Why do so many Democrats hate Hillary and why do so many Republicans hate McCain? Check out this quote:

"If you've got a Hillary and McCain race, you've got a third option: That's the pistol on the bed table."

-- Pat Buchanan on MSNBC.

I dont follow politics at all, I just know I dont trust a one of them....

Its A Frikin Train reck........either way..

But why the hatred? From within their own parties? And what will the haters do if these 2 are the eventual nominees?

I could go on and on about the above, but I am going to make it short.

Hillary is too polarizing. Additionally, she is viewed as the negative candidate. Lastly, a lot of voters believe that once Hillary is elected, it will be more of Bill Clinton.

McCain is not a true Republican. He is a liberal. He advocates open borders, although he is trying to change his stance on that now that he realizes it is something that will make him unelectable. Also, Republicans are against him, because of the McCain-Finestein Bill. Additionally, a certain percentage of voters are concerned about his age.

Hi, Leah. How's it going?

Pat Buchanan also said this about McCain, dumfounded that he is the Republican front runner:

McCain's platform:

1. The jobs aren't coming back
2. The illegals aren't going home and
3. The war might last another 100 years

I couldn't stop laughing when he said it and Pat was laughing too.

Hey Mac.... You know what they say about McCain. He is a RINO.

I'm not so sure you can call him that, Leah. Since Bush has been president every single Republican has been in lock step with him(Bush) with very few exceptions. So for the last 7 years anyway, the Republican party has spoken with one voice. So if you call McCain a RINO, then you have to call every other Republican a RINO, since they have all acted in concert. Right?

Hey Leah... as a fellow Pennsylvanian, you know they say that about Arlen Specter, too. On the other hand, there's Rick Santorum, a Republican's Republican. What did Pennsylvanians say to him in the '06 elections?

-Kerry O.

Mac .... Unfortunately, I can't argue with that.

But the point is, which of them did the people of Pennsylvania send back to the Senate to represent them? The RINO or the hardline rubberstamper for Bush?

A lot of people said that Rick Santorum was his own worst enemy in the '06 campaign. He ran a pretty dirty campaign which backfired on him. Some of his ads definitely did not past the smell test and independent and impartial fact checkers called him on it.

He tried to stoke the conservative fires even hotter by implying such things that a woman's place is in the home in his version of a Republican utopia. He was square behind W's plan to deep six Social Security as a socialist abomination whose extinction needed helping along.

In short, he was more in love with the extremist points of view of the ever-shrinking 'base' than he was in listening to _all_ those he represented.

And he paid the price. No "RINO"ing about it. Because the voters always get the last word. At least until inauguration day...


-Kerry O.

Hey ,Since so many of us agree About McCain and Clinton, I have been wondering if there is any electing going on at all, I have a hard time believing that Clinton and Mc Cain actually have any backing period?From anywhere? This Cr-- has me wondering how Robotic the people are to these No News Channels? These two are obviously against what the people want and still they make it look legitemate that the people really want this!!What they Made it plain They Don't Want.

To me it is so hilarious how
all the Republican talk show
hosts, right-wing pundits, etc...
beat their chests and say
'Well, John McCain is not
a true conservative!
Mitt Romney is the
true Reagan conservative!'

They all want Reagan,
because they don't dare
wish for another Bush Jr.,
what a disaster!

Ann Coulter hates
McCain so much she
would rather campaign
for Hillary.

It's odd how the
right-wing hate
machine turned
away from Hillary
and started focusing
on McCain!

kerry o. ..... copied/pasted part of your post in re Rick Santorum,
"[Santorum] tried to stoke the conservative fires even hotter by implying such things that a woman's place is in the home in his version of a Republican utopia."


Considering the rampant crime that is in our society, so many juveniles getting into trouble with drugs, drinking, robbery, and even murder, maybe a woman's place is in the home. My mom's generation was the one where women stayed home with their families. My mother said the big disgrace at her school was when a group of girls were caught smoking in the bathroom. The principal of the school had a school assembly outlining the fact that there was to be no smoking in the school. The next one who was caught would be expelled. Today, forget about smoking in the schools, sometimes drugs and rape are the norm.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

kerry o. I also copied/pasted another part of your post on Santorum,

"Santorum" was square behind W's plan to deep six Social Security as a socialist abomination whose extinction needed helping along."

You are definitely mistaken about the above, because I remember Santorum saying he would never touch Social Security since his mother is on it and she would disown him if he messed with it. His remark got a big laugh, which is why his stance on Social Security stayed ingrained in my mind.

Just to use one example, Clinton's solutions to somethings cause other problems. For instance, she wants to make health insurance kinda like auto insurance. You MUST have it. If you are alive, you are legally required to have medical insurance. The reason people don't isn't because they don't have it, but because they can't afford it. She doesn't have any plan to address that issue. Her plan is that they will just have to find a way. Which increases the financial hardships on people and families.

Many of her solutions are like that. Which is why Barack has my vote.

There are similar reasons why Republicans don't like McCain.

I think that when it comes down to it, they are too close to the middle in many ways. Which is what you would think people might want.

I just think that when it all comes down to it, I like Barack's solutions better. Some do cost more in upfront costs, but result in far more savings as an end result.

I Clinton's ideas with result in greater hardship than she realizes. The road to hell is paved with good intentions sorta things.

And while I think McCain is a moderate, I think he won't even address issues that need to be dealt with.

In that sense, McCain might be better than Clinton. He might not deal with some things, but he certainly won't make them worse.

Moondark..... You are correct in that Hillary wants to make health insurance akin to auto insurance in that you must have it. There was another thread in which I posted some thoughts on health care, but I will elaborate on what I said in reference to that.

In Senator Clinton's Health Care Program, she speaks of how health care is the right of every “American” — but she has a rather expansive definition of “American.” In 2005, Hillary co-sponsored legislation in the United States Senate to offer free health insurance, under the State Child Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) to the children of illegal immigrants who have lived in the United States for five years. So, that means that those who have dodged the immigration cops for five years successfully would be rewarded not only with legal status and a path to citizenship, but with immediate free health care for their children.

Indeed, when Democrats and liberals speak of the fifty million uninsured Americans, more than one fifth of those are illegal immigrants. Thus, about one in five of the beneficiaries of Hillary's program for universal health insurance are illegal aliens. Illegal immigrants are a disproportionately large segment of the uninsured population because legal immigrants and citizens who live in poverty are eligible for Medicaid, but illegal immigrants are not.

Hillary speaks of the importance of stopping health insurance companies from raising premiums on those who are sick. But she does not mention the inevitable flip side of her proposal — to raise premiums on those who are well. On the one hand, she would cover all those with chronic conditions with low-cost health insurance and, on the other, would stop insurance companies from “cherry picking” healthy and young people for their insurance plans. The net effect would be a major increase in health insurance premiums for the vast majority of Americans.
In effect, her plan would turn “insurance” into “subsidy.”

The concept of insurance is that one pays a relatively low premium to guard against catastrophic expenses that are outside of our ability to meet financially. But Hillary’s program would really be nothing more than a cash transfer from the healthy to the sick, not an insurance program at all.

Hillary says that her program would provide “universal” coverage for all. In order to achieve universality, one must make the program compulsory. The bulk of the uninsured do not want to have to pay for insurance. They are healthy and don’t want the added burden of health insurance. So Hillary’s program, as she freely admits, would require health insurance as a pre-condition of employment. Not having health insurance would be a violation just as driving a car without automobile insurance is illegal. The resulting coercion would force millions to pay for coverage they do not want and feel they don’t need. But to pay for her national program, Hillary needs everyone to be covered so she can use their revenues to subsidize the coverage of those who are ill.

But the main defect of Hillary’s program is that it leaves out any attempt at cost control. With health care absorbing 16 percent of our economy, cost control is a vital part of any plan for universal coverage. Indeed, without it, extending coverage just offers a blank check to patients and providers which would drive even higher the share of our economy that goes to health care. Hillary will be forced to control costs as the implicit and vital element of any health care reform. This control of costs belies her contention that she would leave the health care system untouched except to extend coverage to those who now lack it. Because she would need to limit utilization and lower costs, she would be forced to ration health care and to impose government mandated and controlled managed care on all Americans.

For the first time, the word “no” would come into our system. Do you need open heart surgery? Are you a poor risk because of smoking or diabetes or age? No longer would the bureaucrat at the other end of the phone say “we won’t pay for it” or “you don’t need it” or “we can’t fit you in at our facility.” The answer would simply be no — even if you pay for it yourself, you may not have one. It is this type of coercion that drives Canadians over the border to the U.S. in search of medical options denied them at home under their socialized medical structure. Now it would operate on both sides of the border.

Finally, Hillary admits her proposal will cost $110 billion dollars. Where will this money come from? Taxes.

Though I like McCain, I disagree with him
on how he would handle the Iraq War.

He said that U.S. troops occupying Iraq
for 100 years would be 'fine with me'.

It would not be fine with me.

Though I don't favor immediate troop withdrawal,
I believe a permanent U.S. troop presence in that
country would be a mistake.

I think what stuck in most people's minds even more was when Santorum was greeted by the party faithful at a rally where they chanted "Hey, hey, ho, ho.... Social Security's got to go." The moment was captured beautifully on video by CNN and to this day can still be found on YouTube.

But don't take my word for it, go Google it yourself.

It also didn't help that the Republicans tried to Swiftboat the AARP on this issue. Again, Google is your friend.

-Kerry O.

McCain to me would be another Bush in office. He would keep the war going on and on and probably keep sending money overseas to "fight the terrorist" rather than help everyone here.

Just my opinion, no need to jump on me.