Anyway, maybe someone should take a cue from the GOP and set up a beauty stand at the Democratic national convention because there sure are some behemoths in the Democratic party.
(Oh, but that must mean I’m a sexist, right?)
I’m sorry, but what’s there to defend? A group who set up a stand dedicated to some important female donor to the GOP is offering makeovers to women? The HORROR! Well, obviously it is to Think Progress (which, btw, is anything but an objective news source) and to the people who use it as their major source of news.
“It’s a non-story and anyway your news source is biased and those Democrat women are real uggos but I’m not sexist and did I mention it’s a non-story?”
A sexist fails to see a problem with the sexism in his own party. Guess you can’t claim the coveted Republican label of maverick just yet, eh? Keep trying!
I imagine if somebody like Mary Matalin or Peggy Noonan were asked about this, they would try to make a point about this being just one clueless guy’s bad idea (not the entire party’s), or that it was, in fact, about Florida in August and not at all a bad idea. And the Democrats are just being big liberal whiners and are making a big deal out of nothing.
But Peggy would be more dismissive and patronizing about it.
Let me correct you. It’s a non-story; the source is Think Progress which, contrary to popular board belief, isn’t an impartial news source; and, yes, there are some real behemoths in the Democratic party (note the difference between what I typed out what you allegedly read?).
Oh, and for the love of God learn what sexism is. Seriously. Democrats/liberals/progressives/whatever they’re calling themselves nowadays are apt to throw out the sexism/racism/bigot/fascist card but rarely-- if ever-- understand their meanings. You’re going to be hard pressed to argue “Subset X of group A is uglier/prettier/whatever than subset Y of group A” where A is women to be sexism, as the deciding factor between the two isn’t gender. Of course, since I didn’t say that Subset X of group A is uglier/prettier/whatever than subset Y of group A, it’s a moot point, anyway.
You’re putting an awful lot of effort into non-stories and moot points, especially with all the extra strawmen you’re building. This thread probably would have died a page ago had you not bothered.
2.) But if I didn’t put in the effort well then… That would just be proof that whatever terrible action y’all think the GOP is engaging in is indefensible, as said the post I initially quoted.
Sure, we go for the cool mouse pads and to replenish our stress ball squishy toys. (and because this is the pit – Jackass)
Um… the ‘group’ is the RNC’s official out reach to women. This isn’t a group of hair stylist who’ve bought out a table at the convention. This is the OFFICIAL RNC outreach to women. I wouldn’t be half as upset if they’d only thought to put Ann’s favorite recipes on napkins so the girls could collect the whole set by the end of the conference.
If the RNC wanted to be fair and do a comparable male outreach, they should have set up a farting booth where two men enter and fart at each other to determine who has the most disgusting gas. After all, we all know that the only thing men are good for is farting and standing around talking about farting.
For the record, I’m going to take the somewhat risky stance of being against calling people whom I disagree with “behemoths” or “ugly” or so on. It’s not necessarily a republican thing, but I’ve seen it a lot from republicans lately. I guess the argument is “my side is prettier, and thus more rightlier.” Either that, or they’re grasping for something to further demonized their opposition.
Either way, it’s a stupid, offensive thing to say.
No, it isn’t. I’m curious as to where some of you get your information from (I mean, besides ThinkProgress)? Or do you just make stuff up which sounds nice? The Woman Up! campaign was sponsored by the YG Network pac. Now, last I checked, I don’t think what a pac does or sponsors constitutes the “official” outreach of the political party to whomever.
Now see, ladies and gentlemen, the above quoted is a textbook straw man. Could you show me where anyone said that the only thing women were good for were sitting around getting their nails and hair done, as has been stated in this thread and in the link? Or was that the assumption of others?
Anyway, since it seems we’re going down this route, and not to totally thread jack, but have you totally forgotten the number of otherwise liberal folk over the past four years who have claimed that certain conservative women should be at home taking care of their families instead of trying to engage in politics?
Face. Fucking. Palm.
Stop using terms you don’t understand. A straw man is a deliberate misrepresentation of someone’s argument or position. First and foremost, what you quoted isn’t even an argument; it’s a statement of self-identification. So please, if you would, try again.
Nope. Doesn’t have to be deliberate in order to be fallacious. An argument merely has to be fallacious if the conclusion does not follow from the premises in all scenarios where the premises are true. A straw man argument is arguing against an argument not made by one’s opponent in the debate. As it stands, you were attacking democrats for unfounded accusations of sexism, which has nothing to do with Gyrate’s post and was not evidenced.
1.) Oh, you caught me. I shouldn’t have said deliberate. Guess you get a point.
2.) Really? Because that’s not what I said. What I said was, and this is an exact quote since you couldn’t be bothered to read the top of the page, that “Democrats/liberals/progressives/whatever they’re calling themselves nowadays are apt to throw out the sexism/racism/bigot/fascist card but rarely-- if ever-- understand their meanings” which is a far cry from “attacking Democrats for unfounded accusations of sexism”. And by the way, my post did have something to do with gyrate’s as you can clearly read since (s)he was the one who brought up sexism (more specifically, tried to call me a sexist).
But still wrong about the obvious sexism of that booth. I don’t know where you grew up but I was a white suburbanite whose family, including me, was active in Republican politics and that booth merely tells me the party has not changed since 1970.
Well, it has, actually. It made first its liberals (there was a time when “liberal Republican” was not an oxymoron) then its moderates unwelcome and the pattern is continuing as respectable conservatives no longer find they fit in the Party. Proper conservatives would cringe seeing a hair and makeup booth at the RNC.
Well, basic mockery aside, I have to admit I don’t see the big deal. There are television cameras all over the place, after all, and setting up a place where women can fix their make-up quickly and professionally is probably better than having them crowd the ladies’ rooms for that.
