Romney loses in Florida to McCain...

[_rcrocket]

You just dished out the typical talking points but nothing changes the fact that she is a failure and a liberal socialist. She rode the coat tails of her husband. That is what history is showing us.

She failed in her effort to get universal health care while an advisor to Bill Clinton. She has really failed at little else and has been a wildly successful workhorse in the Senate. She wields power; what she says goes. There are few to no senators with more influence and knowledge of the federal government.

As far as her being a "socialist," that is just a label with no meaning.

Is she a better debater than Obama? No. But she has demonstrated an ability to govern better than any of the candidates -- except for perhaps McCain who has a good track record of "socialist" legislation.

Let me guess -- you support Ron Paul.

[_EAllusion]

I don't see how Clinton gets the hippy label. She (and her husband) has a fairly lengthy history of relative social conservativism - flag-burning, media censorship, expansion of police powers, drug war, etc. - and relative foreign policy hawkishness that clashes with hippiness. That would be more apt for, say, Kucinich. She's a Democrat, but the portrayal of her as ultra-left hippy is more a fanciful creation of her enemies than a reflection of herself. Defense contractors didn't pour money into her campaign because they thought she'd replace guns with flowers. She's hated by the hard left for a reason. Well, several. But you get my point.

[_rcrocket]

Federal outlays - including non-defense related spending - has increased during the Bush administration more than any presidency since FDR. This occurred while cutting taxes, leading to massive budget deficits. And that's not including the upcoming structural problems in entitlement programs for the elderly vs. the tax base. He literally has been one of the least fiscally conservative presidents in US history. He was enabled by a Republican congress for almost the entire course of his administration. To criticize Democrats as the "tax and spend" party seems shortsighted at this point. It's better than "Spend, spend some more and worry about the funds later" approach. The Republicans should have squandered away whatever reputation for fiscal responsibility they once enjoyed. At this point, talking about those crazy tax and spend liberals sounds more like a bumper-sticker slogan than something someone can say having given the matter a modicum of thought.

You are correct. It was irresponsible to fund a war and increased social spending without corresponding tax increases.

[_dartagnan]

She failed in her effort to get universal health care while an advisor to Bill Clinton. She has really failed at little else and has been a wildly successful workhorse in the Senate.

Like what? You can't provide examples.

She wields power; what she says goes.

Like what? You don't say. You justtell us this is what her clients say, which means nothing to the American People. What laws has she proposed that have gone through?

As far as her being a "socialist," that is just a label with no meaning.

Only to those who don't understand what a socialist is.

Is she a better debater than Obama? No.

She loses the debates because she is a double-talker. It isn't because Obama has skill in debate. It is because her positions are untenable and she can't make up her mind what she wants to say. SHe takes whatever position she think might win minds at the time. Just look at how she flip-flopped within a minute: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWb2wBnT ... re=related

But she has demonstrated an ability to govern better than any of the candidates

She has demonstrated little more than a willingness to exploit the success of her husband for her own ambition. You cannot name any examples of anything she has succeeded in.

Let me guess -- you support Ron Paul.

Hell no. I support Romney at this point. But in the election I might sway with Obama, depending on how things go.

[_Sethbag]

Hillary Clinton is the most experienced person to lead this country. She is probably, as well, the most intelligent. McCain is an idiot compared to her. Romney is not experienced.

Hillary will likely have the most reasoned approach to immigration, the most reasoned approach to the war and civil rights.

Wow, this is a side of you that I hadn't expected at all. I'm impressed. You're probably the first hard-core Mormon I've ever heard say a good word about Hillary. I agree with you that she is very smart, and she may well be smarter than all the others. If she wins I won't be upset, and in fact I've seriously mulled over the idea of actually voting for her. I don't know that I will, but I've allowed myself to consider it, and not in a joking way.

[_ozemc]

And her platform stinks. It basicaly consists of the same-old tired liberal views of tax and spend.

You worship the God of Talk Radio, obviously.

Obviously not.

Did you even read the rest of my sentence about the republicans?

The Bush administration has done more to Spend (perhaps not tax) than any other president. Bill Clinton, by contrast, was one of the best fiscal presidents we have ever had -- reduced or eliminated agricultural subsidies; reduced welfare expense.

Yes, he has. One of the many reasons I'm very disappointed in him.

Bill Clinton had to take what was thrust upon him by the Newt Gingrich contract. He had no power to pass tax increases after 1996.

As far as taxing the rich -- who cares? Why shouldn't they pay? I say soak 'em, and soak 'em big.

rcrocket

What a nice, charitable attitude.

Don't you get it? They're already being soaked, to the tune of what I wrote: the top 50% pay 97% of the taxes.

Do you believe that those who don't pay taxes should get tax refunds, i.e. the "stimulus" package just announced?

[Anonymous]

I couldn't give a fig about what McCain's mom said about Mormons

I'm not talking about his Mom, I am talking about McCain's spin to mitigate the damage his Mom did. He insulted our intelligence and essentially lied to us. His Mom is a bigot and I find it hard to believe the apple fell far from the tree. I find it hard to believe McCain was "surprised" at that very moment to learn how his mother felt about Mormons.

I agree, his mom probably is a bigot. So what? She's like 95 years old. A lot of people were bigots back in her day. McCain shouldn't really have been put in a situation to have to say anything about his mother. Whatever he said was either going to make his own mother look bad (if he condemned her), or piss of the Mormons (if he didn't). Are you going to go on National TV and condemn your 95 year old mother? WTF Kevin? What the hell did you expect McCain to do? He clumsily tried to wave the magic wand and just make that comment disappear into the ether. He probably could have done better at it, who knows?

But I really couldn't give a crap what McCain's mom thinks about Mormons, or anyone else. She's not running for President. McCain doesn't have to justify his mother.

McCain is a liar. Nothing you have interpreted from Romney shows him to be a liar like McCain. You're just too stuck in anti-Mormonism, like most people here, to see anything good in Romney.

Romney sucked up to gays and liberal women like freaking crazy in Massachusetts, and then did a 180 degree turn pandering to the fundementalist Christian religious right constituency to try to get them to support him for the nomination. His flip-flopping was so brazen, and on real issues, not stupid crap his mom might have said. It's the brazen pandering to the Religious Right that turns me off from Romney, not his Mormonism. I'd be just as turned off if he did what he did as an Episcopalian, or a Baptist, or whatever.

It just boggles my mind that with all that McCain has done in his decades in office and running for the Presidential nomination twice now, you come up with this thing about McCain's mom disliking Mormons. It's downright bizarre.

[_ozemc]

Federal outlays - including non-defense related spending - has increased during the Bush administration more than any presidency since FDR. This occurred while cutting taxes, leading to massive budget deficits. And that's not including the upcoming structural problems in entitlement programs for the elderly vs. the tax base. He literally has been one of the least fiscally conservative presidents in US history. He was enabled by a Republican congress for almost the entire course of his administration. To criticize Democrats as the "tax and spend" party seems shortsighted at this point. It's better than "Spend, spend some more and worry about the funds later" approach. The Republicans should have squandered away whatever reputation for fiscal responsibility they once enjoyed. At this point, talking about those crazy tax and spend liberals sounds more like a bumper-sticker slogan than something someone can say having given the matter a modicum of thought.

Well, I agree about Bush. One of the many reasons I'm disappointed in him.

That said, Hillary's programs that she has tried to promote would lead to an enormous increase in the spending we already have. Now how would she pay for it? Raising taxes, of course. We can't possibly has a decrease in spending now, can we? Not if you're a liberal.

Like I said, Bush and the republican congress were no better. That's why we need more conservatives running for office. I don't care if they're democrat or republican, just be for conservative ideals: lowere taxes, less epnding, strong military, strong borders, etc.

[_dartagnan]

Hillary will likely have the most reasoned approach to immigration

Will likely?

You speak as if you don't already know what her approach would be. And why is that? Because she is cryptic about her positions.

Gee, isn't that exactly what I said?

You would put her in office on a hunch that she would "likely" have good ideas. Why? Because like you, she is a lawyer so she must be smart. You know her clients and they says she is influential. The fact is the republicans would reject everythings he tried to propose. They hate her guts. Even Ted Kennedy is working against her, and after the slime tactics against Obama, she would have turned away even more liberals.

You need to find out what the candidates stand for beforehand, not afterwards.

[_dartagnan]

Are you going to go on National TV and condemn your 95 year old mother? WTF Kevin? What the hell did you expect McCain to do?

I'd blow it off, take the hit and move on. He didn't have to lie. If my Mom went on camera and said she believed teh world was flat, I'm not going to try damage control by insulting everyone's intelligence by saying, "Oh, what she really meant was round."

Romney sucked up to gays and liberal women like freaking crazy in Massachusetts, and then did a 180 degree turn pandering to the fundementalist Christian religious right constituency to try to get them to support him for the nomination.

Do you have specifics in mind? I don't see what the crime is in trying to get people from different groups to vote for you, even if people from different groups disagree amongst themselves.

His flip-flopping was so brazen

That in itself isn't a flip flop. You have to provide something concrete.

It just boggles my mind that with all that McCain has done in his decades in office and running for the Presidential nomination twice now, you come up with this thing about McCain's mom disliking Mormons. It's downright bizarre.

Again I say, it was McCain's insult to the masses by telling us she meant something else. It showed me he was perfectly willing to lie for his own ambitious agenda.