Hillary is becoming popular.

Like it or not our health care system doesn't work for a very large number of people who work hard and pay taxes. At least Hillary admits there is a problem, the republicans in the debate last night just seemed to tell us over and over again that our reality was wrong and everyone was actually getting richer.
Click to expand...
Be careful what you wish for. Just because something is broken doesn't mean there's only one way to fix it.

First, no national healthcare system is free. The people and suppliers involved in it must be paid, and the money must come from somewhere. If they won't get civilian-level wages and profits, they'll get something else, such as immunity from malpractice.

Second, when the inefficiencies of the governmental system hit, you can expect cuts and shortages in service, and government-mandated demands upon the "beneficiaries." Maybe your fast-food diet caused your heart-attack, so the government now has a vested interest in mandating that you can't eat such a diet. Think that's far-fetched? Think about the recent ban on transfats (NYC, I believe) or law suits against McD's.

Third, if you hand over health care to the government, it will "giveth and taketh away." While traveling in New Zealand during the Clinton presidency, I met a Brit in his mid-60s who warned me about the then-hot-news of HillaryCare #1. At 60, this guy's knee gave out, and the UK's national healthcare system classified him as disabled. He was put on a waiting list to get knee surgery and was given a disability classification so he didn't have to work. Three years later, when the system was financially strapped and he was still waiting for his long-promised surgery, he received a letter reclassifying him as fit. So he was removed from the waiting list for surgery and told to go back to work. His dilemma was that his knee had gotten worse and no one would hire a guy his age with a bad knee. But according to his "free" healthcare, he was good-to-go, no problems.

About a year later, the US news carried a story comparing the much-vaunted Canadian healthcare system to the US system. One thing they looked at were some sort of expensive heart monitoring machines. At that time, Seattle, WA, hospitals had three of the machines, which was exactly how many the entire country of Canada had. Apparently, in similar fashion, lots of Canadians were making their way to US hospitals because the Canadian system either had none of the facilities that the US had, or had so few of them that the wait was upwards of a year or so versus a few weeks in the US.

From my personal experience, during my military days my first wife had a pre-cancerous uterine condition that I begged her to get civilian medical attention for. Trying to save money, she opted instead for military care (about the same as you'd get under a national system, although probably better). The military performed a "cone biopsy" procedure that, we discovered later, was abandoned by the civilian medical community several years earlier because it tended to make matters worse. It certainly did for her, and she finally went to a civilian facility and got the problem fixed. Yeah, it cost us money, but it didn't cost us her life.

Expensive care that you can get beats "free" care that isn't free that you either can't get or takes too long to get.

When you think of national healthcare, think of DMV in charge of your medical needs, and you'll be in the right ballpark.
 
Hillary is becoming popular? Bad news if true, but at least a Hillary administration will come with some entertainment. Imagine the awkward discomfort as pro-war Republicans and anti-war Democrats try to get comfortable with the new reality of Hillary's War.
 
Here's what I think...

1. Neither Hillary Clinton nor Osama bin Obama can individually, nor as a team, win the presidential election. They will probably win the Democratic party nod to be their party's candidates BUT they won't be able to bring home the bacon in the big show.

2. ANY decent Republican candidate will be able to beat the Hitlery/Obama ticket because that candidate will be the "lesser of two evils." The voting public does NOT have to fully understand a candidate. All they need to see is that one is less of a threat to them than the other candidate.

3. Hitlery has way too much baggage to carry around with her. The facts of her husband's infidelity, her alleged lesbian relationships, all those dead bodies that surround her and her husband over the years from Arkansas to Washington and the Rose Law Firm mess come together to make her ineffective. This would be especially true IF the opposing Republican candidate keeps striking at her with issues that are voter sensitive. Many people, like us, are single issue voters. We WILL vote for candidates who are pro-gun and most other voters do the same thing concerning their issues.

4. As time for the election draws near, there will be more activity concerning political candidates with more people coming out to support or work against a candidate that they like or don't like. I would suspect that with Clinton in an election slot, there will be more people working against her than supporting her. I wouldn't be surprised if Al Gore finds it "convenient" to neither support Hitlery Clinton or even give his support to somebody running AGAINST Hitlery within his own Democratic party. Gore would probably NOT support a Republican of any sort unless he was offered something REALLY big as a reward. Remember, Democrats can be EASILY bought and sold like cheap watches. It's a character flaw of theirs and something worth considering.
 
"Even Larry Kudlow liked Hillary's matching 401k thing, and you could hardly call him a liberal."

Really?

Larry Kudlow is the kind of plutocratic Wall Street liberal who wants open borders so the corporations he invests in and serves can have their cheap labor.
 
"Hillary is becoming popular."
Click to expand...

Interesting because just yesterday it was reported that she was slipping a bit in the polls.



http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MmQzNmI5NjYwMGVlNWEzMDRjNGEzNmI1NDM2MmRkOGQ=

Poll Watch: Tiny Signs of Hillary Slipping a Bit

I know the early sense is that the debate answer on driver's licenses hasn't hurt Hillary Clinton yet. But I note Rasmussen has her at 41 percent in his daily tracking poll. It's bounced around a bit, but she was as high as 47 percent on the 25th of October.

But I notice that compared to the last Washington Post poll finished Sept. 30, Hillary is down four and Obama is up six. Maybe that did move the needle a bit.

Looking at the rest of the numbers, we see Iraq is down six points in the "most important issue" category, from 35 percent to 29 percent. The economy is up from 11 percent to 14. (Undermining my previous post, the environment doubled... from one percent to two.)

Approval for Republicans in Congress is 32 percent. Approval for Democrats is 36 percent. The GOP gained three points since the last poll, the Democrats lost two.

When asked who they trust more to handle the issue of immigration, 42 percent said Democrats, 35 percent said Republicans, and 13 percent volunteered "neither." Tomorrow really looms large on how much the GOP will emphasize this issue in 2008.
 
Most Republicans (except Giuliani), and even some Democrats are willing to extend you the priviledge of a license to carry.

There are broader issues at hand with respect to the 2nd Amendment. Most of the Republicans, and almost all of the Democrats have completely forgotten why we even have a 2nd Amendment. Gun ownership for the sake of protection from petty criminals is only a secondary effect of the real reason for the 2nd Amendment.
 
-Hillary has revealed her pro-illegal alien position.

-The Chinese contributions from Senate race #2 and Bill's campaigns are back.

-She has shown her feminine weakness in the last debate by pulling the 'the boys are picking on me' defense after snaring her own ankle.

-She has vanished from the media since the debate and we are now being FLOODED with non-stop coverage of a woman that has been missing for over a YEAR on every news channel. Too bad her opponents statements concerning the debate lacked the relevance this missing persons case has. Two week tactic in play.
 
I'd like to hear more about Hillary's immigration policy. I think that'll make her very popular. With MoveOn.Org and the Demo Underclass, anyway.
 
Whatever Hilary does, it would be hard for her to run a more incompetent administration than what you guys have had in the last 8 years.

Plus, given all the problems (Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, find bin Laden, decrease the national debt, stem the increasing polarisation of wealth and give the middle classes a break, social security reform, a largely hostile supreme court, a lacklustre Congress, the alienation of many key allies, the rise of China and so on and so forth) that she's going to have to fix I seriously doubt that she's going to find the time to put in place any more anti-gun legislation. Especially when it would be so horrifically unpopular. Even within the democratic party there are now plenty of pro-gun members who rode the wave of Iraq into office in 2006. I couldn't say how many, but some.

Only 439 days till whoever wins takes office.
 
Hillary is becoming popular.
This comes as no surprise. Her husband, the lying, philandering, draft-dodging, impeached coward was elected twice. Do you really believe the American electorate is any smarter today?
 
. . . . . . that she's going to have to fix I seriously doubt that she's going to find the time to put in place any more anti-gun legislation. Especially when it would be so horrifically unpopular.<snip>
Click to expand...
I will be blunt. Hillary is a marxist. She is all about the accumulation of power. Anything that stands in the way of her acquisition of power will be crushed. She was trained at the knee of some of the most thoroughgoing marxists the west has ever seen. Gun control is part and parcel with population control.

The fact that she will be busy with the affairs of state will not prohibit her from enthusiastically endorsing gun control. She will merely turn the front man work over to use idiots and organizations such as the Brady Bunch. They will bear the media scrutiny, not Hillary. You must remember we have 8 years experience with Clinton techniques of sponsoring initiative but keeping their fingerprints largely unseen. We have the additional factor with which to deal of international agreements and their impact on the right to bear arms in the US. Anti-gunners have consistently lost in the US over the last 12 years. International agreements is the new frontier into the US constitution. Hillary will drive a tractor trailer right through the constitution when it comes to treaties and "agreements'.
 
Democrats and gun control

Chuckie, Peters, the Brady Bunch, Pelosi, etc. are purposefully laying low on gun control before the Hillary election. IF...... Hillary wins, she will give the secret signal for the gun banners to go full bore. Once they succeed in outlawing our guns, only then will the lazy silent majority in this country finally vote her and her ilk from every office in this great land.
 
Hillary doesn't like directly answering questions about taxes, immigration, and Iraq. Look what happened in the last debate. She accidently stated her true opinion about immigration, and it's been damage control ever since. Of course, we all know that those men were just ganging up on her in the debate, which wasn't very fair. :( So you can't really blame Hillary for wanting to issue driver's licenses to illegal aliens.
 
Hillary is becoming popular.
This comes as no surprise. Her husband, the lying, philandering, draft-dodging, impeached coward was elected twice. Do you really believe the American electorate is any smarter today?

Probably not as we have two terms of a lying, draft dodging nincompoop who has caused the death of 3000 soldiers and the wounding of more than 20K for absolutely nothing. And he wasn't even the popular choice of the country the first time. A moron who mishandleds natural disasters and has some kind of religious fit over an obviously brain dead woman - causing him to violate the privacy of a family decision to cater to zealots?

Looking at the current set of candidates is there one from either party that you think are truly the top echelon of American morals and intellects
 
Looking at the current set of candidates is there one from either party that you think are truly the top echelon of American morals and intellects
Click to expand...


Yes and his name is RON PAUL :D
 
Probably not as we have two terms of a lying, draft dodging nincompoop who has caused the death of 3000 soldiers and the wounding of more than 20K for absolutely nothing. And he wasn't even the popular choice of the country the first time. A moron who mishandleds natural disasters and has some kind of religious fit over an obviously brain dead woman - causing him to violate the privacy of a family decision to cater to zealots?
Click to expand...
The lie is what again? And he was a fighter pilot while Bill was out of the country. George killed soldiers? OH you mean the fine soldiers that have broken the back of Al Q in Iraq? The group that what's to kill YOU killed those fine warriors, not Bush. And fewer would be dead if it wasn't for Democrats playing political gotcha games with thier resources. Democrats are still doing it TODAY. Apropriate thier resources or defund the war. Delays cost lives. Show the courage of your convictions or get out of the way of those that ARE. They have accomplished what Democrat Senate majority leader Reid called an unwindable war and a foregone defeat.

And Bill didn't have the popular vote his first election either (we use the electoral college for a VERY good reason BTW) and both elections were legit. And the Federal Government not realizing instantly the sheer incompetence of a Mayor AND a Governor during Katrina. The only disaster before or since that that level of local incompetence has manifested BTW but you pluralized for some reason. And I'm trying to remember the "religious fit' your referring to. You may want to fact check your vitriol on occasion.

Finally, that 'moron' has out smarted every Democrat leader and still has more influence then the Democrats despite their being majorities in BOTH houses of Congress. Looks like stupid ole' Dubya is leading while the enlightened and intellectual Dems are continuing to prove their impotence. Thier most impactive acomplishment has been to deeply slit their OWN party. FINE leadership.

Four months ago I started a thread about Iraq turning into a success and Bush's leadership was going to prevail over the Democrats stake on defeat. Got shouted down so hard that the thread was closed but then re-opened. Then in September the facts about the progress in Iraq were presented to Congress and every attempt was made to cloud the picture. TODAY the back of Al Q is BROKEN and Baghdad is CLEARED of Al Q. Al Q is so fractured they are fleeing Iraq instead of coagulating there.

Bush has shown what only leaders show, STEADFAST courage of conviction. He took ALL heat, all insults, all political losses for what he KNEW was the right course. Take the fight to them and keep our word to the people of Iraq. Saddam is GONE and Al Q has LOST IRAQ. They are the ones running off.

Leadership IS influence. The Clinton influence was an encouraged Osama Bin Laden that grew a confident Al Q. Bush's is a BROKEN Al Q.

In a few more month's it just may be that politicos will be saying Bush was RIGHT. A few month's ago progress in Iraq seemed just as untenable and look where that bet went.

I wonder how the political arena will look when it's shown how Republicans fight for the Country while Democrats just fight Republicans.

Hillary will have to stop tripping on her own feet. She's smelling like Howard Dean right now. Her best chance is to start celebrating US victories and stop running against Bush for President. But fortunately, that won't happen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top