OMG Politics, I'm over it already.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mark Wein said:
c6d8bfef1adef144d0d56f6647a764c3.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Click to expand...

:grin:

The phrase that is destined to become a classic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tig
Flamencology said:
You just dealt with an accusation of misogyny by making a racist statement.

I don't feel the need to label you a racist, a misogynist, a scumbag, a deplorable, an Okie, whatever.

But the thoughts that you've expressed are dyed with racist and misogynistic tints and shades, and you seem not to be aware of that. I'd recommend some self-reflection.
Click to expand...
And you have let your bias see racism. Problem is that there are too many out there who are more than willing to point fingers at people when they don't like what they hear.

You see racism, I see a lot of voters who have as much prejudice, bias, blindness, stupidity, scumbagginess, etc, as you accuse me of being. They just think they are on the side of "good" so it is ok to label others based not upon context but upon appearances. Kind of like judging another based upon skin color, sex, sexual preferences, etc...

It needs to be racist, misogynistic, homophobic, whatever label is deemed appropriate...Just so the person you don't like will JUST SHUT UP!

Feel free to point out my "racism" as opposed to my pointing out that we are electing presidents based upon appearances instead of actual ability to do the job.

Every single one of you that say you are voting for HRC because of "Experience" is being hypocritical because the majority of you chose appearance over experience when you voted for Obama in '08. None of you, as shown in '08, like HRC. The Democratic Party did not, do not, like her and in '08 they searched far and wide for anyone but her. And found one they knew would fit the bill. The one person who could beat a woman ( just not THAT woman) in an election. Does not matter than he does not have experience, he has other attributes that will overcome that little bump in the road.

If "experience" was truly the case we would have voted for McCain in '08. Or voted for Dole in '98. Or voted for Goldwater. Or Gingrich, Humphrey, etc...

Of course, you don't like hearing that, no matter the accuracy, because it exposes all of you as just as hypocritical, just at motivated by appearances, just as shallow as the Republicans.

So you toss out accusations of Misogyny and Racism, even Scumbag, in your need to right your ship in your own mind.

Hell, no one who considers themselves "Enlightened" wants to hear they are no better than those they say are stupid, racist, shallow, sexist...

Guess what: You are. In your own way. The difference is that the right has managed to marginalize itself, on its own, and the Left has benefited from it in that it is now in a position of superiority.

The problem is that even though the left is just as bigoted, biased, narrow-minded, ignorant in their own way, they are kind of like the Frat character in Van Wilder:

Conceited ( liberals are not good enough to be called arrogant, that would indicate that they are correct in their thinking) due to your favored status but ultimately less of a person than those you ridicule, chastise and, ultimately try to control.

By your eagerness to call me misogynistic and racist and a scumbag, all you show is the same level of shallowness and ignorance that you attribute to the right.
 
Ah yes. The old "you're being racist for perceiving and calling out racism!" line. What's frustrating is that we've hit the point where I'm bothered less by the disturbing content and more by the fact that you've taken 400 words to articulate a meme.
 
2112 said:
And you have let your bias see racism. Problem is that there are too many out there who are more than willing to point fingers at people when they don't like what they hear.

You see racism, I see a lot of voters who have as much prejudice, bias, blindness, stupidity, scumbagginess, etc, as you accuse me of being. They just think they are on the side of "good" so it is ok to label others based not upon context but upon appearances. Kind of like judging another based upon skin color, sex, sexual preferences, etc...

It needs to be racist, misogynistic, homophobic, whatever label is deemed appropriate...Just so the person you don't like will JUST SHUT UP!

Feel free to point out my "racism" as opposed to my pointing out that we are electing presidents based upon appearances instead of actual ability to do the job.

Every single one of you that say you are voting for HRC because of "Experience" is being hypocritical because the majority of you chose appearance over experience when you voted for Obama in '08. None of you, as shown in '08, like HRC. The Democratic Party did not, do not, like her and in '08 they searched far and wide for anyone but her. And found one they knew would fit the bill. The one person who could beat a woman ( just not THAT woman) in an election. Does not matter than he does not have experience, he has other attributes that will overcome that little bump in the road.

If "experience" was truly the case we would have voted for McCain in '08. Or voted for Dole in '98. Or voted for Goldwater. Or Gingrich, Humphrey, etc...

Of course, you don't like hearing that, no matter the accuracy, because it exposes all of you as just as hypocritical, just at motivated by appearances, just as shallow as the Republicans.

So you toss out accusations of Misogyny and Racism, even Scumbag, in your need to right your ship in your own mind.

Hell, no one who considers themselves "Enlightened" wants to hear they are no better than those they say are stupid, racist, shallow, sexist...

Guess what: You are. In your own way. The difference is that the right has managed to marginalize itself, on its own, and the Left has benefited from it in that it is now in a position of superiority.

The problem is that even though the left is just as bigoted, biased, narrow-minded, ignorant in their own way, they are kind of like the Frat character in Van Wilder:

Conceited ( liberals are not good enough to be called arrogant, that would indicate that they are correct in their thinking) due to your favored status but ultimately less of a person than those you ridicule, chastise and, ultimately try to control.

By your eagerness to call me misogynistic and racist and a scumbag, all you show is the same level of shallowness and ignorance that you attribute to the right.
Click to expand...


As I said before, we chose someone with a more progressive bent, because after the absolute regression of the Bush years, we wanted to move further to the left, try to fix the damage done. Also, while Clinton was already quite qualified, her tenure as Secretary of State certainly pushed that to a new height. Clinton was then and is now, more of a centrist than a lot of our party and that doesn't always make for the easiest bedfellows. But when you write off her qualification as being a woman, there is no other word for that than misogyny.
 
2112 said:
Every single one of you that say you are voting for HRC because of "Experience" is being hypocritical because the majority of you chose appearance over experience when you voted for Obama in '08. None of you, as shown in '08, like HRC.
Click to expand...

I am not voting for Clinton solely due to her experience. The main reason I am voting for her is because Trump is a disaster. He is the worst candidate to ever be nominated for president or for any elected office out there.
There are many reasons I am choosing her.
She wants to fix the Affordable Health Care act, not repeal it.
She will nominate supreme court judges who will uphold Roe v Wade and overturn citizens united.
She wants to fix the tax system so billionaires actually pay taxes instead of bragging about not paying them.
She wants to fix the criminal justice system.
She wants to make college affordable.
She wants to enact sensible gun laws.
She believes in climate change.
I could go on, but I will stop here. Experience is just one of the reasons I will be voting for her.
Had she won the nomination in '08 she would have also gotten my vote, but she didn't. Had Obama not have run, I probably would have voted for her in the primary as well.
 
2112 said:
Every single one of you that say you are voting for HRC because of "Experience" is being hypocritical because the majority of you chose appearance over experience when you voted for Obama in '08. None of you, as shown in '08, like HRC. The Democratic Party did not, do not, like her and in '08 they searched far and wide for anyone but her. And found one they knew would fit the bill. The one person who could beat a woman ( just not THAT woman) in an election. Does not matter than he does not have experience, he has other attributes that will overcome that little bump in the road.

If "experience" was truly the case we would have voted for McCain in '08. Or voted for Dole in '98. Or voted for Goldwater. Or Gingrich, Humphrey, etc...
Click to expand...

That's bullshit of the purest ray serene and I suspect you know it.

The entire screed is one long neckbeard bleat, but this part is particularly wrong on it's face, in the middle, and all the way to the bottom.
 
Last edited:
Chad said:
There are many reasons I am choosing her.
She wants to fix the Affordable Health Care act, not repeal it.
She will nominate supreme court judges who will uphold Roe v Wade and overturn citizens united.
She wants to fix the tax system so billionaires actually pay taxes instead of bragging about not paying them.
She wants to fix the criminal justice system.
She wants to make college affordable.
She wants to enact sensible gun laws.
She believes in climate change.
Click to expand...

"She will nominate supreme court judges who will uphold Roe v Wade and overturn citizens united."

Of your list this is the only one I think will actually happen with any sort of real effect. And I even doubt CU gets overturned. I suppose it's a low bar, but better than the alternative.
 
In Canada we are not quite unanimously horrified that there is a portion of the population in the USA that takes Trump seriously enough to make it through a round of the nomination battle - it gets closer to unanimous that he is leading one of the two parties and is actually competing. Mind-blowing that he could win.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top