Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Monica-Haters About to Leave Their Temporary Sojourn in the Republican Party
MensNewsDaily.com ^ | November 3, 2007 | Jim Peterson

Posted on 11/05/2007 3:01:24 AM PST by RogerFGay

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-132 next last
To: Conservativegreatgrandma

BTW: you might also think - young women.


61 posted on 11/05/2007 5:06:45 AM PST by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: mware
Interesting they fail to mention the democratic women who will not vote for Hillary.

Yeah, this guy's map is so screwy that I suspect he's just yanking people's chains for the sake of a story.

He gives people, esp. women, no credit for being able to recognize the dynamic of the Clinton marriage and politics. Bill and Hillary are really a political duo, like Antony and Cleopatra without the passion. Hillary's another Catherine de Medici or Elizabeth I, a woman besotted with power-politics. She's toxic, a female Stalin, and most women realize it.

62 posted on 11/05/2007 5:06:56 AM PST by lentulusgracchus ("Whatever." -- sinkspur)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay

Liberals will make up anything to try to explain why GWB won two terms from the voters. Liberal women joined the Republican Party and the religious right? Ha Ha


63 posted on 11/05/2007 5:16:42 AM PST by Hattie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SERKIT

Clinton was impeached; but his party fellows in the Senate refused to abide by the law.


64 posted on 11/05/2007 5:23:16 AM PST by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Lucas McCain

“Repeal universal sufferage.”

That’s just what we were discussing on another thread yesterday. Women are natures socialists. Women’s suffrage has given us our present socialistic, authoritarian, nanny-state. They vote their emotions and will almost always vote for the person who promises to take care of them instead of the person who promises freedom.


65 posted on 11/05/2007 5:27:06 AM PST by dljordan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Hattie
Liberal women joined the Republican Party and the religious right? Ha Ha

The Republican Party is a liberal party. Be that as it may, the story went that more women voted for Bush the second time because they were more interested in domestic security than the Democrats imagined. (In retrospect at least, that seems a bit dull-witted.) That's why Hillary has switched positions on the security; now she has to play both sides at the same time. Her opponents in the primaries beat her up on it, but it doesn't seem to have mattered.
66 posted on 11/05/2007 5:27:28 AM PST by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: dljordan

Women are naturally attracted to strength - it’s a result of evolution. Politicians have put the government in competition with men (and probably at least partially to up their own chances of getting a little themselves - if you know what I mean). Anyway - government is stronger. Many women joined the government harem. Men can’t win. Marriage died, family died - just like it did under the same circumstances everywhere else in the world.


67 posted on 11/05/2007 5:32:37 AM PST by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay

I can’t believe that a Republican woman would vote for Hillary. If so, these were women who just said that they are Republicans to fool the pollster. If I got a chance like that to skew a Democratic poll, I’d grab the opportunity. A more interesting statistic is how many woman vote as their husbands tell them to regardless of their political leanings before they got married.


68 posted on 11/05/2007 5:33:40 AM PST by MHT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lucas McCain

Here here! And reinstate the land ownership requirement for voting too.


69 posted on 11/05/2007 5:38:31 AM PST by festus (Fred Thompson '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: MHT

Probably a more important statistic is how many young men vote the way radical feminists tell them to under the mistaken belief that it’s good for their wives.


70 posted on 11/05/2007 5:39:00 AM PST by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: MHT

What? You think women have a devious manipulative side?


71 posted on 11/05/2007 5:45:34 AM PST by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay
...the men, having been true liberals for a long while, are now recognizing that the Democratic Party has a toxic future agenda for heterosexual males.

They'll still vote for Hillary if they think it will get them laid by that cute Democrat campaign worker.

I'm thinking 15...maybe 20% of Americans actually choose a candidate based on issues any more. ;)

72 posted on 11/05/2007 5:49:46 AM PST by Mr. Jeeves ("Wise men don't need to debate; men who need to debate are not wise." -- Tao Te Ching)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mware

What’s really funny is the stupidity of asking these questions in the first place.

Avoiding the point is more like it. The point is is Mrs. Clinton a good candidate for POTUS? The answer for so many reasons is No. You take your pick, no experience; cheat, liar, thief, rape enabler, front, woman.


73 posted on 11/05/2007 6:03:27 AM PST by freekitty ((May the eagles long fly our beautiful and free American sky.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay

Ah, affirmative action. Vote for someone solely because they are female/black/gay/you name it.


74 posted on 11/05/2007 6:03:42 AM PST by popdonnelly (Get Reid. Salazar, and Harkin out of the Senate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Jeeves
I'm thinking 15...maybe 20% of Americans actually choose a candidate based on issues any more. ;)

I was just thinking that's why Hillary's poor performance in the last Democratic Party debate had no effect. It isn't about where she stands on issues or whether she's make an adequate president. Talking about issues is just what gets her in the door. They've cultivated a personality, a feeling, emotional mechanics. When men gang up against the poor girl, it just makes the convictions of her following stronger.
75 posted on 11/05/2007 6:05:02 AM PST by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Coldwater Creek

If feminists had interest in anybody but themselves, they’d insist on nuking Saudi Arabia tomorrow morning. Same goes for every Islamic country on the map.

Their version of ‘Dr. Phil’ is actually giving men advice on HOW to beat their wives.

Why no outrage from the NAGS?

I’ll tell you why - because they hate each other, and every other woman in the world. Each is a ball of hatred unto themselves. I don’t know why it is, but women hate each other.

That’s why you don’t see women banding together to kick the everloving stuffing out of every Islamic male on earth.

“No heart, no brains, and no balls - We are Feminism”


76 posted on 11/05/2007 6:06:17 AM PST by RinaseaofDs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay

I think the author has some serious personal issues of his own, and way way way too much time on his hands.


77 posted on 11/05/2007 6:06:47 AM PST by Badeye ('Ron Paul joined 88 Democrats.....")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: popdonnelly

There are a lot of young women who have no comprehension of political issues who I’m sure are willing to vote for Hillary because she is a woman. Many young men however, understand that the Republican Party is no better than the Democratic Party when it comes to corrupt programs that will destroy their lives.


78 posted on 11/05/2007 6:07:03 AM PST by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: DainBramage

ROTFLMS!! And I AM a woman.


79 posted on 11/05/2007 6:07:44 AM PST by tioga
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay
'...where they forged an unholy alliance with self-righteous religious "conservatives"...'

=================================

Hey Jim Peterson, up yours, jackass!

80 posted on 11/05/2007 6:10:21 AM PST by Manic_Episode (Some mornings, it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-132 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson