(01-29-2021 03:25 PM)mrbig Wrote:  Ham - what that "other woman" did to your daughter was not "be a slut". There are more accurate phrases like "gold digger" or "slept her way to the top". Here are some actual definitions, none of which describe what happened to your daughter with this other woman:
Merriam-Webster - disparaging + offensive : a promiscuous person : someone who has many sexual partners —usually used of a woman
Cambridge Dictionary - a woman who has sexual relationships with a lot of men without any emotional involvement
dictionary.com - Disparaging and Offensive. a person, especially a woman, who is sexually promiscuous.
vocabulary.com - A slut is a vulgar insult hurled at woman and it implies that she sleeps around or has sex with too many people. It is not cool to call any woman a slut.

Rather than thinking it is OK because your daughter is OK with it, maybe expand the portfolio of voices you consider? This article in Teen Vogue is pretty elucidating.

Also, if you have any links to definitions that suggest it is not an offensive term, I'll read them. Might as well expand my own knowledge and views.

Why did you do this?

1) I've said a dozen times including here that its offensive... so why do you imply that I didn't?
2) Why is it okay for you to note that your opinion is supported by your wife, whom you have had numerous discussions with... but if I mention my daughter having actually USED the word in an almost identical situation.... you're going to correct her usage of the word... as if 'whore' or 'prostitute' is something that isn't normally applied to women and isn't derogatory?? Or that despite being a despicable person who exploited my daughter and enabled a predator... SHE is the bad one for misusing a word and I'm a bad parent for not correcting her linguistically. Give me a break, Big.
and 3) that I need to refer to Teen Vogue to correct an opinion which once again, I NEVER REMOTELY EXPRESSED... the readership of which is women, not men.... but the problem according to you) is ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY one of misogyny (which is what you implied about it being mostly driven by men against women)?

If you want to know why this goes on for days, look no further than here... where I'm okay with you and your wife having a different opinion from mine, but my daughter and I can't have a different one from yours.... and again, we don't disagree that its a bad word... We only seem to disagree that it can or can not apply to the situation... someone sleeping their way to advancement can or cannot be labeled with a bad word.

I'd also not, most importantly... that we don't disagree that its a horrible word... that we don't disagree that it shouldn't generally be used... that we don't disagree that it is mostly directed at women... like misogyny, rapist, sexual predator are mostly (almost exclusively?) used against men... or even that it doesn't accurately describe the events in question.

The only thing we seem to disagree on is whether it is 'close enough' to allow someone to express their disgust. My daughter and I think so and I have no idea what you think because you keep trying to imply things I've never remotely said.... though I haven't seen you present a better word that doesn't violate the same rules you have here.

(01-29-2021 03:33 PM)mrbig Wrote:  Has anyone here ever called a woman a slut to her face? To their friends? Let's not pretend like this term was so taboo that male athletes in high school and college don't sometimes use the term when describing women with who they had sex. I know I heard it a few times. The worst was in high school when one of my baseball teammates (affectionately) called the young woman sitting next to him a "big-tittied slut". Was that an OK thing for a guy to say to a 16-year-old girl? I sincerely regret not having a serious conversation with him about it, but I didn't have the guts back then.

Its not.... NOBODY has said it was. Is it okay for a girl to call a 16 yr old boy a rapist?


But I should have asked... Don't you think the ages matter? We're not talking about high school kids... we're talking about adults.

Why is it okay to call a sitting Judge a rapist or a President a sexual predator and pedophile but its not okay to call a VP candidate a monster or a slut? What does Teen Vogue say about that?

ETA, if its NOT, then we're on the same page... Its bad, but it sometimes happens because people get mad at the actions of others...

(01-29-2021 03:33 PM)mrbig Wrote:  Has anyone here ever called a woman a slut to her face?

Yep.

Maybe my generation played by different rules.

Back to popping more popcorn.

(01-29-2021 03:52 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Intentionally obtuse. Not a good look on you.

I wasn't intentionally obtuse. I have no idea what any of you consider to be the "conspiracy" part of Trump-Russia and what parts you consider "legitimate fact, but nothing wrong with it".

(01-29-2021 03:52 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  About as outlandish as the theory that Trump and Putin conspired to steal the 2016 election by stealing and publishing Hillary's emails, or that Flynn was colluding with Russia by shaking hands at a state dinner or that Trump was giving Russia secrets to settle a construction debt. Some people call that theory Russia Russia Russia in derision of the constant wailing about Russia 2016-2021. Others call it the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy in derision of the Vast Right-wing Conspiracy Hillary blamed for Bill's. The lefties just called it the Trump-Russia Collusion Investigation. A rose by any other name is still a conspiracy theory.

OK, so that is your explanation of what you describe as a "conspiracy". What I was asking Tomball to do was to post links from other generally-accepted sources (like BBC or WSJ) describing the "conspiracy" part.

It is great that you and Tomball think there is a conspiracy, but I would like to know what part of it all is regarded as a "conspiracy" before commenting on it. Tomball is trying to compare what you describe as a conspiracy to QAnon. I'd like to compare the descriptions of the Trump-Russia conspiracy to the QAnon conspiracy using similar sources. Right now, I am comparing BBC/WSJ to Tomball/OO. Nothing personal, but I regard those other sources as a little more thorough and objective.

(01-29-2021 03:52 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(01-29-2021 03:25 PM)mrbig Wrote:  Ham - what that "other woman" did to your daughter was not "be a slut". There are more accurate phrases like "gold digger" or "slept her way to the top". Here are some actual definitions, none of which describe what happened to your daughter with this other woman:
Merriam-Webster - disparaging + offensive : a promiscuous person : someone who has many sexual partners —usually used of a woman
Cambridge Dictionary - a woman who has sexual relationships with a lot of men without any emotional involvement
dictionary.com - Disparaging and Offensive. a person, especially a woman, who is sexually promiscuous.
vocabulary.com - A slut is a vulgar insult hurled at woman and it implies that she sleeps around or has sex with too many people. It is not cool to call any woman a slut.

Rather than thinking it is OK because your daughter is OK with it, maybe expand the portfolio of voices you consider? This article in Teen Vogue is pretty elucidating.

Also, if you have any links to definitions that suggest it is not an offensive term, I'll read them. Might as well expand my own knowledge and views.

Why did you do this?

1) I've said a dozen times including here that its offensive... so why do you imply that I didn't?

You say the word is offensive to the woman it is directed at, rather than all women. You also say that it applies to the woman who got a job instead of your daughter, and what she did does not meet these descriptions. That is why I copy-pasted these definitions. And for everyone else.

(01-29-2021 03:52 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  2) Why is it okay for you to note that your opinion is supported by your wife, whom you have had numerous discussions with... but if I mention my daughter having actually USED the word in an almost identical situation.... you're going to correct her usage of the word... as if 'whore' or 'prostitute' is something that isn't normally applied to women and isn't derogatory?? Or that despite being a despicable person who exploited my daughter and enabled a predator... SHE is the bad one for misusing a word and I'm a bad parent for not correcting her linguistically. Give me a break, Big.

I wasn't trying to say anything specific about your daughter or my wife or your parenting. Sorry if my inartful posts made it come off that way!

(01-29-2021 03:52 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  If you want to know why this goes on for days, look no further than here... where I'm okay with you and your wife having a different opinion from mine, but my daughter and I can't have a different one from yours.... and again, we don't disagree that its a bad word... We only seem to disagree that it can or can not apply to the situation... someone sleeping their way to advancement can or cannot be labeled with a bad word.

I am just trying to move to more objective sources rather than comparing your daughter's opinion vs. my wife's opinion vs. the opinions of a bunch of dudes on a message board.

(01-29-2021 03:52 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  My daughter and I think so and I have no idea what you think because you keep trying to imply things I've never remotely said.... though I haven't seen you present a better word that doesn't violate the same rules you have here.

"Gold digger" or "slept her way to the top" are both more accurate and less offensive. As I previously wrote...

(01-29-2021 04:24 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(01-29-2021 03:33 PM)mrbig Wrote:  Has anyone here ever called a woman a slut to her face?

Yep.

Maybe my generation played by different rules.

Back to popping more popcorn.

Maybe we can just agree to pass a censure resolution against 69/70/75 by unanimous consent and move on to more productive discussions?

(01-29-2021 06:08 PM)mrbig Wrote:  

(01-29-2021 03:52 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Intentionally obtuse. Not a good look on you.

I wasn't intentionally obtuse. I have no idea what any of you consider to be the "conspiracy" part of Trump-Russia and what parts you consider "legitimate fact, but nothing wrong with it".

(01-29-2021 03:52 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  About as outlandish as the theory that Trump and Putin conspired to steal the 2016 election by stealing and publishing Hillary's emails, or that Flynn was colluding with Russia by shaking hands at a state dinner or that Trump was giving Russia secrets to settle a construction debt. Some people call that theory Russia Russia Russia in derision of the constant wailing about Russia 2016-2021. Others call it the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy in derision of the Vast Right-wing Conspiracy Hillary blamed for Bill's. The lefties just called it the Trump-Russia Collusion Investigation. A rose by any other name is still a conspiracy theory.

OK, so that is your explanation of what you describe as a "conspiracy". What I was asking Tomball to do was to post links from other generally-accepted sources (like BBC or WSJ) describing the "conspiracy" part.

It is great that you and Tomball think there is a conspiracy, but I would like to know what part of it all is regarded as a "conspiracy" before commenting on it. Tomball is trying to compare what you describe as a conspiracy to QAnon. I'd like to compare the descriptions of the Trump-Russia conspiracy to the QAnon conspiracy using similar sources. Right now, I am comparing BBC/WSJ to Tomball/OO. Nothing personal, but I regard those other sources as a little more thorough and objective.

hope this is objective enough for ya

The RRR conspiracy was investigated thoroughly by Mueller and 15 biased lawyers and effectively debunked. It is now in the history books as a non conspiracy.

The FBI/Clinton Campaign conspiracy is still being investigated by the US attorney. More to come.

I don't know why you are so determined to hang Qunol around the neck of every conservative. Maybe it is like the jan 6 riot vis-a-vis the 100 days - yall need something to point to.

(01-29-2021 06:57 PM)mrbig Wrote:  

(01-29-2021 04:24 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(01-29-2021 03:33 PM)mrbig Wrote:  Has anyone here ever called a woman a slut to her face?

Yep.
Maybe my generation played by different rules.
Back to popping more popcorn.

Maybe we can just agree to pass a censure resolution against 69/70/75 by unanimous consent and move on to more productive discussions?

Or maybe not.

The way I've always operated, on this and other boards, is that you don't post offensive stuff about other posters, but public officials are fair game. I will continue to operate that way until directed otherwise, at which point I will probably lose interest in the board.

Others don't operate that way, and I have been called racist and KKKer for posting fiscally conservative views that had nothing to do with race, both here (the poster has since been removed) and elsewhere on social media.

(01-29-2021 07:55 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(01-29-2021 06:08 PM)mrbig Wrote:  

(01-29-2021 03:52 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Intentionally obtuse. Not a good look on you.

I wasn't intentionally obtuse. I have no idea what any of you consider to be the "conspiracy" part of Trump-Russia and what parts you consider "legitimate fact, but nothing wrong with it".

(01-29-2021 03:52 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  About as outlandish as the theory that Trump and Putin conspired to steal the 2016 election by stealing and publishing Hillary's emails, or that Flynn was colluding with Russia by shaking hands at a state dinner or that Trump was giving Russia secrets to settle a construction debt. Some people call that theory Russia Russia Russia in derision of the constant wailing about Russia 2016-2021. Others call it the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy in derision of the Vast Right-wing Conspiracy Hillary blamed for Bill's. The lefties just called it the Trump-Russia Collusion Investigation. A rose by any other name is still a conspiracy theory.

OK, so that is your explanation of what you describe as a "conspiracy". What I was asking Tomball to do was to post links from other generally-accepted sources (like BBC or WSJ) describing the "conspiracy" part.

It is great that you and Tomball think there is a conspiracy, but I would like to know what part of it all is regarded as a "conspiracy" before commenting on it. Tomball is trying to compare what you describe as a conspiracy to QAnon. I'd like to compare the descriptions of the Trump-Russia conspiracy to the QAnon conspiracy using similar sources. Right now, I am comparing BBC/WSJ to Tomball/OO. Nothing personal, but I regard those other sources as a little more thorough and objective.

hope this is objective enough for ya

The RRR conspiracy was investigated thoroughly by Mueller and 15 biased lawyers and effectively debunked. It is now in the history books as a non conspiracy.

The FBI/Clinton Campaign conspiracy is still being investigated by the US attorney. More to come.

I don't know why you are so determined to hang Qunol around the neck of every conservative. Maybe it is like the jan 6 riot vis-a-vis the 100 days - yall need something to point to.

I have never heard of the site “Weather Internal”. Is that more like the BBC or more like the WSJ? And how does a single FBI attorney pleading guilty to lying on a FISA warrant some big conspiracy equivalent to QAnon? And regarding QAnon, I am just asking what you think should be done about folks like GOP Congresswoman Greene. She is a fellow Trump supporter like you. Is she too far out there, or are you good with her?

If Trump-Russia is some conspiracy akin to faking the moon landing, 9/11 being an inside job, or QAnon, surely you can find some source I have heard of that describes the conspiracy?

(01-30-2021 01:28 AM)mrbig Wrote:  I am just asking what you think should be done about folks like GOP Congresswoman Greene. She is a fellow Trump supporter like you. Is she too far out there, or are you good with her?

Getting back to the original subject (Greene, etc), how do *you* feel about AOC tweeting that Cruz tried to have her murdered?

Or, perhaps, is this a figment of my prejudice against her based on her skin color?

Funny, last time I looked, saying that someone tried to 'murder' someone else pretty much rises to libelous speech. I guess those of us that criticize AOC for her positions, and her actions (like saying that Cruz tried to 'murder her') are just basing it on her skin color (according to some).

As for Greene, I have no problem with disavowing her. Nor has most of the Repub leadership felt and done the same. There was public talk against her from republicans going back as far as the primary she won.

That seems to be a fairly decent difference between AOC/Omar and Greene in particular. Republicans have publicly been apposed to here; i.e. Steve Scalise and Liz Cheney (the #2 and #3 Repub House positions) publicly and actively backed her House primary opponent.

On the other hand, the views of Omar, Talibi, and AOC have become mainstream Democratic positions.

So I would actually say there is a big difference in the responses by each party to their own radical wackjobs. Both in official opposition (which, by the way is increasingly growiing every day), and in the apparent responses to their outlooks from the rank and file, ostensibly since the opposition to the Squad is based on bias, prejudice, and racism (according to some).

And thanks for bringing Greene to my attention, I truly had not noted her before this. I would hope the Republican party can firm up the (already public and visible) official opposition to her. I would also hope that the Democrats try to acknowledge the same actions with AOC (especially evident with her grotesque characterization of Cruz), Omar (I seem to remember the Democrats couldnt even vote for a censure of her incendiary and repetitious anti-Semitic comments), and cant seemingly address the milder form of that coming from Talibi.

And again, position wise, the Republicans are seeming to excoriate Greene for her radical policies (not to mention her incendiary language); all the while the radical policies put forth by the trio are warmingly embraced by the Democrats. And, to boot, any opposition to the squad is steeped in the warm waters of 'skin color' and racism by that side.

(01-30-2021 07:57 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(01-30-2021 01:28 AM)mrbig Wrote:  I am just asking what you think should be done about folks like GOP Congresswoman Greene. She is a fellow Trump supporter like you. Is she too far out there, or are you good with her?

Getting back to the original subject (Greene, etc), how do *you* feel about AOC tweeting that Cruz tried to have her murdered?

Or, perhaps, is this a figment of my prejudice against her based on her skin color?

Funny, last time I looked, saying that someone tried to 'murder' someone else pretty much rises to libelous speech. I guess those of us that criticize AOC for her positions, and her actions (like saying that Cruz tried to 'murder her') are just basing it on her skin color (according to some).

As for Greene, I have no problem with disavowing her. Nor has most of the Repub leadership felt and done the same. There was public talk against her from republicans going back as far as the primary she won.

That seems to be a fairly decent difference between AOC/Omar and Greene in particular. Republicans have publicly been apposed to here; i.e. Steve Scalise and Liz Cheney (the #2 and #3 Repub House positions) publicly and actively backed her House primary opponent.

On the other hand, the views of Omar, Talibi, and AOC have become mainstream Democratic positions.

So I would actually say there is a big difference in the responses by each party to their own radical wackjobs. Both in official opposition (which, by the way is increasingly growiing every day), and in the apparent responses to their outlooks from the rank and file, ostensibly since the opposition to the Squad is based on bias, prejudice, and racism (according to some).

And thanks for bringing Greene to my attention, I truly had not noted her before this. I would hope the Republican party can firm up the (already public and visible) official opposition to her. I would also hope that the Democrats try to acknowledge the same actions with AOC (especially evident with her grotesque characterization of Cruz), Omar (I seem to remember the Democrats couldnt even vote for a censure of her incendiary and repetitious anti-Semitic comments), and cant seemingly address the milder form of that coming from Talibi.

Yeah... ridiculous of AOC. She is condemning his use of hyperbolic, inflammatory language all the while using her own hyperbolic, inflammatory language. I think AOC is pretty smart but I don't understand why she uses that type of language.

Greene is a complete disaster and her constituents should be mortified by her behavior (as well as the fact that they elected that woman to congress).

CNN so grain of salt...

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/28/politics/...index.html

Meanwhile, many House Republicans have been silent in the wake of CNN's reporting, but some members of leadership have released statement criticizing the remarks.
House GOP Whip Steve Scalise said in a statement to CNN, "I've consistently condemned the use of violent rhetoric in politics on both sides, and this is no exception. There is no place for comments like that in our political discourse."
Pelosi says part of Capitol Hill security issue is 'the enemy is within the House of Representatives'
Pelosi says part of Capitol Hill security issue is 'the enemy is within the House of Representatives'
"These comments are deeply disturbing, and Leader McCarthy plans to have a conversation with the Congresswoman about them," Mark Bednar, a spokesman for House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, said in a statement Wednesday evening.

Seems like a soft/moderate rebuke from a couple Republicans however not a lot from the big names. Perhaps we'll hear more on the Sunday morning shows. This seems pretty similar IIRC to the Democratic condemnation that Omar received about her comments - including from Nancy Pelosi. I wonder if the Republicans will get behind a official censure of Greene.

Not wanting to start a new argument/controversy... but I'm still a bit underwhelmed about the controversy of Omar's statements re: Israel. I think it's a bit of a stretch to accuse her of anti-semitism over them. I'd be interested in what a politically moderate Jewish person thinks about her tweets/statements. Regardless... I don't think she came close to Greene's ridiculousness (FTR I am no fan of Omar).

Quote:And again, position wise, the Republicans are seeming to excoriate Greene for her radical policies (not to mention her incendiary language); all the while the radical policies put forth by the trio are warmingly embraced by the Democrats. And, to boot, any opposition to the squad is steeped in the warm waters of 'skin color' and racism by that side.

Embraced by the far, far left wing of democrats to be clear. Note that Bernie Sanders did not defeat Joe Biden last fall. That said... certainly AOC's views are closer to mainstream Democrat than Greene's views are to mainstream Republican (at least I hope so).

(01-30-2021 08:22 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(01-30-2021 07:57 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(01-30-2021 01:28 AM)mrbig Wrote:  I am just asking what you think should be done about folks like GOP Congresswoman Greene. She is a fellow Trump supporter like you. Is she too far out there, or are you good with her?

Getting back to the original subject (Greene, etc), how do *you* feel about AOC tweeting that Cruz tried to have her murdered?

Or, perhaps, is this a figment of my prejudice against her based on her skin color?

Funny, last time I looked, saying that someone tried to 'murder' someone else pretty much rises to libelous speech. I guess those of us that criticize AOC for her positions, and her actions (like saying that Cruz tried to 'murder her') are just basing it on her skin color (according to some).

As for Greene, I have no problem with disavowing her. Nor has most of the Repub leadership felt and done the same. There was public talk against her from republicans going back as far as the primary she won.

That seems to be a fairly decent difference between AOC/Omar and Greene in particular. Republicans have publicly been apposed to here; i.e. Steve Scalise and Liz Cheney (the #2 and #3 Repub House positions) publicly and actively backed her House primary opponent.

On the other hand, the views of Omar, Talibi, and AOC have become mainstream Democratic positions.

So I would actually say there is a big difference in the responses by each party to their own radical wackjobs. Both in official opposition (which, by the way is increasingly growiing every day), and in the apparent responses to their outlooks from the rank and file, ostensibly since the opposition to the Squad is based on bias, prejudice, and racism (according to some).

And thanks for bringing Greene to my attention, I truly had not noted her before this. I would hope the Republican party can firm up the (already public and visible) official opposition to her. I would also hope that the Democrats try to acknowledge the same actions with AOC (especially evident with her grotesque characterization of Cruz), Omar (I seem to remember the Democrats couldnt even vote for a censure of her incendiary and repetitious anti-Semitic comments), and cant seemingly address the milder form of that coming from Talibi.

Yeah... ridiculous of AOC. She is condemning his use of hyperbolic, inflammatory language all the while using her own hyperbolic, inflammatory language. I think AOC is pretty smart but I don't understand outrageous language sometimes.

Did you even read the tweet she responded to? Perhaps you should, then come back here and offer a summary for us.

Here it is: Cruz: 'I could support that' (an idea AOC floated)
AOC: I wont accept your help you pig, you tried to have me murdered.

Please note the 'hyperbolic inflammatory' language there that she is 'responding' to.

Nice uninformed kneejerk.

Glad to note your seeming defense of a charge that someone tried to 'murder' her. And, glad to see your defense of that 'you tried to have me murdered' as 'not really meaning that' -- since you never bothered to accord Trump *any* of that. Really interesting to see that change in tone and tenor when 'your side' is saying that ****.

Quote:Greene is a complete disaster and her constituents should be mortified by her behavior (as well as the fact that they elected that woman to congress).

And again noted that some oevr here can denote Greene as such, even here on this board. And again noted the 'to the mats' corresponding defense of the Squad.

Truly eye-opening.

Quote:Not wanting to start a new argument/controversy... but I'm still a bit underwhelmed about the controversy of Omar's statements re: Israel. I think it's a bit of a stretch to accuse her of anti-semitism over them. I'd be interested in what a politically moderate Jewish person thinks about her tweets/statements. Regardless... I don't think she came close to Greene's ridiculousness (FTR I am no fan of Omar).

Kind of rich coming from a guy that gave zero quarter to anything Trump said, and seemingly ginned up 'racist' to anything coming from that quarter that had any iota of race attached to it.

Seems to be a rule from you that "Trump says or mentions anything re: race, yelp and squeal racism; anything in the same ballpark from your side of the fence lets look at it in the most moderate sense."

Sounds fun.

Quote:

Quote:And again, position wise, the Republicans are seeming to excoriate Greene for her radical policies (not to mention her incendiary language); all the while the radical policies put forth by the trio are warmingly embraced by the Democrats. And, to boot, any opposition to the squad is steeped in the warm waters of 'skin color' and racism by that side.

Embraced by the far, far left wing of democrats to be clear. Note that Bernie Sanders did not defeat Joe Biden last fall. That said... certainly AOC's views are closer to mainstream Democrat than Greene's views are to mainstream Republican (at least I hope so).

Animosity or antipathy to Israel as a whole, warming to Iran to the extent of implicitly promoting them as a nuclear power, and following the GND certainly seem to be somewhat central tenets of the Democratic movement these days.

And back to my question: do you have the warm fuzzy's over AOC tweeting that Cruz 'tried to have [her] murdered'? You jump the shark when you seemingly try to pawn the issue off on Cruz's 'hyperbolic' (still yet to see that, mind you) language. Again, and in the broad general sense. Please note *anywhere* where Cruz has charged that *anyone* in Congress 'tried to have [him] murdered'. Or anywhere near that, for that matter.

(01-30-2021 08:49 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(01-30-2021 08:22 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(01-30-2021 07:57 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(01-30-2021 01:28 AM)mrbig Wrote:  I am just asking what you think should be done about folks like GOP Congresswoman Greene. She is a fellow Trump supporter like you. Is she too far out there, or are you good with her?

Getting back to the original subject (Greene, etc), how do *you* feel about AOC tweeting that Cruz tried to have her murdered?

Or, perhaps, is this a figment of my prejudice against her based on her skin color?

Funny, last time I looked, saying that someone tried to 'murder' someone else pretty much rises to libelous speech. I guess those of us that criticize AOC for her positions, and her actions (like saying that Cruz tried to 'murder her') are just basing it on her skin color (according to some).

As for Greene, I have no problem with disavowing her. Nor has most of the Repub leadership felt and done the same. There was public talk against her from republicans going back as far as the primary she won.

That seems to be a fairly decent difference between AOC/Omar and Greene in particular. Republicans have publicly been apposed to here; i.e. Steve Scalise and Liz Cheney (the #2 and #3 Repub House positions) publicly and actively backed her House primary opponent.

On the other hand, the views of Omar, Talibi, and AOC have become mainstream Democratic positions.

So I would actually say there is a big difference in the responses by each party to their own radical wackjobs. Both in official opposition (which, by the way is increasingly growiing every day), and in the apparent responses to their outlooks from the rank and file, ostensibly since the opposition to the Squad is based on bias, prejudice, and racism (according to some).

And thanks for bringing Greene to my attention, I truly had not noted her before this. I would hope the Republican party can firm up the (already public and visible) official opposition to her. I would also hope that the Democrats try to acknowledge the same actions with AOC (especially evident with her grotesque characterization of Cruz), Omar (I seem to remember the Democrats couldnt even vote for a censure of her incendiary and repetitious anti-Semitic comments), and cant seemingly address the milder form of that coming from Talibi.

Yeah... ridiculous of AOC. She is condemning his use of hyperbolic, inflammatory language all the while using her own hyperbolic, inflammatory language. I think AOC is pretty smart but I don't understand outrageous language sometimes.

Did you even read the tweet she responded to? Perhaps you should, then come back here and offer a summary for us.

Here it is: Cruz: 'I could support that' (an idea AOC floated)
AOC: I wont accept your help you pig, you tried to have me murdered.

Please note the 'hyperbolic inflammatory' language there that she is 'responding' to.

Nice uninformed kneejerk.

Glad to note your seeming defense of a charge that someone tried to 'murder' her. And, glad to see your defense of that 'you tried to have me murdered' as 'not really meaning that' -- since you never bothered to accord Trump *any* of that. Really interesting to see that change in tone and tenor when 'your side' is saying that ****.

Quote:Greene is a complete disaster and her constituents should be mortified by her behavior (as well as the fact that they elected that woman to congress).

And again noted that some oevr here can denote Greene as such, even here on this board. And again noted the 'to the mats' corresponding defense of the Squad.

Truly eye-opening.

Quote:Not wanting to start a new argument/controversy... but I'm still a bit underwhelmed about the controversy of Omar's statements re: Israel. I think it's a bit of a stretch to accuse her of anti-semitism over them. I'd be interested in what a politically moderate Jewish person thinks about her tweets/statements. Regardless... I don't think she came close to Greene's ridiculousness (FTR I am no fan of Omar).

Kind of rich coming from a guy that gave zero quarter to anything Trump said, and seemingly ginned up 'racist' to anything coming from that quarter that had any iota of race attached to it.

Seems to be a rule from you that "Trump says or mentions anything re: race, yelp and squeal racism; anything in the same ballpark from your side of the fence lets look at it in the most moderate sense."

Sounds fun.

Quote:

Quote:And again, position wise, the Republicans are seeming to excoriate Greene for her radical policies (not to mention her incendiary language); all the while the radical policies put forth by the trio are warmingly embraced by the Democrats. And, to boot, any opposition to the squad is steeped in the warm waters of 'skin color' and racism by that side.

Embraced by the far, far left wing of democrats to be clear. Note that Bernie Sanders did not defeat Joe Biden last fall. That said... certainly AOC's views are closer to mainstream Democrat than Greene's views are to mainstream Republican (at least I hope so).

Animosity or antipathy to Israel as a whole, warming to Iran to the extent of implicitly promoting them as a nuclear power, and following the GND certainly seem to be somewhat central tenets of the Democratic movement these days.

And back to my question: do you have the warm fuzzy's over AOC tweeting that Cruz 'tried to have [her] murdered'? You jump the shark when you seemingly try to pawn the issue off on Cruz's 'hyperbolic' (still yet to see that, mind you) language. Again, and in the broad general sense. Please note *anywhere* where Cruz has charged that *anyone* in Congress 'tried to have [him] murdered'. Or anywhere near that, for that matter.

Holy crap and to think I almost wrote something in my first post this morning to the effect of "Tanq... it's good to have you back and I appreciate your POV particularly so when you discuss things so reasonably."

And then this.

I meant Cruz's incendiary language in general regarding "stop the steal". Whatever tweet you may be referring to I missed. In no way was I trying to excuse AOC for what she said.

When I posted this morning I was thinking that you and I were generally on the same page re: AOC/Greene/Omar.etc .

As to the rest of it... have a nice weekend. Please go back and re-read my post from this morning (especially in the context with what I just said) and ask yourself if it was deserving of your tone.

(01-29-2021 10:46 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The way I've always operated, on this and other boards, is that you don't post offensive stuff about other posters, but public officials are fair game. I will continue to operate that way until directed otherwise, at which point I will probably lose interest in the board.

Others don't operate that way, and I have been called racist and KKKer for posting fiscally conservative views that had nothing to do with race, both here (the poster has since been removed) and elsewhere on social media.

In the same vein, OwlJacket has called me a "bigot, liar, coward" (because I objected to his doctoring a picture of my father's grave); AtEase specifically endorsed those insults; and Fort Bend Owl has called me a "terrible representative of Rice." Such fine people!

To the greater good, the first named has since absented himself; the second seems to have been banned; and the third's statement seems to have died of its own absurdity.

Party of Unity?

lefties, please comment on the content and not the source. halfway through, please note that a Democrat speaks to this.

But it appears the vendetta continues. The witch hunt has been expanded from Trump to the entire right. We haven't seen this much unity since the Spanish Inquisition.

(01-30-2021 08:49 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  And back to my question: do you have the warm fuzzy's over AOC tweeting that Cruz 'tried to have [her] murdered'?

Never did see an answer to this question.

(01-30-2021 09:59 AM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(01-29-2021 10:46 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The way I've always operated, on this and other boards, is that you don't post offensive stuff about other posters, but public officials are fair game. I will continue to operate that way until directed otherwise, at which point I will probably lose interest in the board.

Others don't operate that way, and I have been called racist and KKKer for posting fiscally conservative views that had nothing to do with race, both here (the poster has since been removed) and elsewhere on social media.

In the same vein, OwlJacket has called me a "bigot, liar, coward" (because I objected to his doctoring a picture of my father's grave); AtEase specifically endorsed those insults; and Fort Bend Owl has called me a "terrible representative of Rice." Such fine people!

To the greater good, the first named has since absented himself; the second seems to have been banned; and the third's statement seems to have died of its own absurdity.

FWIW, George, I think you are an excellent representative of Rice. I cannot imagine any situation or topic in which your representation of Rice would be in the least subpar. I am surprised FBO has not retracted his statement and apologized, as he seems to be a person of integrity.

As for the other two, I am fine with their absence.

(01-30-2021 10:54 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  ...I am surprised FBO has not retracted his statement and apologized, as he seems to be a person of integrity.

As for the other two, I am fine with their absence.

Agreed on all counts.

(01-30-2021 09:10 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(01-30-2021 08:49 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(01-30-2021 08:22 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(01-30-2021 07:57 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(01-30-2021 01:28 AM)mrbig Wrote:  I am just asking what you think should be done about folks like GOP Congresswoman Greene. She is a fellow Trump supporter like you. Is she too far out there, or are you good with her?

Getting back to the original subject (Greene, etc), how do *you* feel about AOC tweeting that Cruz tried to have her murdered?

Or, perhaps, is this a figment of my prejudice against her based on her skin color?

Funny, last time I looked, saying that someone tried to 'murder' someone else pretty much rises to libelous speech. I guess those of us that criticize AOC for her positions, and her actions (like saying that Cruz tried to 'murder her') are just basing it on her skin color (according to some).

As for Greene, I have no problem with disavowing her. Nor has most of the Repub leadership felt and done the same. There was public talk against her from republicans going back as far as the primary she won.

That seems to be a fairly decent difference between AOC/Omar and Greene in particular. Republicans have publicly been apposed to here; i.e. Steve Scalise and Liz Cheney (the #2 and #3 Repub House positions) publicly and actively backed her House primary opponent.

On the other hand, the views of Omar, Talibi, and AOC have become mainstream Democratic positions.

So I would actually say there is a big difference in the responses by each party to their own radical wackjobs. Both in official opposition (which, by the way is increasingly growiing every day), and in the apparent responses to their outlooks from the rank and file, ostensibly since the opposition to the Squad is based on bias, prejudice, and racism (according to some).

And thanks for bringing Greene to my attention, I truly had not noted her before this. I would hope the Republican party can firm up the (already public and visible) official opposition to her. I would also hope that the Democrats try to acknowledge the same actions with AOC (especially evident with her grotesque characterization of Cruz), Omar (I seem to remember the Democrats couldnt even vote for a censure of her incendiary and repetitious anti-Semitic comments), and cant seemingly address the milder form of that coming from Talibi.

Yeah... ridiculous of AOC. She is condemning his use of hyperbolic, inflammatory language all the while using her own hyperbolic, inflammatory language. I think AOC is pretty smart but I don't understand outrageous language sometimes.

Did you even read the tweet she responded to? Perhaps you should, then come back here and offer a summary for us.

Here it is: Cruz: 'I could support that' (an idea AOC floated)
AOC: I wont accept your help you pig, you tried to have me murdered.

Please note the 'hyperbolic inflammatory' language there that she is 'responding' to.

Nice uninformed kneejerk.

Glad to note your seeming defense of a charge that someone tried to 'murder' her. And, glad to see your defense of that 'you tried to have me murdered' as 'not really meaning that' -- since you never bothered to accord Trump *any* of that. Really interesting to see that change in tone and tenor when 'your side' is saying that ****.

Quote:Greene is a complete disaster and her constituents should be mortified by her behavior (as well as the fact that they elected that woman to congress).

And again noted that some oevr here can denote Greene as such, even here on this board. And again noted the 'to the mats' corresponding defense of the Squad.

Truly eye-opening.

Quote:Not wanting to start a new argument/controversy... but I'm still a bit underwhelmed about the controversy of Omar's statements re: Israel. I think it's a bit of a stretch to accuse her of anti-semitism over them. I'd be interested in what a politically moderate Jewish person thinks about her tweets/statements. Regardless... I don't think she came close to Greene's ridiculousness (FTR I am no fan of Omar).

Kind of rich coming from a guy that gave zero quarter to anything Trump said, and seemingly ginned up 'racist' to anything coming from that quarter that had any iota of race attached to it.

Seems to be a rule from you that "Trump says or mentions anything re: race, yelp and squeal racism; anything in the same ballpark from your side of the fence lets look at it in the most moderate sense."

Sounds fun.

Quote:

Quote:And again, position wise, the Republicans are seeming to excoriate Greene for her radical policies (not to mention her incendiary language); all the while the radical policies put forth by the trio are warmingly embraced by the Democrats. And, to boot, any opposition to the squad is steeped in the warm waters of 'skin color' and racism by that side.

Embraced by the far, far left wing of democrats to be clear. Note that Bernie Sanders did not defeat Joe Biden last fall. That said... certainly AOC's views are closer to mainstream Democrat than Greene's views are to mainstream Republican (at least I hope so).

Animosity or antipathy to Israel as a whole, warming to Iran to the extent of implicitly promoting them as a nuclear power, and following the GND certainly seem to be somewhat central tenets of the Democratic movement these days.

And back to my question: do you have the warm fuzzy's over AOC tweeting that Cruz 'tried to have [her] murdered'? You jump the shark when you seemingly try to pawn the issue off on Cruz's 'hyperbolic' (still yet to see that, mind you) language. Again, and in the broad general sense. Please note *anywhere* where Cruz has charged that *anyone* in Congress 'tried to have [him] murdered'. Or anywhere near that, for that matter.

I meant Cruz's incendiary language in general regarding "stop the steal".

So the 'in general' language re: "stop the steal" is "hyperbolic" to you. (scratching my head).

Quote:Whatever tweet you may be referring to I missed. In no way was I trying to excuse AOC for what she said.

Here is the full twitter back and forth:

AOC: "We now need to know more about @RobinhoodApp’s decision to block retail investors from purchasing stock while hedge funds are freely able to trade the stock as they see fit.

As a member of the Financial Services Cmte, I’d support a hearing if necessary. twitter.com/motherboard/st…"

Cruz: "Fully agree."

AOC: "I am happy to work with Republicans on this issue where there’s common ground, but you almost had me murdered 3 weeks ago so you can sit this one out.

Happy to work w/ almost any other GOP that aren’t trying to get me killed.

In the meantime if you want to help, you can resign."

Now that you know of the back and forth, and are not giving an automatic response of the horrible, way out line, "hyperbolic", and "incendiary" language of 'stop the steal', maybe you can give us an informed comment.

Quote:When I posted this morning I was thinking that you and I were generally on the same page re: AOC/Greene/Omar.etc .

As to the rest of it... have a nice weekend. Please go back and re-read my post from this morning (especially in the context with what I just said) and ask yourself if it was deserving of your tone.

With all respect, your answer to the 'tried to murder me' comment was seemingly uninformed, and solely focused on the 'horrific' language of 'stop the steal' as a justification for that comment from AOC.

And, considering your past history of tying anything related to race uttered by Trump as evidence of 'racism' from him, your gloss over of AOC's comments above seem rather hypocritical, trying to make it all Cruz's fault --- that is all his fault for the unpardonable language of 'stop the steal'.

Sorry for pointing those items out.

Saying someone 'tried to murder' you, if uttered in any other forum, rises to libelous speech if untrue. Not just libelous, but horrendously grotesque in nature.

Since we are talking about OAC and her gang in distinction to Greene, this very recent comment from her seems rather germane. Some here might point to my apparent racism and the touch point of AOC's skin color as playing a part in my criticism: but this comment is a wonderful counterpoint to that claim of 'skin color' coloring my beliefs (and those of others, I might surmise).

I can readily point to Greene as a demagogic half wit that is sad was elected to office based on her past comments. And I point to AOC in the same manner.

The big distinction is that the Repub leadership actually has explicitly made comments distancing themselves from Greene, and in the past the high leadership explicitly campaigned against her, to the extent that the #2 and #3 positions in the House explicitly and openly backed her opponent based on Greenes comments *and* positions.

In distinction, AOC and her gang are very much closer to the mainstream of modern Democratic thought and policy than Greene is or ever has been to that of Republican.

I find AOC's current comments equally unhinged; and again, the paradigm readily appears to be: "Green unhinged is met with explicit disavowal, and was met in her election with explicit opposition from top Republican leadership; AOC unhinged is met with..... either crickets, or comments on how Ted Cruz had it coming to him'.

(01-30-2021 10:00 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Party of Unity?

lefties, please comment on the content and not the source. halfway through, please note that a Democrat speaks to this.

But it appears the vendetta continues. The witch hunt has been expanded from Trump to the entire right. We haven't seen this much unity since the Spanish Inquisition.

"No one expects the Spanish Inquisition."

(thanks for the oppty to lay down that classic quote)