What should the President do with the money?

71 posts / 0 new

As we all know the president received a 1 million dollar donation from a well known woman hater. He has refered to women as MILF's, sluts, twat's and cunts. I am personally highly offended with these terms and don't like to repeat them. But the truth is the truth. And we're all big boys and girls here. The president frequently speaks of how he despises the harsh tone and lack of civility in today's politics. He often mentions Sasha and Malia and how he does not want them to deal with this disrespect.

That said, it would not be proper for him to accept campaign money from someone who engages in this type of hate speach against women. A lot of folks are demanding that the money be returned. I think this attitude lacks any creativity. The President obviously cannot accept the money, but he does not have to give it back either. Here are a few ideas:

1) Donate it to the American Cancer society.

2) Donate it to an organization that feeds starving children overseas.

3) Find twenty families that are facing forclosure and pay down their mortgages.

Ideas?

rigel1's picture
rigel1
Joined:
Jan. 31, 2011 6:49 am

Comments

Keep every penny of it. This is not the first time something like this has happened. Should all of the candidates return the money they will receive from BP? How about Exxon? How about Halliburton?

You want to draw a defining line in the sand based on naughty words. It's not about naughty words, it's about how they are used and who they are used against and for what purpose. The dog bit Tommy and Tommy bit the dog are the exact same words with totally different meanings.

Bush_Wacker's picture
Bush_Wacker
Joined:
Jun. 25, 2011 6:53 am
Quote Bush_Wacker:

Keep every penny of it. This is not the first time something like this has happened. Should all of the candidates return the money they will receive from BP? How about Exxon? How about Halliburton?

You want to draw a defining line in the sand based on naughty words. It's not about naughty words, it's about how they are used and who they are used against and for what purpose. The dog bit Tommy and Tommy bit the dog are the exact same words with totally different meanings.

My standards are a little higher than that, and president Obama claims that his are as well. Are you saying that the President would be okay with these "naughty" words being directed at Sasha and Malia? It's an attack on women. All women. Just a sure as the "N" word is an attack on blacks. It's hate speech. Plain and simple. Any self respecting liberal does not tolerate hate speech.

rigel1's picture
rigel1
Joined:
Jan. 31, 2011 6:49 am
Quote rigel1: As we all know the president received a 1 million dollar donation from a well known woman hater. He has refered to women as MILF's, sluts, twat's and cunts.
Of course, this is another right-wing lie. No doubt, it comes from a right-wing blogger who carelessly read this entry.
Obama refused to speak about liberal media and their un “civil discourse,” including, the Bill Maher’s, Keith Olbermann’s, and Ed Schultz’s, the liberal media darlings, that have called many a conservative woman ”slut,” “cunt,” “twat,” and have spoken of them as “MILF’s” and other derogatory terms related to sexual activity
(I don't know anything about American Livewire). There's much that can be said about quotes from these these other pundits and comedians, but it's pretty lame to be attributing their remarks to President Obama. Did you think nobody would check? How many times are you going to emabarrass yourself?

Art's picture
Art
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

The money was given to a Super Pac and, as we all know, the candidate can't coordinate with the Super Pac so your question is moot.

mdhess's picture
mdhess
Joined:
Apr. 9, 2010 10:43 pm

American Livewire has inspired 22 factcheck articles on Snopes.com. It is unquestionably a right-wing website.

Art's picture
Art
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote rigel1:
Quote Bush_Wacker:

Keep every penny of it. This is not the first time something like this has happened.

My standards are a little higher than that, and president Obama claims that his are as well. Are you saying that the President would be okay with these "naughty" words being directed at Sasha and Malia? It's an attack on women. All women. Just a sure as the "N" word is an attack on blacks. It's hate speech. Plain and simple. Any self respecting liberal does not tolerate hate speech.

I would bet - that if there were any program on the tv or any device with an on/off switch - Obama as a concerned father would turn OFF the contraption.

Wouldn't you do that too rigel1 ? Or you do believe in more elaborate socialistic intervention - preferring to bring in the parent police when a parent doesn't have any idea of what common sense is?

Once upon a time someone, I believe the big "J" talked to folks about hate & not to tolerate such sinful behavior. Wow, times have sure changed! Now only self respecting liberals need be concerned with such pedantry. This loopy lopsided looniness explains the lapses in what currently passes for logic - thanks for helping me understand why we have such a mixed up morass of morality.

BTW, we have plenty of starving children here in amerika that need help - why not them help out? Or have you been drinking that Kosmic Koolaid again?

media_muse
Joined:
Dec. 10, 2011 2:09 pm
I would bet - that if there were any program on the tv or any device with an on/off switch - Obama as a concerned father would turn OFF the contraption.
You don't think the President's daughters would have heard what they were being called? What planet do we live on?

Art's picture
Art
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Rigel.......Still trolling I see...

Lets visit something you over looked about Maher. First Maher doesn't hate women after all he dated and probably screwed ann coulter a number of times. Considering what she looks like on the outside and we all know what she's like on the inside I would call his decision to be around her a poor one that had nothing to do with hating women. If he hated women he damn sure wouldn't be seen with her especially out in public.

I think he just wanted to get him some of her booty.....WTF do you think?

Sprinklerfitter's picture
Sprinklerfitter
Joined:
Sep. 1, 2011 5:49 am

@Sprinklerfitter

Quote Sprinklerfitter:[...]If he hated women he damn sure wouldn't be seen with her especially out in public.[...]
Quote Sprinklerfitter:[...]WTF do you think?
I think that you are proof that there is just as much "mysoginist crap" on a left-wing forum as there is on the right.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 11:42 am
Quote mdhess:

The money was given to a Super Pac and, as we all know, the candidate can't coordinate with the Super Pac so your question is moot.

Absolutely correct. Since the Supreme court wrote new law to allow for unlimited donations, maybe they can address it? Maybe Chief Justice Roberts can personally oversee Superpacs, and restrict any funds going to Democratic groups.

Phaedrus76's picture
Phaedrus76
Joined:
Sep. 14, 2010 7:21 pm
Quote mjolnir:

@Sprinklerfitter

Quote Sprinklerfitter:[...]If he hated women he damn sure wouldn't be seen with her especially out in public.[...]
Quote Sprinklerfitter:[...]WTF do you think?
I think that you are proof that there is just as much "mysoginist crap" on a left-wing forum as there is on the right.

Naaaaaaaaaaa.......I like ALL women .................It's you frickin GoPimpNuts that are trying to take their rights away not us lefties. Did you forget the subject was about Bill Maher not me? Maybe you have a case of A.D.S. and don't know it?

Sprinklerfitter's picture
Sprinklerfitter
Joined:
Sep. 1, 2011 5:49 am

What's offensive about the term "MILF?"

chilidog
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

@Sprinklerfitter Post #10

Quote Sprinklerfitter:[...]Considering what she looks like on the outside[...]
Quote Sprinklerfitter:Naaaaaaaaaaa.......I like ALL women ........
I doubt that, you probably like to USE them though. If you had any respect for women you wouldn't countenance such language from anyone left or right. If you knew how to use google and looked at my previous threads you would discover that I am a Democrat.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 11:42 am

I remember when Maher thought that Liberals were good on pot, but that you wanted a mean, nasty Republican guarding your money. To call him a Progressive or Leftist is to miss who he has always been. He did learn not to trust Republicans with money, but Bill still has his own issues on sex and women. However, he does not believe in politicians demanding vaginal probes, and he can call a woman names just like he does a man.

If Obama wanted to fund Rape Treatment and shelters from domestic abuse with Maher's money, that would be great. If he wants to use it to feed kids, that is fine too. If he just wants to keep the patriarchs from getting the White House, it is still ok. BTW, Maher picks on public people, not private individuals. He says things about people who say and do stupid and ugly things in the first place, unlike the fat boy with a mike.

DRC's picture
DRC
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

@DRC

Quote DRC:[...] BTW, Maher picks on public people, not private individuals. He says things about people who say and do stupid and ugly things in the first place, unlike the fat boy with a mike.
And that makes it right "chaplain"?

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 11:42 am

KEEP IT. Let's be big boys & big girls here and keep focused on the real issue. Obama is not personally responsible for any actions of any one else but himself.

Obama doesn't need to return the $$$. If corporations weren't granted life through their immaculate conception - through the sperm donors we call the Supreme Court - then this would be a non-issue.

Maher is NOT one of our government officials.

Maher - unlike limbaugh - DID NOT - make the ridiculous, ignorant & prolific diatribe against Fluke. Maher - unlike limbaugh - DOES NOT claim to be the moral authority for the masses. Maher - unlike limbaugh - DOES NOT insipidly use morality as his daily hypocritical oath. Maher is not as ubiquitous as limbaugh who is well distributed - I'm not talking about his girth here. I'm referring to the vast audience provided to him by the conditional christian clear_channel network monopoly of 850 stations.

Now for the truly mind bending bobbling dingle ball question: (*and you are correct if you intuit it involves $$$)

WHY won't limbaugh trash someone like Palin who insipidly flaunts her stupidity about reasonable matters? Or why Palin put Gabby Gifford & others in her cross hairs? Which caused the death of several people & the destruction of what was once life for several others. Why is this left out? Why doesn't limbaugh ask why Palin is a quitter? Quitting in mid term - from the governors job she wanted bad enough to destroy those who opposed her.

WHY? Why won't limbaugh touch Palin's evilness & call it what it is? And why won't those Konditional_Khristians do the same? Why won't they call evil by it's true name?

WHY? Because *clear channel cleans up the *boku *bucks when *limbaugh doesn't use his big head.

when we realize this is really about making $$$ AND keeping the $$$ limited to a selected few - we might be able to MOVE on from our childish distracted preoccupations with the Potty Mouth. Maybe then we can call evil by it's true name.

media_muse
Joined:
Dec. 10, 2011 2:09 pm

@media_muse So it doesn't run afoul of your moral compass for a so called comedian to demean a public figure but you draw the line at private citizens? Chuck Schumer said today that Maher's comments were okay essentially because they came after 11:00 pm. http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/schumer-defends-maher-because-hes-11...

The clip included Maher making fun of Palin's special needs child. I suppose that means it is alright for Gutfeld or someone who is on late on Fox to make fun of Gabby's speech impediment? Of course not!

The President certainly doesn't have to call for the superpac to return the money nor do they have to do as he says. It would show a lot of class if he did.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 11:42 am
Quote mjolnir:

@media_muse So it doesn't run afoul of your moral compass for a so called comedian to demean a public figure but you draw the line at private citizens? Chuck Schumer said today that Maher's comments were okay essentially because they came after 11:00 pm. http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/schumer-defends-maher-because-hes-11...

The clip included Maher making fun of Palin's special needs child. I suppose that means it is alright for Gutfeld or someone who is on late on Fox to make fun of Gabby's speech impediment? Of course not!

The President certainly doesn't have to call for the superpac to return the money nor do they have to do as he says. It would show a lot of class if he did.

The problem with that is he would be demonized by the right if he were to return the money. It sounds absurd but I know from history that every time the President offers an olive branch of any kind he gets his arm cut off. It will become an even bigger issue than it is now.

As far as Maher goes, a comedien demeaning public figures is being made into a huge national disgrace by the same people who were running campaigns with rifle targets on democratic public figures and were telling people to "reload" and "get ready for war". When called out on that they said that them damn liberals are trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill. Then a democrat gets shot by someone but it's not anybody's fault but the "crazy person" who pulled the trigger.

I'm sorry but if anything should get downplayed it's the Maher contribution to a superpac. But you keep pushing your agenda, it's what you have to do afterall.

Bush_Wacker's picture
Bush_Wacker
Joined:
Jun. 25, 2011 6:53 am

I never said anything about Maher being right to use some words or to make some 'jokes.' He is who he is, and, at times, he is very incisive and funny, but as with my point about having tough old Republican bastards guarding our money, he has been wrong. He also has a problem with sexuality and women that goes a long way back.

His points about Palin's Down Syndrome baby came in the context of her making a public show of the child in her public appearances. That might not make it right, but it does make it something else than picking on the private lives of the innocent.

Notice how the Left has to be blameless and the Right only gets spanked when it is beyond shameless. Notice that Maher comes from a Libertarian position, and not from a Leftist philosophy. His money is not like the Koch Bros. or the KKK preachers. Enough?

DRC's picture
DRC
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

@Bush_Wacker @DRC Anyone on either the left or the right, weather comedian or radio host who publically denigrates women and Down's Syndrome children is lower than whale sh*t.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 11:42 am

If he calls the Palin/Bachmann idiots idiots, he is not wrong. Nor is he misogynist. I think making a comment on Palin's public show of her Downs Syndrome baby was ugly about ugly. Maher may be flotsam or jetsom but Limbaugh is the stuff on the bottom of the ocean. I think Gretchen FAUX Babe is a slut. She dresses for men and sells her 'mind' for cash. It is about equality. I think her sidekick is the Douchy. They both suck for money.

DRC's picture
DRC
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

@DRC

Quote DRC: [...]I think making a comment on Palin's public show of her Downs Syndrome baby was ugly about ugly.[...]
The comment was certainly ugly but what was Palin to do leave the baby at home while she took the rest of the kids on the trail? The comments then from Maher and his ilk would be; Oh, they are ashamed to be seen with the child.

Quote DRC:[...]I think Gretchen FAUX Babe is a slut. She dresses for men and sells her 'mind' for cash.[...]
Perhaps you'd rather she wore a burka? Whose passing "judgement" now "chaplain"?

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 11:42 am
Quote mjolnir:

@Bush_Wacker @DRC Anyone on either the left or the right, weather comedian or radio host who publically denigrates women and Down's Syndrome children is lower than whale sh*t.

I absolutely agree with this statement mjolnir. I just think that it has nothing to do with a super pac contribution. Me, myself and I cannot stand assholes.

Bush_Wacker's picture
Bush_Wacker
Joined:
Jun. 25, 2011 6:53 am

Agreed. A million in an election where each side will spend a billion ultimately means nothing. I just thought it would be good chance for the President to tone down rhetoric on both sides.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 11:42 am

Hello mjolnir. Here's your answer. The original question focused on the $$$, & the question came tangled in a web, I only followed those lines.

I believe my answer to your question about 'moral compass' is addressed in the statement that "Obama would turn OFF any contraption" if someone was using potty mouth language. Perhaps too much ambiguity for you so I'm glad to clear this up

Over thousands of years now the concept of moral compass has been provided to us in several ways. From an assortment of mystics & well meaning hallucinating peoples utilizing their interpretation of spiritual principles- perhaps inspired by the Great Creator. So, it seems to me the moral compass:

#1 - belongs to the individual it is housed in, to be used at their own discretion.

#2 - it belongs to them - and them alone.

#3 - they get to use it for their-self & their-self alone.

#4 - it is no else's business to decide how the moral compass - housed inside anothers body - is to be used

#5- no one else can tell any one else how their own innate moral compass works.

When folks go into the public arena I don't see how this changes how the moral compass ought to work. However, I don't run the show. It's complicated. At a certain point we have to be grown ups about this. Until the gamet runs out what 'free speech' means to many amerikans such as those fixated on mean-spiritless or potty mouth this is what we are going to continue to have. These ways of talking will continue to take over what the real issues are.

Sarah Palin is another matter. It's clear she has no idea of what self respect is. I'm not sure she has a moral compass - if so she has no idea where it is. She looks like a money grubbing beauty queen who isn't capable of getting past those fake diamonds on her tiara. ( I believe she would have left her baby at home if this were not the case.) All those fake glitzy sparkles keep her from being a real woman. Please remember - this is only my opinion, no need to punish me for that.

Thanks for asking! I'm glad to clear up this important matter.

media_muse
Joined:
Dec. 10, 2011 2:09 pm

I am still missing it? How can Pres. Obama return money given to an independent, non coordinating SuperPac? Pres. Obama has no control over the SuperPac, by law. Mr. Maher is limited to giving any politician $2000, right? How can he give Obama $1,000,000?

I mean, either Rigel1 is ignorant of the law, or he is just lying.

Phaedrus76's picture
Phaedrus76
Joined:
Sep. 14, 2010 7:21 pm

Bill Maher won't return to "Real Time" on HBO until March 2, but when he does you can be sure he's going to be talking about so-called super PACs.

Why? Because the comedian just entered into the world of big-time political donations with his announcement on Thursday that he's donating a cool million to the pro-Obama PAC known as Priorities USA Action.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/showtracker/2012/02/bill-maher-donates-million-dollars-to-obama-pac.html

mdhess's picture
mdhess
Joined:
Apr. 9, 2010 10:43 pm

mjolnir, almost forgot to give you this part for your answer -

Palin put herself in the public arena - as a politician & a media head wannabe. Now maybe she has handlers who thought she was capable in these areas & they are responsible for pushing her in to further limelight. I really have no idea, nor does it matter to me. Whatever the case, for what ever reasons: she ran rogue (her word I believe). When I check the dictionary rogue means: dishonest, tramp, or a playful mischievous person. I would heartily concur with the first two meanings - they are spot on - the last one I never saw from Palin.

In this posting here I see several postings - going back & forth - but NO one has spoken to the evilness Palin brought to our world in her incessant vainglorious efforts to be ubiquitous. (This in itself I find astounding but consistent for what passes as the contemporary though process.) Her vanity is so much more important to you than all else giving you the temerity in this blog to write:" I suppose that means it is alright for Gutfeld or someone who is on late on Fox to make fun of Gabby's speech impediment?" Comments like this make me embarrassed - this is why I can only call myself an amerikan.

And, I think you ought to be ashamed of yourself for using this example of Gifford so flippantly.

media_muse
Joined:
Dec. 10, 2011 2:09 pm

Actually Phaedrus76 - rigel1 is correct! Surprise surprise surprise - now that corporations are people according to the January 2011 Citizens United decison of our Supreme court there are now no limits - except for us poor suckers, of course. This is the place where corporations can now give & give & give - back to their media friend cronies. Not very likely that any of the anticipated billions spent for this upcoming election will circulate back in to the economy.

media_muse
Joined:
Dec. 10, 2011 2:09 pm
Quote mjolnir:

@Sprinklerfitter Post #10

Quote Sprinklerfitter:[...]Considering what she looks like on the outside[...]
Quote Sprinklerfitter:Naaaaaaaaaaa.......I like ALL women ........
I doubt that, you probably like to USE them though. If you had any respect for women you wouldn't countenance such language from anyone left or right. If you knew how to use google and looked at my previous threads you would discover that I am a Democrat.

I tend to skip over replies that don't interest me especially from those who apparently live in glass houses......As a man with 4 kids and 7 grandkids I'm pretty sure I know how to treat women. I'd say nit-pickers like you are the types that don't have a clue how to treat the ladies and trying to place judgement on someone you don't know based on what is posted on a internet board is pretty frickin pathetic. As far as Google is concerned, you can bet your ass I know how to use it. Not many days go by that I'm not looking something up.

Take a chill pill and relax.

Sprinklerfitter's picture
Sprinklerfitter
Joined:
Sep. 1, 2011 5:49 am

@media_muse

Quote media_muse:[...]giving you the temerity in this blog to write:" I suppose that means it is alright for Gutfeld or someone who is on late on Fox to make fun of Gabby's speech impediment?"[...]
Quote mjolnir: I suppose that means it is alright for Gutfeld or someone who is on late on Fox to make fun of Gabby's speech impediment? Of course not!

I guess your "moral compass" was spinning so wildly you didn't see the "Of course not."? The facts are I condemn this type of speech on both sides while your dislike of Palin allows you to be blind to the words of a man who makes fun of "special needs" children.

br /

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 11:42 am
Quote Sprinklerfitter:
Quote mjolnir:

@Sprinklerfitter Post #10

Quote Sprinklerfitter:[...]Considering what she looks like on the outside[...]
Quote Sprinklerfitter:Naaaaaaaaaaa.......I like ALL women ........
I doubt that, you probably like to USE them though. If you had any respect for women you wouldn't countenance such language from anyone left or right. If you knew how to use google and looked at my previous threads you would discover that I am a Democrat.

I tend to skip over replies that don't interest me especially from those who apparently live in glass houses......As a man with 4 kids and 7 grandkids I'm pretty sure I know how to treat women. I'd say nit-pickers like you are the types that don't have a clue how to treat the ladies and trying to place judgement on someone you don't know based on what is posted on a internet board is pretty frickin pathetic. As far as Google is concerned, you can bet your ass I know how to use it. Not many days go by that I'm not looking something up.

Take a chill pill and relax.

If my statement: "If you had any respect for women you wouldn't countenance such language from anyone left or right." means I live in a "glass house" so be it.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 11:42 am

This is a great exmple of how the "Oh yeah? Well what about you?" argument doesn't really work very well. Bill Maher just hasn't seemed to inspire a lot of outrage with half the voting population. Then, there's Limbaugh. What do you suppose the difference is? Could it be that some people are just inherently offensive?

Art's picture
Art
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote media_muse:

Actually Phaedrus76 - rigel1 is correct! Surprise surprise surprise - now that corporations are people according to the January 2011 Citizens United decison of our Supreme court there are now no limits - except for us poor suckers, of course. This is the place where corporations can now give & give & give - back to their media friend cronies. Not very likely that any of the anticipated billions spent for this upcoming election will circulate back in to the economy.

The point of Phaedrus76's post was that the money in the SuperPAC is not Obama's to control.

chilidog
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote chilidog:
Quote media_muse:

Actually Phaedrus76 - rigel1 is correct! Surprise surprise surprise - now that corporations are people according to the January 2011 Citizens United decison of our Supreme court there are now no limits - except for us poor suckers, of course. This is the place where corporations can now give & give & give - back to their media friend cronies. Not very likely that any of the anticipated billions spent for this upcoming election will circulate back in to the economy.

The point of Phaedrus76's post was that the money in the SuperPAC is not Obama's to control.

MediaMuse, from what entity was the money given, and to which entity was it received? Did the money go to the campaign to re- elect Obama? Or was it some Its-a-bird-its-a-plane-its-a SuperPac! Which by law cannot coordinate with the candidate they are working to elect?

Phaedrus76's picture
Phaedrus76
Joined:
Sep. 14, 2010 7:21 pm

mjoinir, my point about "Gretchen" is that she has no integrity. I need no "burkha" to have her use her mind for something other than a sold out tv spot. My comment on women who dress for men applies to the FAUX babe tv image which reminds my of Italian TV under the former PM where cleavage is the most important qualification.

Palin made a point out of her special needs child. She had a staff and could easily have kept the child off camera and off stage, but her "image" was about being anti-abortion so she trots the kid around and Maher comments on that. Do you remember Limbo on Chelsea Clinton? The best, and maybe only good thing, about the Clinton White House was that Chelsea was not running around like the Bush kids and was a private person.

I am tired of the double-standard for liberals. This is just more false equivelancy. Maher is not even a "liberal" and the money goes to a SuperPac, not to Obama for his personal disposal. It did not come in any context related to his tasteless joke you are making into a mountain. In fact, it is an interesting departure from where he was in the not too distant past. It might be that even Bill is offended by the war on women. He would probably come up with a frat boy reponse to you about vaginal probes. So would some funny women.

I also don't portray myself as publicly 'pious' or neutral. I am not here a "chaplain" and resent the taunt as if I did not have the right to comment about what I find offensive in the anti-feminist women on the Right and their tired sex role stereotype "babe" imagery and conduct.

DRC's picture
DRC
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote Phaedrus76:

I mean, either Rigel1 is ignorant of the law, or he is just lying.

I give my opinion. I repeat facts. Occaisionally the facts or stats that I repeat might have been incorrect on some level. I don't spend hours researching everything. Neither do you.

But I never lie. And I never accuse accuse my fellow posters of lying either.

Feel better now Pha?

rigel1's picture
rigel1
Joined:
Jan. 31, 2011 6:49 am

mjolnir - both your moral compass & creative compass are disengaged. Why do I say this? Clearly you are unable to grok that you had many many many many many other word choices to use to make your point without stooping to shovel out more stuff you don't care for. Remember? That's what YOU are complaining about! I am in agreement with you - undeniably Maher has a potty mouth!

This is an example of the wondrous kind - a missed opportunity - FOR YOU - to put YOUR thoughts out in to the world and YOU go for the same mean-spiritedness. What's that about?

mjolnir - YOU have the right to complain about Maher - whom YOU have no control over. Fine. Complain about HIM. But YOU have the grown up job of control over YOURSELF. Do YOU have control over YOUR self - or don't YOU? Your example of what Gutfeld might say is an airy fabrication without critical thought. The "Of course not!" does not nullify it.

Palin is a supreme media wannabe. I didn't hear about her talking her baby along on any of those infamous hunting trips of hers. (The baby would have been safe in the helicopter.) How come we didn't ever see her in a 'real life' situation with the babe? You know the paparazzi are exceedingly determined get a picture of some actress shopping or talking her child to school? I can't find any photos of Palin on the prowl of domesticity.

Now there's alot more I could say but I'll let your fingers do the walking. Click below:

Sarah Palin: Advocate?

Prior to her running for the prezeedential prize and after her dismal loss she hasn't really bothered with those silly special needs issues. I guess this area doesn't give her the glamor & bucks she's after.

Let your fingers do some more walking & you'll see that Palin has plenty of money - click below:

Palin's Net Worth Exceeds $1 Million, Financial Disclosure Shows ..

I am fairly certain she has household help so she had other options besides bringing the baby with her.

Undeniably it is challenging & at times joyful & sorrowful to have a special needs child - this is not the real issue here. It is quite a stretch to bring Palin in to this discussion - and defend her. Especially since she is a public figure - got herself elected & did her best to stay in the media picture.

So why oh why oh why or how can you insist on making the connection: Maher uses a potty mouth about Palins child > Obama has to give $$$ back to a super pac> you get to make mean-spirited remarks for the sake of a rhetorical poin t> and "of course not" makes mean -spirited evaporate? My eye sight is quite good - what blindness are you projecting out on to me & OUR WORLD?

mojlnir, I am in agreement with you Maher has a potty mouth.

As ugly as that is, I am not aware that anyone has then gone & shoved Maher's potty mouth down any one throat resulting in their death or disabilty. Please let me know if I am mistaken about this.


media_muse
Joined:
Dec. 10, 2011 2:09 pm

@media_muse You said

Quote media_muse:[...]My eye sight is quite good[...]
That invariably leads to the conclusion that you deliberately left the words "Of course not!" out of my response to make it seem that I was suggesting that a late night comic target Gabby. Patently untrue.

If you read my other posts you will see I aknowledge that it is not incumbent upon the President to ask the superpac to return the money but it would be a good life lesson for his children, and everyone elses.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 11:42 am

@DRC

Quote DRC:I also don't portray myself as publicly 'pious' or neutral. I am not here a "chaplain" and resent the taunt as if I did not have the right to comment about what I find offensive in the anti-feminist women on the Right and their tired sex role stereotype "babe" imagery and conduct.

Fair enough. I have to point out though you had no trouble using scripture to criticize my position in the "gay marriage" thread.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 11:42 am
Quote mjolnir:

@DRC

Quote DRC:I also don't portray myself as publicly 'pious' or neutral. I am not here a "chaplain" and resent the taunt as if I did not have the right to comment about what I find offensive in the anti-feminist women on the Right and their tired sex role stereotype "babe" imagery and conduct.

Fair enough. I have to point out though you had no trouble using scripture to criticize my position in the "gay marriage" thread.

MJ, When I start a topic such as this, the left has two choices.

1) Condemn the sexism demonstrated by the liberal offender (which would be the stand up thing to do).

2) Somehow attempt to convice people that sexist insults are not really sexist if commited by a dedicated progressive.

They typically give the libs a pass. I simply and respectfully point our the double standard and watch them have a melt down. Kinda fun really.

rigel1's picture
rigel1
Joined:
Jan. 31, 2011 6:49 am

@rigel1 +1

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 11:42 am

mjolnir - it seems to me, you have some neurological disorder which affects your comprehension. Consequently I don't want to take advantage of your challenged position - so, please excuse anything I have said which has invariably led you to a conclusion that actually has not concluded. Here it is again for your own eyes to see the part you believe was not concluded which was actually concluded:

"Your example of what Gutfeld might say is an airy fabrication without critical thought. The "Of course not!" does not nullify it."

You deliberately used a set of words when many more are available. YOU gave yourself the permission to do it- even if it was rhetorical - it doesn't change the fact that it is empty rhetoric of any rhetoric except mean-spirit. If you had said something to the effect that: 'I suppose that means it is alright for Gutfeld or someone who is on late on Fox to make fun of Palins special needs baby? Of course not!' This conversation would have been over & we would be in agreement. But that's not what you choose to do. The deliberations you used took the topic out of context & overly complicated the discussion.

What kind of cry-baby are you anyway? I like to read interesting thought provoking material, something I haven't seen before - I haven't seen any thing like this in what you have written - so NO WAY will I go & search out other silliness from you. Besides that you didn't answer my question which was in earnest. Here it is again: I am not aware that anyone has then gone & shoved Maher's potty mouth down any one throat resulting in their death or disability - do you know of anything like this? Please let me know if I am mistaken about this.

media_muse
Joined:
Dec. 10, 2011 2:09 pm

@media_muse

Quote media_muse:[...]If you had said something to the effect that: 'I suppose that means it is alright for Gutfeld or someone who is on late on Fox to make fun of Palins special needs baby? Of course not!' This conversation would have been over & we would be in agreement. But that's not what you choose to do.[...]

That's ludicrous. I point out what I see as hypocrosy on either side and today you fit the bill.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 11:42 am

Let's put an end to this right now. President Obama should just send it to my pay pal account and put an end to this controversy. :)

Bush_Wacker's picture
Bush_Wacker
Joined:
Jun. 25, 2011 6:53 am
Quote mjolnir:

If you read my other posts you will see I aknowledge that it is not incumbent upon the President to ask the superpac to return the money but it would be a good life lesson for his children, and everyone elses.

mjolnir - oops overlooked this important part - if it was the Presidents job to be the moral authority & set the perfect example for everyone else then we need to re- address the morality of all who have passed through the White House.

I will acknowledge: morality is important & we need our governance to set good examples for us. And if you are going to continue to whine about this "it would be a good life lesson for his children, and everyone elses" you are more naive than I first realized. The $$$ from the super pac is not about morality. It is about the current workings of the system we call democracy. Why aren't you worried about the lack of morality given to us from the supreme court who are responsible for making super pacs possible ? ? ? They created the playing field for this incredible morass of this unmoral drama of granting life to corporations. And this topic was thoughtfully provided to us by rigel1.

Last time I checked I understood Obama is our President & Chief Executive Officer. Not the president of the 'Moral Authority'. I believe Obama is smart enough to understand as a parent & a prez - that the most important factor in setting good example for one children are THE PARENTS OF THE CHILD. Or do you consider this just an old fashioned notion?

media_muse
Joined:
Dec. 10, 2011 2:09 pm

FABULOUS IDEA Bush_Wacker - ! ! ! I'll only agree to it, however, if we can split it 50 - 50.

media_muse
Joined:
Dec. 10, 2011 2:09 pm
Quote mjolnir:

@media_muse

Quote media_muse:[...]If you had said something to the effect that: 'I suppose that means it is alright for Gutfeld or someone who is on late on Fox to make fun of Palins special needs baby? Of course not!' This conversation would have been over & we would be in agreement. But that's not what you choose to do.[...]

That's ludicrous. I point out what I see as hypocrosy on either side and today you fit the bill.

You ought to run for public office. I'm guessing maybe you are already there, cause spin baby spin you do -

Again you provide the opportunity to ask: why didn't you write something to this effect: 'I suppose that means it is alright for Gutfeld or someone who is on late on Fox to make fun of Palins special needs baby? Of course not!'

Are you opposed to being direct? Are you opposed to staying on topic?

media_muse
Joined:
Dec. 10, 2011 2:09 pm

I was setting up a dichotomus variable, obviously a false one, to gauge what I see as hypocrosy between the reactions of the members of this forum to Maher's rants against GOP women and a defenseless child and the supposed reaction garnered by a hypothetical FOX comedian demeaning Gabby Giffords.

If you can't see that I can't help it.

mjolnir's picture
mjolnir
Joined:
Mar. 3, 2011 11:42 am

So, why would you think that was worth doing? Where is the 'hypocrisy?" What is our responsibility to make an issue of Bill Maher? Even were there an equivalency, why would it be worth posting about? Or, do you really buy into the Bullwrinkle stuff about why we 'hate' conservative women? In my "you've come a long way Barbie" thinking, the question is where did feminism lose its way in our 'culture' when it has made sex role stereotypes the new feminism?

I remember Bella Abzug as a woman it would be fun to be around. I don't have to want to date her to want to be in the same room and to enjoy her humor. I think Rachel is attractive, but she is quietly but publicly lesbian, so what would be the point of sexualizing my opinion about her appearance? I like the fact that men do not, or did not, have to be matinee idols to report the news because the news requires smart truthtellers more than seducers. Edward R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite were tv journalists. I would like equality for women to be journalists without smears about their looks from Righties who make it sound as if we need to get the babes reporting.

Beyond that, what appears in beer ads and other places where the point is to attract men, I feel demeaned as a man by what is put forward to "attract me." The lurid burger ad shows a woman with no idea how to use makeup or dress other than to act like a whore. With apologies to honest sex workers, I am not looking for cleavage and 'come hither' to sell me a deathburger. On the other hand, Jack's parody where the Texas Cowgirl Babe says "ride that funky chicken" is a hoot and a pan on the rest of the burger ads. Is FAUX a self-parody? I don't think they intend to be, but yeah.

DRC's picture
DRC
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Currently Chatting

The Death of the Middle Class was by Design...

Even in the face of the so-called Recovery, poverty and inequality are getting worse in our country, and more wealth and power is flowing straight to the top. According to Paul Buchheit over at Alternet, this is the end result of winner-take-all capitalism, and this destruction of the working class has all been by design.

Powered by Drupal, an open source content management system