English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-02-15 10:13:28 · 21 answers · asked by Razor Sharp II 2 in Politics & Government Politics

brad- GREAT ANSWER DUDE! You are too too intelligent!

2007-02-15 10:19:32 · update #1

jw- here'e one: sociaized medicine...GO!

2007-02-15 10:21:00 · update #2

greencoke- annnnnnd the rights of the unborn child?

2007-02-15 10:28:38 · update #3

Let me say that I would be the 1st person in line to vote for a woman who was qualified for the job. It isn't about THAT! Hillary is dangerous to this country in that her policies will take away our freedoms. Abortion? Think of the unborn child. Socialized health care? It's great for the lazy bastards sitting at home without a job. Me? Oh, it's going to cost me a bundle. (Did her "wife" Bill go to Canada for any of his medical treatments? Didn't think so...)

2007-02-15 10:34:16 · update #4

Since when is it MY problem that YOU don't have friggin insurance?!? GET A JOB! I want a nicer car, is THAT in her plans too?!?

2007-02-15 10:36:13 · update #5

21 answers

IMPOSSIBLE!!!!!!!!
We working people are sooooo f**ked.

2007-02-15 10:24:58 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 5

Maybe you can get a job with her office and you will get a bigger paycheck eh? Stop whining everyone is hurting, we need someone with experience to straighten out this mess! And she may be the one, certainly not a muslim eh? Or the old man that is probably senile John McCain? We need energy in there and someone that people will listen to, and fear to pull crap on her because whether you like it or not she is the last hope we have to save this country or would you rather see us torn apart! People fear Hillary and that is a good thing? They don't fear Bush they Spar with him! And he stirs up more trouble and spends way too much money on his debts to his friends! Are you his friend are you getting any dividends from his Stocks with Halliburton? Then stop it! because she did not start this war and she did not spend those trillions, and she did not lose 363 tons of US dollars amounting to 12 Billion dollars! eh? Who did that convienently to escalate the war! How stupid do you or Bush think the public is! Escalate the war for the other side and we will have to send those 21,000 troops? When will you realize that the money is ours? he did not put his own money over there? It is ours?
Ask him to buy you a cup of coffee or a beer? See what he says to you? We don't even have a health care plan? it has been 6 freaking years! Get off of it and vote for that woman she is the right stuff for now! And save your country!

2007-02-15 10:25:12 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

Ok, look. I do not appreciate your rants about how liberals just need to get a job. Let me tell you a little story. Someone I know had a business renting out duplexes back in Clinton's day. We did fine then. Then bush's tax cuts kicked in, and what happened? My mom's ENTREPENEURSHIP, a supposed capitalist value, began to fail. She had to take a second job, then because she owned property although it had a negative income we couldn't get health insurance through the state for me, my sister, or my mother, who is older and whose health is beginning to fail. Even with the second job, we barely made it and lived basically off credit. She had not one, but two jobs. She started her own business. And yet it failed. And you want to tell us that iit's because liberals don't work hard enough? You, my friend, are an ignorant fool.

2007-02-15 10:45:38 · answer #3 · answered by Giliathriel 4 · 3 1

Hillary does want to give civil liberties but that's just about it! She is too concerned with big government she forgot they were the problem. When you step back the uneducated liberal is the problem. Without an understanding of competitive markets and the problems with big government, all they see is progress when history will always prove socialism/communism as failures!

2007-02-16 14:35:01 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Billions of tax dollars not being dumped into the pockets of bush family members to build war equipment. Ws' cousing made literally billions on this war because it was his company that got the contract to supply the vehicles and equipment to the ground forces. War is business, it is never anything else but business. War is absolutely NEVER for moral implications, only monitarial.

2007-02-15 10:25:01 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

If Hillary's original Heath Plan had passed, your employer wouldn't be saddled with the huge burden of employer provided health coverage. You'd probably be taking home more pay and American Companies like the Big 3 automakers wouldn't be going broke.

2007-02-15 10:32:19 · answer #6 · answered by wyldfyr 7 · 4 1

The privilege of being an American will compromise your freedoms and paycheck regardless of who is president. Therefore I can not name one thing--your right.

2007-02-15 10:57:18 · answer #7 · answered by GO HILLARY 7 · 2 0

Well she has led the fight to give all illegal children free health care..Why not go to her web page , and read ..she is for tougher immigration but she wants to leave the borders open ,and provide govt assistance ,and housing for undocumented workers,and make sure their "rights" are not violated...

someone has to pay for all this free stuff for illegals

2007-02-15 10:35:58 · answer #8 · answered by Insensitively Honest 5 · 0 1

Name one thing that Hillary's agenda will do to compromise your freedom and or paycheck......please? I'm curious as to what you feel she can do that would damage your freedom or paycheck any more than what Bush has done over the past 6 plus years?

2007-02-15 10:20:31 · answer #9 · answered by carpediem 5 · 7 2

Why don't you list the issues of her agenda that you have problems with so us Dems can rebut.

Her agenda is vast...just like any politicians so help us out.

2007-02-15 10:18:22 · answer #10 · answered by jw 4 · 6 0

Not all liberals support Hillary Clinton for president, so we all aren't inclined to defend her. As far as socialized medicine goes, we have to do something about all of the people without health insurance in this country. I don't know if socialized medicine is the best answer, but it is better than the current state of affairs.

Key Findings from the New Census Data

* The number of people without health insurance was 46.6 million in 2005, compared to 45.3 million in 2004, and 41.2 million in 2001 (see table below).

* The percentage of Americans without insurance rose to 15.9 percent in 2005, higher than the 15.6 percent level in 2004 and much higher than the 14.9 percent level in 2001.

* The percentage of Americans who are uninsured rose largely because the percentage of people with employer-sponsored coverage continued to decline, as it has in the past several years.

* The percentage of children under 18 who are uninsured rose from 10.8 percent in 2004 to 11.2 percent in 2005, while the number of uninsured children climbed from 7.9 million in 2004 to 8.3 million in 2005, an increase of 360,000.

* Lack of insurance is much more common among people with low incomes. Some 24.4 percent of people with incomes below $25,000 were uninsured in 2005, almost triple the rate of 8.5 percent among people with incomes over $75,000.

* African-Americans (19.6 percent uninsured) and Hispanics (32.7 percent) were much more likely to be uninsured than white, non-Hispanic people (11.3 percent).

* The percentage of native-born citizens who were uninsured rose in 2005, while the percentage of non-citizen immigrants who lacked coverage was unchanged. Nonetheless, non-citizen immigrants were far more likely to be uninsured (43.6 percent uninsured) than native-born citizens (13.4 percent). The principal reason so many immigrants lack insurance is that they are less likely to be offered health insurance by their employers.[1]

* Insurance coverage declined in the South and the West in 2005, while remaining steady in the Northeast and Midwest. Unfortunately, the South and the West already had poorer health insurance coverage than the other two regions in earlier years, so this further widened the gap between regions.

* Significant changes in the percentage of people who are uninsured occurred in a number of states. Comparing the 2004-5 period with the 2003-4 period, the percentage of people who are uninsured increased significantly in eight states (Arizona, California, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Utah and Vermont), while it declined significantly in three states (Idaho, Iowa and New York).

* In 31 states, the percentage of residents who are uninsured was significantly higher in the 2004-2005 period than in 2000-2001, before the current economic recovery began. The 31 states with significant increases were Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.[2]

* While Hurricane Katrina had severe consequences for a large number of its victims in the Gulf region, it should not have a significant effect on the number or percentage of people who are uninsured, as measured by the Census Bureau. In the March 2006 Current Population Survey, the Bureau asked whether people had any health insurance coverage in calendar year 2005. An uninsured person is defined as a person who had no coverage at all in 2005. Thus, a person who had health insurance from January thru August 2005 — before Katrina hit — but became uninsured after that would be counted as insured in 2005.

Source: http://www.cbpp.org/8-29-06health.htm

P.S. Why don't we focus on providing for the children of this country who are living outside the womb instead of attacking a women's right to make the decision not to bring a child into this F'd up world.


"Since when is it MY problem that YOU don't have friggin insurance?!? GET A JOB! I want a nicer car, is THAT in her plans too?!?"

There is a difference between wanting a car and providing health insurance. Most people who don't have health insurance do have jobs. Many employers do not offer health insurance, or if they do it is outrageously expensive. Your belief that people don't have health insurance because they are lazy is unfounded and ignorant. You are definitely not a compassionate conservative.

2007-02-15 10:34:04 · answer #11 · answered by Seraphim 3 · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers