Hilary takes New Hampshire

[AZ_Infantry]

Well, either we have a communication problem or you're just being obstinate - most likely, you're just too filled with hype from the media to look past anything.

Picking out one funny comment and twisting it out of context to make me appear biased against women is just silly. :sarc:



Agreed. Yes, he is just a sniper.

I don't have anything against him - he seems sincere and intelligent, two qualities sadly lacking in most men these days.

I just don't like to be quoted out of context to be branded as sexist. I've been married (and divorced) twice, and both of my wives were my equal in every sense of the word. I work with women I consider my equal. I work with women I consider superior to me (morally, spiritually, financially - not personally). And women serve this country with distinction on the front lines every day.

I am a Conservative Christian that takes a very biblical approach to women/wives: They are an equal part of me as I am an equal part of them. I prefer they stay home and raise my children, but only because I believe a man's place is at work and dual-income families sacrifice a part of the rearing process that children need to grow to healthy, morally and spiritually mature adults. It's nothing at all to do with a sexist attitude of "why buy your woman a watch when she should be close enough to the stove to see the clock."

But Hillary is a Neo-Socialist Left-Winger that would have this country in shambles with her philandering and HATRED of our military. A country is only as secure as the ability and morale of its military - that's my primary voting concern. Well, that and the fact that she'd SLAUGHTER us in taxes to give welfare away and make me pay for every crackhead's dream of sitting at home eating twinkies and breeding with other crackheads. God love socialized medicine.

 

[mmarsh]

I don't have anything against him - he seems sincere and intelligent, two qualities sadly lacking in most men these days.

I just don't like to be quoted out of context to be branded as sexist. I've been married (and divorced) twice, and both of my wives were my equal in every sense of the word. I work with women I consider my equal. I work with women I consider superior to me (morally, spiritually, financially - not personally). And women serve this country with distinction on the front lines every day.

I am a Conservative Christian that takes a very biblical approach to women/wives: They are an equal part of me as I am an equal part of them. I prefer they stay home and raise my children, but only because I believe a man's place is at work and dual-income families sacrifice a part of the rearing process that children need to grow to healthy, morally and spiritually mature adults. It's nothing at all to do with a sexist attitude of "why buy your woman a watch when she should be close enough to the stove to see the clock."

But Hillary is a Neo-Socialist Left-Winger that would have this country in shambles with her philandering and HATRED of our military. A country is only as secure as the ability and morale of its military - that's my primary voting concern. Well, that and the fact that she'd SLAUGHTER us in taxes to give welfare away and make me pay for every crackhead's dream of sitting at home eating twinkies and breeding with other crackheads. God love socialized medicine.

--------------------------------------------------------------
I dont know where you you get the idea that Clinton cannot make a decision, if you look at her voting record she made lots of decisions -most of which were of supporting George Bush disasterous ideas. She supported the war in Iraq, hawkish policies toward Iran, the Patriotic Act, the Bankruptcy Bill, the tax cuts, PLUS she was on the board of Directors of WAL-MART for 6 years making her a very cozy friend of the same corporate interests that now control Washington. Of all the Democrats, her Voting record and past resembles that of a Republican.

And a word about taxes. We have $9 Trillion Dollar Deficit -all thanks to the present disaster and his BORROW-AND-SPEND policies. How do you plan on paying that money back WITHOUT rising taxes, or do you plan on China and Saudi Arabia (they are the debtors) start cashing in the money that they are owed.

 

[Pale Rider]

HILARY CLINTON won the New Hampshire contest as far as the Democrats were concerned. Speaking last night of the result forecast of a big Obama win, Bill Clinton said - B***-S***. He was right.

Now Obama has pledged not to use 9/11 in electioneering and to finish the job in Afghanistan; but is this a promise he can keep? I have grave doubts, it cannot be clever to hang your prospects on such a pledge, surely. That is a bigger problem than Iraq. Oops - bring back Geo W.!

It doesnt matter how tough the Democrats talk when it comes to pulling out of Iraq or the issue in Afghanistan, after they get into office they will take the recommendations from the state department.

 

[AZ_Infantry]

--------------------------------------------------------------
I dont know where you you get the idea that Clinton cannot make a decision, if you look at her voting record she made lots of decisions -most of which were of supporting George Bush disasterous ideas. She supported the war in Iraq, hawkish policies toward Iran, the Patriotic Act, the Bankruptcy Bill, the tax cuts, PLUS she was on the board of Directors of WAL-MART for 6 years making her a very cozy friend of the same corporate interests that now control Washington. Of all the Democrats, her Voting record and past resembles that of a Republican.

And a word about taxes. We have $9 Trillion Dollar Deficit -all thanks to the present disaster and his BORROW-AND-SPEND policies. How do you plan on paying that money back WITHOUT rising taxes, or do you plan on China and Saudi Arabia (they are the debtors) start cashing in the money that they are owed.

That was MY quote, not Del Boys.

My point is made for me in your post:

She supported everything - but then her platform says she never supported it and is now against it. Never a reason offered, all questions avoided, nothing. That's what we call double standards. Sorry, but I abhor those who say one thing at one time because it is hip and then say another thing another time because it is hip. Hillary was the 3rd signature to invade Iraq. Now she is the first to decry it as illegal. This is not backpedaling?

As to taxes, yes! Raise them! But Hillary won't allocate them to the deficit, inflation, the value of the dollar, the integrity of our country...

Go read her political campaign strategy - she is for socialized medicine. That means, according to her, that 80% of every tax dollar (remember, we are already taxed twice on every dollar we spend through earning - Corporate Finance 101) goes to her "new" policies (Stalin, anyone?) and will not assist a rise in the actual weight of the dollar in the world economy. Even North Korea agrees with this, which is why they hold so many securities in the European Dollar as ours decline - that's called a CALL on the dollar, IE: Hoping it will decrease in value by holding futures against it.

Her corporate interests are of little concern to me. She's a smart business women. Unfortunately, a smart business person does not equal a viable presidential candidate when my brothers and sisters are fighting a war.

Any other time, she'd likely get my vote.

 

[Del Boy]

Absolutely right. And I have started another thread to enquire how much differently any of the current candidates might have handled the situation Geo. W. inherited. (Geo. W. Bush - the legend?)

 

[Damien435]

We have $9 Trillion Dollar Deficit

You meant debt. The deficit is the yearly loss when spending is subtracted from income for the US government. And I agree, we do need to fix that, it's one area where I agree whole heartedly with Bill, if we had continued following his budget plans we would be in year seven of a ten year plan to erase the national debt.

As for why Hillary shifting blame is different, it's because she's dodging questions and shifting blame on hypothetical and quite real situations that could happen is she is President. "We'll cross that bridge when we get there." Isn't good enough when talking about how she would handle a terrorist attack on US soil.

I don't understand this fear of "socialized" medicine. If we make a list of the top ten economies in the world by GDP (Nominal) we will find that of the top ten nations on the list, only the United States doesn't have some sort of "socialized" medicine. Sure we'll have to pay more taxes to cover it, but we're already paying monthly fees for our private insurance accounts that don't cover **** unless it's a $4 bottle of antibiotics or a $13,000 knee operation. Anything in between there and your ****ed. At least with a socialized system we aren't paying extra to cover the profit margins and we know that everything will be covered. Oh, and I bet if Hillary puts this together birth control will finally be covered by insurance. The current system is broken and needs fixing.

 

[AZ_Infantry]

I both agree and disagree with socialized medicine - it's not the bread and butter it seems to be.

On the one hand, I am self-employed and know all too well the outrageous costs associated with getting treated. I have to use the VA, and they are so over burdened that even seeing my PCP for a referral is a 3-month affair (if not longer). Getting my leg worked on requires months and months of the same stuff over and over again - commonly known as dicking around.

But on the other side of the coin, look at the ridiculous price of buy-out to opt out of privatized medicine - we've tried that ourselves, and it failed miserably - HMO, anyone? What happens is that private providers simply soak the government - $400 hammer, anyone? These are the costs of de-institutionalizing a Republic - and remember, we ARE a Republic, not the Democracy other countries claim us to be. What works for some can't work for all, and what works for all is usually doomed to a miserable failure.

The question, then, is whether the investment coupled with the risk is worth the potential payout. My answer is no. It didn't work when we privatized military contracting, it soaked us in HMO's, it way over-taxed some and over-taxed many, and the welfare system bore the brunt with all the dope heads getting stoned and having babies to keep that cash flow coming in a little stronger every nine months.

The current problems times 10 (or more) is what this country will face if we try the socialist approach to medicine. Hillary and camp look at one aspect: It will help parents out to care for their children. Well, dingbat, that's great if it was a one-dimensional thing, but where does the rest of the population fit in to this grandiose scheme? Considering that we have one of the lowest infant mortality rates in the world, I say don't fix what ain't broken. Should we then become Australia where there are the extravagantly rich and bitter poor and relatively no middle class? Or maybe like China where everyone gets the same type of care: Crap. Oh, and then there is Sweden where NO ONE makes a decent living without a ton of money to invest, or Britain or England or even Poland... take yer pick.

Every nation has problems. We have problems. But taking one problem by the shorthairs isn't the cure-all candy extravaganza Klinton and camp make it out to be. It never has been, and those refusing to learn from the past are bound to repeat it.

Hear this, my brothers and sisters:

You're sitting in A-Stan humping the real hills. Social medicine is now going to be a fact. And screw you, we can't afford those radios to hand out to the populace for relations, or bottled water, or more ammo, and no, we can't rotate you home because we just cut military spending by 50% and there is no one to replace you.

Omar Bradley is turning in his grave.

A vote for Klinton or Obama is a slap in the face to our military and your intelligence. That's harsh, but it is true. Civilians with socialist ideals have NO business trying to guide the United States military and our goals. And the ultimate leader of our forces is the president.

Would you really want either of those two idiots sharing YOUR foxhole? No? Than don't saddle our people with them just because they show you the shiny side of the reform coin. Don't let those dillweeds cover the truth over YOUR eyes as they have with so many civilians by promising things that cannot and will not happen.

We are the backbone of this country, brothers and sisters. We are what makes this country work, those who put our lives on the line for our borders and principles. I won't serve as a AMERICAN soldier for a leader with a SOCIALIST agenda. Think about it! Think circa 1918, then again in 1940, and then again in 1960. Are we silly that we can't find the pattern here? Stand up and be a F-ING soldier, ruck up, drive on, and tell the demo's to STFU with their idealist and unrealistic solutions to America's issues.

Sorry to be so blunt, but someone has to remind us of the history we need AWAY from, while blunt burners like Hillary and Osama sweeten up the terrible truths with their own personal sugar.

Pardon me, I need to wretch. :stupid: