Way to go, ladies ... let's keep women at each other's throats, shall we?

[X]

Just political hacks.

[kvrdave]

Originally Posted by Rockmjd23

I guarantee David Axelrod was not offended by those comments.

It's not much different than the Limbaugh "whore" statement. I can't imagine anyone really cared, but saw it as an opportunity to act outraged and go after someone they don't care for. That is all that happened here. Act outraged at Rosen and eventually she apologized, but like Limbaugh. I doubt either thought they were wrong, but political theater doesn't give a shit about that.

[JasonF]

Originally Posted by kvrdave

It's not much different than the Limbaugh "whore" statement.

Wrong.

[kvrdave]

Originally Posted by JasonF

Wrong.

Enlighten us all with your unbiased opinion.

[slop101]

The difference being is that the woman Limbaugh called a whore wasn't necessarily a whore and that statement was Limbaugh's subjective opinion. Saying that Ann Romney hasn't ever held down a job is an objective fact. What they have in common is what the comments may imply, and that's based on what sort of life-filter the listener is hearing those comments through.

[JasonF]

Originally Posted by kvrdave

Enlighten us all with your unbiased opinion.

Like you're going to listen? I've explained the context of both quotes already and you reject the explanations. Will it matter if I put it into a single post? I'm not wasting my time, but thanks anyway.

[kvrdave]

You're welcome? I'm sure it would have been unbiased if you had put forth the effort.

[kvrdave]

Originally Posted by slop101

The difference being is that the woman Limbaugh called a whore wasn't necessarily a whore and that statement was Limbaugh's subjective opinion. Saying that Ann Romney hasn't ever held down a job is an objective fact. What they have in common is what the comments may imply, and that's based on what sort of life-filter the listener is hearing those comments through.

No analogy is perfect. There are some minor differences and some similarities. The point is that both said something that, in reality, was a throw away comment and got skewered by it because people suddenly found an opportunity in which fake rage could play well.

And who changed their vote over either statement? No one. It's just political theater.

[K&AJones]

Originally Posted by slop101

The difference being is that the woman Limbaugh called a whore wasn't necessarily a whore and that statement was Limbaugh's subjective opinion. Saying that Ann Romney hasn't ever held down a job is an objective fact. What they have in common is what the comments may imply, and that's based on what sort of life-filter the listener is hearing those comments through.

Not exactly as what Rush actually said has been totally taken out context. He didn't call Fluke a "slut" out of thin air much like what Ed Schultz called Laura Ingraham a "Right-wing slut". The full context of what rush said is....


On February 29, 2012, after referencing Fluke's statement that "contraceptives can cost a woman over $3000 during law school", Limbaugh stated......

What does it say about the college co-ed Susan Fluke [sic], who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex, what does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She's having so much sex she can't afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex. What does that make us? We're the pimps. (interruption) The johns? We would be the johns? No! We're not the johns. (interruption) Yeah, that's right. Pimp's not the right word. Okay, so she's not a slut. She's "round heeled". I take it back.



Saying Ann Romney hasn't held a "job" is a obective fact? Depends on one's interpretation of "Job". One can make the same argument against anyone who has never ran a business, managed a budget being in charge of say....the whole country. Of course it's how one sees a "stay-at-home Mom" or a "Community Organizer" job importance and qualifications.

[slop101]

Now you're just getting into semantics.

[CRM114]

Originally Posted by Rockmjd23

I guarantee David Axelrod was not offended by those comments.

Exactly.

If they weren't running against Romney, I'd totally abandon Obama based on this kind of stuff and the medical marijuana nonsense they are pulling.

[Nausicaa]

Originally Posted by K&AJones

Not exactly as what Rush actually said has been totally taken out context. He didn't call Fluke a "slut" out of thin air much like what Ed Schultz called Laura Ingraham a "Right-wing slut". The full context of what rush said is....


On February 29, 2012, after referencing Fluke's statement that "contraceptives can cost a woman over $3000 during law school", Limbaugh stated......

What does it say about the college co-ed Susan Fluke [sic], who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex, what does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She's having so much sex she can't afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex. What does that make us? We're the pimps. (interruption) The johns? We would be the johns? No! We're not the johns. (interruption) Yeah, that's right. Pimp's not the right word. Okay, so she's not a slut. She's "round heeled". I take it back.



Saying Ann Romney hasn't held a "job" is a obective fact? Depends on one's interpretation of "Job". One can make the same argument against anyone who has never ran a business, managed a budget being in charge of say....the whole country. Of course it's how one sees a "stay-at-home Mom" or a "Community Organizer" job importance and qualifications.

When someone uses the phrase 'held a job', it is pretty fucking obvious what they mean. No one - ever - has referred to motherhood as 'holding a job', even if it is hard work in its own right.

And it's hilarious you try and argue Limbaugh's comments were taken out of context. The context makes them worse. Not that I think that says anything more than Limbaugh is a dick.

[kvrdave]

Originally Posted by slop101

Now you're just getting into semantics.

And you weren't?

I don't really care, I'll just stick up for Obama and say that he was correct on this matter. May be the only time JasonF hasn't.

[CRM114]

Originally Posted by kvrdave

No analogy is perfect. There are some minor differences and some similarities. The point is that both said something that, in reality, was a throw away comment and got skewered by it because people suddenly found an opportunity in which fake rage could play well.

And who changed their vote over either statement? No one. It's just political theater.

Sorry, calling a woman a "whore" is pretty loathsome in any context except promiscuous women or prostitutes. And even then, its insulting. I know this forum loves that word though. I'm not sure what insulting name Anne Romney was called.

[wishbone]

Perhaps if Hilary Rosen had started with, "The Romneys do not have to face economic hardships like so many Americans do...," then maybe she would have had a point to be discussed. No, Hilary Rosen went directly after Ann Romney -- for a comment made by Mitt, not by Ann -- and no amount of context or backpedaling can salvage what she said after, "His wife has actually never worked a day in her life!"

[kvrdave]

Maybe. I don't see them as much more out of touch than Michelle Obama saying she didn't have the luxury of staying home with the kids while they were still making enough to be in the top tax bracket with a 6 figure income.

[CRM114]

Originally Posted by wishbone

Perhaps if Hilary Rosen had started with, "The Romneys do not have to face economic hardships like so many Americans do...," then maybe she would have had a point to be discussed. No, Hilary Rosen went directly after Ann Romney -- for a comment made by Mitt, not by Ann -- and no amount of context or backpedaling can salvage what she said after, "His wife has actually never worked a day in her life!"

Bah. Anyone with any sense understands what she meant. Ann hasn't had to work and provide for her family so what in the hell does Ann's input into family economics actually mean? Very little.

[Marc Brobard]

Originally Posted by CRM114

Bah. Anyone with any sense understands what she meant. Ann hasn't had to work and provide for her family so what in the hell does Ann's input into family economics actually mean? Very little.

Yes, because if you haven't done it, you have no business talking about it. A few hundred thousand historians would say you're wrong, along with the millions of others.

[printerati]

Originally Posted by CRM114

I'm just a working stiff. My wife makes all the money in our house.

So...we should be making fun of her for paying more in taxes than we make?

[CRM114]

Yes, but we file jointly. And I don't think there was any "we" about it. For all I know, you could run six gas stations in Kentucky.