Man Coulter says so, but this could only be to demoralize Democrats. He said if it comes down to a choice between Hillary and McCain, he would vote Hillary and urge his followers to do the same, because Hillary is the more conservative of the two, and would be more likely to implement a conservative policy for the United States.

Is this true? It sort of feels at the gut level like Coultergeist might be right (first time for everything). But is this true, or just how the corporate media paints things? What are Hillary's actual positions?

• Be at war with all life for all eternity. (Conservative)
  • Supports the "Bush Doctrine" as valid international law. (Neo-Conservative++)
• Stop being a Republic, become an Oligarchy (like modern Russia) with all power in the hands of corporate donors. (Conservative, but increasingly bipartisan)
• Has worked hard for socialized medicine and suffered the consequences. (Very liberal)
• Hated with a passion by many Democrats. (Conservative)
• Hated with a passion by many Republicans. (Liberal)
• Sucks money up like an elephant. (Conservative, but increasingly bipartisan)
• Unwavering support for evil. (Conservative++ - reminds them of evil)
• Likes to talk instead of act, especially if it means talking to Europeans. (Liberal - reminds us of JFK)
• Lies every time her lips move. (Bipartisan - all politicians do this)

So I guess the question is did Man Coulter decide to be a Godless Treason[ist], or did he just plagiarize the notion that Hillary Clinton is a conservative?

First off, let me say that Ann Coulter is HOT! So what if she has an Adams apple. In the sack, shes got the best pillow talk and can take a punch.

Secondly, while there is no doubt that the Clintons are amongst the most conservative democrats, the real question is, is she really right of McCain, as Ann suggests. To get that answer, we have to look at McCain. So here it is, John McCain:
Older than Dirt (Conservative)
defend the country (Conservative)
Amnesty for Illegals (Liberal)
Raising Taxes is good (Liberal)
No Economic Experience (Liberal x 3)
Pro-Life (Conservative++)
Complete Liar (Bi-Partisan)
Believes his own lies enough to repeat them in the face of all evidence to the contrary (Liberal)
Extreme arrogance and lack of character(At this level, Unique to John and Hillary)
Guantanamo (Liberal)
Water boarding (Liberal)
Dirty Politics (Liberal, but increasingly bi-partisan)
Gun Control (Liberal Flip Flopper)
Hated with a passion by most conservatives (Liberal)
Hated with a passion by most liberals (Conservative)

All told, only conservative on the things that really suck. Left of Hillary? Maybe. Combine them and they would make the candidate of perfect suckage, with no redeeming features whatsoever, save McCains position on the war.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

• Sucks money up like an elephant. (Conservative, but increasingly bipartisan)

Until Bush, this was a Liberal thing to do, so I think you got that one reversed.

*cough* Reagan.....

I've been thinking about this. McCain can't speak without getting booed by his crowd.

Why?

McCain is pretty dang liberal for the Republican Party. He's also going to win his party's nomination. Because people like and want liberal policies. When a Democrat does something liberal, Republicans complain about mis placed priorities. When a Republican does something liberal, a lot of them call "Uncle Tom Sellout!" but a lot of them say "Hey, that's sensible and not insane!!" Example? At a debate, McCain answered that he didn't want to teach voodoo in public schools, even if he knows God exists because of the Grand Canyon in his state.

Liberal is in. Just please call it by a different name and we'll love it. That's why McCain is so divisive - because he's liberal and he's successful because of it.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

Liberal is in.

I can definitely agree with that.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

because he's liberal and he's successful because of it.

Very debatable. McCain is winning the Republican Nomination for a variety of reasons, I think none of which have anything to do with how liberal he is. He had two conservatives running against him, which divided the conservative vote. He actively used dirty politics in West Virginia to keep that vote evenly divided so he would stand out as a clear front runner. Sadly, with Romney out of the race, the conservative part of the conservative party is now consolidated against McCain, which leaves the party even more fractured. Even worse, the only remaining conservative is a an ex-pastor, which is conservative in a way that many of the core conservatives disagree with.

Essentially McCain got lucky, but I doubt he will ever garner more than 50% of the Republican party. We are not busy trading away our values for an egotistical elderly idiot like McCain.

Pro life "varmit hunters" = "the conservative part of the conservative party"?

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

Pro life "varmit hunters" = "the conservative part of the conservative party"?

Well, I'm not pro-life, and I don't consider myself part of the conservative part of the conservative party, but I cant stand him. I guess thats bad news for him because a lot of conservatives don't like him for the issues he reached across the isle on. I personally don't like him because he seems like an arrogant Washington insider prick who has lived off the U.S. taxpayers for all his years in the Senate without producing much of anything. A know it all who knows nothing. I think he and Hillary have that in common. I respect the man's service, but that doesn't mean I have to like him as a person. Also, on the economy, he is nearly as economically non-viable as Obama or Hillary. Its pathetic really.

I don't have a mind of my own, all I know is that Rush does not want me to vote for him, so I can't.