[QUOTE=Barbarian]
If Pennsylvania picks Clinton, the end result won’t be known until the Democratic convention.
[/QUOTE]
Sounds like fun.
[QUOTE=Richard Parker]
Wow, what’s it like to be such a misogynistic asshole? Does it hurt your personal relationships, or are you able to find women/men that put up with it?
I feel sorry for you, I guess. You have all this pent up rage that has nothing to do with Hillary and everything to do with women. Have you had a tough life in that regard?
[/QUOTE]
If I hate Hillary and everything she is and stands for, and also, like the OP think she is a wretched hag whose time has come and gone, am I too a misogynist?
[QUOTE=buttonjockey308]
If I hate Hillary and everything she is and stands for, and also, like the OP think she is a wretched hag whose time has come and gone, am I too a misogynist?
[/QUOTE]
No, not necessarily. My comment was not in any way based on the fact that the OP dislikes Hillary. It was based entirely on the blatantly misogynistic things said therein. That you fail to see that, on the other hand, might suggest that you too are a misogynistic asshole.
[QUOTE=Wee Bairn]
Yeah, because we all know personality and likability are the top two factors in choosing a leader- people said Dubya was the one they’d most like to have a beer with- how’d that turn out? And he was choice of the people as well.
[/QUOTE]
Unfortunately that’s how the majority of people vote these days. Depressing isn’t it. A candidate could have all the solutions for the country on every issue and people would still judge them on their smile.
“I wouldn’t vote for her becuase I can’t stand her grating voice.” Wake up dumb-ass. This isn’t fucking American Idol.
Find a candidate the matches your views on the issues, find out what they plan to do about these issues, go with that candidate. Not voting for someone because they seem like a bitch, had an affair, have a dishonest looking scowl, have a name that sounds muslim, etc. is just retarded.
[QUOTE=Richard Parker]
No, not necessarily. My comment was not in any way based on the fact that the OP dislikes Hillary. It was based entirely on the blatantly misogynistic things said therein. That you fail to see that, on the other hand, might suggest that you too are a misogynistic asshole.
[/QUOTE]
It is a shame that, unlike in the real world, feces does not fertilize message boards. That would be the only way to rationalize Aeschines’ defecations, er, contributions to the SDMB.
Using female gendered language is nothing new for Aeschines. In his opusculum “Bush, I pray for an end to your cuntdom”, we have specimes like
You can find the rest here. You may require irrigation afterwards.
Why would one describe one’s feelings for Hillary using gendered words (like “crone” or “whore” or “hag” or “Vagisil” or “shrill” or “harpie” or “she reminds me of my nagging ex-wife”) if one is not a misogynist?
This is not a rhetorical question, because I don’t think that all people who use those words are necessarily misogynists. But it sure makes them sound that way. So why do it? Why not choose gender-neutral words? Our language is very rich in vocabulary, there are plenty of options.
[QUOTE=Richard Parker]
No, not necessarily. My comment was not in any way based on the fact that the OP dislikes Hillary. It was based entirely on the blatantly misogynistic things said therein. That you fail to see that, on the other hand, might suggest that you too are a misogynistic asshole.
[/QUOTE]
After reading a couple of threads on Clinton, you’ll see that you are quite wrong, despite comments on her looks, fuckability, questioning her gender, calling her a crone, bitch, hag, shrill mother, stern teacher, pimp, whore, trash, mentally unstable… Just par for the SDMB course.
[QUOTE=Cat Fight]
After reading a couple of threads on Clinton, you’ll see that you are quite wrong, despite comments on her looks, fuckability, questioning her gender, calling her a crone, bitch, hag, shrill mother, stern teacher, pimp, whore, trash, mentally unstable… Just par for the SDMB course.
[/QUOTE]
That I’m quite wrong about what? I’ve read pretty much every Clinton thread in the last three months. Indeed, I’ve participated in most of them (though I haven’t seen you there). Had you actually read them, you might have noticed that I’m not much of a fan myself. I am not a member of the NOW brigade which claims that you must support Hillary or you hate women. As recently as a few weeks ago on this board, I have defended people against the charge of misogyny for using the word “bitch” as an insult. But this OP is quite clearly not about Hillary as a politician. It is about her as a woman. And the OP has a very serious problem with women that seems to go quite beyond the average amount of misogyny present in our society or on this board.
[QUOTE=Aeschines]
this ego-greedy old crone is still grasping and preening and picking at the carcass of the United States!
[/QUOTE]
“Brawwwwk! Obama, Shame On You!!!”
[QUOTE=cowgirl]
Why would one describe one’s feelings for Hillary using gendered words (like “crone” or “whore” or “hag” or “Vagisil” or “shrill” or “harpie” or “she reminds me of my nagging ex-wife”) if one is not a misogynist?
[/QUOTE]
For the same reason one would use “she” to reference her. Or “pimp” to reference a man.
What’s amazing is that the Aeschines can write everything he said about Hillary Clinton in his post and yet still feel that the Clinton campaign is the only one that’s gone negative on the opposition.
[QUOTE=Little Nemo]
What’s amazing is that the Aeschines can write everything he said about Hillary Clinton in his post and yet still feel that the Clinton campaign is the only one that’s gone negative on the opposition.
[/QUOTE]
Not to understate the silliness of **Aeschines’ ** OP, but I hardly think a pissy Pit by some fool out here in cyberland constitutes anyone going “negative on the opposition.” You’re certainly not suggesting the Obama campaign has to take responsibility for Aeschines, are you? :dubious:
[QUOTE=Liberal]
But that’s the whole point, Steve. She IS just one of the boys.
What was remarkable was not that she was all over the place, but that she was all over the place in the span of a few days. In about a week: (1) it’s just such an honor to be here with Barack Obama; (2) shame on you, Barack Obama, shame on you!; (3) if we hold hands the heavens will open and love will steer the stars!; (4) my experience spans 35 years, from the time I left college; (5) the only one who can bring change is me; (6) all your jobs will be restored when I’m president; (7) bad things like NAFTA weren’t part of my experience; (8) he’s not a muslim terrorist as far as I know; (9) you can trust me because I’m the calm collected one.
:eek:
[/QUOTE]
Understood.
That whole “be all things to all people, say anything the current audience wants to hear, and and promise anything” shtick. Apparently you were expecting some higher standard?
[QUOTE=Richard Parker]
That I’m quite wrong about what
[/QUOTE]
Ayy, I am a non-smiley person, even in sarcasm, and now I’m regretting it…
I actually find the pure anger directed towards Clinton and the blatantly sexist form it takes quite disgusting. I’m always shocked when no one calls other posters out on it when those using, say, racist language gets cussed out pretty quickly.
[QUOTE=zuma]
There’s my over-simplification for today.
[/QUOTE]
Is this Aeschines always this - er - strident?
This is bordering on the bizarre…
[QUOTE=cowgirl]
So why do it? Why not choose gender-neutral words? Our language is very rich in vocabulary, there are plenty of options.
[/QUOTE]
Oh, but so many of the best epithets happen to be gender-specific. For example, one might refer to our current President—a male—as a prick, dickhead, motherfucker, son-of-a-bitch… well, I could go on and on. We could use gender-sanitized terms like “jerk” or “dummy” or “big sillyhead,” but they just don’t have the same impact, do they?
This is the way the vernacular of ridicule has evolved in our language, and I would argue that this is part of the very richness you extoll.
Besides, the shrill old harpy should be able to roll with the punches. Lord knows her balls are big enough.
Gendered insults are one thing. This OP is quite another.
[QUOTE=Aeschines]
This is the loser, the Bush Fuckin’-Redux, who requires full crushage in November, and we’ve got to get on the ball–wouldn’t you say that’s a fair statement? This is the dude who listens to K-Tel records and makes the songs about bombing foreign nations. This fucker is a nut with a Cialis hardon for warfare! We gotta defeat that shit, people!
[/QUOTE]
If your war lasts 40 years or longer, please consult your general for assistance.
[QUOTE=Missy2U]
Is this Aeschines always this - er - strident?
This is bordering on the bizarre…
[/QUOTE]
Ask him about ghosts.