The "First Lady."

cawacko said:
Jarod said there's no evidence Melania is a whore. From a feminist position is it a man's job or position to determine whether a women is a whore or not? Isn't that a form of male control in determining how a woman should be labeled?
Click to expand...

It's the job of anyone who is curious to make such a determination for themselves, male or female.
 
blackascoal said:
There is no real line between what is real and what other people choose to believe. This is politics, and all manner of real and imagined hypocrisy exists between those lines.

This is war and politics .. and in war, everyone on your side doesn't have to fight in lockstep .. nor should they. I have no doubt that every time I call Noxzema Trump a whore, there are progressives here whom I like and respect that are cringing when I do. My argument to them would be that fighting republicans like democrats is why republicans control everything. Poodles vs Pit Bulls.

Grant your enemy no weapon that you won't use yourself. Fight republicans like republicans.

My argument to my democratic friends would be that power concedes to nothing but power. How do you remove attacks on the families of politicians from political discourse? Rely on the 'humanity' of the side that uses it to make it stop .. or do you give them a taste of their own medicine for them to figure out how nasty that medicine tastes?

If the other side had any humanity, they wouldn't have been doing it in the first place. Drinking their own piss is far more effective in ending and reducing the practice.

Ideological confusion will work itself out in policy.

Judge me by the enemies I've made .. FDR
Click to expand...

So in that context labeling people racist and sexist, for example, is used as a political weapon. What ramifications does that have in the real world?
 
cawacko said:
Again, just for the sake of discussion what about Michelle saying "when they go low we go high?"
Click to expand...

That's nice .. and Mrs. Obama speaks for many, but not all.

When they go low .. kick them in the face.

During the Civil Rights era there were two distinct factions of the movement, but both on the same side. The peacenik marchers, represented by Dr. King .. and the 'By any means necessary' faction, represented by Malcolm X. Both were absolutely necessary, and neither could have accomplished what they did without the other.
 
cawacko said:
So in that context labeling people racist and sexist, for example, is used as a political weapon. What ramifications does that have in the real world?
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter what one calls you, it only matters what you answer to. If ones actions represent racist or sexist .. then that's who they are, regardless of labels.

Racist republicans on this board call people who fight racism a racist. :0) There you have the meaningless use of a word.

It's not just about a word.
 
cawacko said:
Jarod said there's no evidence Melania is a whore. From a feminist position is it a man's job or position to determine whether a women is a whore or not? Isn't that a form of male control in determining how a woman should be labeled?
Click to expand...

It's perception .. not always gender based.

You think there aren't women calling Noxzema Trump a whore?
 
blacksambo said:
It doesn't matter what one calls you, it only matters what you answer to. If ones actions represent racist or sexist .. then that's who they are, regardless of labels.

Racist republicans on this board call people who fight racism a racist. :0) There you have the meaningless use of a word.

It's not just about a word.
Click to expand...

You don't fight racism sambo. You perpetuate with your race hustling victimology.
 
blackascoal said:
'
:0) The hypocrisy is all yours Gomer.

You failed to demonstrate your objections to the attacks on Mrs. Obama from your side of the fence. THUS, you have no argument .. just emotions. :0) need a hanky?

You obviously thought it was OK for the attacks on the Obamas .. including their children .. but now you're looking for respect and decorum. Hypocrisy.

It's simply idiotic to believe that democrats shouldn't respond in kind .. asshole.
Click to expand...
GFY, I already told you I was and am opposed. Stupid liar.
 
I agree with Krugman. Excerpts include:

"The first few weeks of the Trump administration have been marked by huge protests, furious crowds at congressional town halls and customer boycotts of businesses seen as Trump allies. And Democrats, responding to their base, have taken a hard line against cooperation with the new regime. But is all this wise? Inevitably, one hears some voices urging everyone to cool it — to wait and see, to try to be constructive, to reach out to Trump supporters, to seek ground for compromise.

Just say no.

Outrage at what’s happening to America isn’t just justified, it’s essential. In fact, it may be our last chance of saving democracy. Even in narrowly partisan terms, Democrats would be well advised to keep listening to their base. Those who claim that being seen as obstructionist will hurt them politically must have slept through the past couple of decades. Were Democrats rewarded for cooperating with George W. Bush? Were Republicans punished for their scorched-earth opposition to President Barack Obama? Get real.

But there is a much bigger issue here than partisan politics, important as that is, given the evident determination of a Republican Congress to cover up whatever Mr. Trump does. For democracy itself is very much on the line, and an outraged populace may be our last defense.

A crucial part of the story is that the emerging autocracy uses the power of the state to intimidate and co-opt civil society — institutions outside the government proper. The media are bullied and bribed into becoming de facto propaganda organs of the ruling clique. Businesses are pressured to reward the clique’s friends and punish its enemies. Independent public figures are pushed into collaboration or silence. Sound familiar?

This means supporting news organizations that do their job and shunning those that act as agents of the regime. It means patronizing businesses that defend our values and not those willing to go along with undermining them. It means letting public figures, however nonpolitical their professions, know that people care about the stands they take, or don’t. For these are not normal times, and many things that would be acceptable in a less fraught situation aren’t OK now.


For example, it is not OK for newspapers to publish he-said-she-said pieces that paper over administration lies, let alone beat-sweetening puff pieces about Trump allies. It’s not OK for businesses to supply Mr. Trump with photo-ops claiming undeserved credit for job creation — or for business leaders to serve on “advisory” panels that are really just another kind of photo-op."

http://www.post-gazette.com/opinion/Op-Ed/2017/03/04/The-uses-of-outrage/stories/201703040058
 
Jarod said:
Anyone interested in if...
Click to expand...

Let it out , Jarod. I'm sure your spouse will be delighted, but soldier on counselor. Divorce should be a fucking walk in the park for you since your own practice suffers from your negligence.

I am sure your "anyone interested" was a Freudian slip eh, big boyo?
 
blackascoal said:
It doesn't matter what one calls you, it only matters what you answer to. If ones actions represent racist or sexist .. then that's who they are, regardless of labels.

Racist republicans on this board call people who fight racism a racist. :0) There you have the meaningless use of a word.

It's not just about a word.
Click to expand...

But by definition what you are saying about Melania is sexist. However you argue it's fair game because it's within the battle of politics. So people who were against Hillary weren't sexist they were just playing rough and tumble politics.

I guess I go back to where is the line drawn because sexism in 'the real world' vs. sexism in politics?
 
blackascoal said:
It's perception .. not always gender based.

You think there aren't women calling Noxzema Trump a whore?
Click to expand...

Women are brutal on each other. I gave the example last week of the girls on my team not wanting to hire a woman we interviewed because she was good looking. Chritiefan and rana came at me hard over that but I don't see them speaking out here. That's why I don't buy this whole womanhood bond thing and think women will stab each other in the back in the workplace and elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
christiefan915 said:
I agree with Krugman. Excerpts include:

"The first few weeks of the Trump administration have been marked by huge protests, furious crowds at congressional town halls and customer boycotts of businesses seen as Trump allies. And Democrats, responding to their base, have taken a hard line against cooperation with the new regime. But is all this wise? Inevitably, one hears some voices urging everyone to cool it — to wait and see, to try to be constructive, to reach out to Trump supporters, to seek ground for compromise.

Just say no.

Outrage at what’s happening to America isn’t just justified, it’s essential. In fact, it may be our last chance of saving democracy. Even in narrowly partisan terms, Democrats would be well advised to keep listening to their base. Those who claim that being seen as obstructionist will hurt them politically must have slept through the past couple of decades. Were Democrats rewarded for cooperating with George W. Bush? Were Republicans punished for their scorched-earth opposition to President Barack Obama? Get real.

But there is a much bigger issue here than partisan politics, important as that is, given the evident determination of a Republican Congress to cover up whatever Mr. Trump does. For democracy itself is very much on the line, and an outraged populace may be our last defense.

A crucial part of the story is that the emerging autocracy uses the power of the state to intimidate and co-opt civil society — institutions outside the government proper. The media are bullied and bribed into becoming de facto propaganda organs of the ruling clique. Businesses are pressured to reward the clique’s friends and punish its enemies. Independent public figures are pushed into collaboration or silence. Sound familiar?

This means supporting news organizations that do their job and shunning those that act as agents of the regime. It means patronizing businesses that defend our values and not those willing to go along with undermining them. It means letting public figures, however nonpolitical their professions, know that people care about the stands they take, or don’t. For these are not normal times, and many things that would be acceptable in a less fraught situation aren’t OK now.


For example, it is not OK for newspapers to publish he-said-she-said pieces that paper over administration lies, let alone beat-sweetening puff pieces about Trump allies. It’s not OK for businesses to supply Mr. Trump with photo-ops claiming undeserved credit for job creation — or for business leaders to serve on “advisory” panels that are really just another kind of photo-op."

http://www.post-gazette.com/opinion/Op-Ed/2017/03/04/The-uses-of-outrage/stories/201703040058
Click to expand...

Great, don't support him in any way at all. We are all able to make choices and ultimately since this is about the horse race voters will decide come election time.
 
cawacko said:
Women are brutal on each other. I gave the example last week of the girls on my team not wanting to hire a woman we interviewed because she was good looking. Chritiefan and rana came at me hard over that but I don't see them speaking out here. That's why I don't buy this whole womanhood bond thing and think women will stab each other in the back in the workplace.
Click to expand...

I agree with you, bro.
 
cawacko said:
Women are brutal on each other. I gave the example last week of the girls on my team not wanting to hire a woman we interviewed because she was good looking. Chritiefan and rana came at me hard over that but I don't see them speaking out here. That's why I don't buy this whole womanhood bond thing and think women will stab each other in the back in the workplace and elsewhere.
Click to expand...

What's the correlation between those two situations?
 
Yaya said:
GFY, I already told you I was and am opposed. Stupid liar.
Click to expand...

If you were opposed, then obviously you are aware of all the hate thrown Mrs. Obama's way.

If you were opposed, good for you, you have a right to protest.

That being said, given that you are aware, suggesting that democrats shouldn't fire back in kind is just your opinion. You should have expected it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top