He's got a fair amount on protecting our right to keep and bear assault weapons, and rolling back Roe v. Wade, but nothing on helping young people get a college, or other post-secondary, education.
According to the TG: Legislative Report: February 20, 2008
"The likely Republican nominee, Arizona Senator John McCain, has no stated position on the federal role in providing, or even promoting, access to postsecondary education. Aside from (but also including to a significant degree) the high profile issues of health insurance, Medicare, and Social Security, the traditional and historical position of the Republican Party is that the federal role in providing support for domestic education, health and human service, and job programs should be as limited as possible. And entitlement programs should be as limiting as politically possible. It is likely that the cost of the two major student loan programs would be a major consideration, with performance another factor. This is borne out by the results of the annual program evaluations of the current Office of Management and Budget Program Assessment and Rating Tool (PART) of the FFELP and FDLP."
It's interesting to compare John McCain's non-position, with the variety of ideas Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have provided to help ensure our nation provides young people an opportunity to get a college, or other post-secondary, education.
It would be helpful if the talking heads on network news shows would stop talking about Hillary vs. Obama and discuss John McCain's positions (or lack of positions) and how they compare to either Hillary or Obama's.
Having people's attention diverted from the real issues, gives John McCain a free ride for now, but after the presidential debates start and people get a chance to compare John McCain side by side with Barack Obama, that free ride could very well turn into a free fall.
________________________________
Postscript - June 1, 2008
When I wrote John McCain has information on his website about protecting our right to keep and bear assault weapons, I didn't mean to imply I don't support the second amendment right of law abiding citizens to keep and bear arms. What I do believe is that the issue of people in the U.S. not having access to all the guns they want is pretty much being taken
Actually the second amendment doesn't say "law-abiding citizens"it says "the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" so if we were strict constitionalists we would have to say criminal type people have the right to arm themselves, which is pretty much the way things have worked out.
I'd be in favor of a law that limits gun ownership to those who hunt or use them for target shooting, but given the number of guns we have in our society there is no law that is going to keep them out of the hands of bad people who don't obey the law. Depending on who you are and where you live - you may feel you need - or in fact do need - a gun to protect yourself from the bad guys.
That premise that you are going to defend yourself with a gun from a criminal who also has a gun, and intends to do you bodily harm, means you better be able to use it quicker than they can.
I've always thought a better plan than keeping a heavy pistol in my shirt or a loaded shotgun under the bed would be to be aware of my surroundings, learn self-defense, and use my brain to protect myself and those around me rather than depending on my quick-draw skills. Call me foolish but I don't want to live with the paranoia that the world is such a dangerous place that I need to have a gun nearby at all times (if you use your head there's usually some kind of weapon around you that you could use as a last resort).
When I wrote John McCain has information on his website about protecting our right to keep and bear assault weapons, I didn't mean to imply I don't support the second amendment right of law abiding citizens to keep and bear arms. What I do believe is that the issue of people in the U.S. not having access to all the guns they want is pretty much being taken
Actually the second amendment doesn't say "law-abiding citizens"it says "the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" so if we were strict constitionalists we would have to say criminal type people have the right to arm themselves, which is pretty much the way things have worked out.
I'd be in favor of a law that limits gun ownership to those who hunt or use them for target shooting, but given the number of guns we have in our society there is no law that is going to keep them out of the hands of bad people who don't obey the law. Depending on who you are and where you live - you may feel you need - or in fact do need - a gun to protect yourself from the bad guys.
That premise that you are going to defend yourself with a gun from a criminal who also has a gun, and intends to do you bodily harm, means you better be able to use it quicker than they can.
I've always thought a better plan than keeping a heavy pistol in my shirt or a loaded shotgun under the bed would be to be aware of my surroundings, learn self-defense, and use my brain to protect myself and those around me rather than depending on my quick-draw skills. Call me foolish but I don't want to live with the paranoia that the world is such a dangerous place that I need to have a gun nearby at all times (if you use your head there's usually some kind of weapon around you that you could use as a last resort).
