Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2018 15:26:31 GMT
Just a reminder, guys, being a liar is not a protected class. You can deny service because you don't like someone's personality or attitude. But you can't deny them service based on a protected class. She wasn't kicked out because of her personality or attitude. She was kicked out because her political ideology made the owner butthurt. And that's fine, by the way. You shouldn't be forced to associate with anyone that you don't want to associate with. But leftists are some of the most hypocritical people on the planet. They preach tolerance all day long, but the second someone comes along who disagrees with them politically, they have a public meltdown.
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Jun 26, 2018 15:30:00 GMT
Just a reminder, guys, being a liar is not a protected class. You can deny service because you don't like someone's personality or attitude. But you can't deny them service based on a protected class. She wasn't kicked out because of her personality or attitude. She was kicked out because her political ideology made the owner butthurt. And that's fine, by the way. You shouldn't be forced to associate with anyone that you don't want to associate with. But leftists are some of the most hypocritical people on the planet. They preach tolerance all day long, but the second someone comes along who disagrees with them politically, they have a public meltdown. And because of her lies in press conferences. Political affiliation is also not a protected class. Essentially, you can't discriminate someone based on how they were born or on something they can't change. I saw no meltdown from the owner. Besides, I'd say the standard for public meltdown is tiki torches.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2018 15:34:01 GMT
She wasn't kicked out because of her personality or attitude. She was kicked out because her political ideology made the owner butthurt. And that's fine, by the way. You shouldn't be forced to associate with anyone that you don't want to associate with. But leftists are some of the most hypocritical people on the planet. They preach tolerance all day long, but the second someone comes along who disagrees with them politically, they have a public meltdown. And because of her lies in press conferences. Political affiliation is also not a protected class. Essentially, you can't discriminate someone based on how they were born or on something they can't change. I saw no meltdown from the owner. Besides, I'd say the standard for public meltdown is tiki torches. The tiki torch morons aren't being hypocritical. They're not pretending to be tolerant and inclusive. They're just dumb (and evil).
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Jun 26, 2018 15:54:35 GMT
I think that the election of President Trump, and the subsequent “vitriol” that he has regularly engaged in during the campaign and throughout his Presidency (usually on Twitter), in a manner that no other elected leader to that office has done before has created a climate of vitriol throughout politics and into mainstream culture. I think his actions have “normalized” this type of behavior as being “okay” for most people, to the point where we are now see people on the right and left engaging in it, modeling their behavior after his poor example. And ultimately, I think that is a shame because that doesn’t serve the American people. It’s designed to divide rather than unify!
I think that Donald Trump is a compulsive liar and a racist, and I think that Sarah Sanders is his spokesperson, and essentially his public voice. Her job is to defend what the President says (no matter how bad), and to defend every policy he enacts (no matter how immoral or unpopular). So logically, this makes her a target of those who are anti Trump. However, denying her service and forcing her to leave a public establishment because she has different political views, or works for someone you disagree with is just wrong! It is just as wrong as a homophobic bakery denying services to a gay couple! And it is hypocritical to criticize one while failing to condemn the other. Two wrongs don’t make a right, and if you return evil for evil, then you are no better morally than the person you condemn.
What’s worse than Sanders being kicked out of a restaurant is Maxine Waters inciting harassment of anti liberal, or Trump supporting government officials. To me, that’s just as bad as Trump calling NFL players “sons of bitches” for protesting his policies and insisting they be fired! People have the right to eat in peace and not be harassed by others who disagree with them politically. Michelle Obama’s motto was “when they go low, we go high”. Neither her, nor President Obama (whom I consider to be a great President) would have supported Maxine Waters statements, nor the actions of this restaurant owner. And that should be a clue to any liberals or democrats who might be considering supporting such actions. Maybe you need to check yourself and consider whether you are a positive depiction of the party you supposedly represent. Whoopi, Joy, and Meghan are right; Sunny is wrong!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2018 16:05:31 GMT
I think that the election of President Trump, and the subsequent “vitriol” that he has regularly engaged in during the campaign and throughout his Presidency (usually on Twitter), in a manner that no other elected leader to that office has done before has created a climate of vitriol throughout politics and into mainstream culture. I think his actions have “normalized” this type of behavior as being “okay” for most people, to the point where we are now see people on the right and left engaging in it, modeling their behavior after his poor example. And ultimately, I think that is a shame because that doesn’t serve the American people. It’s designed to divide rather than unify! I think that Donald Trump is a compulsive liar and a racist, and I think that Sarah Sanders is his spokesperson, and essentially his public voice. Her job is to defend what the President says (no matter how bad), and to defend every policy he enacts (no matter how immoral or unpopular). So logically, this makes her a target of those who are anti Trump. However, denying her service and forcing her to leave a public establishment because she has different political views, or works for someone you disagree with is just wrong! It is just as wrong as a homophobic bakery denying services to a gay couple! And it is hypocritical to criticize one while failing to condemn the other. Two wrongs don’t make a right, and if you return evil for evil, then you are no better morally than the person you condemn. What’s worse than Sanders being kicked out of a restaurant is Maxine Waters inciting harassment of anti liberal, or Trump supporting government officials. To me, that’s just as bad as Trump calling NFL players “sons of bitches” for protesting his policies and insisting they be fired! People have the right to eat in peace and not be harassed by others who disagree with them politically. Michelle Obama’s motto was “when they go low, we go high”. Neither her, nor President Obama (whom I consider to be a great President) would have supported Maxine Waters statements, nor the actions of this restaurant owner. And that should be a clue to any liberals or democrats who might be considering supporting such actions. Maybe you need to check yourself and consider whether you are a positive depiction of the party you supposedly represent. Whoopi is right, Sunny is wrong! I don't think this started with Trump. Since I can remember, leftists have been demonizing people on the right as "old, evil, and stupid." For the longest time, most of the people on the right took the high road (you rarely saw Bush, McCain, or Romney demonizing their political opponents). Trump was just the first one to fight back IN KIND. Did that help our political discourse? No. But he's just fighting fire with fire. That's why he's disrupted the system so much. People don't know how to react to him because he's actually willing to hit back. At the end of the day, I've never put much hope in politicians or in our political system, so it's just been entertaining for me to watch as people on both sides lose their minds over stupid shit. It's a fun time to be alive.
|
|
hanswilm
Sophomore
old imdb name was Hans-Wilhelm but this site tweaked it to hanswilm
@hanswilm
Posts: 679
Likes: 416
|
Post by hanswilm on Jun 26, 2018 18:10:57 GMT
I think they are tools but in the U.S. at least a store owner reserves the right to refuse service. Whether that is a good idea in a capitalist economy, I'm not sure but they have the right to do it. I think it is petty though and kind of shows this owner to be messed up that they take politics this seriously. Refusing service just because the customer has different ideas about what's best for the country.
|
|
|
Post by CrepedCrusader on Jun 26, 2018 18:16:24 GMT
It's another sign that leftists aren't always the fair, compassionate, and open-minded people they pretend to be. I love how cons will defend people denying services to others based on sexual orientation, race, religion, etc., and then turn around and be like, "Oh, I thought you were supposed to be tolerant, lol".
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Jun 26, 2018 18:16:59 GMT
I think they are tools but in the U.S. at least a store owner reserves the right to refuse service. Whether that is a good idea in a capitalist economy, I'm not sure but they have the right to do it. I think it is petty though and kind of shows this owner to be messed up that they take politics this seriously. Refusing service just because the customer has different ideas about what's best for the country. Well, she's also a public liar. I'd say that's beyond just having different ideas.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Jun 26, 2018 19:12:16 GMT
I think that the election of President Trump, and the subsequent “vitriol” that he has regularly engaged in during the campaign and throughout his Presidency (usually on Twitter), in a manner that no other elected leader to that office has done before has created a climate of vitriol throughout politics and into mainstream culture. I think his actions have “normalized” this type of behavior as being “okay” for most people, to the point where we are now see people on the right and left engaging in it, modeling their behavior after his poor example. And ultimately, I think that is a shame because that doesn’t serve the American people. It’s designed to divide rather than unify! I think that Donald Trump is a compulsive liar and a racist, and I think that Sarah Sanders is his spokesperson, and essentially his public voice. Her job is to defend what the President says (no matter how bad), and to defend every policy he enacts (no matter how immoral or unpopular). So logically, this makes her a target of those who are anti Trump. However, denying her service and forcing her to leave a public establishment because she has different political views, or works for someone you disagree with is just wrong! It is just as wrong as a homophobic bakery denying services to a gay couple! And it is hypocritical to criticize one while failing to condemn the other. Two wrongs don’t make a right, and if you return evil for evil, then you are no better morally than the person you condemn. What’s worse than Sanders being kicked out of a restaurant is Maxine Waters inciting harassment of anti liberal, or Trump supporting government officials. To me, that’s just as bad as Trump calling NFL players “sons of bitches” for protesting his policies and insisting they be fired! People have the right to eat in peace and not be harassed by others who disagree with them politically. Michelle Obama’s motto was “when they go low, we go high”. Neither her, nor President Obama (whom I consider to be a great President) would have supported Maxine Waters statements, nor the actions of this restaurant owner. And that should be a clue to any liberals or democrats who might be considering supporting such actions. Maybe you need to check yourself and consider whether you are a positive depiction of the party you supposedly represent. Whoopi is right, Sunny is wrong! I don't think this started with Trump. Since I can remember, leftists have been demonizing people on the right as "old, evil, and stupid." For the longest time, most of the people on the right took the high road (you rarely saw Bush, McCain, or Romney demonizing their political opponents). Trump was just the first one to fight back IN KIND. I disagree. I think you have selective memory in the way you categorize “leftists” from “rightists”. I agree with you that Bush, Romney, and McCain never engaged in that type of demonization of people the way that Trump has (which actually goes to my point). But Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and Hillary Clinton never did that either and you failed to mention them. No President or cabinet member other than Trump has ever suggested that a Judge couldn’t do their job because they were “Mexican”, or mocked a disabled reporter on live TV, or suggested that POWs weren’t war heroes, or criticized their opponents “face”, or “hands”, or suggested putting their political opponents in jail, or encouraged crowds to solve political differences with violence, or endorsed an accused child molester over a person of the opposite party, or made blanket statements against the entire religion of Islam, or tried to delegitimize their political rival as not being an American citizen, or suggested that the media was the enemy of the people. Trump has done ALL of those things! And that type of vitriol has only become common place because of him. He’s the only President that ever spoke that way; and it’s why his supporters (“rightists”) actually like him. Him “telling it like it is” is exactly the reason often given for why you guys support him! But now all of a sudden you’re trying to distance yourself from that by suggesting that he’s somehow just like every other “liberal” politician? That’s a ridiculous use of kettle logic. Moreover, you act as though only liberals demonize people on the right, but that the reverse is not true! Conservatives demonize the left all the time as well. So it’s a two way street and it always has been. My point is, there’s a difference between criticism policies and even making broad, sweeping assumptions about the opposite political ideology, and attacking a specific individual (denying them service), or inciting harassment of individuals based on their political ideology. That type of behavior became popularized as normal during the Trump administration, not Obama, not Bush, and not Clinton because as leaders of the nation they behaved “presidential”. Trump does not! Well then he is a FAILURE as a national leader, because that’s not how you “lead”. That’s not how you bring people together to resolve conflict. On the contrary, that’s how you create MORE conflict. A President is supposed to be the representative of ALL AMERICANS, not just the minority of people who voted for him, and not just his own political party. And when you address your political concerns by demonizing your political rivals as “little Marco”, or “Lying Ted”, or “Crooked Hillary”, or “Cheatin Obama”, or “Crazy Bernie”, or “Leaky Comey”, or “Wacky Wilson”, or “Pocahontas”, that’s not fighting “fire with fire”, that’s fighting political adversaries with kindergarten name calling! When he criticizes Obama for spending time on the golf course, and then subsequently spends twice as many hours on the golf course, that’s not fighting fire with fire; that’s being a giant hypocrite! And when he claims that a former President was not an American citizen, that’s being a racist! Well that’s a very sad and cynical way of looking at our political process, and I feel sorry for you. Because I still have hope for America (despite Trump and the ensuing chaos he’s caused and continues to facilitate). I am hopeful that the next elected official will NOT be like that, and will NOT encourage that type of behavior or set those kinds of examples. Because fighting fire with fire is not indicative of strong leadership, it’s indicative of someone who doesn’t know how to resolve conflict for the benefit of ALL Americans.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2018 19:22:50 GMT
Just a reminder, guys, being a liar is not a protected class. You can deny service because you don't like someone's personality or attitude. But you can't deny them service based on a protected class. She wasn't kicked out because of her personality or attitude. She was kicked out because her political ideology made the owner butthurt. And that's fine, by the way. You shouldn't be forced to associate with anyone that you don't want to associate with. But leftists are some of the most hypocritical people on the planet. They preach tolerance all day long, but the second someone comes along who disagrees with them politically, they have a public meltdown. Next thing you know they'll be refusing to bake wedding cakes for people.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2018 21:08:35 GMT
I don't think this started with Trump. Since I can remember, leftists have been demonizing people on the right as "old, evil, and stupid." For the longest time, most of the people on the right took the high road (you rarely saw Bush, McCain, or Romney demonizing their political opponents). Trump was just the first one to fight back IN KIND. I disagree. I think you have selective memory in the way you categorize “leftists” from “rightists”. I agree with you that Bush, Romney, and McCain never engaged in that type of demonization of people the way that Trump has (which actually goes to my point). But Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and Hillary Clinton never did that either and you failed to mention them. No President or cabinet member other than Trump has ever suggested that a Judge couldn’t do their job because they were “Mexican”, or mocked a disabled reporter on live TV, or suggested that POWs weren’t war heroes, or criticized their opponents “face”, or “hands”, or suggested putting their political opponents in jail, or encouraged crowds to solve political differences with violence, or endorsed an accused child molester over a person of the opposite party, or made blanket statements against the entire religion of Islam, or tried to delegitimize their political rival as not being an American citizen, or suggested that the media was the enemy of the people. Trump has done ALL of those things! And that type of vitriol has only become common place because of him. He’s the only President that ever spoke that way; and it’s why his supporters (“rightists”) actually like him. Him “telling it like it is” is exactly the reason often given for why you guys support him! But now all of a sudden you’re trying to distance yourself from that by suggesting that he’s somehow just like every other “liberal” politician? That’s a ridiculous use of kettle logic. Moreover, you act as though only liberals demonize people on the right, but that the reverse is not true! Conservatives demonize the left all the time as well. So it’s a two way street and it always has been. My point is, there’s a difference between criticism policies and even making broad, sweeping assumptions about the opposite political ideology, and attacking a specific individual (denying them service), or inciting harassment of individuals based on their political ideology. That type of behavior became popularized as normal during the Trump administration, not Obama, not Bush, and not Clinton because as leaders of the nation they behaved “presidential”. Trump does not! Well then he is a FAILURE as a national leader, because that’s not how you “lead”. That’s not how you bring people together to resolve conflict. On the contrary, that’s how you create MORE conflict. A President is supposed to be the representative of ALL AMERICANS, not just the minority of people who voted for him, and not just his own political party. And when you address your political concerns by demonizing your political rivals as “little Marco”, or “Lying Ted”, or “Crooked Hillary”, or “Cheatin Obama”, or “Crazy Bernie”, or “Leaky Comey”, or “Wacky Wilson”, or “Pocahontas”, that’s not fighting “fire with fire”, that’s fighting political adversaries with kindergarten name calling! When he criticizes Obama for spending time on the golf course, and then subsequently spends twice as many hours on the golf course, that’s not fighting fire with fire; that’s being a giant hypocrite! And when he claims that a former President was not an American citizen, that’s being a racist! Well that’s a very sad and cynical way of looking at our political process, and I feel sorry for you. Because I still have hope for America (despite Trump and the ensuing chaos he’s caused and continues to facilitate). I am hopeful that the next elected official will NOT be like that, and will NOT encourage that type of behavior or set those kinds of examples. Because fighting fire with fire is not indicative of strong leadership, it’s indicative of someone who doesn’t know how to resolve conflict for the benefit of ALL Americans. Leftists regularly demonized their political opponents. Bush was called Hitler regularly. Romney was demonized for wanting to hire women ("BINDERS FULL OF WOMEN!!!"). McCain was called an old and evil warmonger. Happened all the time. The only difference was that the media mostly ignored it.
|
|
|
Post by drystyx on Jun 26, 2018 21:42:54 GMT
I wouldn't let any of you Homo Sapiens in my restaurant.
And by the way, you all look alike to me.
Kidding aside, lots of things are going on here. Kicking someone out of your restaurant, well, if she was just a minion doing a job, that would be unforgivable to kick her out. But at what point does someone become fair game?
I'd rather it be a non story to begin with, if she's high enough up the ladder to not be concerned with being kicked out by a restaurant owner, knowing she has friends in other high places.
What's truly sick is the monsters who join lynch mobs. In this case, it's after this woman, and that's never okay. That's why it should be a non news story. We have this information age now, and it was always bad, but now it's worse, where demon possessed monsters can be part of lynch mobs. The one monster claimed the food must be delicious and this person was going to go there all the time. Well, okay, but this person is trying to force others to go to this restaurant just because of this act. And that's not okay. And that's the sickest crime in the world short of Murder. In fact, this is the sort of crime that leads to lynching historically.
The idea of Homo Sapiens taking sides in order to be control freaks, playing God out of hateful whims, burns me up against Homo Sapiens.
And the manager of the place knew all this when the manager kicked the lady out. There was no "emotional decision". The world no longer has emotional decisions based on emotions. They're all very conscious. There is not a human being in the first world who doesn't go to work every day thinking of thousands of possible scenarios and what to do in case of them. This is no different. Okay, lets say just 50 scenarios a day, with overlaps of 10% each day after that. After a year, that's still thousands of premeditated decisions. And this one is pretty obviously going to be covered.
Of course the same can be said for the Trump minion. She knew this day would come. I'd respect her more if she made an honest outburst instead of the "premeditated" crap. I think I'll just go over there and b..slap all of them; every Homo Sapien I see. Cause you all look alike to me any way.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Jun 26, 2018 22:48:42 GMT
Leftists regularly demonized their political opponents. Bush was called Hitler regularly. Romney was demonized for wanting to hire women ("BINDERS FULL OF WOMEN!!!"). McCain was called an old and evil warmonger. Happened all the time. The only difference was that the media mostly ignored it. First of all, let’s test that theory of yours. Who specifically are you claiming called George W Bush Hitler? “Liberals” is not an answer! It’s a broad generalization that means nothing. You are clearly claiming that a specific liberal of relevance did this, so who are you making this claim about and what evidence do you have to support it? Because if it wasn’t a known liberal (politician, celebrity, organization, etc) then there would be no reason for the media to report it! Do you know how many random people say things about others all the time? The media doesn’t just report what random people say unless they are relevant and what they say is significant. Secondly, Romney was rightly criticized for his “binders full of women” comment because that was a ridiculous and tone deaf statement that made him sound completely out of touch. And that’s partly why his lost the election badly! For some additional context, here is what Romney actually said: "I had the chance to pull together a cabinet, and all the applicants seemed to be men… I went to a number of women's groups and said, 'Can you help us find folks?' and they brought us whole binders full of women." The phrase was depicted by Romney's detractors as demeaning and insensitive toward women, and was widely mocked. Barack Obama referenced the phrase, saying at a campaign stop: "I've got to tell you, we don't have to collect a bunch of binders to find qualified, talented, driven young women". The Washington Post stated: "Mitt Romney's 'binders full of women' comment during the second presidential debate did more than go viral; it put women's issues back in the campaign spotlight." Also, Romney's statement that he was the one who initiated the recruitment of so many women was challenged by a coalition of women's groups known as MassGAP, affiliated with the Massachusetts Women's Political Caucus. MassGAP issued a statement saying that they had approached both Romney and his opponent's campaigns prior to the election to ask for a commitment to appoint more women to address underrepresentation of women in Massachusetts' government. The group compiled the names of female applicants and offered them to both Romney and his Democratic opponent Shannon O'Brien before the election. So its not that Romney was “demonized” by liberals for being a conservative candidate. It’s that he made a political gaffe (an untruthful one at that) during his campaign debate which provided a tone deaf appearance, gave his opponent a political advantage, and was ultimately challenged by the very people he referred to. I also noticed that you failed to provide any of the numerous examples where the right demonized the left (almost like you can’t remember that ever happening before). But again, “selective memory” might convince you that it’s all just liberals demonizing the right! If you’d like me to jog your memory, I’d be happy to provide a dozen recent examples where that happens as well. And I’m not talking about irrelevant and unknown right wing voters making harsh comments about politicians they oppose, I’m talking about actual people in power (in the government) demonizing their political opponents on the left. But that doesn’t really approach what I’m talking about. I have no doubt that many liberals did demonize their political opponents. I also have no doubt that the reverse is true. That’s part of politics and it always has been. But that’s not what we are talking about here. The issue right now is the level of vitriol, and the manner in which political opponents are being demonized. Being called a name in print, or on the radio, or on television, or on the internet is very different from calls for harassment or violence against political opponents in public places, or veiled threats of jailing your political opponents, or making “jokes” about voters shooting your political opponents, or politicians being denied service because of their political beliefs, or citizens being denied service because of their sexual orientation, et cetera. And that’s the type of activity that’s going on today to the point where it’s becoming a “normal” part of politics. You wouldn’t have seen a billboard like this one 15 years ago, but today people seem to think it’s okay! That is indicative of the “Trump Effect”!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2018 22:53:17 GMT
My thoughts are exactly the same as I had on other incidents involving discrimination. We live in an open society and an open economy. We can't pick and chose whom to provide our services as long as others are part of the system where we live. This isn't some feudal society of past where you had ownership of your domain. This is an open economy and you have to learn to assimilate with others. I can't discriminate with people who are Muslims, Christians, atheists, whites, blacks, communists etc. etc. In cases when you have a convict or man with dangerous motives can you justifiably deny your services. But you shouldn't deny your services because you do not agree with the people who are working for political party you don't like. I agree.
This sort of thing only gives the other side ammo to keep behaving badly.
One only gains respect and wins converts by one taking the high road.
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Jun 26, 2018 22:58:48 GMT
I wouldn't let any of you Homo Sapiens in my restaurant. And by the way, you all look alike to me. Kidding aside, lots of things are going on here. Kicking someone out of your restaurant, well, if she was just a minion doing a job, that would be unforgivable to kick her out. But at what point does someone become fair game? I'd rather it be a non story to begin with, if she's high enough up the ladder to not be concerned with being kicked out by a restaurant owner, knowing she has friends in other high places. It was a non-story until she and her goon of a president went on official government channels to cry about it and try to ruin a business.
|
|
|
Post by drystyx on Jun 26, 2018 23:11:55 GMT
I wouldn't let any of you Homo Sapiens in my restaurant. And by the way, you all look alike to me. Kidding aside, lots of things are going on here. Kicking someone out of your restaurant, well, if she was just a minion doing a job, that would be unforgivable to kick her out. But at what point does someone become fair game? I'd rather it be a non story to begin with, if she's high enough up the ladder to not be concerned with being kicked out by a restaurant owner, knowing she has friends in other high places. It was a non-story until she and her goon of a president went on official government channels to cry about it and try to ruin a business. I'd say it's "trash against trash". Both sides of extremists, but in reality, both extremists worship the same devil and in a supernatural sense shake hands with each other in order to try to lie, cheat, steal, and destroy against everyone else. Trump's group have no intention of ruining the business. Neither do those fighting for the business have any intention of hurting Trump and his high level goons They know they help each other out with free advertisement.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jun 27, 2018 8:40:12 GMT
It's another sign that leftists aren't always the fair, compassionate, and open-minded people they pretend to be. I love how cons will defend people denying services to others based on sexual orientation, race, religion, etc., and then turn around and be like, "Oh, I thought you were supposed to be tolerant, lol". Well, aren't you?
|
|
|
Post by Hairynosedwombat on Jun 27, 2018 10:51:25 GMT
It's another sign that leftists aren't always the fair, compassionate, and open-minded people they pretend to be. Not like the Republicans who praised the proprietors of a bakery which refused service to Joe Biden in 2012.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jun 27, 2018 17:55:01 GMT
It's another sign that leftists aren't always the fair, compassionate, and open-minded people they pretend to be. Not like the Republicans who praised the proprietors of a bakery which refused service to Joe Biden in 2012. I don't remember hearing about that one, but I am not praising them, and it's beside the point. If you want to have a reputation for being fair, compassionate, and open-minded, it might help to set an example. The Republican Party doesn't have that reputation, so nothing much is lost by refusing service to Crazy Joe Biden.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jun 27, 2018 17:58:20 GMT
Leftists regularly demonized their political opponents. Bush was called Hitler regularly. Romney was demonized for wanting to hire women ("BINDERS FULL OF WOMEN!!!"). McCain was called an old and evil warmonger. Happened all the time. The only difference was that the media mostly ignored it. First of all, let’s test that theory of yours. Who specifically are you claiming called George W Bush Hitler? “Liberals” is not an answer! It’s a broad generalization that means nothing. You are clearly claiming that a specific liberal of relevance did this, so who are you making this claim about and what evidence do you have to support it? Because if it wasn’t a known liberal (politician, celebrity, organization, etc) then there would be no reason for the media to report it! Do you know how many random people say things about others all the time? The media doesn’t just report what random people say unless they are relevant and what they say is significant. Secondly, Romney was rightly criticized for his “binders full of women” comment because that was a ridiculous and tone deaf statement that made him sound completely out of touch. And that’s partly why his lost the election badly! For some additional context, here is what Romney actually said: "I had the chance to pull together a cabinet, and all the applicants seemed to be men… I went to a number of women's groups and said, 'Can you help us find folks?' and they brought us whole binders full of women." The phrase was depicted by Romney's detractors as demeaning and insensitive toward women, and was widely mocked. Barack Obama referenced the phrase, saying at a campaign stop: "I've got to tell you, we don't have to collect a bunch of binders to find qualified, talented, driven young women". The Washington Post stated: "Mitt Romney's 'binders full of women' comment during the second presidential debate did more than go viral; it put women's issues back in the campaign spotlight." Also, Romney's statement that he was the one who initiated the recruitment of so many women was challenged by a coalition of women's groups known as MassGAP, affiliated with the Massachusetts Women's Political Caucus. MassGAP issued a statement saying that they had approached both Romney and his opponent's campaigns prior to the election to ask for a commitment to appoint more women to address underrepresentation of women in Massachusetts' government. The group compiled the names of female applicants and offered them to both Romney and his Democratic opponent Shannon O'Brien before the election. So its not that Romney was “demonized” by liberals for being a conservative candidate. It’s that he made a political gaffe (an untruthful one at that) during his campaign debate which provided a tone deaf appearance, gave his opponent a political advantage, and was ultimately challenged by the very people he referred to. I also noticed that you failed to provide any of the numerous examples where the right demonized the left (almost like you can’t remember that ever happening before). But again, “selective memory” might convince you that it’s all just liberals demonizing the right! If you’d like me to jog your memory, I’d be happy to provide a dozen recent examples where that happens as well. And I’m not talking about irrelevant and unknown right wing voters making harsh comments about politicians they oppose, I’m talking about actual people in power (in the government) demonizing their political opponents on the left. But that doesn’t really approach what I’m talking about. I have no doubt that many liberals did demonize their political opponents. I also have no doubt that the reverse is true. That’s part of politics and it always has been. But that’s not what we are talking about here. The issue right now is the level of vitriol, and the manner in which political opponents are being demonized. Being called a name in print, or on the radio, or on television, or on the internet is very different from calls for harassment or violence against political opponents in public places, or veiled threats of jailing your political opponents, or making “jokes” about voters shooting your political opponents, or politicians being denied service because of their political beliefs, or citizens being denied service because of their sexual orientation, et cetera. And that’s the type of activity that’s going on today to the point where it’s becoming a “normal” part of politics. You wouldn’t have seen a billboard like this one 15 years ago, but today people seem to think it’s okay! That is indicative of the “Trump Effect”! Captain Bryce, are you sure that billboard message exists except on the Web? Someone can take a photo of a real billboard and make it say anything, with the magic of special effects.
|
|