HuskyCaucasian Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 QUOTE (Soxy @ Oct 22, 2008 -> 09:12 AM) I don't read those threads. I read this one. And yeah, it's sexist. I don't like the woman. I think she's dangerous, unqualified, and, well, you all know. But I can't stand sexist jokes about her. There are plenty of other jokes to be made. Now if it was a sophisticated joke about the Republican party about how they nominated a totally unqualified candidate, and suddenly awoke to their "nakedness" in her nomination, then, yeah, I would laugh. my apologies if I offended you. It was just meant as a stupid little joke. When I read "new clothes" it was the first thing that popped into my head. Probably because I head a reference to the emperors new cloths a few days ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 QUOTE (Soxy @ Oct 22, 2008 -> 09:12 AM) I don't read those threads. I read this one. And yeah, it's sexist. I don't like the woman. I think she's dangerous, unqualified, and, well, you all know. But I can't stand sexist jokes about her. There are plenty of other jokes to be made. Now if it was a sophisticated joke about the Republican party about how they nominated a totally unqualified candidate, and suddenly awoke to their "nakedness" in her nomination, then, yeah, I would laugh. Not to mention if someone else has made the same type of joke about Obama, except with race, you would have posted it for all as more proof of racism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Chappas Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 QUOTE (Soxy @ Oct 22, 2008 -> 10:12 AM) I don't read those threads. I read this one. And yeah, it's sexist. I don't like the woman. I think she's dangerous, unqualified, and, well, you all know. But I can't stand sexist jokes about her. There are plenty of other jokes to be made. Now if it was a sophisticated joke about the Republican party about how they nominated a totally unqualified candidate, and suddenly awoke to their "nakedness" in her nomination, then, yeah, I would laugh. I think the way it was worded made it comical to me and give him credit for it. It was in a tasteful context which while in a hot chcik kind of way is one way but it could also be used as a knowingless leader which is how I also took it and made it more funny. You see the story is of an emporer, short chubby guy marching down the street in his "clothes" and thinking he is the s***. This is kind of how I see Palin. Not in a sexist way but in a way that I believe she is well out of her league. I believe her inabiltiy to actually have an interview with a source that may challenge her is scary as hell. Her inabilities I find insulting as she is in serious contention for the mist powerful job in the world and she is very smug about it. In the genereal election thread it stated that her own state is seeming to not really like her. I think the joke worked on a couple of different levels and approve of AHB's message. If McCain choose Bloomberg he would be walking away with this race right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 22, 2008 -> 10:17 AM) Not to mention if someone else has made the same type of joke about Obama, except with race, you would have posted it for all as more proof of racism. I don't know if you're referring to just the Filibuster or not, but there are plenty of racist things said about Obama every single day that I don't waste my time acknowledging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 (edited) Oh please thats ridiculous, your comparing apples and oranges. (That remark is toward the Obama racism comment.) The comment was not sexist, it may have been demeaning, it may have been crass, it may have been bad taste (not saying it was any of those things, just saying may have been.) But I sincerely doubt that it was in anyway espousing the idea that women are not as smart as men, that women cant be as smart as men, that women shouldnt be taken seriously, that women dont deserve the same respect as men, and so on and so forth. Now maybe it was portraying her as a sexual object, but really it was just a joke. And Soxy you have to realize that for the most part these boards are like a locker room, jokes that are said here are things that many people would not repeat in public because the reality of the board is its like 99% male to 1% female (I can almost count the females who have posted here). So some of the jokes may be in bad taste, but thats generally because these boards are seen as more male dominated and thus people can say things that they would otherwise censor. Edited October 22, 2008 by Soxbadger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Oct 22, 2008 -> 08:57 AM) here's the problem, it might violate McCain-Feingold SEC. 313. USE OF CONTRIBUTED AMOUNTS FOR CERTAIN PURPOSES. (a) PERMITTED USES- ... (b ) PROHIBITED USE- (1) IN GENERAL- A contribution or donation described in subsection (a) shall not be converted by any person to personal use. (2) CONVERSION- For the purposes of paragraph (1), a contribution or donation shall be considered to be converted to personal use if the contribution or amount is used to fulfill any commitment, obligation, or expense of a person that would exist irrespective of the candidate's election campaign or individual's duties as a holder of Federal office, including-- (A) a home mortgage, rent, or utility payment; ( B ) a clothing purcha s e; ( C ) a noncampaign-related automobile expense; (D) a country club membership; (E) a vacation or other noncampaign-related trip; (F) a household food item; (G) a tuition payment; (H) admission to a sporting event, concert, theater, or other form of entertainment not associated with an election campaign; and (I) dues, fees, and other payments to a health club or recreational facility.' Quick follow up, via loop-holes, it is legal: Democratic legal eagle Ken Gross tells me that, despite some legal language saying campaigns can't go beyond t-shirt shopping, the Palin clothing purchases were perfectly legal. That's because they were purchased by the Repubilcan National Committee, which isn't covered by that set of rules. So if you wonder why they're wearing those pricey leather pants in the RNC press office, there's your explanation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Oct 22, 2008 -> 10:24 AM) Oh please thats ridiculous, your comparing apples and oranges. (That remark is toward the Obama racism comment.) The comment was not sexist, it may have been demeaning, it may have been crass, it may have been bad taste (not saying it was any of those things, just saying may have been.) But I sincerely doubt that it was in anyway espousing the idea that women are not as smart as men, that women cant be as smart as men, that women shouldnt be taken seriously, that women dont deserve the same respect as men, and so on and so forth. Now maybe it was portraying her as a sexual object, but really it was just a joke. And Soxy you have to realize that for the most part these boards are like a locker room, jokes that are said here are things that many people would not repeat in public because the reality of the board is its like 99% male to 1% female (I can almost count the females who have posted here). So some of the jokes may be in bad taste, but thats generally because these boards are seen as more male dominated and thus people can say things that they would otherwise censor. I think you are probably right about it not originally being meant as sexist. But, it kinda was. Your last graf there bothers me though. I'd rather you thought of each forum as its own club, and each thread as its own lockerroom. If someone wants to start a thread about hot chicks in the SLaM, hey, go ahead. People who are offended won't go in that room. But this is a political discussion. There are women who read and post here, and we expect that the level of respect should assume that the room could have anyone who might follow politics. Men and women, black and white, Christian and Muslim, gay and straight. You follow me? It may be 90% men, but that doesn't mean we treat the 10% any differently. Not trying to make a huge deal of this, as I don't think it is one. Just want to take the opportunity to lay out our expectations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 But this is a political discussion. There are women who read and post here, and we expect that the level of respect should assume that the room could have anyone who might follow politics. Men and women, black and white, Christian and Muslim, gay and straight. You follow me? It may be 90% men, but that doesn't mean we treat the 10% any differently. Which is exactly why I dont think there is a problem with what was said. If he had said "can we give him the emperors new clothes" in reference to either McCain or Obama, no one would say a word, no one would say that the comment was sexist, crass, or in bad taste. The only reason we are having this discussion is because Palin is a woman and therefore society has placed certain restraints on the comments that can be made about women because they are to be protected and cherished. The idea that women need more protecting than men is in of itself sexist. If you can say a comment about a man and have it be nothing, than the exact same comment about a woman should be the same. So if we truly want to not "treat the other 10% different" then we should treat them exactly the same way as wed treat the other 90%. In this case if it was a comment about a man wed never be talking "sexism", so why are we talking "sexism" when its a woman? It can also be sexist to overly protect women and treat them like they are delicate flowers that can not protect themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Oct 22, 2008 -> 11:07 AM) HOw many times are there threads about "hot chicks" or a "hot chick contest" or someone says "damn. I'd do her"? A LOT. I make a comment about Palin and "OMG! HOW SEXIST!" I'd say we'd definitely cut down on those. Remember this is soxtalk.com not sextalk.com. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 So ive been posting on the wrong site for the last 6 years? I just thought all of the talk about doubles and home runs were sexual innuendo's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 Another day, another Republican McCarthyite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 So, what does the Obama campaign know that we dont? What do states like Georgia, South Carolina, North Dakota and even Arizona have in common? They’re all reach states that the Obama campaign now believes could be in play. Thanks in part to an astonishing $150 million take in September, the Democrat has his eyes on some unlikely prizes, including McCain’s own home turf. We've talked about Georgia and a little about ND. So, those dont really surprise me. But SC and AZ? RCP has McCain +11.3 in Arizona as of September 28th and McCain +12.7 in South Carolina as of just a few days ago. The Obama campaign is ambitious, but not stupid. They wouldnt dump money into AZ and SC unless they really thought they could win there. What do they know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 The Making (and Remaking) of McCain, the NYT Magazine piece, is live. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Oct 22, 2008 -> 10:33 AM) The Obama campaign is ambitious, but not stupid. They wouldnt dump money into AZ and SC unless they really thought they could win there. What do they know? They know that they have more money than they can possibly spend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 22, 2008 -> 11:58 AM) They know that they have more money than they can possibly spend. And that because they have such a money advantage, and a substantial lead in the important polls, the best strategy for them right now is an all-out blitz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 22, 2008 -> 11:58 AM) They know that they have more money than they can possibly spend. Maybe they can help me with my student loans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 Speaking of debt though I wonder how much of Hillary's debt he paid? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 22, 2008 -> 11:00 AM) And that because they have such a money advantage, and a substantial lead in the important polls, the best strategy for them right now is an all-out blitz. And even if all they do with those ads is pile up %age points, and go from a 5% win to a 7-8% win (without winning any more states), that helps people down the ticket in competitive races, sets them up for 2010 and 2012 by building organization, and helps push the concept of them having won a massive "Mandate" compared to what GWB had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 (edited) QUOTE (Gene Honda Civic @ Oct 22, 2008 -> 11:54 AM) The Making (and Remaking) of McCain, the NYT Magazine piece, is live. John and Cindy McCain showed up at the end of the daylong meeting, and Schmidt took the opportunity to run the celebrity concept by them. The McCains liked it — though the candidate was otherwise cranky: he was tired of being overscheduled and always late and demanded that this change immediately. (It did, according to a senior adviser: “After that meeting, you will rarely see McCain do an event before 9 in the morning.”) Well, i guess he wont answer that 3AM call... too busy sleeping. Palin's Qualifications for VP: Consistency, Confidence, Good Looking Reviewing the tape, it didn’t concern Davis that Palin seemed out of her depth on health-care issues or that, when asked to name her favorite candidate among the Republican field, she said, “I’m undecided.” What he liked was how she stuck to her pet issues — energy independence and ethics reform — and thereby refused to let Rose manage the interview. This was the case throughout all of the Palin footage. Consistency. Confidence. And . . . well, look at her. A friend had said to Davis: “The way you pick a vice president is, you get a frame of Time magazine, and you put the pictures of the people in that frame. You look at who fits that frame best — that’s your V. P.” As a whole, the article was very interesting. Nothing I would call shocking, but interesting. It seems to me like McCain wasnt / isn't really running his campaign. He's lettering Davis do it and he just signs off on it. Edited October 22, 2008 by Athomeboy_2000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 GOP Pulling Its Ads From Bachmann's Race Five days after Rep. Michele Bachmann went on a McCarthy-esque rant suggesting Barack Obama was unpatriotic and urging the major newspapers of the country to investigate anti-American sentiment in Congress, the national Republican political parties are running for cover. Two sources aware of ad buys in Minnesota say that the National Republican Congressional Committee is pulling its media purchases from Bachmann's race. If true, it is a remarkable fall for a congresswoman who, until recently, seemed relatively safe in her predominantly conservative district. The race had become closer in recent days -- the NRCC had transferred funds from Rep. Erik Paulsen (MN-03) to Bachmann a little over a week ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 This post made me chuckle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 Obama to appear on SNL? http://www.popeater.com/television/article...ma-visit/221279 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted October 22, 2008 Share Posted October 22, 2008 What is a precondition? ummm... diplomatic strategy. Isnt meeting with someone in and of itself a diplomatic strategy? By definition, a "pre-condition" is agreeing before hand (pre) to a set of circumstances (conditions) like: stop your centrifuges and we'll talk about getting you outher energy sources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 From the Daily Dish... If McCain's ads were made by John Woo (meh), Kevin Smith (decent), and Wes Anderson (brilliant): Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Yes, the Wes Anderson mock was the best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts