Huckabee- Health

k.khan
per 3


During the track of his campaign Republican candidate Mike Huckabee has been asked a tremendous amount of questions on his views towards health care. In return, Huckabee has responded stating, “We can make health care more affordable by reforming medical liability; adopting electronic record keeping; making health insurance more portable from one job to another; expanding health savings accounts to everyone, not just those with high deductibles; and making health insurance tax deductible for individuals and families as it now is for businesses... When I'm President, Americans will have more control of their health care options, not less.” This response could be easily said, but in reality could it easily be accomplished? (Huckabee)

Huckabee believes, “Americans who live healthy lifestyles should be rewarded in the cost of their health insurance. In a consumer-based system, we have some skin in the game, some incentives to stay healthy . . . so that we’ll have tax-free money coming back to us from our health savings accounts.” Many believe Huckabee poorly demonstrates the issue on health and seemingly tries to give the people of the United States false hope. (The People to People Organization)

Though some believe that Huckabee “has what seems to be a practical long-term approach to health-care reform.” This is mostly due to the fact that Huckabee had issues with his own health; this issue being his weight. During his time of being a Baptist Minister Huckabee faced the problem of being overweight, but soon after Huckabee came to realize that his life may be at risk and started his routine walks and healthy eating habits, this finally leading to his weight loss of an astonishing 120 pounds. If it were that simple then in the United States of America, being overweight or obese wouldn’t be such a great health issue. In America 62% of adults and 34% of children are overweight and or obese. Having such high percentages of Americans being overweight Huckabee’s health plan, seeks to create “insurance rewards for those who avoid using tobacco, drinking alcohol, and staying fit.” This issue of being overweight and of obese helps Huckabee, but could it also help him tackle the plans of Medicare, medical, and all those other health questions that America faces today?( Jackson Free Press)

Huckabee has many great ideas and plans on health care, but are his ideas up to date with today’s problems rather than tomorrows or yesterdays? “The problem with Huckabee’s plan, however, is that it looks too far into the future.” How does it look too far into the future? Well, Huckabee states that when he is president, “he will ‘work with the private sector, Congress, health-care providers, and other concerned parties to lead a complete overhaul of our health care system,’” This being said, Huckabee doesn’t seem to look at the actuality and with the things that need to be faced with now rather then ahead. He doesn’t see “the immediate health-care problem staring us in the face.” ( Jackson Free Press)

Some wonder if the republican parties share the same view on certain issues. In this case Huckabee has a similar outlook of health plans with fellow republican running mate, Mitt Romney. The similarity here is that Huckabee points out the fact that health care “should move from employer-based to consumer-based” Mitt Romney shares the same concept. Huckabee disagrees about the fact that employers spend ridiculous amounts to “employers spend and to insure employees, citing that ‘General Motors spends more on health care than it does on steel, $1,500 per car,’ and ‘Starbucks spends more on health care than it does on coffee beans.’” The main issue of health care is what seems to be the key to every voter’s decision on whether they agree on the strong oppositions their candidate gives their input on. (Mike Huckabee)

Another big issue that has to do with health is outcome of AIDS and what each candidate views are on it. In 1992 former Baptist Minister Mike Huckabee had been asked what should done with the AIDS patients in response Huckabee stated, “the call for quarantining AIDS patients” but now in 2008 Huckabee was asked if he stands by that now he replied, “I had simply made the point that in the late '80s, when we didn't know as much as we do now about AIDS, we were acting more out of political correctness…” The answer that Huckabee had given in 1992 could very easily allow other candidates to re-quote him and allow him to look like the bad guy. (Huckabee)

All in all Huckabee is like any other candidate on the issues of health, whether being democrat or republican, his views on health care are nearly the same as the ones of his fellow running mates. Though questions involving health care are important, many could take in consideration the fact that all candidates running have the same ideas, whether ones may seem a bit more promising than the others, a flaw could always be seen.

Work cited

Source A : Huckabee, Mike. "Mike Huckabee for President- Issues". 2/5/08

Source B: Hope, "Health Affairs". The People to People Organization. 2/5/08

Source C: Jackson Free Press, "Let’s (Health) Care For Ourselves". Jackson Free Press. 2/5/08

Source D: "Mike Huckabee on Health Care". On the Issues. 2/7/08

Mitt Romney's view on Iran

NPlascencia p.3

Mitt Romney's view on Iran

One of this year’s Presidential candidates is Mitt Romney, the previously Governor of Massachusetts, is campaigning for the Republican Party in the 2008 United States Presidential Election. His views on Iran generally agree with those of President Bush. Romney believes that the United States should diplomatically isolate Iran and inform the Iranian people of the consequences of a nuclear invasion. He thinks that the United States should tighten economic sanctions. Romney also believes that Iran is a genocidal nation in which case going to war is always going to be an option.

Mitt Romney is a strong supporter of keeping troops in Iraq, also supporting Bush’s stand on Iran. Romney basically says that he will take whatever action necessary to keep stability. He declares, “If for some reason they continue down their course of folly toward nuclear ambition, then I would take military action." (Source D) Romney is most definitely pro-war and he is intent on keeping American control over future Iranian threats. But Romney does make it clear that he has no intent on going to war with Iran; he simply believes that “we do have interest in making sure that they do not develop additional nuclear technology.” (Source B)

Romney makes his thoughts about and position on Iran very clear. The reason that Romney is so intent on his stand with Iran is because he believes Iran to be "a genocidal nation, a suicidal nation, in some respects." (Source A) Romney believes that Iran, “is a nation where the genocidal inclination is really frightening and having a nation of this nature develop nuclear weaponry is unacceptable to this country and to the Middle East." (Source A) Romney views the fact that Iran is an unstable nation with the capabilities of establishing a nuclear threat a real hazard to our country. Also, Romney states that Iran has been involved in the conflict with Iraq and also with attacks on our American soldiers. Romney believes that the President has “whatever authority is necessary to protect this country and protect our troops.” (Source B) He is basically saying that if he becomes president, he will always consider the option of war, because he is capable of it.

This presidential candidate believes that the United States should diplomatically disconnect with the Iranian people and that we should educate the people, not the government, about nuclear consequences. He thinks that negotiating with the Iranians is not going to change much. Romney believes that it is not the government that we need to be concerned with, but the religious leaders and the people themselves. Since governmental negotiations will be useless against the nuclear terror threat, Romney says that we should not invade them, or go to war with them, but to inform the people causing the treat. According to Romney, the United States needs to inform the religious leaders and Iranian people that “a downside to having fissile material in your country and, that is, if that material falls in the hands of terrorists who use it, that the world community is not going to just respond to the terrorists, it's going to respond to who provided that material.” (Source B) Romney wants to use a scare tactic on the Iranians to force their people and religious leaders to influence the groups around them to abstain from developing, or using, nuclear weapons. As he said, the world will not just blame the terrorists, but the whole country; that is why they need to try to eliminate nuclear terrorization.

In his opinion, Mitt Romney believes that the Unites States should be tough with the Iranians. He stated that we should, “Isolate Iran diplomatically,” and for us also to, “tighten economic sanctions.” (Source E) Romney claims that this can be done by restricting Iranian access to our banking and credit services. He congratulates the Bush Administration for following through with this plan to tighten economic sanctions. Romney states that this will be much more effective on Iran if other countries join us as well because, “financial, and credit and monetary penalties are some of the most effective sanctions there are.” (Source C) Romney thinks that Iran can be compelled to negotiate through peaceable options over the nuclear weapons issue.
As he previously stated, Mitt Romney thinks that Iran is “a genocidal nation, a suicidal nation, in some respects.” (Source A) In accordance to this stand, he takes a stand that he does not support Ahmadinejad and his political stance over Iran. Romney boldly states that, "there is one place of course where I'd welcome Ahmadinejad with open arms: and that's in a court where he would stand trial for incitement to genocide, under the terms of the Genocide Convention." (Source E) Romney makes his point clear that he does not support the Iranian people with their ‘genocidal’ and ‘suicidal’ ways.

In conclusion, Mitt Romney takes positions that are along the lines of Bush. He states that we should isolate Iran diplomatically; tighten economic sanctions; communicate to the Iranian people the folly of nuclear weaponry, and that Ahmadinejad should be charged for indictment of genocide.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

SOURCE A:
LEUPP, GARY . ""A Genocidal, Suicidal Nation"." COUNTERPUNCH February 19, 2007 .

SOURCE B:
Stephanopoulos, "Romney: Iran Is 'Suicidal' Nation ." ABC News Feb. 16, 2007 .

SOURCE C:
"With a Business Record Like That, Romney Should Just Stick to the Flip-Flops." The Democtratic Party December 20, 2007 .

SOURCE D:
"No Speech Can Fix Romney's Flawed Foreign Policy." The Democtratic Party December 7, 2007 .

SOURCE E:
"ISOLATE IRAN DIPLOMATICALLY; TIGHTEN ECONOMIC SANCTIONS." New York Times February 8, 2008 .

Iraq-Barack Obama

KHilva pd.4

"I believe that, having waged a war that has unleashed daily carnage and uncertainty in Iraq, we have to manage our exit in a responsible way - with the hope of leaving a stable foundation for the future, but at the very least taking care not to plunge the country into an even deeper and, perhaps, irreparable crisis." Barack Obama, a 2008 presidental candidate is opposed to the War in Iraq and claims that he will start to withdraw American troops from Iraq if he is elected president.

Although he is opposed to the war, Obama makes a point that Iraq needs help with reconstruction, but also that they need to help themselves and get involved."We have to get more Iraqis involved with the reconstruction efforts. After all, it is the Iraqis who best know their country and have the greatest stake in restoring basic services."

"I believe that U.S. forces are still a part of the solution in Iraq." Here, Obama faces a difficult delima in addressing the War in Iraq.
"The Administration tells us there can not be reconstruction without security, but many Iraqis make the opposite argument. They say Iraq will never be secure until there is reconstruction and citizens see that a better future awaits them.
The Administration also tells us that they are making progress, but can not publicize the specific successes out of security concerns.
If we are unable to point out the progress, how are Iraqis - especially ones we are trying to persuade to claim a bigger stake in the future of their country - ever to know that the Americans efforts are helping to make their lives better? How does this approach help to quell the insurgency?" From this, America can gather that Obama is addressing what may be termed as a "lose- lose situatoin"

On the one hand he wants troops to be pulled out of Iraq, on the other he admits that Iraq is in serious need of help and wants to prevent a civil war from wreaking havoc in Iraq. His solution to this obsticle is to slowly withdraw our soldiers. "First and foremost, after the December 15 elections and during the course of next year, we need to focus our attention on how reduce the U.S. military footprint in Iraq. Notice that I say "reduce," and not "fully withdraw." **http://obama.senate.gov/speech/051122-moving_forward/**

Barack Obama shows a steady opinion in each speech, but readers and listeners have found flaws in the consistancy in different speeches on the same topic. "Obama is opposed to a complete withdrawal: “We should leave behind only a minimal over-the-horizon military force in the region to protect American personnel and facilities, continue training Iraqi security forces, and root out al Qaeda.” Yet Obama wants to “make clear that we seek no permanent bases in Iraq.”

**http://middleeast.about.com/od/usmideastpolicy/a/me071202a.htm**

Another issue that Obama must face is being scrutinized by the people, which obviously happens when one runs to president. The candidate has said that he was not for the war in the first place, then he stated that he believes the troops should not all come home at once, he has also been said to have played the blame game when it comes to topics on Iraq. These actions have been considered "wishy-washy" and Obama has been labled by some as a "people pleaser". "CHICAGO, Nov. 22 -- Sen. Barack Obama said President Bush should admit mistakes in waging the Iraq war and reduce the number of troops stationed there in the next year."

**http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/22/AR2005112201661.html**

Obama seems to be a man that will say what he thinks is necessary in order to win presidency. He uses appeal to all people. Those for and those against the war. The video posted below shows Obama discussing what how he wants to stop the war.

*http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/*

***Works cited***

^^http://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/Barack_Obama_War_+_Peace.htm
^^http://www.examiner.com/a538597~_The_Obama_position_on_the_war_.html
^^http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/22/AR2005112201661.html

^^http://obama.senate.gov/speech/051122-moving_forward/

^^http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/

Senator John McCain on Climate Change

wbarloon
p. 3

John McCain is one of the leading candidates of the Republican Party for the election of 2008 and has been foreseen to be the winner of the Republican nomination, though this is yet to be determined in actuality. One of the leading issues of this election is that of climate change, otherwise referred to as global warming and what each of the candidates plans to do or not do about this delicate topic. On the Democratic side, climate change is all too real and terrible. It is their belief that drastic measures have to be taken as soon as possible to relieve the stress caused by greenhouse gasses on the atmosphere. On the other hand, the Republican Party has chosen to believe that climate change is fictitious and that very little or nothing has to be done at the present. Despite all of this, Senator John McCain has chosen to preach a path somewhere in the middle of all of this. He has neither taken a strong stand towards solving the problem, or standing back and living under the pretense that the climate change does not really exist. Because of this in between stance, Senator McCain has and is still taking criticism from both the Democratic left and the Republican right.

McCain’s stance on the issue goes something like this, he believes climate change to be a real a potential threat and wants to take steps towards eliminating it, however, he is willing to let those who have the financial means to continue with their gas emissions as long as they pay for them. He plans on moving the country towards more renewable fuel sources including nuclear power, while simultaneously moving farther and farther away from the United States’ dependence upon oil for our energy. On the Republican side of his argument, he states that, “other proposed remedies, such as fuel standards for cars, which many Democrats are proposing, would be more disruptive to the economy” (source A). This proves that Senator McCain is still far enough away from the Democratic left and way of thinking that he would still rather do nothing than to take the dramatic measures that have been endorsed by the Democrats.

For his actions, McCain has been criticized for promoting his, “up and down candidacy” and for, “confusing the issue by laying out moderate solutions to a crisis that demands bold action” (source B). This truly represents the position of John McCain, it could almost be described as indecision on a subject that everyone is looking for an answer to, whether that answer is to let it be or to take real action. The public is not looking for something in between and uncertain. As far as the Republican side of the argument is concerned, McCain is way out of line, pushing the envelope, and being outside the box. This is mainly because McCain is talking about climate change like it is real. In a New Hampshire campaign stop, McCain made sure to, “educate the audience who still thought it was a myth”. It being climate change and the audience who still believed it to be a myth are the Republicans. McCain is trying to take the Republican Party in a step towards reconstruction of the system to create a cleaner atmosphere, and as one writer states, “McCain took them the first and most important step: recognizing that climate change is a major problem”. But that was in New Hampshire, in front of a Republican crowd in South Carolina, McCain held a campaign stop on an abandoned aircraft carrier, and did not once mention climate change. This is where the Democratic critics come in to play. For McCain to make such a big deal out of it in one state, and then to completely disregard it in front of a different crowd in a different state does not show the commitment to the climate change problem that the Democrats practice. The Democrats say that McCain is not being even close to progressive enough and needs to realize the extent of the problem and take action. The Democrats seem to almost forget the fact that John McCain is currently the leading Republican representative and he has taken a step towards climate change while the other Republican candidates disregard it.

There is heavy criticism coming the Republican side of this debate. Senator Mitt Romney has been especially outspoken about McCain’s ideas. Romney has accused McCain of supporting, “radical climate change legislation” and, “pushing for a massive new energy tax” (source C). In essence, Romney is calling McCain a Democrat, touché Mitt, touché. Romney even went so far as to quote the bible in his battering of McCain. In St. Matthew 7:15, “beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves”. In this sense it appears that Romney feels Senator McCain has somehow betrayed the Republican Party and is leading them on, only to destroy them later.

Source A:

http://www.qctimes.com/articles/2007/05/08/news/local/doc46400ef9dfea7939544485.txt

Source B:

http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2008/01/19/john-mccain-and-climate-change-dispatch-from-sc/

Source C:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x129810

Source D:

http://punchup.files.wordpress.com/2007/06/john_mccain.jpg

Barack Obama: Abortion and Gay Rights

ABasurto, P3


Barack Obama, one of the Democratic presidential candidates, has been criticized and judged throughout his presidential campaign on what he has said regarding many of the United States' issues. Two of those issues being Abortion and Gay Rights.


“My job is not to represent Washington to you, but to represent you to Washington” (Source B). In order to accomplish this statement, he has talked about gay rights and abortion in a way that won't offend anyone. On gay rights, he stated that he “supports granting civil unions for gay couples and opposed a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage,” (Source D); while on abortion he believes that “a woman's right to decide how many children to have and when is one of the nation's most fundamental freedoms” (Source A).


“If we are honest with ourselves, we must admit that none of our hands are entirely clean. If we’re honest with ourselves, we’ll acknowledge that our own community has not always been true to King’s vision of a beloved community. We have scorned our gay brothers and sisters instead of embracing them” (Source D). Barack Obama is obviously not against gay people's rights. In his point of view “We can no longer afford to build ourselves up by tearing someone else down” (Source D). This shows that he wants to encourage tolerance, rather than division when it comes to the truth about people and their sexuality. To him homosexuals are no more immoral than heterosexuals, so they shouldn't be classified as a group because of their sexuality. He supports gay rights so much that he co-sponsored a bill that would expand the definition of hate crimes to offenses based on sexual orientation (Source C).

Regarding marriage, he personally believes that it is between a man and a woman. Yet in his book, The Audacity of Hope, he sticks with the fact that he is “open to the possibility that my unwillingness to support gay marriage is misguided ... I may have been infected with society's prejudices and predilections and attributed them to God” (Source E). He thinks that decisions regarding gay marriage should be left to each state, but that he supports in giving civil unions between gay couples the same benefits as a man and woman couple. Obama has said in many occasions that the definition of the word 'marriage' should be “disentangled” from the civil rights of gay people because it causes a lot of controversy towards gay people (Source B).
Obama's position on gays serving in the U.S. Military is supported by the “Don't Ask, Don't tell” Policy, which allows gays to serve in the military only if their sexual orientation remains hidden. But he thinks that this policy, which is very costly, should be reexamined because “gays and lesbians who have been serving ably in the military” shouldn't have to be excluded when they have performed their job as well as a heterosexual (Source B).


Barack Obama's views on Abortion are that it should only happen in terms of the mother’s life or severe health consequences. “There are two principles: There’s the principle that a fetus is not just an appendage, it’s potential life ... They also believe that women should have some control over their bodies and themselves and there is a privacy element to making those decisions” (Source G). Because this is a very sensitive and arguable issue, the only way that it can be solved in Obama's eyes, is by reducing teen pregnancies. The way to do that is by giving sex education to teenagers, not so that they don't have sex, but so that they can act responsibly about it. A parent is a big role in this by communicating to their children so that they take it seriously, not just as a game(Source G). Since Obama is Pro-Abortion, it has caused a lot of controversy within the black community because it has the highest abortion rates compared to any other ethnic group and it “shows a lack of love for the black community and especially for the unborn”(Source F).


Citations:

Source A
"2008 Presidential Campaign Issues." USA Today 06-02-2008 .
Source B
"Barack Obama on gay civil rights." USA Today (2008) 06-02-2008 .
Source C
"Interview With Barack Obama." CNN LARRY KING LIVE 19 Mar 2007 06-02-2008 .
Source D
Jackson, Thomas. "Obama Speaks Out on Gay Rights ." 20 Jan 2008 06-02-2008 .
Source E
"The Candidates on Gay Marriage." The Pew Forum (2008) 06-02-2008 .
Source F
Starr, Penny. "Obama's Abortion Stance Hurts Blacks, Say Pro-Life Experts." CNSNews.com 08 Jan 2008 06-02-2008 .
Source G
Zeleny, Jeff. "Obama Explores Abortion Issue." The New York Times 6 Oct 2007 06-02-2008 .

Edwards on Iraq

Senator John Edwards has a unique view on Iraq and the Iraq War. First and foremost if he is to be elected president he plans to end the war outright by immediately withdrawing 40,000 to 50,000 troops. He wants to have total removal of all troops within twelve to eighteen months. He would then cap the funding for troops. His reasoning for such quick removal of troops is this,” I [Edwards] believe it is a betrayal not to speak out against the escalation of the war our nation is engaged in today, in Iraq. It is a betrayal for this President to send more troops into harm's way when we know it will not succeed in bringing stability to the region.” Edward’s view is that by withdrawing from Iraq, Iraq will be forced to take responsibility for their own country and bring about reconciliation between the Shiites and Sonnies. “He believes that the only solution to the situation in Iraq is a political solution, which requires all the parties in Iraq to take responsibility for the future of their country. By leaving Iraq, the Iraqi people, regional powers, and the entire international community will be forced to engage in the search for a political solution that will end the sectarian violence and create a stable Iraq. Escalating the war sends exactly the wrong signal to the Iraqi people, regional powers and the world.” (Source A) He believes we “can not stay there forever policing a civil war” and that the “peace and stability of the country is dependent upon them”. (Source B) After he has removed all the troops from Iraq he still wishes to keep an American presence to contain the conflict and stop instability in the areas of Kuwait, Afghanistan, and the Persian Gulf, although he would ban any permanent United State’s military bases in Iraq. He would ensure that all troops sent to keep the American presence in those area would first be combat ready and he would ban funding to deploy any new troops to Iraq that do not meet readiness standard.

Senator Edwards also has a strong view on the role the Bush administration played on the Iraq war; “The core of this presidency [George W. Bush] has been a political doctrine that George Bush calls the 'Global War on Terror.' He has used this doctrine like a sledgehammer to justify the worst abuses and biggest mistakes of his administration... The war on terror is a slogan designed only for politics, not a strategy to make America safe. It's a bumper sticker, not a plan. It has damaged our alliances and weakened our standing in the world... The 'war' metaphor has also failed because it exaggerates the role of only one instrument of American power--the military... we must move beyond the idea of a war on terror.”(Source C) Some people, such as journalist Peter Wehner’s, view of this statement is a little different, “The global war on terror is not a "political doctrine" advanced by the Bush Administration or a bumper sticker slogan. Rather, it refers to an epic struggle we are engaged in against Islamic jihadists. These jihadists -- years before George W. Bush became president and years before Operation Iraqi Freedom -- publicly announced, through their fat was, that they were at war against us.”(Source C) Wehner goes on to criticize Edwards for being hypocritical since, in 2002 Edwards voted in favor of the war. Wehner made his opposing view apparent in his article entitled, “Edwards' View is Wrong - and Dangerous”. Not all believe Edwards view is wrong or even dangerous, journalist Patrick Fergusson, endorses Edwards’s view of the Iraq war and the Bush administration’s role in the war. Fergusson writes in his article, “An official endorsement: John Edwards” that, Edwards is the most worthy candidate because, “Edwards has gone on record and apologized for voting in favor of the Iraq war, and is the only one of the top three Democrat candidates to publicly denounce Bush's recent request for more funds for the Iraq War.” (Source D) Edwards made a public apology for his original thoughts on the Iraq war, “I was wrong...The argument for going to war with Iraq was based on intelligence that we now know was inaccurate. The information the American people were hearing from the president -- and that I was being given by our intelligence community -- wasn't the whole story. Had I known this at the time, I never would have voted for this war.”(Source E)

Going along with Senator Edwards plan for Iraq he also wishes to increase diplomatic efforts between the conflicting nations after the withdrawal of troops. He wishes to directly communicate with nations in question, which is something he is extremely critical of the Bush Administration for never doing. In all Edward’s brings forth many unique views on all the different aspects of Iraq and the Iraq war.






Citations:

Source A: Sanam . "Opposed to Troop Increase ." Edwards: Military and War 8-9-07 February .

Source B: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2Lo3dBHlfc
Video

Source C: Wehner, Peter. "Edwards' View is Wrong- and Dangerous ." Clear Politics May 24, 2007 February 7, 2008 .

Source D: Fergusson, Patrick. "An Official endorsement: John Edwards." November 11, 2007 February 7, 2008 .

Source E: Bosman, Jenny. "Edwards Talks About his War Vote." The Caucas December 29, 2007 February 7, 2008 .



HButler
P3

AAguilar- Period 3

John McCain on Abortion and Gay Rights

“John McCain is an experienced conservative leader in the tradition of Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, and Ronald Reagan. He is a common sense conservative who believes in a strong national defense, a smaller, more accountable government, economic growth and opportunity, the dignity of life and traditional values.” As a conservative republican John McCain officially does not believe in abortion or gay marriage, but has contradicted himself on both topics over the years, and has changed his position several times. (Source: A)

Since the 2008 campaign is not McCain’s first campaign for presidency (he also ran in the 2000 election), his views on particular matters, including abortion, have changed. At the beginning of the 2000 campaign, on July 2nd 1998, McCain claimed that “abortions should be legal only when pregnancy resulted from incest, rape, or when the life of the women is endangered”, but by the end of that election he claimed that he would “not support the repeal of Roe v. Wade ”, which states, “abortions are permissible for any reason a woman chooses, up until the "point at which the fetus becomes ‘viable,’ that is, potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid.” However during this same campaign he also declared, “I am proud of my pro-life record in public life, and I will continue to maintain it… As a leader of a pro-life party with a pro-life position, I will persuade young Americans to understand the importance of the preservation of the rights of the unborn.” (Sources: A and B)

Even though he supported the Roe v. Wade decision, to an extent, in the 2000 campaign, by 2007 his ideas on the matter had radically changed and he stated, “It should be overturned.” Throughout the 2008 campaign he has maintained his position against abortion, and claims that if he were elected “Constitutional balance would be restored by the reversal of Roe v. Wade, returning the abortion question to the individual states.” (Source: E)

Although McCain has been inconsistent with his views on abortion, he has maintained a firm position on the promotion of adoption as an alternative. He believes that abortion rights and anti-abortion activists should cooperate on issues of foster care and adoption, as they are good alternates. McCain states, “I don’t believe they should advocate abortion with my tax dollars,” but he does plan to fund programs that will promote the use of alternatives including adoption education, and tax deductions for qualified adoption expenses, as well as the removal of barriers to interracial and interethnic adoptions. John McCain is an adoptive parent himself, which creates some bias, but his views create a reasonable solution for this political issue. “Both pro-life and pro-choice people strongly that we need to eliminate abortion. I and my wife, Cindy, are proud adoptive parents. We encourage adoption in America. We need to improve foster care dramatically. We can work together. We can have respectful disagreements on specific issues, and we can work together on this one.” (Sources: B, D, and E)

Similar to his views on abortion, McCain changed his mind on stem-cell research as well. In the 2000 campaign, McCain was a pro-life candidate, but unexpectedly voted to support fetal tissue research, “because it has helped make progress against Parkinson’s disease,” claiming that he had made his decision, “after a lot of study, consultation, and a lot of prayer”; and then went on to add that he would, “like to have less intensity on this issue.” Countering his previous support for stem-cell research, McCain has taken a position against stem cell research and has promised to fund research programs, including amniotic fluid and adult stem cell research, as well as any other types of scientific study that does not involve the use of human embryos. (Sources: C, D, and E)

Gay marriage is yet another subject that McCain is knowingly against; however he does has been accused of “flip-flopping” his ideas on not only this issue, but also several other issues, especially during his current, 2008 campaign. On October 18th 2006, in “Hardball” interview with MSNBC McCain even made the following statements within 11 minutes of each other: “I think gay marriage should be allowed if there is a ceremony kinda thing if you wanna call it that, I don’t have any problem with that,” and then claimed, “I think that private ceremonies are fine, but gay marriage should not be legal.” In the Huffington Post in particular, McCain called out on these conflicting views, and Hoadley states, ‘‘Sometimes McCain gets a pass because he wasn't a staunch supporter of the federal marriage amendment, but he showed his true colors when he campaigned...to pass the marriage ban in Arizona.’ (McCain starred in two television advertisements supporting the ban.) ‘When the community is looking at McCain, they need to look at the true record he was adamantly opposed to one of the groundbreaking victories in 2006.’” Some even claim that he is “using the same tactics that George Bush used against him in 2000;surreptitiously trying to exploit anti-gay prejudice for votes.” Despite his clashing statements, on paper McCain claims to be against gay marriage, as he is intransigent conservative republican. (Sources: F, G, and H)

Link to October 18th 2006 “Hardball” interview with MSNBC and other "flip-flop" evidence:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeBw28tX5Nw&feature=related

Sources:
Source A: "John McCain." Wikipedia. Wikipedia. "GNU Free Documentation License". 6 Feb. 2008 http://http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCain.>

Source B: Keyes, "John McCain on Abortion." "Family Conference" if daughter wanted an abortion 26 Jan 2000 06Feb2008 http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/John_McCain_Abortion.htm.>

Source C: "John McCain on Abortion." "Supports fetal tissue research; against over-intensity Jan 22, 2000: 06Feb2008 http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/John_McCain_Abortion.htm.>

Source D: "John McCain on Abortion."Republican Debate at Dartmouth College "Support adoption & foster care; work together on abortion"Oct 29, 1999 : 06Feb2008 http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/John_McCain_Abortion.htm.>
Source E: "On Issues: Human Dignity & the Sanctity of Life ." John McCain. 2008. John McCain Campaign. 7 Feb 2008 http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/95b18512-d5b6-456e-90a2-12028d71df58.htm. >