Breathe deep...and get over it: Clinton supporters should mourn, but how could they vote for McCain?

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette ^ | June 8, 2008 | Sally Kalson

[2ndDivisionVet]

One of the weirder themes of this Democratic primary season was the loyalists' cry that if their candidate lost, they'd take revenge by voting for the very guy who opposes most of what their idol stands for.

This scorched-earth approach was evident in both camps. Hillary Clinton supporters swore they'd vote for John McCain if their gal didn't win, and Barack Obama fans vowed to do likewise if their guy lost.

Some of it could be chalked up to the heat of passion during a close, grueling race. But some of it was, excuse the expression, just plain bitterness.

You could almost hear these folks fuming under their breath -- "If I can't get (insert name) in charge of health care, the war and the Supreme Court, then dammit, I'm going for the fellow who'll set us back another 100 years! That'll show 'em!"

Never mind that Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama are so close on the issues that they had to find other things to argue about, while Mr. McCain thinks the free market is doing a fine job on health insurance, would be fine with 100 years of U.S. involvement in Iraq and promises to appoint justices that right-wing Christians will love.

This family feud among the Democrats has never been about issues. It's been about a lot of other things, even if the distinctions weren't always fair or accurate:

• History (the first woman presidential nominee vs. the first African American one)

• Symbolic redress of centuries of grievances (sexism vs. racism)

• Age and experience (seasoned pro who's earned it vs. relative newcomer promising to shake things up)

• Style (war horse vs. race horse)

• Class (blue and pink collar vs. college-educated)

• Tone (dogged determination vs. rhetorical uplift)

[WOSG]

“He also voted for Souter and correct me if I’m wrong, Stevens.”

Souter was Rudman and John Sununu’s fault. they thought/claimed he was conservative.
Stevens was before McCain’s time.

McCain voted FOR clarence Thomas, FOR Scalia, FOR Roberts, FOR Alito.

Obama voted AGAINST Roberts and Alito and has made perfectly clear his litmus test is such that all his nominees will be liberal activists. He will be an utter disaster for the courts.

[Eagles6]

“This lady-Ms Kalson has been a raving moonbat for many years. She is one reason that the Pittsburgh Post Gazette is fondly called “Pravda at the Point”.

[SIDENET]

I was gonna say, if McCain were anything like this angry shrew thinks he is, I’d be raising money and knocking on doors.

LOL. No kidding!

[Rubber_Nose]

[Salvation]

**Clinton supporters should mourn, but how could they vote for McCain?**

Don’t worry, they will.

[kcvl]

Sally Kalson

[PhilDragoo]

[Bigg Red]

I think the democrats will be stunned at how many of their flock cross over to vote for John McCain in November.

&&&
Not going to happen. They are fuming now, but the Clinton crybabies will be back to the fold come November. Even if a few refuse to vote for BHO, they will most likely just not vote for POTUS or write in someone.

At this point, I plan not to vote for McAmnesty, but there is no way in h3!! I would vote for a Rat for POTUS.

[WOSG]

Think again.

http://no-bama.blogspot.com/

[Sister_T]

Interesting comments.

[Marie2]

“do you really believe that any truly conservative judges will pass Judiciary hearings and a full Senate vote?”

I don’t know.

I really believe that Obama’s nominee will sail through a Dem. Senate.

I hope that McCain’s nominee can fight his way through. He may have to go through two or three before the American people demand the Senate pass somebody. That seems to be the current charade. We need a decent Senate, obviously.

Turn out! Turn out!

In California, we not only have an initiative to require parental consent for minor abortions on the November ballot, we have a constitutional amendment to ban homosexual marriage. The conservative turnout should be at its height, for what that’s worth.