8
   

The congress and the word "vagina"

 
 
amorea
 
Reply Sun 24 Jun, 2012 06:21 pm
hat a prude , old fashioned attitude for congress to forbid the use of the word:vagina: used on the floor of Congress. As if vagina would be a dirty word.!
First of all all human beings enters and comes out of it
2. All those hypocrite congressmen kiss caress lick and enjoy frequently the vagina.
3 it is an anatmically acturate name for a body part
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 8 • Views: 3,715 • Replies: 72

 
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Mon 25 Jun, 2012 11:06 pm
@amorea,
amorea wrote:
hat a prude , old fashioned attitude for congress to forbid the use of the word:vagina: used on the floor of Congress. As if vagina would be a dirty word.!
First of all all human beings enters and comes out of it
2. All those hypocrite congressmen kiss caress lick and enjoy frequently the vagina.
3 it is an anatmically acturate name for a body part


It wasn't so much the word, as it was the snide way she was using the word to denigrate her opponents' political views.

In any case, she was was only barred from speaking on the floor for a single day. Hardly a big deal.
Joe Nation
 
  2  
Reply Tue 26 Jun, 2012 11:29 am
@oralloy,
She was bared from speaking on the floor of the State Legislature, a place she was elected by the people to speak for them.
That, in a democratic republic, is a big deal.
And, the weasels who bared her now say that is wasn't the word 'vagina' that upset them, it was the 'no means no.' Sure. Yeah.....whatever.

To make matters worse, if they could be, they did reveal just how little respect they have for the women legislators involved. They say now the women were having 'temper tantrums' and that baring them was akin to giving a kid a 'time-out.' A kid. "Go away little girl, you bother me."
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/06/20/503041/michigan-republican-male-legislator-time-out/

Come on, Michigan. Dump these chumps.

Joe(They haven't a clue what they are doing.)Nation




parados
 
  4  
Reply Tue 26 Jun, 2012 11:36 am
@oralloy,
Quote:
In any case, she was was only barred from speaking on the floor for a single day. Hardly a big deal.

Considering she was barred from speaking on the only day they could speak about the bill prior to the vote, it was a big deal.

I'm sure you wouldn't think it a big deal if the GOP was barred from speaking about their candidate for the week before the election. After all, it's only one week. What's the big deal? Right?
Joe Nation
 
  4  
Reply Tue 26 Jun, 2012 01:41 pm
It's as if the GOP doesn't understand what participatory democracy is. Nationally, they have lost the concept of compromise. The Speaker of the House can't even bring himself to say the word. He will say "Find common ground." but then doesn't offer anything that could be construed as a good faith effort to do so.

They have become increasingly odd. They were FOR the Individual Mandate for Healthcare as opposed to the Single Payer System offered by the Democrats UNTIL the Democrats, sensing no movement from the GOP, adopted the Individual Mandate into their bill, THEN the GOP was opposed to it.
And they still are.
And they are still against a single payer system.
What are they for?
hmmm.
Repeal and replace.
Goodie.
Replace with what?

<crickets>
~~
Immigration: all they know is they are against whatever the Democrats propose. Their own plan, long term, as Romney put it the other day is completely undefined.
It's like getting a promise to pay from a drunk.
~
Cap and Trade: It was McCain's idea!!! Now that it's been accepted as workable by the Democrats, he opposed. And so it the rest of the GOP.

Joe(Ppphfftttt)Nation

oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 26 Jun, 2012 03:54 pm
@Joe Nation,
Joe Nation wrote:
She was bared from speaking on the floor of the State Legislature, a place she was elected by the people to speak for them.
That, in a democratic republic, is a big deal.


Meh. After the 2008 Michigan Democratic Primary, the Democrats have no standing to complain about democracy.



Joe Nation wrote:
And, the weasels who bared her now say that is wasn't the word 'vagina' that upset them, it was the 'no means no.' Sure. Yeah.....whatever.


Well, yes. They have a legitimate heartfelt position, and she was making it sound like they were some creepy guy trying to sexually assault her.



Joe Nation wrote:
To make matters worse, if they could be, they did reveal just how little respect they have for the women legislators involved. They say now the women were having 'temper tantrums' and that baring them was akin to giving a kid a 'time-out.' A kid. "Go away little girl, you bother me."


The Republicans were a lot more diplomatic about it than I'd have been. But then I've never had a strong grasp of diplomacy.

I commend the Republicans for their restraint.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 26 Jun, 2012 03:55 pm
@parados,
parados wrote:
oralloy wrote:
In any case, she was was only barred from speaking on the floor for a single day. Hardly a big deal.


Considering she was barred from speaking on the only day they could speak about the bill prior to the vote, it was a big deal.


I was not aware of that. Still, the Republicans had to respond to her sleazy insinuation somehow. They were a lot more diplomatic about it than I'd have been.
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Tue 26 Jun, 2012 04:00 pm
@Joe Nation,
Joe Nation wrote:
It's as if the GOP doesn't understand what participatory democracy is.


The GOP are not the ones who disenfranchised Michigan in the 2008 Democratic Primary.



Joe Nation wrote:
Nationally, they have lost the concept of compromise.


Both parties have.



Joe Nation wrote:
The Speaker of the House can't even bring himself to say the word. He will say "Find common ground." but then doesn't offer anything that could be construed as a good faith effort to do so.

They have become increasingly odd. They were FOR the Individual Mandate for Healthcare as opposed to the Single Payer System offered by the Democrats UNTIL the Democrats, sensing no movement from the GOP, adopted the Individual Mandate into their bill, THEN the GOP was opposed to it.
And they still are.
And they are still against a single payer system.
What are they for?
hmmm.
Repeal and replace.
Goodie.
Replace with what?

<crickets>
~~
Immigration: all they know is they are against whatever the Democrats propose. Their own plan, long term, as Romney put it the other day is completely undefined.
It's like getting a promise to pay from a drunk.
~
Cap and Trade: It was McCain's idea!!! Now that it's been accepted as workable by the Democrats, he opposed. And so it the rest of the GOP.

Joe(Ppphfftttt)Nation


Yes. Politics sucks.
nqyringmind
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Jun, 2012 04:26 pm
@amorea,
Quote:
2. All those hypocrite congressmen kiss caress lick and enjoy frequently the vagina.


You sure about that one?
http://i376.photobucket.com/albums/oo201/CookieFromLandover/Phillip-Hinkle-Indiana-gop-with-a-secret-and-a-whipedited.jpg
0 Replies
 
Joe Nation
 
  2  
Reply Tue 26 Jun, 2012 07:48 pm
@oralloy,
This is just politics, oralloy, it's a form of psychosis. It's the same behavior one sees among three and half year olds who want what they want until some other child wants it too. Then it's no good no matter what.

2008 Michigan Democratic Primary
AW...let me kissah boo boo!
That was some pretty childish behavior in the Democratic Party, not the first reported incident, I assure you. The whole, we want our State primary to be first, movement could have been solved in much better ways. Now, we in the Democratic Party are as united as we have ever been which is to say not so much as our monolithic myopic puritanical cohorts across the aisle but better than we would have been had we lost the 2008 election to the likes of McCain/Palin.

yipes
Joe(what a debacle)Nation
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  2  
Reply Tue 26 Jun, 2012 08:36 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
They were a lot more diplomatic about it than I'd have been.


I am curious. What would you have done that would have been less diplomatic?
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Sun 8 Jul, 2012 12:47 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:
oralloy wrote:
They were a lot more diplomatic about it than I'd have been.


I am curious. What would you have done that would have been less diplomatic?


Instead of using official disciplinary measures, I'd have just been rude back at her -- maybe even said some offensive things on live TV if I could manage it.

I'd try to assess the degree of offense she had given, and try to calculate my own comments to equal hers in offensiveness.

Possibly I'd have also falsely accused her of being a "woman of low virtue" -- not because I really meant it, but just to be more of a jerk if I felt I was not being offensive enough.
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  3  
Reply Sun 8 Jul, 2012 01:04 am
There was a protester who had a sign that was apropos:
"Why can't you say 'vagina' in a roomful of douchebags?". Pretty much sums it up.
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  2  
Reply Sun 8 Jul, 2012 01:08 am
Quote:
Last week, during a debate over a proposed law that would ban all abortions after 20 weeks with no exceptions for the woman’s health, State Representative Lisa Brown (Dem.-West Bloomfield) concluded her impassioned floor speech against the bill by saying, “Finally, Mr. Speaker, I'm flattered that you’re all so interested in my vagina, but ‘no’ means ‘no.’”

Supposedly terribly offended, Majority Floor Leader Jim Stamas (Rep.-Midland) decided that Brown’s word choice violated the decorum of the House and banned her from speaking on the floor until further notice. Although Stamas has avoided commenting publicly on the incident, State Representative Mike Callton (Rep.-Nashville) claimed that “It was so offensive, I don't even want to say it in front of women. I would not say that in mixed company.”

As Brown and others have pointed out, however, “vagina” is the medically correct term; all other alternatives—and there are many—are necessarily less proper, and most are considered obscene. As Brown later asked rhetorically, “What word should I have said?”

The word “vagina” is now regularly used on broadcast television, and online searches of the Congressional Record for the past five sessions reveal that the word was used at least 29 times on the floor of the House or Senate over past ten years. No one objected in any of these cases, and the ability of Congress to do its job was not affected.



The bill itself is offensive. I see nothing to indicate she was anywhere near as offensive as is the concept of censoring people who object to a really stupid law. Apparently she represents the town my relatives lived in and I spent large amounts of my youth in. Good to see it's still a sensible place, as opposed to what large swathes of Michigan seem to have become.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 8 Jul, 2012 03:10 am
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
The bill itself is offensive.


I wasn't offended.



MontereyJack wrote:
I see nothing to indicate she was anywhere near as offensive as is the concept of censoring people who object to a really stupid law.


She was not censored for objecting to a proposed law. She was censured for the way she made it sound like her political opponents were making untoward sexual advances.



MontereyJack wrote:
Good to see it's still a sensible place, as opposed to what large swathes of Michigan seem to have become.


Michigan is doing just fine. The left has been trying to make bizarre over-the-top allegations against the governor (supposedly he is a secret evil overlord plotting to take over the state, dismantle all the unions, and privatize all the local governments, or something), but no one seems to be buying it.

Aside from that, it seems like we've stopped arguing about garbage from Canada. The statewide silly topic this decade is bridges to Canada. Rolling Eyes
MontereyJack
 
  2  
Reply Sun 8 Jul, 2012 03:36 am
Quote:
She was censured for the way she made it sound like her political opponents were making untoward sexual advances.


From what was reported, if you actually think that,. or if they actually thought that, you people really have sick fantasies/imaginations. It was a political hack job on her, pure and simple
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 8 Jul, 2012 04:32 am
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
oralloy wrote:
She was censured for the way she made it sound like her political opponents were making untoward sexual advances.


From what was reported, if you actually think that,. or if they actually thought that, you people really have sick fantasies/imaginations.


Her snide insinuation was blatant. It is silly to deny it.



MontereyJack wrote:
It was a political hack job on her, pure and simple


Maybe she'll be more civil towards her political opponents now. If not, there will likely be more of the same in the future.

Like I said before, if it were my call, I'd just be offensive right back at her. But I suspect that the Republicans will just keep on disciplining her as necessary.
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  3  
Reply Mon 9 Jul, 2012 06:37 pm
I was right. You really are sick. Had nothing to do with "untoward sexual advances". Exactly the opposite, in fact. She was saying, stay OUT of other people's sex lives and lives in general.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 9 Jul, 2012 07:46 pm
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
I was right. You really are sick. Had nothing to do with "untoward sexual advances". Exactly the opposite, in fact. She was saying, stay OUT of other people's sex lives and lives in general.


No, she implied it. It was quite blatant.

If she doesn't learn her lesson (and extremists like her never do), she'll get punished again the next time she steps out of line.
MontereyJack
 
  2  
Reply Mon 9 Jul, 2012 09:39 pm
bullshit. no implication. it's completely obvious what she was saying, and it had nothing to do with sexual advances. it had to do with legislators trying to intrude themselves into other people's business by trying to pass a probably unconstitutional law, which is precisely what the far right wing has been trying to do at every opportunity since 1973. If you had been paying attention at all for the last 40 years that would be obvious, not your and the legislators' pathetic attempt to spin it differently. The legislators are the extremists, not her.
Quote:
State Representative Mike Callton (Rep.-Nashville) claimed that “It was so offensive, I don't even want to say it in front of women. I would not say that in mixed company.”



Since Callton is completely clueless, I will assure him that every woman he will ever come in contact with is already completely familiar with the word "vagina", even though he is apparently not. Which says something about the quality and knowledge of the majority of Michigan's legislators. The word "abysmal" comes to mind.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » The congress and the word "vagina"
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/26/2022 at 01:49:53