23
   

American Conservatism In 2012 & Beyond

 
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 01:20 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Try as I might, I simply don't understand why they found Romney's comment about binders of women so offensive and deserving of derision.


wasn't even on my radar, but then I'm not a liberal. I think it fell into the narrative of the "war on women" and his ivory tower world view. Of all the reasons I didn't support Romney, his binder comment didn't make the list.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 01:34 pm
@JPB,
Romney's "binder" comment only proved once again that he has no idea about the average American. He lacks the normal sensitivities of others who are not "rich."
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 02:06 pm
@cicerone imposter,
How did it prove it CI?

Don't dodge the question.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 02:37 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
The proof is in the pudding; the many media commentaries talked about it. If you missed it, that's your problem, not mine.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 03:14 pm
@JPB,
Undoubtedly it fell into the ridiculous War on Women element of the Obama campaign, but I can't for the life of me figure out how.

The entire War on Women shibboleth was a cynical ploy to capture the votes of single-issue women.

There is nothing about the conservative position on the Administration's requirement that religious institutions provide insurance that includes reimbursement for contraception, that can rationally be interpreted as a desire to ban access to contraception - the hyperbole of the vapid Ms Fluke not-with-standing.

I've no doubt that there are reasonable and decent people on the Pro-Choice side of the abortion issue, just as there on the same on the Pro-Life side. It is an obviously difficult issue for Americans, but it serves no positive purpose to deliberately and, quite frankly, malignantly mischaracterize the position of either side.

The overwhelming majority of those who can be said to be Pro-Life, base their stance on sincere and fundamental beliefs concerning when life begins and the sanctity of same, and not on a desire to force women into some second-class status.

Mitt Romney was not running explicitly or implicitly to drive women's rights back a couple of centuries. The people who have idiotically declared that he did are...well, idiots.

Todd Aiken is, himself, an idiot and a self-centered one at that. His absurd comment about "legitimate rape" was the mouthing of a moron. On the one hand he was referencing a tiny sliver of actual rape cases wherein consentual sex was later claimed to be rape for reasons of spite and/or greed, and on the other he made utterly absurd claims about female biology. He was a disgrace, and conservatives and the GOP condemned him from day one and called for him to withdraw. Undoubtely much of the outrage had to do with his doomed candidacy, but certainly not all.

In any case it is ridiculous to suggest, as Democrats, did that Aiken was representive of the Right's view on women, abortion and rape.

Some of the virulent despisers, in this forum, of the Tea Party point to Aiken as the poster child of the movement. Nonsense. He wasn't supported by local Tea Party members for these comments and positions and since when does any group bat 100% with their candidates. I doubt Democrats want to hold up folks like Alan Grayson, William J Jefferson, Wilbur Mills, Kerry Gauthier, and Albert Bustamante (to name but a few) as exemplars of their party.

Richard Mourdock's comments are a different story.

(Cue the onslaught of outraged A2K Liberal reactions)

Consider this, if one believes that the lives of unborn children are sacred, why would the life of an unborn child conceived by a terrible crime, but entirely innocent of the malignancy of its father be any less sacred?

It is certainly not obscene to consider the lives of the unborn to be sacred. You and others may not agree, but it clearly comes down to a matter of opinion and belief, and not fact.

Starting from the principle that all unborn life is sacred, it actually makes sense that a child concieved by rape should not be aborted simply because of the circumstances of its conception.

Clearly, this is a difficult argument to be made in the face of the revulsion we have for the crime and the sympathy we have for the victim, but it is entirely consistent with the basic premise.

There are good and just reasons to believe that a woman should have the right to abort a child conceived through rape, but for someone who holds that all unborn life is sacred, it is a tough exception to make.

His comments about the child born of rape perhaps being a blessing from God were certainly impolitic, but, again, there were entirely consistent with his beliefs.

If you believe that all things flow from God and that all events, good and bad, have a purpose in his plan, then it follows that you would believe that the child born of rape is part of that plan. It's hard to imagine the most secular of his opponents contending that the child bore the sins of the father.

This is not to say that I agree with Mourdock but that I respect the consistency of his beliefs .

If you don't share those beliefs, you will not want him to represent you in congress and that is all well and good. What is not, in my opinion, is to suggest that he was demonstrating some underlying hatred for women or an utter lack of appreciation for the consequences of the crime of rape.

Unfortunately he spoke from the heart, rather than his political brain, but that's hard to condemn.


Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 03:15 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

The proof is in the pudding; the many media commentaries talked about it. If you missed it, that's your problem, not mine.


CI: The Unartful Dodger.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 03:20 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
No, you're wrong as usual.

Here's a whole slew of them just by an easy Search.
Quote:
Romney's 'Binders Full of Women' Gaffe Sparks Instant ...
The internet goes wild following Mitt Romney's unfortunate comment during Tuesday's presidential debate. Here are the best of the best.
www.wired.com/underwire/2012/10/romney-binders-full-of... - Cached
Romney's 'binders full of women’ gaffe, and why women ...
What fun the Internet is having with this four-word phrase: Binders Full of Women. If anything gets remembered from last night’s presidential debate it will be Mitt ...
www.theglobeandmail.com/life/the-hot-button/romneys...
Romney’s “Binders” gaffe heightens campaigns’ focus ...
Romney’s “Binders” gaffe heightens campaigns’ focus on women voters. Posted on: 6:03 pm, October 17, 2012, by Eli Stokols
kdvr.com/2012/10/17/romneys-binders-gaffe-heightens... - Cached
Romney's 'binders full of women' gaffe goes viral - ITV News
Read Romney's 'binders full of women' gaffe goes viral latest on ITV News. All the World news
www.itv.com/news/.../romneys-binders-full...gaffe-goes-viral - Cached
Romney's 'Binder Full Of Women' Gaffe - Business Insider
HEMPSTEAD, N.Y. — Asked about pay equity for women, Mitt Romney launched the meme of the evening with his reply during the presidential debate Tuesday night. It was ...
www.businessinsider.com/romneys-binder-full-of-women... - Cached
Romney's 'Binders Full of Women' Gaffe Inspires Amazing ...
Sure, Mitt Romney said way more infuriating things about us womenfolk during this week's presidential debate than the fact that he was presented with "binders of them."
jezebel.com/5952889/romneys-binders-full-of-women-gaffe...
‘Binders Full Of Women’, Romney Gaffe, Gets Tumblr And ...
Mitt Romney’s “binders full of women” gaffe at last night’s debate set off a viral firestorm of gender-themed parodies, including a Tumblr, a ...
techcrunch.com/2012/10/17/binders-full-of-women-romney... - Cached
More results from techcrunch.com »
Binders Full Of Women: Romney Gaffe During 2nd Debate Spark ...
Romney's horrendous "Binders full of women" gaffe causes one of the wildest social media frenzies for the 2012 presidential campaign yet.
www.idigitaltimes.com/.../binders-full-women-romney-gaffe... - Cached
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 03:25 pm
@cicerone imposter,
So you don't have an opinion of your own? You can only provide the opinions of others?
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 03:29 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
You miss the whole point; they support what I said - and what you asked me.
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  0  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 03:41 pm
@JPB,
JPB wrote:

Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Try as I might, I simply don't understand why they found Romney's comment about binders of women so offensive and deserving of derision.


wasn't even on my radar, but then I'm not a liberal. I think it fell into the narrative of the "war on women" and his ivory tower world view. Of all the reasons I didn't support Romney, his binder comment didn't make the list.


Maybe these were Yankee females with Quaker pasts.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  2  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 04:07 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Bullshit.

Todd Akin was elected by his constituents to represent them in Congress. As such, he proposed legislation that was voted on by all members of the House. My supposedly moderate R Congressman saw reason to support his bill and vote in the affirmative. That man is no longer in Congress.

If morons are getting elected and sent to Washington then it behooves us to place closer attention to how our own representatives vote on the bills put forward by these morons. That he was on the Science and Technology committee was a reflection of the Republican leadership that put him there. The Republican leadership is responsible for the way their party is perceived by the public. This wasn't about Todd Akin being a moron. It was about what happens once a moron gets elected.

Nationwide, there have been many bills at the state level that intend to determine through the legislative process what a woman can and can't do with her body. That's a party platform position and has nothing to do with the occasional moron.
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 05:32 pm
@JPB,
JPB wrote:
This wasn't about Todd Akin being a moron. It was about what happens once a moron gets elected.

Nationwide, there have been many bills at the state level that intend to determine through the legislative process what a woman can and can't do with her body. That's a party platform position and has nothing to do with the occasional moron.


Nicely stated. (I started to highlight just the first quoted paragraph for that, but I like the second one too.)
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 05:57 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Undoubtedly it fell into the ridiculous War on Women element of the Obama campaign, but I can't for the life of me figure out how.

The entire War on Women shibboleth was a cynical ploy to capture the votes of single-issue women.

I answered this in the Where Did Romney Screw Up thread, too, but in case you didn't see it there:


Romney, himself, participated in trying to relegate women to second-class status. His answer to unequal pay... is to send women home early to cook dinner? Really?

Republican office holders routinely seek to deny women access to health care and contraception. Republicans rail about Planned Parenthood... which provides women with all kinds of health care.

How many candidates made offensive comments about rape (and pregnancies from rape)? To what political party did every single one belong? And how many prominent Republicans spoke out against these offenses? (Not many.)


Republicans have a serious image problem when it comes to women's issues, mainly because their "conservative" viewpoint is about 50 years outdated.

As a father with two daughters... you're not going to win me over by telling me they would have to carry a rapist's child. You're not going to win me over by trying to tell me that a rape has to be "legitimate" or "forcible" in order to taken seriously.


Here's my prediction: You will keep denying that, as a party, Republicans have serious issues with women taking an equal place in the world with men. And Republicans will keep pushing forward with these repugnant policies. And Democrats will keep winning elections.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 06:21 pm
@DrewDad,
"Fifty years outdated?" LOL That belief remains from the beginning of most cultures of this world.
0 Replies
 
IRFRANK
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 07:23 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Because "binders full of women" shows a lack of personal understanding. Considers women a stack of resumes. He should have said , I personally interviewed many women and when they were qualified I hired them, at equal salary. Obama mentioned specific women, and came across much more sincere.
IRFRANK
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 07:23 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Maybe you should ask a woman.
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 08:01 pm
@IRFRANK,
If it disagrees with his opinion he dosent care what women think.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 09:10 pm
@IRFRANK,
I'm assuming JPB is one. You don't value her opinion?
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 09:11 pm
@IRFRANK,
Well, if that's all there is too it, it's a pretty pathetic charge.
0 Replies
 
IRFRANK
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Nov, 2012 09:13 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Yes I do. And it's about men telling women what they can and cannot do.
 

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
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/09/2022 at 08:08:41