.
With the exception of Ron Paul most GOP Rivals Argued who's Most Conservative, Ron Paul As he has before, spoke passionately against the war in Iraq. But he also accused his Republican rivals of being for big government. "Our big-government conservatives, they're part of the neo-conservative movement. This war movement is very perplexing.

Who won the Orlando, Florida Republican debate?

--- /> http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=765
.

You get along with women as long as those women aren't "feminists", your term of choice for insulting anyone who disagrees with you and/or supports Hillary Clinton. As long as women don't hate men, or try to act like men, you get along with them great. No, you have no problem with women at all.

Blarg, your and Claudia's amature psychoanalysis borders on defamation. I suppose it's becasue you have some deeep seated issues about masculinity. I urge you to seek expert help!

As for women, I get along with women quite well, thank you. I do not like radical feminists and a detest the male hating garbage being spewed by the Hillary crowd these days. Go read some of her biographies and the quotes of ewhat she says about men in general. Then, go take a lok at the television or other photo's of the fawning crowd around her. Most are women and more than a few are recognizable as died in the wool feminists.

What is especially worrisome about feminism, and radical feminism in particular, is that it is, at best, women trying to act like men. The men they want to emulate, however, are the worst jerks on the planet - corrupt, conquest and money driven amoral thugs in business suits. Not exactly the sort of human being I would want to emulate, but it's what you see as self identified feminists - business analysts and CEO's.

response to: (mark_in_austin | October 18, 2007 08:00 AM)

You made some valid points. Geraldine Ferraro(?) if I'm not mistaken was on the Dem. ticket with Mondale.

Unfortunately, as the recent outbursts by Michael Richards, George Allen Jr., Mel Gibson, etc. suggest -- the racial divide in America is greater than White folks usually claim that it is. I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but it's it was a little bit funny how Richards was baffled by his own rant. Of course he's "not a racist." There aren't as many Klansmen running around at nighttime, but the racist sentiments are still there. There's FOX News juxtaposing text about William Jefferson, with an image of John Conyers. There's FOX News misspelling Obama's name as "Osama." There's a conservative/racist TV host asking a duefully-elected, American-born African-American Muslim in the U.S. House of Representatives--to convince him that he's not a terrorist. In theory, a minority at the top or bottom of a Dem presidential ticket would show progress. That said, for pragmatic purposes it's doubtful that a minority will fill one of those positions before a white female. If I'm not mistaken, anti-miscegenation laws weren't overturned nationally until 1967. Change takes time.

It's true, Rufus. Read MikeB's posts some time. (Assuming you're capable of reading peoples' posts, something that's still in doubt.) He accuses anyone of disagreeing with him of being a "feminist". He assumes that all supporters of Hillary Clinton are rabid radical feminists. And he's anti-abortion. I'm not making this up; it's right there in his posts.

"Drindl, MikeB has well-documented problems with women. He blames feminists for all kinds of horrible things,"

wow. A Well-documented history. HAHAHHA.

Ok mr. freud. attempts at discredit. Ignore the peanut gallery

'maybe Congress is no fun when you can't ram your agenda down the throats of the opposition.'

--that's what i think. the dems make 'em all work a 5-day week now too, they hate that.

drindl, UPI says
"A total of 13 Republican House members have said they won't seek re-election in 2008."

That Hastert won't even finish his term is somewhat surprising. Is there something up or is he just bored with life in the minority? He doesn't seem like the 'quitter' type, though maybe Congress is no fun when you can't ram your agenda down the throats of the opposition.

drindl, zouk posted instructions for changing your login back on the 1st or 2nd thread in the new mandatory registration world. So he's good for something...

Mark, when you google my name you will come up with a porn star, a nun who runs a mission for orphans in Africa, a mystery writer, and a buncha other things... and i can assure you they are not all me. All of them seem to have led rather less mundane lives than I ...

Your wife's dad sounds like a nice guy and a brave soul.

I'm cross county from Mamaroneck, about a half mile from the Hudson, you'll be passing through here on your way.

Hi - I thought you were "claudia" by the substance of your posts. I googled "claudialong" and found... tee-shirts.

We should be on the road at 6:30A 11-15 with the hope of being in Durham at my sister's by 6:00P. In Westchester, we will be visiting my in-laws. My wife's dad, who can claim VA benefits for 90 days each year as a WW2 vet, lives in a nursing home in Mamaroneck. He is partially paralyzed and a stroke victim but he has his wits and is a delightful human being. A devout Italian Catholic, he goes to the Jewish services because he feels sorry for the Rabbi when "not enough people" show up. His idea of religion was always more in the doing than in the "grace", anyway.

Drindl, MikeB has well-documented problems with women. He blames feminists for all kinds of horrible things, and assumes that Hillary's supporters are all radical feminists. In fact, whenever anyone criticizes him, he accuses them of being a feminist. I've never seen him give any details as to what Hillary's feminist ideology involves, except for support for abortion. And she's hardly radical when it comes to abortion. Naturally, MikeB is anti-abortion, just like he's against gay rights.

'once her more radical feminist ideology comes out,'

This is just a truly bizarre statement. What has Hillary ever said or done that could be considered 'radical' or 'feminist'? Most women [especially younger] today are 'feminists' in the sense of the word that I had growing up -- meaning that we beleive that women should get equal pay for equal work, and that if a woman in a couple works, a guy should do his share around the house. I honestly don't know what is so scary to some men about that.

I mean, really, please explain what you mean about that, and why it threatens you so much.

Hey Mark in austin,

Thanks for asking. This is me, drindl. I signed on to WaPo with my real name years ago, and I asked the system admin to wipe out my old account when they started registration [yay!] so I could long on with a new name -- and they have tried--but apparently they can't, they say it's something in my computer--frankly I have such a strong love/hate relationship with technology. Anyway, maybe my techie husband can fix it over the weekend, don't like using this because as you know, there are many loons lurking. But for now.

Sounds like you'll be going right past my house on your trip -- I live off the Sawmill Parkway, near the Tappan Zee Bridge! If you get stuck in traffic or whatever, we should have coffee!

Btw, I was up in the Catskills and Berkshires for several days, checking out the autumn leaves [they never seem to get as bright now as they used to, summers are too hot and dry--altho still pretty]. Anyway, there was hand-lettered Ron Paul [who is Ron Paul?] signs, like everywhere. Incredible -- like the Blair Witch Project. Very rural up there, militia territory, I used to live there for a couple years, everyone and their dog has a gun or three.

Anyone else notice Denny Hastert is out? Not finishing his term. and Deborah Pryce too. That's 12 or is it 13 or 14 down now?

con_crusher, I understand your sentiment. The Ds, in my memory, ran a woman for VP, one who had made her own name. Neither party has run an African-American for P or VP. A minor quibble.

response to: (mibrooks27 | October 17, 2007 11:21 PM)

The GOP relies heavily on hardcore support from the religious right. Some are already talking about putting up their own (anti-choice) candidate, if Guiliani gets the nomination. Will any Repub candidate get the vast majority of the religious right's vote? Sure. But a pro-choice candidate could siphon off enough to give the Repub. candidate less of an edge.

You said: "I've NEVER voted for a Republican but I will if Ms Clinton is inflicted upon us." I remember talking to a Md. Dem who swore up and down that he'd never vote for a woman politician. I'm not certain where your resentment for Hillary comes from, but America's moderate-to-conservative leanings will be tested if Hillary gets the nomination.

You said: "You can pretty much kiss every blue dog Democrat and moderate vote "goodbye." It's a little bit funny that you should mention that. As you may or may not know, she's a member of the DLC - a moderate Dem. group that never saw a defense budget it didn't like. Hillary seems to have been more progressive when she was younger, but weren't we all? As a liberal-centrist myself, in every sense of the word I'd consider her centrist.

You said, "Once her more radical feminist ideology comes out, I would expect her to be the worst disaster to ever befall the Democratic Party." If you don't think, for example, that men and women should get equal pay for equal work--you probably shouldn't be a Democrat. I'm not certain which "radical feminist ideology" you're referring to. As I mentioned before, she was definitely more progressive in her youth. But who can blame her? Most of the WW2 generation would be considered sexist and racist by today's standards.

To the best of my knowledge, there's never been a woman in the Virginia or Maryland governor's mansion. And of course, there's never been a woman in the White House. I suspect that Karl Rove/FOX News will be busy during the next year labeling Hillary as a weak woman or Yankee liberal. The very issue of Hillary being "electable" has more to do with who she is, than what she believes in. I don't pay much attention to the polls regarding her, because I sense that many of her "supporters" in the polls would ultimately vote differently. Hillary and Obama are probably the best things to happen to the Dem. party, and politics in general. Even if they aren't elected, they represent a country that's become more diverse. The Republican response is trying to replace Bush Jr. with another angry white male who doesn't have one single fresh idea.

con-crusher -
The religious right jumping ship? Well, there are a lot of Democrats that will jump ship if Hillary is the nominee. I've NEVER voted for a Republican but I will if Ms Clinton is inflicted upon us. You can pretty much kiss every blue dog Democrat and moderate vote "goodbye". Once her more radical feminist ideology comes out, I would expect her to be the worst disaster to ever befall the Democratic Party.

From what I've read, Hillary is about neck-and-neck with Guiliani in a nationwide matchup. That said, she definitely has the advantage right now--deep, deep pockets. Red/Purple states would be more challenging for her to overcome, than for someone like Edwards. But if Guiliani gets the nomination, expect the religious right to jump ship. That should create some parity. But the honeymoon with evangelicals and the GOP is over, and more voters are realizing that there's nothing really "Christian" about the Christian Coalition.

Repuglicans are on their heels. The "fiscal conservatives" are spending beyond their means, and they're not even attracting a majority of Repubs. What's they're typical response? Reactionary responses. Romney says that Hillary couldn't be elected be France, but could Romney be elected anywhere outside of Utah? Even Mass. is sick and tired of his flipflopping. Guiliani is leading nationwide, but he's no whopping saint. McCain is another Bush Sr. and Bob Dole - too tired and too old at this "juncture." Fred Thompson? He's referred to Russia as the Soviet Union, and claims that Iraq has WMD. Ron Paul has a lot of grassroots support, but the media hasn't given him the time of day. When Repubs get behind in polls, they get negative and Rove-ish. Expect more of the same until November '08. AMF GOP.

Rasmussen Reports has their first poll on the Iowa caucus. The trend towards Hillary seems to be gaining there as well as everywhere else. I think this now puts Hillary ahead in every state that will have a primary or caucus, and with the early February, [mini-super Tuesday], voting, by my figures, Hillary will have the dem nomination sewed up. I still remain puzzled about who the repubs will choose, but am heartened by the one-on-one matchups showing Hillary will beat any of them and be our next POTUS, as I predicted many months ago.

Hey, Chris, you give us the redux but where's the post about Stephen Colbert? This is the biggest political news we've got today. It could shake up everything!

Well, not really, but still, he's the best satirist we have in this country and he's so great at skewering the Republicans that you should never pass him up.

DID "DRINDL" TELL US HER NEW ID?

This is a rehash. Take it easy. no one else even posted. Other than you and your thought police peanut gallery comments. Who's thunder am I stealling. Stop the complaints gop. you can't make laws to silence the internet. You tried, you failed. Go back to attacking 12 year old sick children and old women. It's what your good at. They may fear you. i am a patriot. I ama chrisitan. I do not fear you.

What does McCain and Sanchez have to do with this thread?

Can this clown be banned for off-topic spamming?

www.crooksandliars.com

"John McCain says Gen. Sanchez was afraid to be fired
By: John Amato @ 2:01 PM - PDT John McCain told Bob Schieffer that he feels retired Lt. Gen. Sanchez might have felt he would have met the same fate as Gen. Shinseki if he gave an honest opinion about the war in Iraq which is another indictment on the Bush loyalty doctrine. Sanchez came out hard against the war planning and is now being criticized by the right wingers...

Sen. McCAIN: And one of the reasons, in all due respect, my friend, is because General Shinseki gave his opinion and got fired.

Download (135) | Play (122) Download (294) | Play (83)

Transcript via Face the Nation (pdf)

SCHIEFFER: Senator, we don't want generals making policy. That's for the civilian leadership. But should they resign? Should they be willing to speak out when they don't agree with the policies? What should they do?
"

Much like they fired Gen. Batiste from CBS when he spoke out, to try and silence dissent. Much like the entire right wing radio (country music) black balled the dixie chicks. And the right is crying about free speech? Everyone but them lost their free speech long ago. You got to give to get. The right has been silencing the left since the red scare of the fifties. Why can we not repicrate. Or better yet, how long does the right get to silecne the elft until the same standards apply to those hypocrites?