<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Meaning of Hillary: Just What Sort of a President Would She Be?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://themoderatevoice.com/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/</link>
	<description>An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 23:08:02 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: domajot</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/comment-page-1/#comment-99670</link>
		<dc:creator>domajot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2007 06:34:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/#comment-99670</guid>
		<description>&#039;Feudal succession&#039; does not apply to Hillary, since she has earned her own political creds as a Senator.
Bill didn&#039;t go to committee meetings with her! 
She had to do her own homework, and no one can claim she has slept on the job.  In fact, Republicans hate her because they fear the fact that she is capable, and could have a successful presidency.  A successful Democratic presidency is the last thing they want and the first thing they fear.

If she is fake, it&#039;s because, I think, she has a vision of what it takes to be a successful president, and part of that involves working with all sectors.  Pleasing just one wing of the Democrats might win friends in that group, but it won&#039;t win support from the country as a whole.

Not progressive enough?  If you look around, the country as a whole is not progressive enough, and large chunks of it are so not-progressive that they are reactionary.  Bush&#039;s presidency was a lesson in what happens when the WH forgets everyone but one group and is the president only for one sector instead of being a presiden for the whole country. 

Insisting on getting the whole pie is a guaranteed way of losing it all after 4 years.  
Our immigration mess is what happens when an all-or-nothing attitude takes over.

I think Hillary is the one who understans that, and she is looking further down the road than the primaries or just the election.  She is looking to have a successful Presidency as a Democrat to pave the way for other Democrats to follow.

It&#039;s the difference between going for broke all at once and risk losing everyting and , instead, developing a sustainanable direction on which long term successes can be built.

If the Democrats refect her, they&#039;ll be cutting off their noses to spite their faces, IMO.

Having said that there&#039;s much about her I don&#039;t like, either.  But I think she represents the kind of long-term vision that the Democrats need.  If Obama had her skills, I&#039;d vote for him in a flash, but he doesn&#039;t, yet.  In four years, though, it might be another story.  and Hillary is the one to pave the road for him.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8216;Feudal succession&#8217; does not apply to Hillary, since she has earned her own political creds as a Senator.<br />
Bill didn&#8217;t go to committee meetings with her!<br />
She had to do her own homework, and no one can claim she has slept on the job.  In fact, Republicans hate her because they fear the fact that she is capable, and could have a successful presidency.  A successful Democratic presidency is the last thing they want and the first thing they fear.</p>
<p>If she is fake, it&#8217;s because, I think, she has a vision of what it takes to be a successful president, and part of that involves working with all sectors.  Pleasing just one wing of the Democrats might win friends in that group, but it won&#8217;t win support from the country as a whole.</p>
<p>Not progressive enough?  If you look around, the country as a whole is not progressive enough, and large chunks of it are so not-progressive that they are reactionary.  Bush&#8217;s presidency was a lesson in what happens when the WH forgets everyone but one group and is the president only for one sector instead of being a presiden for the whole country. </p>
<p>Insisting on getting the whole pie is a guaranteed way of losing it all after 4 years.<br />
Our immigration mess is what happens when an all-or-nothing attitude takes over.</p>
<p>I think Hillary is the one who understans that, and she is looking further down the road than the primaries or just the election.  She is looking to have a successful Presidency as a Democrat to pave the way for other Democrats to follow.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s the difference between going for broke all at once and risk losing everyting and , instead, developing a sustainanable direction on which long term successes can be built.</p>
<p>If the Democrats refect her, they&#8217;ll be cutting off their noses to spite their faces, IMO.</p>
<p>Having said that there&#8217;s much about her I don&#8217;t like, either.  But I think she represents the kind of long-term vision that the Democrats need.  If Obama had her skills, I&#8217;d vote for him in a flash, but he doesn&#8217;t, yet.  In four years, though, it might be another story.  and Hillary is the one to pave the road for him.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Satterfield</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/comment-page-1/#comment-99658</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Satterfield</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2007 01:48:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/#comment-99658</guid>
		<description>Hillary is not my favorite Democratic candidate, either. But I would vote for her over any of the Republican contenders if that&#039;s the way the general election turns out. Every one of the realistic Republican candidates is running as the new Bush while saying that&#039;s not what they are. Do any of them have any stands that differ from those of GWB significantly? Moderately? If they do I&#039;m not aware of them. Guiliani says he does but promises to appoint Supreme Court justices who disagree with him and would continue the policies of the current Administration.

DLS says &quot;Run Right, then Lurch Left&quot;. Yes, that&#039;s exactly what the major Republican candidates are doing. Promise the extremely right wing base of the Republican Party whatever they want then do a wink-wink, nudge-nudge with them while they lie to the independents, moderate Republicans and moderate Democrats during the general election. No matter what Hillary is campaigning like, I still regard her as less hypocritical than the Republicans.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hillary is not my favorite Democratic candidate, either. But I would vote for her over any of the Republican contenders if that&#8217;s the way the general election turns out. Every one of the realistic Republican candidates is running as the new Bush while saying that&#8217;s not what they are. Do any of them have any stands that differ from those of GWB significantly? Moderately? If they do I&#8217;m not aware of them. Guiliani says he does but promises to appoint Supreme Court justices who disagree with him and would continue the policies of the current Administration.</p>
<p>DLS says &#8220;Run Right, then Lurch Left&#8221;. Yes, that&#8217;s exactly what the major Republican candidates are doing. Promise the extremely right wing base of the Republican Party whatever they want then do a wink-wink, nudge-nudge with them while they lie to the independents, moderate Republicans and moderate Democrats during the general election. No matter what Hillary is campaigning like, I still regard her as less hypocritical than the Republicans.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: thePajamaPundit</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/comment-page-1/#comment-99651</link>
		<dc:creator>thePajamaPundit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2007 23:18:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/#comment-99651</guid>
		<description>... and after Chelsea, we&#039;ll have a dual-ticket candidacy in Jenna &amp; Barbara ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8230; and after Chelsea, we&#8217;ll have a dual-ticket candidacy in Jenna &#038; Barbara &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sam</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/comment-page-1/#comment-99645</link>
		<dc:creator>Sam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2007 22:27:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/#comment-99645</guid>
		<description>And after Jeb I think Chelsea will be old enough to run.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And after Jeb I think Chelsea will be old enough to run.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DLS</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/comment-page-1/#comment-99640</link>
		<dc:creator>DLS</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2007 21:59:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/#comment-99640</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt; I had thought we were past feudal succession.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Wait for Jeb Bush to run someday, Sam.  [scowl]

The Bushes, the Clintons, the Kennedys, innumerable others on the lower tiers (Dodds, Bayhs, etc.) are forming a hereditary aristocracy -- complete with hangers-on known as staffers and lobbyists and the major party apparatchniki.

And Washington, DC, is not only far too large and far too powerful, it&#039;s far too opulent.  (No wonder it&#039;s also far too corrupt and far too decadent sometimes.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p> I had thought we were past feudal succession.</p></blockquote>
<p>Wait for Jeb Bush to run someday, Sam.  [scowl]</p>
<p>The Bushes, the Clintons, the Kennedys, innumerable others on the lower tiers (Dodds, Bayhs, etc.) are forming a hereditary aristocracy &#8212; complete with hangers-on known as staffers and lobbyists and the major party apparatchniki.</p>
<p>And Washington, DC, is not only far too large and far too powerful, it&#8217;s far too opulent.  (No wonder it&#8217;s also far too corrupt and far too decadent sometimes.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: thePajamaPundit</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/comment-page-1/#comment-99631</link>
		<dc:creator>thePajamaPundit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:49:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/#comment-99631</guid>
		<description>Sam, I completely agree with you.

Way back in June, I &lt;a href=&quot;http://pjpundit.blogspot.com/2007/06/why-ill-never-vote-for-hillary.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;blogged&lt;/a&gt; about why I&#039;ll never vote for Hillary.
&lt;blockquote&gt;So, understand that for nearly thirty years, there has been a Bush or a Clinton in the White House. If Hillary were to win in 2008, that would make 20 years that a Bush or a Clinton was PRESIDENT (not to mention if she were to win a second term). Ugh.&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sam, I completely agree with you.</p>
<p>Way back in June, I <a href="http://pjpundit.blogspot.com/2007/06/why-ill-never-vote-for-hillary.html" rel="nofollow">blogged</a> about why I&#8217;ll never vote for Hillary.</p>
<blockquote><p>So, understand that for nearly thirty years, there has been a Bush or a Clinton in the White House. If Hillary were to win in 2008, that would make 20 years that a Bush or a Clinton was PRESIDENT (not to mention if she were to win a second term). Ugh.</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sam</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/comment-page-1/#comment-99628</link>
		<dc:creator>Sam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:32:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/#comment-99628</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m also totally against Clinton.  First, I think its rediculous that someone in the immediate family of a former president could even be up for the job.   I had thought we were past feudal succession.

Second, I agree she&#039;s fake.  I&#039;ve heard her at various venues and she&#039;s noticably different at each one.    Her answers are the canned poll approved sayings that shut reporters up without actually having said anything.   Plus in all the times I&#039;ve heard her talk she hasn&#039;t said one thing that I found inspiring.  

Third, this unbelievable partisanship started in the 90&#039;s with the GOP talk radio crowd going after Bill Clinton with a ferocity I found entirely undeserved.   Bush has been a nightmare of division and partisanship, and if we have another Clinton in the White House, its never going to end.   There are other viable candidates for the job, Hillary just brings too much baggage with her.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m also totally against Clinton.  First, I think its rediculous that someone in the immediate family of a former president could even be up for the job.   I had thought we were past feudal succession.</p>
<p>Second, I agree she&#8217;s fake.  I&#8217;ve heard her at various venues and she&#8217;s noticably different at each one.    Her answers are the canned poll approved sayings that shut reporters up without actually having said anything.   Plus in all the times I&#8217;ve heard her talk she hasn&#8217;t said one thing that I found inspiring.  </p>
<p>Third, this unbelievable partisanship started in the 90&#8217;s with the GOP talk radio crowd going after Bill Clinton with a ferocity I found entirely undeserved.   Bush has been a nightmare of division and partisanship, and if we have another Clinton in the White House, its never going to end.   There are other viable candidates for the job, Hillary just brings too much baggage with her.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: krit</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/comment-page-1/#comment-99627</link>
		<dc:creator>krit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:29:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/#comment-99627</guid>
		<description>Hillary may not be my first choice, but I do respect her strength and toughness in dealing with the opposition. Gore lacks this and showed it in 2000- though he is an admirable man in many other ways. Obama is too much of an untested commodity and Edwards&#039; appeal is based too much on populism and traditional liberal ideology. I do think a lot of Biden, but he is getting no traction on the campaign trail, and Richardson, for all of his achievements, has not been impressive during the debates. 

 Bill Clinton is still a big asset to the party and can help the Democrats greatly in their quest to regain the WH. You can&#039;t compare him with Michelle Obama or Elizabeth Edwards in clout or the ability to fill a room of campaign donors.

Mrs Clinton and her husband are showing Democrats the way to regain the WH. Can we really survive another Republican administration like this one?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hillary may not be my first choice, but I do respect her strength and toughness in dealing with the opposition. Gore lacks this and showed it in 2000- though he is an admirable man in many other ways. Obama is too much of an untested commodity and Edwards&#8217; appeal is based too much on populism and traditional liberal ideology. I do think a lot of Biden, but he is getting no traction on the campaign trail, and Richardson, for all of his achievements, has not been impressive during the debates. </p>
<p> Bill Clinton is still a big asset to the party and can help the Democrats greatly in their quest to regain the WH. You can&#8217;t compare him with Michelle Obama or Elizabeth Edwards in clout or the ability to fill a room of campaign donors.</p>
<p>Mrs Clinton and her husband are showing Democrats the way to regain the WH. Can we really survive another Republican administration like this one?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: thePajamaPundit</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/comment-page-1/#comment-99625</link>
		<dc:creator>thePajamaPundit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:21:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/#comment-99625</guid>
		<description>LL, I respect your opinion and do not wish to engage in name-calling.

However, I will answer your question - despite the fact that I&#039;m sure it will incite more of the same negativity from you.

I think that Hillary Clinton is a master politician.  She knows what to say, how to say it, and when to say it (hence the aforementioned calculative persona).  I also think that she is fake based on the appearances at which I have seen her.  Take this past weekend for example.  Hillary did all of the Sunday morning shows (for her stamina, I must give her credit) and on each one I &lt;em&gt;FELT&lt;/em&gt; like she was being fake.  The (seemingly) fake smiles.  The (seemingly) fake laughter.  These are MY impressions LL and if you don&#039;t agree, that&#039;s fine.

I never said that I &quot;hate&quot; Mrs. Clinton - I only said that I wouldn&#039;t vote for her.

Also, I would note that the other Democrats who are running are FAR from losers.  Take Bill Richardson or Joe Biden for example: both of them have more international relations experience in their index finger than Senator Clinton has in her entire body.

Finally, I would say that if you would like to engage people in meaningful debate, calling them &quot;pathetic&quot; or &quot;losers&quot; will usually turn people away from you.  If you truly believe in your candidate, you probably want people &lt;em&gt;listening &lt;/em&gt;to you, not trying to block you out.

Respectfully submitted -

&lt;a href=&quot;http://pjpundit.blogspot.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;the Pajama Pundit&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>LL, I respect your opinion and do not wish to engage in name-calling.</p>
<p>However, I will answer your question &#8211; despite the fact that I&#8217;m sure it will incite more of the same negativity from you.</p>
<p>I think that Hillary Clinton is a master politician.  She knows what to say, how to say it, and when to say it (hence the aforementioned calculative persona).  I also think that she is fake based on the appearances at which I have seen her.  Take this past weekend for example.  Hillary did all of the Sunday morning shows (for her stamina, I must give her credit) and on each one I <em>FELT</em> like she was being fake.  The (seemingly) fake smiles.  The (seemingly) fake laughter.  These are MY impressions LL and if you don&#8217;t agree, that&#8217;s fine.</p>
<p>I never said that I &#8220;hate&#8221; Mrs. Clinton &#8211; I only said that I wouldn&#8217;t vote for her.</p>
<p>Also, I would note that the other Democrats who are running are FAR from losers.  Take Bill Richardson or Joe Biden for example: both of them have more international relations experience in their index finger than Senator Clinton has in her entire body.</p>
<p>Finally, I would say that if you would like to engage people in meaningful debate, calling them &#8220;pathetic&#8221; or &#8220;losers&#8221; will usually turn people away from you.  If you truly believe in your candidate, you probably want people <em>listening </em>to you, not trying to block you out.</p>
<p>Respectfully submitted -</p>
<p><a href="http://pjpundit.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">the Pajama Pundit</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: LL</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/comment-page-1/#comment-99623</link>
		<dc:creator>LL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:10:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/#comment-99623</guid>
		<description>She&#039;s far above the other losers running amongst the Democrats. In fact if she isn&#039;t the nominee, I fully intend to vote GOP. I absolutely despise the left.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>She&#8217;s far above the other losers running amongst the Democrats. In fact if she isn&#8217;t the nominee, I fully intend to vote GOP. I absolutely despise the left.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: LL</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/comment-page-1/#comment-99622</link>
		<dc:creator>LL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:07:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/#comment-99622</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;His impassioned conclusion: STOP HILLARY NOW!&lt;/blockquote&gt;
How pathetic, this hysterical Hillary hatred is. 

pajamapundit, you are equally pathetic. If you think she&#039;s fake and calculated, it obviously means she&#039;s not. On what do you base this impression on. You are just mimicking things you&#039;ve been hearing about her for years and haven&#039;t actually come to that conclusion yourself at all. Try to think for yourself for once. The ones you believe are genuine are the ones who are the calculating frauds. Obama is a good example.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>His impassioned conclusion: STOP HILLARY NOW!</p></blockquote>
<p>How pathetic, this hysterical Hillary hatred is. </p>
<p>pajamapundit, you are equally pathetic. If you think she&#8217;s fake and calculated, it obviously means she&#8217;s not. On what do you base this impression on. You are just mimicking things you&#8217;ve been hearing about her for years and haven&#8217;t actually come to that conclusion yourself at all. Try to think for yourself for once. The ones you believe are genuine are the ones who are the calculating frauds. Obama is a good example.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DLS</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/comment-page-1/#comment-99621</link>
		<dc:creator>DLS</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:56:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/#comment-99621</guid>
		<description>Run Right, then Lurch Left</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Run Right, then Lurch Left</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: thePajamaPundit</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/comment-page-1/#comment-99619</link>
		<dc:creator>thePajamaPundit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:44:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/15319/the-meaning-of-hillary-just-what-sort-of-a-president-would-she-be/#comment-99619</guid>
		<description>My wife and I had this conversation just last night.

The Wife: &lt;em&gt;So you won&#039;t vote for Hillary?&lt;/em&gt;
Me: &lt;em&gt;No.&lt;/em&gt;
The Wife: &lt;em&gt;You&#039;d vote for a Republican out of the current crop over her?&lt;/em&gt;
Me: &lt;em&gt;Yup.&lt;/em&gt;
The Wife: &lt;em&gt;What if it was her versus John McCain?&lt;/em&gt;
Me: &lt;em&gt;Well, I probably would have to think long and hard about that... and I do like J.Mac.  I just don&#039;t like his stance on the war.  I&#039;d probably vote for John McCain.&lt;/em&gt;
The Wife: &lt;em&gt;Really?!&lt;/em&gt;
Me: &lt;em&gt;Yup.  Look hon, I really don&#039;t like Hillary.  She&#039;s too fake, too calculated.  The only time that I would likely reconsider voting for her would be if George W. Bush amended the Constitution and was able to run for a third term.  THEN I would vote for Hillary.&lt;/em&gt;
The End.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My wife and I had this conversation just last night.</p>
<p>The Wife: <em>So you won&#8217;t vote for Hillary?</em><br />
Me: <em>No.</em><br />
The Wife: <em>You&#8217;d vote for a Republican out of the current crop over her?</em><br />
Me: <em>Yup.</em><br />
The Wife: <em>What if it was her versus John McCain?</em><br />
Me: <em>Well, I probably would have to think long and hard about that&#8230; and I do like J.Mac.  I just don&#8217;t like his stance on the war.  I&#8217;d probably vote for John McCain.</em><br />
The Wife: <em>Really?!</em><br />
Me: <em>Yup.  Look hon, I really don&#8217;t like Hillary.  She&#8217;s too fake, too calculated.  The only time that I would likely reconsider voting for her would be if George W. Bush amended the Constitution and was able to run for a third term.  THEN I would vote for Hillary.</em><br />
The End.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
