Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I forgot and broke my own rule about chatting with people who aren't being intellectually honest with me.
You are 100 wrong, but that's your right.
You make me so glad Hillary lost.
The differences between Hillary's positions and Obama's were minimal.
The difference between Hillary and McCain's positions is night and day.
So I can only assume two things:
A. You are not really a Hillary supporter, you are just trying to pull Hilllary supporters to McCain or
B. You are a racist.
Fraz, I only got through your first paragraph where you talked about carefree sex only being important to guarantee for men.
That's big of you.
That's possible. But your rant had nothing to do with the fact that Viagra is covered and birth control pills aren't. I can sympathize with you that your father-in-law died of a disease while wondering what made you even bring it up.Then you have a reading comprehension problem and no one can help you with that.
That's possible. But your rant had nothing to do with the fact that Viagra is covered and birth control pills aren't. I can sympathize with you that your father-in-law died of a disease while wondering what made you even bring it up.
Erectile disfunction is a symptom of some other problem, no? By treating it, and ignoring the cause, what exactly is being accomplished but a little nookie? I have no problem with Viagra being covered, I have a problem with birth control pills not being covered...even when they are to treat an actual medical problem and not just to keep someone from becoming pregnant (which is also a valid reason).
I'll break my rule and talk to someone I know won't hear me.
obama isn't liberal. I pay close attention and I see an honest man who has to play the game in order to win. And I see the negative smears coming. You are doing it now. He couldn't be clean enough for you, He is the least corrupted candidate and yet you won't stop until he is more corrupt than mccain. And you won't stop after he wins. Just like you constantly bashed bill while he did a great job. Obama could walk on water and you would still fault him. I know you are wrong because I follow politics closely. At what point did you stop defending Bush? i'll try to go back and see your oldest posts.
So you don't like rev wright but you excuse al mccains lobbiest buddies?
And if obama is so bad, why is it that all you have on him are lies or exxagerations? Or you give mccain a pass? Not buying t. madrasas, muslim, etc. all the stuff you say are the lies the gop are putting out there to appeal to the ignorant vote, and your buying it! lol.
obama is appealing to the left and center. that's great. the right are ruining america, and that's who mccain is sucking up to.
I know i'm smart and voting for obama, so I know you are wrong. that's why I usually don't even bother with ppl from west virginia.
mccain is the elitist. he never worked. he married a rich woman who fights madd. mothers against drunk driving. why don't you know that? because mccain learned from dole. he courted the mainstream media since 1999 so you don't know all mccans issues, but I do.
far left or people sick of poltics as usual?
hillary appealed to poor white racist men and also to women. that was her base. mccain now wants to ban abortion. i'm practically a history scholar. not the history you learn in school either. So I know what you are doing to obama is nothing new. You only have 4 months so you are working overtime. I know you are so wrong about everything you are saying. I don't know why I bother. but I guess I like telling you?
Hillary isn't runing and she is campaigning for obama. if she isn't sincere, neither are you.
your history on reagan and carter is cute.
Obama is not liberal. clinton wasn't either, but I heard these sme arguments against hillary and bill.
I truly believe you are a right winger pretending to be one of us.
mccain is on both side of every argument, so he can't lose.
You are right race isn't an issue. You wouldn't vote for any democrat.
no, you aren't a racist. after reading your post, you are just a dumb voter or a republican. no offense.
and I think liberal policies are great. look what gop policies got us.
I think somethings wrong with you if you aren't liberal. not far left, but liberal is not a dirty word.
Not having a rock hard erection when you're an old man is not a disease, folks.
It's a fact of life unless you take drugs to artifically make and keep yourself turgid.
Well that is the current and PC liberal interpretation, isn't it?
Hillary and Obama discussed only a few issues in the broadest generalities during the primaries because they were trying to appeal to the same far left liberals that dominate Democrat primaries and spoke to just a few of their issues in generalities. But Obama is actually far more to the left than Hillary and on many more issues than were discussed in the primaries. Based on his record in the Illinois legislature, his two unremarkable years in the Senate, years of association with far leftwing hatemongers like Rev. Wright and that Catholic priest and his years of association with the far leftwing organization ACORN, he could be considered even radically leftwing. He has the track record supporting such a conclusion -one that is impossible to hide.
Obama's bulk of hardcore supporters during the primaries were the far leftwing but Hillary's core supporters included many more moderate and conservative Democrats than Obama had then. Hillary is a far more experienced and savvy politician who knows what sells best to voters in the general election. She spent her 7 years in the Senate building a voting record that reflects a more moderate record than her liberal campaign rhetoric would suggest she had and she deliberately did so with the intention of having a record that would support her (phony but) inevitable shift to the center for the general election. It is a voting record that shows much less difference between her and McCain than you appreciate. It is NOT "night and day". Obama has no such record to support any move to the center -and his shift just isn't believable as a result. No way he can believably palm himself off as some kind of moderate with that track record.
While liberals dominate the Democratic primaries, there are far more moderate and conservative Democrats than far left liberal ones -many of whom don't vote in primaries but do vote in the general election. And most of those Democrats have not voted for their own party's leftwing extremist candidate when one got the nomination. Which is why leftwing extremist McGovern only won a single state and why they abandoned Jimmy Carter and his leftwing policies in favor of Reagan.
For more moderate and conservative Democrats -their choice will be a leftwing extremist with a visible track record of that extremism and one they are uncomfortable with, if not downright opposed to - or the RINO McCain whose track record shows a long history of sharing many of their own views too that isn't dramatically different from Hillary's own voting record. Not a darn thing "racist" involved if Hillary's moderate and conservative supporters decide their second choice isn't Obama -but McCain. Republicans have no such decision to make. Democrats put up a leftwing extremist they aren't going to support at all no matter what color he is. And that leaves them stuck with a candidate they aren't thrilled with either but will end up voting for - because in spite of him being a RINO, is still nowhere near the level of Obama's extremism. Race is not an issue for them either because Obama's political views are much too liberal for the vast majority of Republicans. Period.
I think liberals are OBSESSED with Obama's race, certainly WAY more than Republicans. KS Governor Kathleen Sebelius went so far as to say that Republicans would make a massive effort to scare people off from voting for Obama for no other reason EXCEPT his race. And said they would be using "code words" to do it that all meant the same thing - "don't vote for him because he is black". She said to remember whenever they used those "code words" like "too inexperienced" and "too liberal" -it really meant "he's black". RUN THAT BY ME AGAIN YOU LYING DUMB ASS IDIOT! Of course Republicans have never said their opponent lacked experienced or was too liberal before -just about every election is all. And as if Republicans would be flocking to support this guy and his liberal extremism if he were just white instead. ROFL There is no logical reason for Republicans to try and "scare" people by pointing out what everyone already knows. Republicans will point out what Obama doesn't want everyone to know -that he is a leftwing extremist. In spite of the fact that I have and will again vote for other black candidates and did so for NO reason except that person's views more closely matched my own over those of those of the other candidates - according to Sebelius, if I don't vote for THIS particular black candidate when his views are diametrically opposed to my own -I'm a racist? Huh?
Liberals like Sebelius who love to hurl "racist" at Obama's political opponents when they would be the same ones even if he were white, are trying to squelch legitimate debate on issues that would expose Obama's extremist views by substituting this phony, nonexistent one of race. Many liberals seem to suggest that no one, not even Republicans, much less the Democrat moderate/conservative Hillary supporters - could POSSIBLY find Obama's even more extremist leftwing political views objectionable and suggest that even if they did, it still isn't a legitimate reason to not vote for him. Sebelius was among the first but won't be the last to suggest that unless you abandon your own core values and vote for him anyway -why you are just a racist! That can only mean that for them, Obama's skin color supercedes all else and are insisting it should for everyone else too. That isn't just racist in my book -its downright stupid.
why did edward and bill richardson endorse obama over hillary? I respect these men, so saying they are left wing will only discredit you.
if you agree all politicians are corrupt and if you agree our system is broken, then you know that mccain and hillary are both good old boys and neither represent change. mccain will carry on bush's bad policies. so get over hillary. shes not running. far left conspiracy. is that all you got? 58 percent trust obama more on the economy and 38 for mccain.
That's possible. But your rant had nothing to do with the fact that Viagra is covered and birth control pills aren't. I can sympathize with you that your father-in-law died of a disease while wondering what made you even bring it up.
Erectile disfunction is a symptom of some other problem, no? By treating it, and ignoring the cause, what exactly is being accomplished but a little nookie? I have no problem with Viagra being covered, I have a problem with birth control pills not being covered...even when they are to treat an actual medical problem and not just to keep someone from becoming pregnant (which is also a valid reason).
Don't fool yourself, Obama is nothing new at all. Just another politician.
why did edward and bill richardson endorse obama over hillary? I respect these men, so saying they are left wing will only discredit you.
if you agree all politicians are corrupt and if you agree our system is broken, then you know that mccain and hillary are both good old boys and neither represent change. mccain will carry on bush's bad policies. so get over hillary. shes not running. far left conspiracy. is that all you got? 58 percent trust obama more on the economy and 38 for mccain.
Then you have a reading comprehension problem and no one can help you with that.
Exactly what am I 100% wrong about?
See, people like you really piss me off. Instead of actually debating, you tell people they're wrong and walk away. Supporters like you make me understand more and more why Obama is an elitist prick.
You make a good point.I gotta say, I agree completely with his adviser...it IS unfair for a provider to cover a man's Viagra but not a woman's birth control pill...
and I still say, who give's a hoot?
So McCain hasn't honed his fine-tuned policy on whether private health-insurance companies should be required to cover any or all medications that a customer wants - oh, no! Obviously this points to him being woefully under-qualified to be President!
Excuse my sarcasm, but come on - if anything, I'm impressed that McCain didn't do what most politicians would have done, and quickly give a politically correct blow-off answer, "I think that a woman has an absolute right to receive equal healthcare under her plan - and if a man is getting a Viagra prescription covered it should be a given that a woman can get her birth control covered..." McCain at least had the guts to eventually pony up to the fact that he didn't know what he wanted to say about it and therefore wouldn't say anything about it.
Additionally, I have had 7 insurance plans in my life - including the 3 I had when I was still in college and being covered by my parents. 6 of those 7 covered my birth control prescription - no questions asked. The 7th didn't, but covered several other types of birth control pill - I consulted my doctor and switched prescriptions. Bottom line, I would be fascinated to learn just how many women are affected by this problem.
You make a good point.
This issue simply points out the bigoted hatred some women have for men because men like sex with women.
These women have so much hatred for men, that they do not care that Viagra is used to treat heart failure in men.
Some women would like to have men die from heart failure if they could get birth control covered by Insurance.
American culture has turned into a hate fest!