|
|
|
|
|
| Women and McCain
Posted: 6/22/2008 3:03:31 PM | It's old news now and time to think about other things.....like how anti-sense, anti-people, and anti-democrat McCain is.
We have moved on, Simmah. It's you who hasn't. We've already determined that of the two evils, McCain is the lessor of those. The choice now is between Barack or John. When you are sincerely faced with a choice of either or and you don't care for either, you choose the one who will do the least damage based upon gut feeling, the issues, and what's best for the country, and not necessarily in this order depending upon who's voting.
Based upon Obama's shady politics, his dubious alliances and connections, his empty campaign promises, his inexperience, his flip flopping, unrealiable stances on various issues, I heartily conclude that I'll be moving on with John McCain. And I concur that I won't be alone when I'm hitting the lever in that voting booth. 
Have a nice day, hon. | |
|
| Women and McCain
Posted: 6/22/2008 3:11:36 PM | Based upon Obama's shady politics, his dubious alliances and connections, his empty campaign promises, his inexperience, his flip flopping, unrealiable stances on various issues,
Take out the word "inexperience" and you could very well be talking about John McCain. But you don't want to see it, so you go into the voting booth with blinders on....but don't be bytching in another 6 months or so when you take the blinders off and realize you've just elected GWBIII.
| |
|
| Women and McCain
Posted: 6/23/2008 6:52:13 AM | "Ok easy. You win. I'm a hypnotized idiot just like you've been saying since we met up in the Hillary thread. Funny how when someone does not agree with you they are made out to be a bad person, of inferior intelligence, and trying to skew the truth every time. I'm done trying to show you the other side of the Hillary/Obama argument. You're holding on to the idea of Hillary far too tightly to ever let it go. But someday I hope you move on. It's old news now and time to think about other things.....like how anti-sense, anti-people, and anti-democrat McCain is."
That's ridiculous. I don't resort to name calling, that's your strategy.
I'm not holding on to any idea of Hillary - it's you who won't let go of what you think my position is. You hold on to it so fiercely, you can't allow another thought to enter.
This thread is Women and McCain. If someone brought Hillary into this discussion, it wasn't me. All I did was point out that the article you posted was not likely to sway anyone's opinion since it was long on anecdotal name dropping and short on facts.
Everything you have posted since then has been an attempt to tell me what I think about McCain, Obama and Clinton, and then tell me just how wrong I am . It might serve you better to actually read what I post and comment on that. | |
|
| Women and McCain
Posted: 6/23/2008 9:36:22 AM | SimmahDahnNah --
You might be right about that hypnotized idiot part. You keep flogging a dead horse. No one is holding onto Hillary. Hillary is out of the race.
Now it's between Obama and McCain. Many of us think that McCain is the better choice given the options we have.
So we're pulling the lever for him.
I don't see why this is a problem for you. We aren't telling you who to vote for. | |
|
| Women and McCain
Posted: 6/23/2008 9:49:08 AM | You know, the great thing about our country is that we have the right to vote for whoever we think is the candidate that best reflects our own priorities and values. Just because someone does or does not like a particular candidate does not make them stupid or uninformed. May I suggest ladies, we "Woman Up" not make this personal, and present the information without the name calling, hair pulling, etc.
While I myself am against abortion, I don't think for a minute that McCain can possibly overtune Roe vs Wade. It's the law of the land and it won't be overturned. | |
|
| Women and McCain
Posted: 6/23/2008 11:10:44 AM |
You might be right about that hypnotized idiot part. You keep flogging a dead horse. No one is holding onto Hillary. Hillary is out of the race.
Well you'd never know it by reading the Why is Hillary losing thread that's almost up to 100 pages now with people saying they are going to vote for McCain because Hillary lost....this again, is why I posted this thread. Sorry some took such offense to it. I wonder why that might be. | |
|
| Women and McCain
Posted: 6/23/2008 11:15:35 AM | At the risk of revisiting the original point of this thread, one exerpt from the article points out:
Susan Eisenhower - granddaughter of former GOP President Dwight Eisenhower and a Washington, D.C.-based expert on foreign policy and national security issues - said Wednesday she is backing Obama over McCain because the Democrat has shown more understanding of how the Iraq war, the economy and other key issues affect women's daily lives.
And Harriet Stinson, the 82-year-old founder of Bay Area-based Republicans for Choice, said that - after 60 years of Republican registration - she has finally reregistered as a Democrat.
"I couldn't take it anymore," she said, arguing that on issues like funding birth control and support of sex education, McCain "couldn't be worse."
See......it's those issues having to do with women's rights that MAY have a tendency to motivate some women to steer in Obama's direction. Perhaps because poverty disproportionately affects women and children, the economy could/should matter more to women. Perhaps some of us that fought hard for these rights cringe at the possibility that soon Roe vs. Wade will be overturned if McCain gets in.
I don't envy McCain. I think he may have some moderate tendancies but, unfortunately he simply has to appeal to the far right to stay in the game here and that's the anti-gay and pro-life folks. Now it appears a number of women may be revisiting the womens' rights angle. Of course, those conservatives that align with McCain on these issues don't see it as a problem. Other women may simply decide differently on the basis of gender. | |
|
| Women and McCain
Posted: 6/23/2008 1:29:45 PM |
Well you'd never know it by reading the Why is Hillary losing thread that's almost up to 100 pages now with people saying they are going to vote for McCain because Hillary lost.
Well, of course. That's because McCain's the best candidate now that Hillary's out of the race.
Regardless of Obama's stand on the issues he's still an inexperienced candidate with more than a few questionable associations. Further, I disagree with Obama about as much as I disagree with McCain on the issues -- therefore I'm voting for the candidate who is better suited for the job. | |
|
| Women and McCain
Posted: 6/23/2008 3:06:06 PM | While I myself am against abortion, I don't think for a minute that McCain can possibly overtune Roe vs Wade. It's the law of the land and it won't be overturned.
I'm with you there, Barbe. I am also against it personally, but I think it should remain a right and remain something that doesn't take crossing state lines to obtain. I also agree that he won't overturn it. But why do we want someone who wants to try? | |
|
| Women and McCain
Posted: 6/23/2008 3:31:19 PM |
I don't think for a minute that McCain can possibly overtune Roe vs Wade. It's the law of the land and it won't be overturned.
You don't see? If McCain can appoint another right wing Supreme Court judge, you'd be surprised what could happen. Think about it. The Supreme Court gave Bush the presidential nomination. You don't think they'd love to overturn Roe if they had the votes? Think again. If you want to get back to coathanger abortions, feel free to vote for McCain. Good luck. | |
|
| Women and McCain
Posted: 6/23/2008 4:42:32 PM | Easyoneverything,
Since you have said that your mind "is still pretty open" I would like you to explain why you don't see how terrible it would be electing McCain. He would continue the policies of GWB in regard to keeping us involved in wars.
You said " Tell me, is anybody in favour of war? Even those who serve would rather not be going, but you do what you have to do." Do you honestly believe that nobody is in favour of war? Is that belief what prevents you from seeing the terrible blunders of this administration taking us to war based on lies? If nobody likes wars, then how do you explain the immoral war profiteering going on now?
Notice that I didn't call you names, or anything like that. I just asked you a few questions hoping to get some answers. | |
|
| Women and McCain
Posted: 6/23/2008 4:47:28 PM | McSame is NOT pro-life. He favors the death penalty while mouthing off about being "pro Life" just for being against abortion. That is ridiculous! And supporting the war in Iraq is NOT pro-life either. Rethuglicans like McSame care more about pre born kids than the ones who are already born into poor families. What about the SCHIP fiasco in which the Rethugs voted AGAINST kids who are already born??!! It makes little sense to me.
I am a woman and no one could pay me enough to vote for McInsane. Frankly, he scares me. He is too much of a warmonger and has a violent temper, as demonstrated by the incident in which he called his wife an unprintable name. I am afraid he could start a nuclear war, putting the whole human race at risk!
GO OBAMA!!!!!! | |
|
| Women and McCain
Posted: 6/23/2008 6:32:49 PM | Well, to some degree I agree with that. Personally, I'm pro-choice and also for the death penalty. Unfortuantely, post-natal "abortion" is sometimes necessary.
While I don't agree with McCain on the abortion issue, I agree with him on so many other issues, including health care, smaller government, smaller taxes. And quite frankly, on Iraq, I think either candidate would do the exact same thing -- slowly withdraw over the next 2 to 3 years.
Finally, anyone who uses derogatory terms in describing the view with which they don't agree has no credibility. Calling candidates Shillery, Hitlery, McSame, McInsane, etc. and the opposing party "Rethugs" shows lack of a valid point. Because THERE WAS a point, it could be made without such banality.
If you notice, the McCain supporters in this thread don't have to stoop to such things. Should tell you all something. | |
|
| Women and McCain
Posted: 6/23/2008 6:45:42 PM | Fly, I don't know where you're coming from when you say McCain is for smaller govt. He has been repeatedly on record as saying he supports the wiretapping and thinks it is and should be legal, for one thing.
I also do not understand what he really wants for healthcare. I looked it up on his website, and other than privatizing social security, I see nothing clear on his ideas for healthcare. So I'm not sure how you can agree with him on that...there's not much to agree on. lol
He has never said he plans on withdrawing in the next 2 to 3 years, in fact, he said he'd possibly have them home by 2013 (we could guess that means the withdrawal will start soon then I suppose, but he's never said it). Then he said we'll stay 'as long as it takes'. Again, I'm not sure what he means by as long as it takes.....as long as it takes for what? Till there's no military left? Till they're RPG'd to bare bones and then we get to go back to the draft? I wish I knew what he meant.
I swear these debates need to start soon!!! | |
|
| Women and McCain
Posted: 6/23/2008 6:57:17 PM | Straight Talk on Health System Reform
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/19ba2f1c-c03f-4ac2-8cd5-5cf2edb527cf.htm
1) Make insurance affordable and available regardless of employment status.
2) Open insurance up to competition and allow individuals to buy policies across state lines.
3) Tax credits to offset the cost of insurance (which need to be higher than what's state here. I think they need to be 100 percent of cost).
4) Expand health savings accounts.
5) Establish a guaranteed access program for individuals with pre-existing conditions.
You can read the rest at the above link.
As far as Iraq goes, no President will withdraw troops if the country remains unstable. I'm being optimistic and saying that within 2-3 years it should improve. No President is going to instigate new actions in Iraq, so it really depends on how long it takes to get things down a dull roar. We can't withdraw a significant numbers of troops until that time, and also until the time when Iraqis are able to take those functions over.
Debates will start after the primaries. We don't have any candidates until then, only "presumptives". | |
|
| Women and McCain
Posted: 6/23/2008 7:08:54 PM | Well those sound plausible, thanks for providing them. But they sound just like Obama's ideas with the exception of Obama wanting to move toward making a more universal system. I can definitely say that option #2 on that list has been happening for several years, and it is bad. It doesn't work well at all.
I have been doing insurance billing for the last 10 years, and have worked in healthcare for nearly the last 20. I can see both good and bad in both the dems and the republicans ideas on healthcare. I honestly don't know what the answer is. If you nationalize it, doctors will no longer be as competitive, and care may suffer. But the good thing about that is, the HMO's will no longer dictate fee schedules and force physicians and hospitals to further drive the fees up, in turn increasing the cost of the plans for employers and employees. It's a vicious cycle. Even HSA's are not always the best way to go, depending on the plan you buy, if something is a non-covered service, the HSA money will be paid by you and not the employer. I could go on for days about this.
What I do know, is that someone needs to come up with a viable plan for the geriatric population, and fast. We are going to find ourselves in a huge crisis with Medicare and nursing homes in several years, the likes of which we've never seen and no one seems to be prepared for this and it's ticking me off. | |
|
| Women and McCain
Posted: 6/23/2008 8:48:37 PM | I probably shouldn't, but...
Simmah, the most logical thing you wrote in this entire thread was the above paragraph on healthcare. You are being a realist with that because you know from experience that our current system is failing but nationlized health care will affect the good quality of healthcare we have available now.
I don't understand why you are baiting a Democrat vs. Republican war where it doesn't exist. This race isn't a party polarized race and maybe that scares you, but it's fantastic! Even when Hillary was in, these were not extremely dissimiliar candidates in their platforms. There are plenty of cross-overs occurring (via talk anyway) between registered voters of both parties. Why? Because McCain is practically a Democrat and Hillary was looking like the best "conservative" of the bunch when she was in the race. I would have voted for Hillary as a registered Republican. Now I will vote for no one.
Anyway, enough of trying to scare people with the old and tired tactics of abortion and San Franciscan uh, "reporting", and McCain hates women, even his own wife. (YouTube Obama and see what scary stuff comes up). Obama has started on the higher road on his campaign. If you are his supporter, try to do the same. | |
|
| Women and McCain
Posted: 6/23/2008 10:03:31 PM | tranquilo,
"Since you have said that your mind "is still pretty open" I would like you to explain why you don't see how terrible it would be electing McCain."
I don't know enough about McCain's policies or Obama's to make a decision one way or the other. What I mostly get from the media is their interpretation of McCain or Obama's position, usually vocalized by some high profile somebody or other, but not usually any specifics about the actual policy, without the slant one way or another, for me to make up my own mind based on facts. I don't respond well to editorializing on what so and so thinks Obama or McCain is saying and why I should support one over the other.
Some of the people posting on these threads provides links to one site or another, and I find much of it informative. That's why I say my mind is open, but not so open that my brain falls out. I'm willing to read opinions, but emotional hyperbole doesn't sway me one way or the other.
" Do you honestly believe that nobody is in favour of war? "
Well, the armed forces have a vested interest in conflict, and the people who supply the war effort do pretty well economically, so I was probably hasty in saying "nobody." I meant the average voter who has or may have sons or daughters engaged in any conflict.
"Is that belief what prevents you from seeing the terrible blunders of this administration taking us to war based on lies?"
No, I think I understood that the Bush administration has been lying to the American people for quite some time. My recollection, however, was that there weren't a whole lot of americans who thought they were being lied to. The majority seemed to buy into the need for defending themselves against terrorism by engaging in this conflict. At least, that was my perspective as your neighbour to the north. The Bush administration was quite hostile to countries that did not join their effort, but when asked, they were unable to make a compelling case. Now, of course, most americans are against the war, but when the conflict began those voices were not so loud.
I happened to be in Mexico in 2003 during the invasion of Iraq. My partner and I were seated next to a table of 4 americans who were discussing the invasion; we couldn't help but overhear. They were lamenting the fact that none of the major nations were joining with them in this effort. One of them said "where are our friends?" It would have served no purpose to point out that other nations were skeptical of the case Bush was making. In a January 2003 CBS poll, 64% of Americans approved of military action against Iraq. So, while I appreciate and support today's anti-war vehemence, many americans have come to this position later in the day, yes?
"Notice that I didn't call you names, or anything like that. I just asked you a few questions hoping to get some answers."
Was that really necessary? | |
|
| Women and McCain
Posted: 6/24/2008 3:27:00 AM |
Simmah, the most logical thing you wrote in this entire thread was the above paragraph on healthcare. You are being a realist with that because you know from experience that our current system is failing but nationlized health care will affect the good quality of healthcare we have available now.
I think there was more logic to be found in other posts, but thanks for the critique. 
I don't understand why you are baiting a Democrat vs. Republican war where it doesn't exist. This race isn't a party polarized race and maybe that scares you, but it's fantastic!
Not trying to "bait" anything. There is and are many items on the agendas that are polarized, like taxes for one thing, the war in Iraq, big government, and others.
And believe it or not Even when Hillary was in, these were not extremely dissimiliar candidates in their platforms. There are plenty of cross-overs occurring (via talk anyway) between registered voters of both parties. Why? Because McCain is practically a Democrat and Hillary was looking like the best "conservative" of the bunch when she was in the race. I would have voted for Hillary as a registered Republican. Now I will vote for no one.
Why will you vote for no one?
Anyway, enough of trying to scare people with the old and tired tactics of abortion and San Franciscan uh, "reporting", and McCain hates women, even his own wife. (YouTube Obama and see what scary stuff comes up). Obama has started on the higher road on his campaign. If you are his supporter, try to do the same.
I am not trying to scare anyone. If bringing to light McCain's ideas on abortion etc are scary, it's not my fault. I was simply trying to start a dialogue. Maybe I could have used another source. Because the facts remain, and a lot of people here are trying to shoot the messenger. And I never said or implied that McCain "hates women". I don't even believe that. I just think that there are a lot of things women voters need to take into consideration before voting for him if they were previously left-minded and now are just voting for him simply because Hillary lost. I want to apologize if this is seen as baiting, but it feels kind of disengenuous, because that was not my intention at all. Any time I ever post an article it is with genuine intentions of hoping people see things from a different perspective. | |
|
| Women and McCain
Posted: 6/24/2008 3:31:41 AM | Mccain is the 8th most conservative Republican senator. Anybody telling you he is a maverick hasn't done any real research at all.
http://www.voteview.com/sen110.htm
We have moved on, Simmah. It's you who hasn't. We've already determined that of the two evils, McCain is the lessor of those. The choice now is between Barack or John. When you are sincerely faced with a choice of either or and you don't care for either, you choose the one who will do the least damage based upon gut feeling, the issues, and what's best for the country, and not necessarily in this order depending upon who's voting.
In the fox thread you were saying that you support it's viewpoints already, frankly, I think the loss of your support of the democratic party isn't much of a loss. | |
|
| Women and McCain
Posted: 6/24/2008 10:26:59 AM | | ^ ^ ^ ^ Hopefully Democrats won't think of the few million other women also voting for McCain as a "loss". How's Obama going to make that up, LOL? | |
|
| Women and McCain
Posted: 6/24/2008 10:39:45 AM | "but his inclinations against abortion would in this election be enough to override those disagreement"
Real pro-lifers, like me, left the Republican party when they killed over 50,000 women and children. Their pro-life claims are a bunch of B S Thye are killers. They think war and fear mongering is a way to peace when that is against all natural laws. They deny and reject all of Christ's teachings with their actions while falsely claiming to be Christians. They sicken me. | |
|
| Women and McCain
Posted: 6/24/2008 10:49:35 AM | In the fox thread you were saying that you support it's viewpoints already, frankly, I think the loss of your support of the democratic party isn't much of a loss.
Yes, I do support FOX' views already. I'm not sure why exactly but I think it has a lot to do with the mistreatment I saw handed out to Hillary Clinton by her own party. It was like a shock to find that the party I had always admired could so crap on someone that I think so much of. If Bill Clinton should ever endorse Obama, he deserves a medal. I don't think he should and I'll be very disappointed if he does. Bill's wife was treated very badly and he should ask Hillary to leave the party entirely. Unfortunately, she isn't likely to and I find that to be disappointing. She's got too much invested, I guess.
At any rate, based upon my becoming much more particular, thoughtful, and perhaps even growing older, I find myself beginning to lean in a more conservative direction. I'm not sorry for this. I think based upon my spiritual views and overall perceptions that it's what's right for me. If I have to actually choose a label though, I think Independent fits best. I never again plan to vote along party lines. I will vote the individual.
As for whether or not my non-support for the democratic party is a loss, well.. I'm just another cog in the wheel that has rolled away over to the side that now seems a lot more reasonable, mature, and definitely more fair. I don't really mind if I'm not missed. The newness and thrill of joining a new political "club" is rather exciting. | |
|
| Women and McCain
Posted: 6/24/2008 11:07:05 AM | "Real pro-lifers, like me, left the Republican party when they killed over 50,000 women and children. Their pro-life claims are a bunch of B S Thye are killers. They think war and fear mongering is a way to peace when that is against all natural laws. They deny and reject all of Christ's teachings with their actions while falsely claiming to be Christians. They sicken me"
cncgandolf,
that is a brave comment. It should be seriously considered by all the people voting in this election. | |
|
| Women and McCain
Posted: 6/25/2008 8:29:14 PM | I agree, tranquilo that cncgandolf has it right!!!!!!
BRAVO!!! | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
