have been smarter and held up a Qualcomm based phone. It just makes them seem out of touch because they don't realize just how badly we rely on foriegn technology at the moment.

Sodas
09-16-2008, 02:06 PM
Here is the McCain's record ~

Telecommunications Act of 1996 - Voted Against. Passed 81-18, and signed into law by President Clinton. It was the first major telecommunication, including internet and cellphones, revision in over 60 years.

McCain authored the Consumer Broadband Deregulation Act of 2002 which did not pass. Democrats claimed it "eliminated the requirement of the 1996 law that telecommunication companies provide access to competitors."

Internet Tax Freedom Act of 2003 - passed 97-3 with McCain in majority but not as a sponser. This was basically a "moratorium on taxes for activities on the Intenet."

Going forward -
McCain is not a sponsor of the "Connect the Nation Act"
McCain is not a sponsor with Senator Rockefeller's call for a universal next generation broadband by 2015
McCain isn't a sponsor of the "Internet Freedom Act"

Crispin's Crispian
09-16-2008, 03:05 PM
Here is the McCain's record ~

Telecommunications Act of 1996 - Voted Against. Passed 81-18, and signed into law by President Clinton. It was the first major telecommunication, including internet and cellphones, revision in over 60 years.

McCain authored the Consumer Broadband Deregulation Act of 2002 which did not pass. Democrats claimed it "eliminated the requirement of the 1996 law that telecommunication companies provide access to competitors."

Internet Tax Freedom Act of 2003 - passed 97-3 with McCain in majority but not as a sponser. This was basically a "moratorium on taxes for activities on the Intenet."

Going forward -
McCain is not a sponsor of the "Connect the Nation Act"
McCain is not a sponsor with Senator Rockefeller's call for a universal next generation broadband by 2015
McCain isn't a sponsor of the "Internet Freedom Act"
hahahahah!

Fantastic research, Sodas.

irerancincpkc
09-16-2008, 04:27 PM
On a somewhat related topic...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1Jr4YfSemk

So McCain's top economic advisor says he wouldn't be able to run a corporation...here is Obama's response.

If John McCain’s top economic advisor doesn’t think he can run a corporation, how on Earth can he run the largest economy in the world in the midst of a financial crisis? Apparently even the people who run his campaign agree that the economy is an issue John McCain doesn’t understand as well as he should.

Ouch. :D

Crispin's Crispian
09-16-2008, 04:35 PM
Nothing like sound bites to make a case.

Ivhon
09-16-2008, 05:16 PM
Nothing like sound bites to make a case.

That's all the average voter pays attention to.
There are plenty of substantive resources out there for the more discerning voter to get details.

But considering that 90% of the voters don't pay attention to more than sound bites (as evidenced by the poll jumps for the Republicans based on nothing but sound bites) how can you fault a candidate for using them? It clearly works for one side, it should be fair game for the other.

Particularly when the sound-bite in question makes a certain amount of sense. Fiorina definitely stuck her foot in her mouth by insinuating that Palin's executive experience - which by Republican definition is more than McCain, Obama or Biden - is fine for being President or VP, but not for running a company.

As if running a single company is more difficult than running a nation of 400 million with the largest economy in the world that just happens to be in the middle of economic, military and social crisis. That's the message she is sending. And while she slams Obama and Biden with it, she also slams her own candidates. I think it was a pretty stupid thing to say, personally.

Sodas
09-16-2008, 07:04 PM
Rofl. Fiorina basically ran HP into the ground. I'm sure many will remember when HP merged with Compaq. That was her idea. How did it turn out? HP laid off thousands. HP moved from respectible to junk in the market place. Compaq's management quit in droves. Quality on everything from personal computers to printers became second rate. HP stock dropped by over half.

Fiorina's track record is horrible. If it wasn't for her so-called support for McCain, she wouldn't be on tv.

The fact that she pointed out something so obvious, that Palin couldn't run a company like HP, is more ironic than anything else.

Two dumb surrogate quotes for the day.

I however thought McCain's idea of a commission to study why the markets collapsed yesterday was more serious. Slamming that statement is beyond easy.

GonzoTheGreat
09-17-2008, 04:01 AM
Here is the McCain's record ~

Bunch of facts
Don't you know that facts are irrelevant when it comes to Republicans?
If facts mattered, there wouldn't be a Republican Party left, after all.

Ozymandias
09-17-2008, 04:10 AM
Don't you know that facts are irrelevant when it comes to Republicans?
If facts mattered, there wouldn't be a Republican Party left, after all.

If facts mattered, neither party would likely exist. Republican backers would fade away because frankly, the vast majority of their support comes from religious fools who base their entire life on a stupid, ignorant, and small minded ideals, and the Democrats would lose their support as high minded idealists realized the promise of their policies never quite works as expected.

But I see your point.

Sodas
09-17-2008, 04:40 AM
I think wholesale statements like that usually prove untrue ;)

There are decent, qualified Republicans.

Bush / McCain defenders at the moment though seem to be inside a bubble.