Why Not Hilary?

[quote]JeffR wrote:
Thanks for the response. However, I was hoping you’d take a peek at Rudy. He’s definetly not business as usual.
[/quote]
I have taken a look at his stance on the “feature” issues; however, I could never bring myself to vote for someone whose only major precedent is being mayor of NY on 9.11. If he had not been mayor on that day would he be running?

I feel like the answer to that question is a resounding “no”. Not to mention I do not like his stance on the war, the patriot act, social security, decriminalization of marijuana (big issue for me), health care, or prescription drugs.

I understand his motivation for supporting the war, having been mayor of one of the places attacked. Would the Mayor of Arlington have the same chance?

[quote]lIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
JeffR wrote:
Thanks for the response. However, I was hoping you’d take a peek at Rudy. He’s definetly not business as usual.

I have taken a look at his stance on the “feature” issues; however, I could never bring myself to vote for someone whose only major precedent is being mayor of NY on 9.11. If he had not been mayor on that day would he be running?

I feel like the answer to that question is a resounding “no”. Not to mention I do not like his stance on the war, the patriot act, social security, decriminalization of marijuana (big issue for me), health care, or prescription drugs.

I understand his motivation for supporting the war, having been mayor of one of the places attacked. Would the Mayor of Arlington have the same chance? [/quote]

liftus,

This is what I fear with most dems: They’ll talk the talk but won’t walk the walk.

Instead of encouraging a more moderate Republican, they’ll make up excuses not to vote for him.

Your response is very typical of what I expect.

You left out his pre-911 clean-up of New York.

Remember the reputation New York has had since, well, FOREVER!?!

Who changed that? It was Rudy.

Again, I fear you and your ilk will see Republican and not be able to see beyond the cover.

JeffR

[quote]hedo wrote:
PGJ wrote:
hedo wrote:
Summary of candidate positions.

http://www.selectsmart.com/president/2008/comparethem.html

Very interesting. I did that candidate selectorat the end to figure out who my ideal candidate would be. Came out Duncan Hunter at 87%. Who is that? Obama came out last at 9%. Hillary was at 21%.

Former California Congressman. Ex-Ranger.

Good guy but a long shot.

[/quote]

Hunter was a Ranger? I’m glad to hear that. That info needs to get out to the public. We don’t need another draft dodger in power or their wife, we need a Ranger/Spec. ops type in a time of war. Honestly, I always liked Colin Powell. Its too early to really start paying attention, but Im glad to hear he is a Ranger.

[quote]jumper wrote:
hedo wrote:
PGJ wrote:
hedo wrote:
Summary of candidate positions.

http://www.selectsmart.com/president/2008/comparethem.html

Very interesting. I did that candidate selectorat the end to figure out who my ideal candidate would be. Came out Duncan Hunter at 87%. Who is that? Obama came out last at 9%. Hillary was at 21%.

Former California Congressman. Ex-Ranger.

Good guy but a long shot.

Hunter was a Ranger? I’m glad to hear that. That info needs to get out to the public. We don’t need another draft dodger in power or their wife, we need a Ranger/Spec. ops type in a time of war. Honestly, I always liked Colin Powell. Its too early to really start paying attention, but Im glad to hear he is a Ranger.[/quote]

Powell and Rice would make an awesome team.

[quote]jumper wrote:
hedo wrote:
PGJ wrote:
hedo wrote:
Summary of candidate positions.

http://www.selectsmart.com/president/2008/comparethem.html

Very interesting. I did that candidate selectorat the end to figure out who my ideal candidate would be. Came out Duncan Hunter at 87%. Who is that? Obama came out last at 9%. Hillary was at 21%.

Former California Congressman. Ex-Ranger.

Good guy but a long shot.

Hunter was a Ranger? I’m glad to hear that. That info needs to get out to the public. We don’t need another draft dodger in power or their wife, we need a Ranger/Spec. ops type in a time of war. Honestly, I always liked Colin Powell. Its too early to really start paying attention, but Im glad to hear he is a Ranger.[/quote]

75th. Rangers, Vietnam Vet.

He’s a longshot but you never know…

http://www.gohunter08.com/inner.asp?z=2

He also served in the 173rd Airborne in Vietnam. America needs a badass SOB in office like this. I would like to see him and Powell on the ticket or Thompson.

[quote]jumper wrote:
He also served in the 173rd Airborne in Vietnam. America needs a badass SOB in office like this. I would like to see him and Powell on the ticket or Thompson. [/quote]

Imagine the FEAR and FURY you’d see from lixy and his pals.

I may vote for him just to watch them squirm.

JeffR

[quote]JeffR wrote:
lIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
I’ve just never actually heard anyone give real reasons why she would make a “crazy bitch” of a president.

I know I don’t fall into the conservative camp but I will say why I do not want her to be nominated.

  1. she seems too insincere.

  2. she has no real policy (other than perhaps health care) that I have heard her talk about.

  3. she is just a legacy from her husband and I don’t think that is good (at this time) for the this country.

  4. I don’t think she has the guts to just say what she means (of mean what she says) which is the most important thing we should see in a presidential candidate–not just spouting rhetoric to get the votes.

  5. she voted to go to war with a country that was never a threat to us–which shows ultimately a lack of judgement.

  6. and…she can’t even play the sax.

liftus,

I’m very curious to see if any of you die-hard dems will give Rudy a sniff.

He was the only candidate in the recent debate who was pro-choice and certainly the only one who donated to planned parenthood.

He also is known for speaking his mind.

He meets many of your stated criteria.

I’m guessing most of the dems who claim to have an open mind and insist they vote the person and not the party, are just windbags.

However, I’d be glad to be wrong.

JeffR

[/quote]

He’s also a big supporter of big authority. Something I don’t like. If It comes down to him or Hilary, it’d be a choice for me. I have no idea who I’d vote for in that situation.

Should Ron Paul get the nomination (as if) he’d have my vote off the bat!

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Disclaimer: This is in no way putting my support behind Hilary Clinton as a presidential candidate.

When I look at the GOP line-up, I can name at least one thing I don’t like, usually many things, about what the candidates say they are going to do. While I understand Hilary comes off as incredibly insincere and power hungry, she isn’t much worse than most politicians. I’m asking my conservative friends, why don’t you like her? I see the argument against Obama, he’s indecisive, no experience, ect…

But Hilary has by far the most experience and connections needed to be an effective President (not that she’d make a good one, just an effective one). I recently realized I’d never actually heard the real argument against her, and I’m curious.

What about her voting record, or her campaign platform do you dislike in particular? What has she said she will do as President that you dislike? I’ve heard the whole “She’s crazy” and "She’d end up doing this and this and this), but what about her actual message is not to like? What about her period as a NY Senator rubs you guys the wrong way?

I’ve just never actually heard anyone give real reasons why she would make a “crazy bitch” of a president.

And, of course, I’ll gladly answer any questions about the GOP candidates individually; I will say what I do not like about their platforms, if asked.[/quote]

Hillary made her stance on guns clear the first time she was in office, “evil looking guns are bad.”

An AK-47 with a synthetic stock: Bad!
An AK-47 with a wooden stock: Good.
A muzzle loaded rifle with a bayonet: Bad!
An M-16 without a bayonet: Good.

That is why Republicans hate her.

At the very least, Obama hasn’t had enough time to contradict himself… not to mention that he comes from a conservative generation.

Yes, he talks a good liberal game. However, in the end, he will kick a#$ and take names if the U.S. is attacked.

That is why so many ‘Republicans’ will vote for him in 2008. If their choice is a fudge-packing baby killer and Obama… Obama wins.

Look at the front page of Drudge today.

billy boy is doing commercials for hillary.

God, I truly love it!!!

It almost makes me giddy thinking about her as the nominee.

It seems like many on the far left have had hillary in their pocket for about the last 12 years.

You could sense that they were just waiting to unleash her.

When she loses, she will be finished. The clinton “mystique” and all her schemes will disappear.

Since Bill Richardson won’t be the nominee, I am rooting for hillary unashamedly (for a very different reason). I would consider voting for Richardson. hillary, not a chance in hell.

I encourage all the democrats (and Republicans when available) to vote for her in the primaries. Donate to her campaign.

Let’s get this movement, rolling!!!

hillary in 2008 and beyond!!!

JeffR

[quote]JeffR wrote:
I encourage all the democrats (and Republicans when available) to vote for her in the primaries. Donate to her campaign.
[/quote]

I encourage all democrats to register as republicans and write in Michael Moore on the primary ballot. Lets see who can get the last laugh. You republicans/conservatives go ahead and vote in Hillary…

Democracy inaction.

[quote]jumper wrote:
hedo wrote:
PGJ wrote:
hedo wrote:
Summary of candidate positions.

http://www.selectsmart.com/president/2008/comparethem.html

Very interesting. I did that candidate selectorat the end to figure out who my ideal candidate would be. Came out Duncan Hunter at 87%. Who is that? Obama came out last at 9%. Hillary was at 21%.

Former California Congressman. Ex-Ranger.

Good guy but a long shot.

Hunter was a Ranger? I’m glad to hear that. That info needs to get out to the public. We don’t need another draft dodger in power or their wife, we need a Ranger/Spec. ops type in a time of war. Honestly, I always liked Colin Powell. Its too early to really start paying attention, but Im glad to hear he is a Ranger.[/quote]

Good thing he’s a Republican. If he were a democrat, it would take them 3 weeks to convince you he was a coward and the more patriotic thing to do was to vote for the Republican draft dodger.

Hey, they did it before.

[quote]JeffR wrote:
If you are seriously interested here is a pretty good discussion (scroll down)

www.gonemild.com/2004/11/why-do-they-hate-hillary-clinton-so.html

I for one, am thrilled that she will be the nominee.

The electoral map stacks up against her BIG TIME.

hillary’s supporters assume that women will come to her side based on gender.

You watch, they’ll abandon her in droves. I’ll bet quite a few are insulted by her assuming their vote.
Women just aren’t that stupid.

Further, many women can see right through her. Many women are suspicious that she only married billy boy (and stayed with him) to trade off the name. They don’t have a lot of respect for someone who tolerates infidelity.

In the end, her genitalia won’t save her.

As you know, most men outright HATE her. From her dumping on traditional values “I could have stayed home and baked cookies.” To her arrogant and pathetic attempt (unelected I might add) to reform health care. To her myriad of quotes that sound like communism.

I’m salivating at the opportunity to oppose her. We Republicans know that dems are ruthless when someone loses a Presidential nomination.

When she loses, she’s finished. She’ll become a pathetic shell flailing in the wilderness (gore/kerry/mondale/dukakis).

JeffR
[/quote]

Most Americans won’t vote for her because she’s a woman. They hate women in charge.

Most won’t vote for her because she’s smart. They hate smart people.

That’s why they got stuck with Bush who got them stuck in Iraq.

When you read about all the lives wasted in Iraq, you just think by yourself how you made it all possible by voting for Bush. Don’t you feel proud about that? I bet you do.

And how much worse it would be if you voted for someone smart. Oh, the horror.

Remember when Bill was in charge? The economy was soaring. Unemployment was low. There was a surplus. People were actually worrying about how the government was going to spend the surplus.

Bill was getting along with all his allies. Remember when you guys had allies?

How were the oil prices then?

But that didn’t matter. The pres had sex.

Oh the horror.

Good thing you voted for Bush who put an end to all that.
The economy went down. Unemployment went up. There was the biggest deficit in history, but it didn’t help the economy much.

Bush is despised all over the world.

Oil prices went up. Way up.

But that doesn’t matter.

Bush doesn’t have sex.

And that’s important.

Hey, if you play your vote right, the pigs might screw up your country so badly it might NEVER recover.

Wouldn’t that be something? And you could blame Bill.
Or me. You could blame me.

Or the Islamo-fascists or how you prefer to call them.
Never hold yourself accountable though. Stupid people don’t make mistakes. They’re always right.

Vote for one of your self declared patriots, and Osama will love you for it.

You know you want to.

I know you’re going to.

Don’t let me down.

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
.[/quote]

Exatcly.

She’s a woman and she’s smarter than you. So she must be a bitch.

Never trust a woman. Never put her in charge.
Never trust someone who is smarter than you. Never put one of those in charge.

If only you could vote for Bush again. Perhaps he has a twin. Or a clone.

You guys make it sound like you can choose between Hillary and perfection.
Do you really believe that?

I think the choice is change and more of the same.

I’d vote for change.

[quote]reckless wrote:
JeffR wrote:
If you are seriously interested here is a pretty good discussion (scroll down)

www.gonemild.com/2004/11/why-do-they-hate-hillary-clinton-so.html

I for one, am thrilled that she will be the nominee.

The electoral map stacks up against her BIG TIME.

hillary’s supporters assume that women will come to her side based on gender.

You watch, they’ll abandon her in droves. I’ll bet quite a few are insulted by her assuming their vote.
Women just aren’t that stupid.

Further, many women can see right through her. Many women are suspicious that she only married billy boy (and stayed with him) to trade off the name. They don’t have a lot of respect for someone who tolerates infidelity.

In the end, her genitalia won’t save her.

As you know, most men outright HATE her. From her dumping on traditional values “I could have stayed home and baked cookies.” To her arrogant and pathetic attempt (unelected I might add) to reform health care. To her myriad of quotes that sound like communism.

I’m salivating at the opportunity to oppose her. We Republicans know that dems are ruthless when someone loses a Presidential nomination.

When she loses, she’s finished. She’ll become a pathetic shell flailing in the wilderness (gore/kerry/mondale/dukakis).

JeffR

Most Americans won’t vote for her because she’s a woman. They hate women in charge.

Most won’t vote for her because she’s smart. They hate smart people.

That’s why they got stuck with Bush who got them stuck in Iraq.

When you read about all the lives wasted in Iraq, you just think by yourself how you made it all possible by voting for Bush. Don’t you feel proud about that? I bet you do.

And how much worse it would be if you voted for someone smart. Oh, the horror.

Remember when Bill was in charge? The economy was soaring. Unemployment was low. There was a surplus. People were actually worrying about how the government was going to spend the surplus.

Bill was getting along with all his allies. Remember when you guys had allies?

How were the oil prices then?

But that didn’t matter. The pres had sex.

Oh the horror.

Good thing you voted for Bush who put an end to all that.
The economy went down. Unemployment went up. There was the biggest deficit in history, but it didn’t help the economy much.

Bush is despised all over the world.

Oil prices went up. Way up.

But that doesn’t matter.

Bush doesn’t have sex.

And that’s important.

Hey, if you play your vote right, the pigs might screw up your country so badly it might NEVER recover.

Wouldn’t that be something? And you could blame Bill.
Or me. You could blame me.

Or the Islamo-fascists or how you prefer to call them.
Never hold yourself accountable though. Stupid people don’t make mistakes. They’re always right.

Vote for one of your self declared patriots, and Osama will love you for it.

You know you want to.

I know you’re going to.

Don’t let me down.[/quote]

Horrible post.

You certainly are a useful troll.

If you are for something, it is advisable to agree with the exact opposite.

For instance, I think the gender issue will balance out.

For every man (or woman) who is sexist for, there will be an equal number who will be sexist against.

Anyway, you are a bad person with no understanding of anything except muffins.

JeffR

[quote]JeffR wrote:
Anyway, you are a bad person with no understanding of anything except muffins.[/quote]

I nominate this for “Put Down of the Month.”

[quote]pookie wrote:
JeffR wrote:
Anyway, you are a bad person with no understanding of anything except muffins.

I nominate this for “Put Down of the Month.”[/quote]

2nd

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Why not hilary? [/quote]

'Cause she supports the war.

'Nuff said.

[quote]pookie wrote:
JeffR wrote:
Anyway, you are a bad person with no understanding of anything except muffins.

I nominate this for “Put Down of the Month.”[/quote]

3rd.

Make it a bran muffin, and I’ll double that 3rding.