New Yorker here, who voted for her. I have to say, I never understood the whole carpetbagger argument. Especially coming from folks who grew up in New York City … are you sure you actually DID grow up in NYC? Were you in a coma your whole childhood and then were shipped out of the city before you awoke? Anyone who has lived in New York City should recognize what I always thought was the most striking thing about it: EVERYONE is from somewhere else. Hell, I remember reading that 60% of New Yorkers are either immigrants or children of immigrants–so not only are many people from somewhere else, many many are not even from this COUNTRY.
That’s the beauty of NYC. Everyone wants to move there to do business, experience the culture, etc. The whole frickin’ place is nothing but carpetbaggers. I moved there for a job, lived in Queens for 6 years, and then moved upstate (but still commuted in to the city). Does that make me not a New Yorker somehow?
Now granted, if she had done this anywhere else, the label could stick. I’m from Pennsylvania originally, and the state just isn’t that cosmopolitan. If she had shown up trying to be senator … no dice. But New York State is different. I’m sure many up in Buffalo and on Lake Erie would argue with my perspective, but sadly they lack the votes to overturn where NYC wants to take the state.
I’m a socialist, Magiver. Well, not in Olentzero’s judgment, but never mind that. I do know some things about socialists. And trust me: HRC is no socialist. I wish!
I am very sorry. I did not know the history of your exchanges with Gaudere on the topic. If I misunderstood “Hillary Whore Clinton,” and mischaracterized your deep, abiding admiration for her, you have my deepest apologies. I certainly don’t want to be like Michael Moore!!!
Oh, excuse me. Just one more thing before you go. Could you explain the rhetorical devices that I am certainly missing in these other quotes. Particularly “former first bitch.” I would definitely not want to once again misrepresent your admiration for her.
Yes, it is pretty much purely partisan reasons. She is a liberal Democrat; I am a moderately conservative Republican.
She has a good deal of baggage from her long association with her slimey husband and his tenure in Arkansas as well.
The stuff about being threatened by strong women is too stupid to bother much with. If you like, you can show how threatened the Right is by people like Maggie Thatcher, Jeanne Kirkpatrick, and Condoleeza Rice.
What? What? Hillary Clinton is in favor of taxation? The horror, oh, the horror!
Friend Liberal, I fear you do need to change your name back. Just in the interest of truth in advertising. You disparage Senator Clinton not because she isn’t a free lunch Republican (who at least accept the idea of taxes as long as they don’t have to pay them), but because she is not an every-man-is-an-island, every-man-for-himself-and-the-devil-take-the-hindmost libertarian cum anarchist. This is not a useful debating position.
The hysteria over the aborted and complicated Clinton health care plan puts me in a mind of my own father’s temper tantrums about Medicare – which of course was a Communist plot to foist socialized medicine with all its attendant horrors of national standards and diagnoses manuals and tax subsidy on patriotic physicians who had sweated in the deserts of North Africa just to prevent that sort of thing.
Concerning Eleanor Roosevelt, there was an item today, albeit on a supposedly comic program, in which J Edgar Hoover was quoted as saying that Mrs Roosevelt was a danger to the republic and a subversive. Sound familiar?
And yet you list some reasons in the first paragraph. What, exactly, is the problem of opposing a politician for the reasons you listed? You dismiss them and thats cool. But for other people they are substantive issues.
On a further note, what exactly do you mean by visceral dislike? Perhaps I am not thinking of the same thing you are.
Having every need met without any fiscal responsibility is the walking definition of socialism. Socialized medicine fits that definition in every way.
Keep in mind, I’m not complaining about Senator Clinton’s prior health care proposals because she single handedly turned over both houses to the GOP. No First Lady has ever achieved that. She is the best thing that ever happened to the Republican Party.
Sorry to bust your insult bubble but I work for a living and I don’t have time to listen to the radio. You might want to save your Limbaugh labels for somone who actually quotes him.
No, Magiver, what you are describing is the welfare state, which can exist in a socialist economy or a market economy. It does exist in most of the states of Europe, all of which have market ecomies, none of which are “socialist” in the Soviet sense, and few of which are even social-democratic in the Swedish sense.
I think you are overestimating HRC’s power to anger swing voters, and slighting the credit due to Newt Gingrich and the on-the-ground Republican organizers.
I’m curious, what makes health care different from fire fighting, street maintenance, postal service, education, etc? Do you believe that all of these industries should be privatized?
When does it stop being “OK” and start being “socialism”, and how far over this line is government medicare?