And now they understand why that wasn't such a good idea.curtpenn said:The fact you don't see it tells us all we need to know about your vision.HuMcK said:nein51 said:
Been saying that for a while. The only real hope is that what we see is the fringe 5% of each side and that most people are somewhere closer to the middle.
Difference is Dems rebuked their fringe and nominated Biden, but Republicans elevated their fringe to the White House. The GOP is about to elect multiple QAnon believers to Congress, I just don't see that same kind of ideological escalation on the other side.
The lunatic left and decades of Bush/Romney/McCain-type Republicans who only paid lip service to truly conservative ideas while taking care of their crony capitalist/1% donor-types gave rise to a disenfranchised middle who went with Trump as the only alternative.
Are We Still The United States?
4,709 Views |
68 Replies |
Last: 3 yr ago by Waco1947
60-60% of us are united and resilient and patriotic to to COE
Waco1947
Thank you for your thoughtful reply. Full transparency, sort of inline with Niebuhr's concepts of "love" and "justice," I always hope for love but must settle for justice ... i.e., I wish we had fully ethical politicians, but I will settle for above average among the corruptions.ScruffyD said:
the payments to stormy daniels and the other lady were illegal.
he had about 3000 conflict of interest instances in his first year in office, they are here:
https://www.citizensforethics.org/trump-conflicts-of-interest-tracking/
I will ignore the obvious incompetence, but what can you cite as major accomplishments of his? Yes they have reshaped the courts. OK. Tax relief. OK. Prison reform? Sure. Some of these could have been done in the first year. The courts maybe not.
What else? How has he helped your life? And I am not looking for platitudes about how he stands up for Christianity and it is ok to say merry christmas again.
Keep in mind he had control of all branches his first two years in office.
1. I'm not an attorney, so I cannot intelligently speak to the Stormy Daniels and other payoffs. I cannot make an excuse for it. However, I am guessing confidentiality agreements are not unique to the president. Do I like having a president that has to payoff a stripper, no. Is that corruption or bad character? I'm saying totally tongue in cheek, but better to pay off risks than murder them a la the Clintons.
2. I think the web site seems like a lot of sound and fury, signifying nothing. I mean visiting your business is corruption? Playing golf on a course you own as corruption? If this is "corruption," then we should really be concerned about the Obama's taking record international family vacations at taxpayer expense. No the latter does not bother me, a perk of the job, but since we're talking about the average not perfection. I'm much more worried about the Clinton "Foundation" which literally was a vehicle to solicit bribes for the Secretary of State - what were its annual contributions yr/yr in 2017? Enough said.
3. As I mentioned on the other failed thread, I supported: 1) many of his health care initiatives especially around drug controls and pricing transparency as well as trying to fix some of the VA mess and opioid epidemic; 2) prison reform; 3) making U.S. corporate taxes more competitive vs. other countries; 4) renegotiating trade deals to favor American workers; 5) standing up to our enemies and not being bullied by Iran and China, specifically but also Russia; 6) of course, unprecedented economic growth and low unemployment, especially among minority groups; 7) and I appreciate enforcing immigration laws and supporting illegal children toward a path toward citizenship, which blends the practical with compassion; 8) demanding our NATO allies pay more of its fair share of the bill.
I cannot support the mess that is our Congress, but at the end of the day or legislators no longer want to legislate but bloviate.
cinque said:And now they understand why that wasn't such a good idea.curtpenn said:The fact you don't see it tells us all we need to know about your vision.HuMcK said:nein51 said:
Been saying that for a while. The only real hope is that what we see is the fringe 5% of each side and that most people are somewhere closer to the middle.
Difference is Dems rebuked their fringe and nominated Biden, but Republicans elevated their fringe to the White House. The GOP is about to elect multiple QAnon believers to Congress, I just don't see that same kind of ideological escalation on the other side.
The lunatic left and decades of Bush/Romney/McCain-type Republicans who only paid lip service to truly conservative ideas while taking care of their crony capitalist/1% donor-types gave rise to a disenfranchised middle who went with Trump as the only alternative.
No. He was still the best choice available. Would have thought by now this wouldn't be so difficult to grasp.
I don't know we've ever been all that united.Jack and DP said:
https://peltthepundits.com/2020/06/walsh-it-is-time-to-face-the-facts-we-cannot-be-united
This unfortunate lost me at saying we had lost the rule of law over the shutdowns.
Nutjobs like this will always be on the fringe.
Uh no.Jack and DP said:HuMcK said:nein51 said:
Been saying that for a while. The only real hope is that what we see is the fringe 5% of each side and that most people are somewhere closer to the middle.
Difference is Dems rebuked their fringe and nominated Biden, but Republicans elevated their fringe to the White House. The GOP is about to elect multiple QAnon believers to Congress, I just don't see that same kind of ideological escalation on the other side.
Dems are encouraging demonstrations during a pandemic. Dems have allowed rioters and looters to run wild. I'd call that ideological escalation.
Dems condemned rioting and looting, And shut it down.
Try again.
George Truett said:Uh no.Jack and DP said:HuMcK said:nein51 said:
Been saying that for a while. The only real hope is that what we see is the fringe 5% of each side and that most people are somewhere closer to the middle.
Difference is Dems rebuked their fringe and nominated Biden, but Republicans elevated their fringe to the White House. The GOP is about to elect multiple QAnon believers to Congress, I just don't see that same kind of ideological escalation on the other side.
Dems are encouraging demonstrations during a pandemic. Dems have allowed rioters and looters to run wild. I'd call that ideological escalation.
Dems condemned rioting and looting, And shut it down.
Try again.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8515783/AOC-defends-rise-NYC-crime-saying-people-stealing-bread-feed-children.html
Give us some examples of your ridiculous claim that Dems "condemn rioting and looting" and "shut it down".
George Truett said:I don't know we've ever been all that united.Jack and DP said:
https://peltthepundits.com/2020/06/walsh-it-is-time-to-face-the-facts-we-cannot-be-united
This unfortunate lost me at saying we had lost the rule of law over the shutdowns.
Nutjobs like this will always be on the fringe.
WWII
9/11
Miracle On Ice
the stormy daniels issue is not so much the hush money. it's that it was not reported as an in kind contribution. i think that is a felony. should it be? i don't know.
visiting his businesses. the issue is he makes money off it. he charges everyone for being there. the secret service has to rent golf carts from him. and the hundreds of heads of state that stay in his hotels. the saudi's have floors rented. it's unethical. he shouldn't profit every time he visits a trump property. and he does. and i'm quite certain he's vacationed/golfed more than his predecessor.
shoot today's campaign event in the rose garden was illegal. truly it was illegal. that was a full on campaign attack. it was actually his intent to talk about China policy and he wandered off. and yes other presidents have likely skirted the line, but that was another one of the many things he does...it's impossible to keep track and you become so desensitized to it when he does it. i almost feel silly mentioning it compared to the myriad other things he's done.
hard to argue with the economy prior to the pandemic. and
i've pointed out some other of his accomplishments. but in terms of legislative, there aren't many to speak of and he had the keys to the city for some time.
i'm not sure he's even talked once about what he hopes to accomplish in a second term. it is all just blister, vitriol, grandstanding, etc. i could be wrong but i
don't think i've heard much about how he's going to help
our country if given 4 more years.
visiting his businesses. the issue is he makes money off it. he charges everyone for being there. the secret service has to rent golf carts from him. and the hundreds of heads of state that stay in his hotels. the saudi's have floors rented. it's unethical. he shouldn't profit every time he visits a trump property. and he does. and i'm quite certain he's vacationed/golfed more than his predecessor.
shoot today's campaign event in the rose garden was illegal. truly it was illegal. that was a full on campaign attack. it was actually his intent to talk about China policy and he wandered off. and yes other presidents have likely skirted the line, but that was another one of the many things he does...it's impossible to keep track and you become so desensitized to it when he does it. i almost feel silly mentioning it compared to the myriad other things he's done.
hard to argue with the economy prior to the pandemic. and
i've pointed out some other of his accomplishments. but in terms of legislative, there aren't many to speak of and he had the keys to the city for some time.
i'm not sure he's even talked once about what he hopes to accomplish in a second term. it is all just blister, vitriol, grandstanding, etc. i could be wrong but i
don't think i've heard much about how he's going to help
our country if given 4 more years.
I'm curious. How should the Democrats have prevented McConnell's court packing?ScruffyD said:
what many of you dont see is an almost ceremonial opposition from Democrats, as if this were some form of performance or dance between them and the Republicans - and yet you have such blind rage toward them.
I see very little effectiveness on the Democratic side, yet you would think they'd been running all branches of Government forever. Sure they impeached Trump and investigated him. What has that yielded? Yet they've also allowed McConnell to fill judicial seats all across the land with very little fight.
this is one of the most ineffective and corrupt administrations in some time, if not ever. led by a man who wears a girdle, makeup, some form of lifts or stilts, is no more coherent that Biden, likely abuses adderall at best, is a sexual predator, tax cheat, is making money off being president, cannot run a charity in the state of New York, and yet this election is way too close to call. and i am not even getting into everything involving him.
Antifa and all of the other monsters you fear are under your bed are really not part of this. I am talking about your garden variety Democratic party. What a mess.
granted they cannot stop it, but they could sure gum
it up. fight dirty like mcconnell always has. call attention to who some of these judges are and how unqualified they are. make some kind of noise on it. something.
they don't fight. when they do it is ceremonial.
it up. fight dirty like mcconnell always has. call attention to who some of these judges are and how unqualified they are. make some kind of noise on it. something.
they don't fight. when they do it is ceremonial.
One comment by Pelosi taken out of context. Video cuts of God knows whatcity in what yeat or what context or what statue. Fire in what cities. It's trash journalismSIC EM 94 said:George Truett said:Uh no.Jack and DP said:HuMcK said:nein51 said:
Been saying that for a while. The only real hope is that what we see is the fringe 5% of each side and that most people are somewhere closer to the middle.
Difference is Dems rebuked their fringe and nominated Biden, but Republicans elevated their fringe to the White House. The GOP is about to elect multiple QAnon believers to Congress, I just don't see that same kind of ideological escalation on the other side.
Dems are encouraging demonstrations during a pandemic. Dems have allowed rioters and looters to run wild. I'd call that ideological escalation.
Dems condemned rioting and looting, And shut it down.
Try again.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8515783/AOC-defends-rise-NYC-crime-saying-people-stealing-bread-feed-children.html
Give us some examples of your ridiculous claim that Dems "condemn rioting and looting" and "shut it down".
Waco1947
Waco1947 said:One comment by Pelosi taken out of context. Video cuts of God knows whatcity in what yeat or what context or what statue. Fire in what cities. It's trash journalismSIC EM 94 said:George Truett said:Uh no.Jack and DP said:HuMcK said:nein51 said:
Been saying that for a while. The only real hope is that what we see is the fringe 5% of each side and that most people are somewhere closer to the middle.
Difference is Dems rebuked their fringe and nominated Biden, but Republicans elevated their fringe to the White House. The GOP is about to elect multiple QAnon believers to Congress, I just don't see that same kind of ideological escalation on the other side.
Dems are encouraging demonstrations during a pandemic. Dems have allowed rioters and looters to run wild. I'd call that ideological escalation.
Dems condemned rioting and looting, And shut it down.
Try again.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8515783/AOC-defends-rise-NYC-crime-saying-people-stealing-bread-feed-children.html
Give us some examples of your ridiculous claim that Dems "condemn rioting and looting" and "shut it down".
You too lazy to watch AOC's video as well?
This Pelosi link better?
https://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2020/07/09/christopher-columbus-statue-removed-baltimore-nancy-pelosi-responds-latest/
George Truett said:Uh no.Jack and DP said:HuMcK said:nein51 said:
Been saying that for a while. The only real hope is that what we see is the fringe 5% of each side and that most people are somewhere closer to the middle.
Difference is Dems rebuked their fringe and nominated Biden, but Republicans elevated their fringe to the White House. The GOP is about to elect multiple QAnon believers to Congress, I just don't see that same kind of ideological escalation on the other side.
Dems are encouraging demonstrations during a pandemic. Dems have allowed rioters and looters to run wild. I'd call that ideological escalation.
Dems condemned rioting and looting, And shut it down.
Try again.
Really? Less than a week ago, the Speaker of the House said "people are going to do what they are going to do."
You find that to be condimnation?
Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
You seriously need to put down the bong.George Truett said:Uh no.Jack and DP said:HuMcK said:nein51 said:
Been saying that for a while. The only real hope is that what we see is the fringe 5% of each side and that most people are somewhere closer to the middle.
Difference is Dems rebuked their fringe and nominated Biden, but Republicans elevated their fringe to the White House. The GOP is about to elect multiple QAnon believers to Congress, I just don't see that same kind of ideological escalation on the other side.
Dems are encouraging demonstrations during a pandemic. Dems have allowed rioters and looters to run wild. I'd call that ideological escalation.
Dems condemned rioting and looting, And shut it down.
Try again.
Not only did dems NOT condemn it, they stood by and let it happen...
Thanks for playing.
1. Like I said, I do not have the qualifications to really speak on the Daniels thing.ScruffyD said:
the stormy daniels issue is not so much the hush money. it's that it was not reported as an in kind contribution. i think that is a felony. should it be? i don't know.
visiting his businesses. the issue is he makes money off it. he charges everyone for being there. the secret service has to rent golf carts from him. and the hundreds of heads of state that stay in his hotels. the saudi's have floors rented. it's unethical. he shouldn't profit every time he visits a trump property. and he does. and i'm quite certain he's vacationed/golfed more than his predecessor.
shoot today's campaign event in the rose garden was illegal. truly it was illegal. that was a full on campaign attack. it was actually his intent to talk about China policy and he wandered off. and yes other presidents have likely skirted the line, but that was another one of the many things he does...it's impossible to keep track and you become so desensitized to it when he does it. i almost feel silly mentioning it compared to the myriad other things he's done.
hard to argue with the economy prior to the pandemic. and
i've pointed out some other of his accomplishments. but in terms of legislative, there aren't many to speak of and he had the keys to the city for some time.
i'm not sure he's even talked once about what he hopes to accomplish in a second term. it is all just blister, vitriol, grandstanding, etc. i could be wrong but i
don't think i've heard much about how he's going to help
our country if given 4 more years.
2. I agree on the visiting businesses. However, two things for intellectual honesty:
a. I'd pretty sure previous presidents vacationed in crony-owned spots; so that's not really any different (maybe not, I'm not a presidential vacation historian, but not a big reach). How are presidential retreats normally decided? Guessing they do not have to pick the little green mark in Concur.
b. Key question is did he charge the government less than other alternatives - to me that is what would define corruption. If Option B was $200, and Trump business was $199, then it is a win-win. Those details matter. No way he has vacationed and golfed more than Obama - I mean that guy vacationed about 80% of the time, and it costs a lot more to fly your family around the world on vacation than play golf in Florida.
3. Apparently this Rose Garden thing is today's talking point - a few loony friends were losing it on Facebook. I appreciate you begrudgingly acknowledged how silly it is. FWIWNTYC it makes me respect you.
4. The president does not control Congress. I agree with you, but Congress is full of *******. I mean has Pelosi's Pansies done anything? Literally, have they done a single thing?
5. Agreed. No argument there. (but that is not corruption or incompetence)
most presidents just go to camp david so it is less of a cost etc. this one goes to his own properties and taxpayers inadvertently fund it. sure they'll occasionally go somewhere else. but for the most part that's why camp david exists.
vacationing in and of itself isn't unethical so i don't mean to imply otherwise.
the rose garden deal is untoward. presidents should act presidential. we've become so numb to his antics. it should not have happened. the white house is not a place to campaign. i think this runs into hatch act violations that they've run afoul of many times.
legislating is hard. it requires a lot of diligence and effort. he's done very little even when he had all the chambers. if he doesn't like it then he shouldn't be president.
vacationing in and of itself isn't unethical so i don't mean to imply otherwise.
the rose garden deal is untoward. presidents should act presidential. we've become so numb to his antics. it should not have happened. the white house is not a place to campaign. i think this runs into hatch act violations that they've run afoul of many times.
legislating is hard. it requires a lot of diligence and effort. he's done very little even when he had all the chambers. if he doesn't like it then he shouldn't be president.
It is going to take an ontological shift to re-unite us. Our struggle is not cultural or political but ontological: the eternal tension between reason and emotion, data and feelings, results and intentions. A political system requires debate and conversation. Debate and conversation require some mutually agreed upon facts and logical system. The reason we talk past each other is because starting with opinions and generating facts to support those opinions leads to impossible resolution.
Not by any objective standard was Trump the best alternative to be POTUS as he has made abundantly clear over the last 3 years.curtpenn said:cinque said:And now they understand why that wasn't such a good idea.curtpenn said:The fact you don't see it tells us all we need to know about your vision.HuMcK said:nein51 said:
Been saying that for a while. The only real hope is that what we see is the fringe 5% of each side and that most people are somewhere closer to the middle.
Difference is Dems rebuked their fringe and nominated Biden, but Republicans elevated their fringe to the White House. The GOP is about to elect multiple QAnon believers to Congress, I just don't see that same kind of ideological escalation on the other side.
The lunatic left and decades of Bush/Romney/McCain-type Republicans who only paid lip service to truly conservative ideas while taking care of their crony capitalist/1% donor-types gave rise to a disenfranchised middle who went with Trump as the only alternative.
No. He was still the best choice available. Would have thought by now this wouldn't be so difficult to grasp.
I honestly do not have data, but I do not think today "most presidents go to Camp David." Prepared to be proven wrong, but whereas Trump goes to Florida the Obama's spend months across the globe vacationing. Maybe there is some data for nights / year at Camp David, but it seems less popular since Carter. More than any president I can recall, Obama spent more time on global family vacations - I think he took the family literally to every continent for extended periods of time with no obvious business.ScruffyD said:
most presidents just go to camp david so it is less of a cost etc. this one goes to his own properties and taxpayers inadvertently fund it. sure they'll occasionally go somewhere else. but for the most part that's why camp david exists.
vacationing in and of itself isn't unethical so i don't mean to imply otherwise.
the rose garden deal is untoward. presidents should act presidential. we've become so numb to his antics. it should not have happened. the white house is not a place to campaign. i think this runs into hatch act violations that they've run afoul of many times.
legislating is hard. it requires a lot of diligence and effort. he's done very little even when he had all the chambers. if he doesn't like it then he shouldn't be president.
I think you're confounding two issue. No questions the president is not presidential and his antics are tiresome, but this faux red meat outrage is silly - literally every president since there was a White House campaigned from the White House. **** - Obama used the CIA and FBI to conduct opposition research for Hillary.
Did Obama or Bush pass more legislation? That's a cute generality, but a president cannot force a timid Congress to nut up and act like men - we have raise a generation of women.
Sexist stupidity --- "Did Obama or Bush pass more legislation? That's a cute generality, but a president cannot force a timid Congress to nut up and act like men - we have raised a generation of women."
Anti - sexist remark --- smart women are organizing and voting to elect women. Smart men are organizing and voting for smart women,
Anti - sexist remark --- smart women are organizing and voting to elect women. Smart men are organizing and voting for smart women,
Trump's been great. Can't wait to vote for him in November.cinque said:Not by any objective standard was Trump the best alternative to be POTUS as he has made abundantly clear over the last 3 years.curtpenn said:cinque said:And now they understand why that wasn't such a good idea.curtpenn said:The fact you don't see it tells us all we need to know about your vision.HuMcK said:nein51 said:
Been saying that for a while. The only real hope is that what we see is the fringe 5% of each side and that most people are somewhere closer to the middle.
Difference is Dems rebuked their fringe and nominated Biden, but Republicans elevated their fringe to the White House. The GOP is about to elect multiple QAnon believers to Congress, I just don't see that same kind of ideological escalation on the other side.
The lunatic left and decades of Bush/Romney/McCain-type Republicans who only paid lip service to truly conservative ideas while taking care of their crony capitalist/1% donor-types gave rise to a disenfranchised middle who went with Trump as the only alternative.
No. He was still the best choice available. Would have thought by now this wouldn't be so difficult to grasp.
You were so close but your statement is overtly sexist AND elitist. In your scenario dumb men dont vote for smart women OR dumb men dont vote for dumb women OR smart men dont vote for dumb women.Waco1947 said:
Sexist stupidity --- "Did Obama or Bush pass more legislation? That's a cute generality, but a president cannot force a timid Congress to nut up and act like men - we have raised a generation of women."
Anti - sexist remark --- Smart men are organizing and voting for smart women,
You were SO close in the game of trying to be equal to everyone, so, so close.
My apologies You are right. I set up a straw man (woman)nein51 said:You were so close but your statement is overtly sexist AND elitist. In your scenario dumb men dont vote for smart women OR dumb men dont vote for dumb women OR smart men dont vote for dumb women.Waco1947 said:
Sexist stupidity --- "Did Obama or Bush pass more legislation? That's a cute generality, but a president cannot force a timid Congress to nut up and act like men - we have raised a generation of women."
Anti - sexist remark --- Smart men are organizing and voting for smart women,
You were SO close in the game of trying to be equal to everyone, so, so close.
Another try: Anti - sexist remark --- Men are organizing and voting for women to overcome sexist ideas like the one espoused by flaming moderate
And now you have offended the trans community and all people who dont identify as men or women...but it's getting closer.Waco1947 said:My apologies You are right. I set up a straw man (woman)nein51 said:You were so close but your statement is overtly sexist AND elitist. In your scenario dumb men dont vote for smart women OR dumb men dont vote for dumb women OR smart men dont vote for dumb women.Waco1947 said:
Sexist stupidity --- "Did Obama or Bush pass more legislation? That's a cute generality, but a president cannot force a timid Congress to nut up and act like men - we have raised a generation of women."
Anti - sexist remark --- Smart men are organizing and voting for smart women,
You were SO close in the game of trying to be equal to everyone, so, so close.
Another try: Anti - sexist remark --- Men are organizing and voting for women to overcome sexist ideas and policies like
nein51 said:Waco1947 said:My apologies You are right. I set up a straw man (woman)nein51 said:You were so close but your statement is overtly sexist AND elitist. In your scenario dumb men dont vote for smart women OR dumb men dont vote for dumb women OR smart men dont vote for dumb women.Waco1947 said:
Sexist stupidity --- "Did Obama or Bush pass more legislation? That's a cute generality, but a president cannot force a timid Congress to nut up and act like men - we have raised a generation of women."
Anti - sexist remark --- Smart men are organizing and voting for smart women,
You were SO close in the game of trying to be equal to everyone, so, so close.
Another try: Anti - sexist remark --- cisgendered people are organizing and voting for cisgendered people to overcome the sexist ideas of cisgendered people like flaming moderate
Meaningless assertion. What objective standard would that be?cinque said:Not by any objective standard was Trump the best alternative to be POTUS as he has made abundantly clear over the last 3 years.curtpenn said:cinque said:And now they understand why that wasn't such a good idea.curtpenn said:The fact you don't see it tells us all we need to know about your vision.HuMcK said:nein51 said:
Been saying that for a while. The only real hope is that what we see is the fringe 5% of each side and that most people are somewhere closer to the middle.
Difference is Dems rebuked their fringe and nominated Biden, but Republicans elevated their fringe to the White House. The GOP is about to elect multiple QAnon believers to Congress, I just don't see that same kind of ideological escalation on the other side.
The lunatic left and decades of Bush/Romney/McCain-type Republicans who only paid lip service to truly conservative ideas while taking care of their crony capitalist/1% donor-types gave rise to a disenfranchised middle who went with Trump as the only alternative.
No. He was still the best choice available. Would have thought by now this wouldn't be so difficult to grasp.
Im doing this only to make a point...reductio ad absurdum, if you will...Waco1947 said:nein51 said:Waco1947 said:My apologies You are right. I set up a straw man (woman)nein51 said:You were so close but your statement is overtly sexist AND elitist. In your scenario dumb men dont vote for smart women OR dumb men dont vote for dumb women OR smart men dont vote for dumb women.Waco1947 said:
Sexist stupidity --- "Did Obama or Bush pass more legislation? That's a cute generality, but a president cannot force a timid Congress to nut up and act like men - we have raised a generation of women."
Anti - sexist remark --- Smart men are organizing and voting for smart women,
You were SO close in the game of trying to be equal to everyone, so, so close.
Another try: Anti - sexist remark --- cisgendered people are organizing and voting for cisgendered people to overcome the sexist ideas of cisgendered people like flaming moderate
You have offended the agendered aliens that walk among us who claim no gender AND claim to not be people (yes, that is a real thing).
Further, sexism cant exist if there is no gender, if gender is a social construct then so is sexism. If I cant even define what is and what isnt a man or a woman then I cant possibly discriminate because I dont even know what I am discriminating against.
I would say keep trying but the point of this exercise is that it is completely exhausting and diminishes every single one of us; all races, all creeds, all colors, all genders, all species.
We need less not more of the kind of politics practiced by McConnellScruffyD said:
granted they cannot stop it, but they could sure gum
it up. fight dirty like mcconnell always has. call attention to who some of these judges are and how unqualified they are. make some kind of noise on it. something.
they don't fight. when they do it is ceremonial.
In answer to the OP: I did a quick google search and that is still our title. Confirmed as a yes.
It is sexist to acknowledge so-called "men" and "women" even exist.nein51 said:And now you have offended the trans community and all people who dont identify as men or women...but it's getting closer.Waco1947 said:My apologies You are right. I set up a straw man (woman)nein51 said:You were so close but your statement is overtly sexist AND elitist. In your scenario dumb men dont vote for smart women OR dumb men dont vote for dumb women OR smart men dont vote for dumb women.Waco1947 said:
Sexist stupidity --- "Did Obama or Bush pass more legislation? That's a cute generality, but a president cannot force a timid Congress to nut up and act like men - we have raised a generation of women."
Anti - sexist remark --- Smart men are organizing and voting for smart women,
You were SO close in the game of trying to be equal to everyone, so, so close.
Another try: Anti - sexist remark --- Men are organizing and voting for women to overcome sexist ideas and policies like
nein51 said:Im doing this only to make a point...reductio ad absurdum, if you will...Waco1947 said:nein51 said:Waco1947 said:My apologies You are right. I set up a straw man (woman)nein51 said:You were so close but your statement is overtly sexist AND elitist. In your scenario dumb men dont vote for smart women OR dumb men dont vote for dumb women OR smart men dont vote for dumb women.Waco1947 said:
Sexist stupidity --- "Did Obama or Bush pass more legislation? That's a cute generality, but a president cannot force a timid Congress to nut up and act like men - we have raised a generation of women."
Anti - sexist remark --- Smart men are organizing and voting for smart women,
You were SO close in the game of trying to be equal to everyone, so, so close.
Another try: Anti - sexist remark --- cisgendered people are organizing and voting for cisgendered people to overcome the sexist ideas of cisgendered people like flaming moderate
You have offended the agendered aliens that walk among us who claim no gender AND claim to not be people (yes, that is a real thing).
Further, sexism cant exist if there is no gender, if gender is a social construct then so is sexism. If I cant even define what is and what isnt a man or a woman then I cant possibly discriminate because I dont even know what I am discriminating against.
I would say keep trying but the point of this exercise is that it is completely exhausting and diminishes every single one of us; all races, all creeds, all colors, all genders, all species.