cshort wrote:

drsmooth wrote:

cshort wrote:

Phan In Phlorida wrote:Jews in east Ukrane being told by the pro-Russia militants to register. Lovely.

Time top draw another line that Putin can cross.

yeah it's pretty much as black & white as that, Senator McCain

Was actually pointing out the silliness of even stating there's a line to cross. Anything we've come out with is completely ignored by Putin. Barry just likes to make himself sound tough, but if that makes you feel better, let him keep doing it.

ok but your post was kind of mccain-y

my facebook feed is regularly filled with posts where people point out some crazy mayor or state rep in Missouri or Alabama who said a dumb thing and then go on about how all Republicans are crazy. kind of amazed/almost impressed that a Democratic state senator trying to sell crateloads of weaponry to terrorists hasn't put a hitch in Team Blue's step

what response are you looking for from us about Yee? maybe you should post it on your FB feed

So it's like Iran Contra lite?

I don't think it's been brought up on this board yet or maybe I missed it. Is it big in the news? It's not making it over here.

If some dem is really selling weapons to a terrorist group, then I hope they spend the rest of their days behind bars. A traitor is bad enough, but one that is helping violence to occur is even worse.

Leland Yee in California, JH posted the link a while back. here:

The 65-year-old Yee has pleaded not guilty to gun trafficking and corruption charges that accuse him of accepting bribes in exchange for promises of political favors. The San Francisco Democrat is alleged to have traded his political juice for money to pay off campaign debts as he pursued a run for secretary of state, caught in wiretapped conversations with undercover FBI agents offering to broker an international arms deal and carry out political favors for bribes.

The case originated as an investigation into Asian organized crime and Raymond "Shrimp Boy" Chow, a central figure in the indictment.

Thursday's hearing primarily dealt with whether the defendants and their lawyers would be barred from making public any of the evidence the government must now turn over as they prepare for trial. Breyer sided with the government's demand that the material be kept under wraps, disclosing that he had added familiarity with the evidence because he was one of the local federal judges to approve the government wiretaps.

dude was going to run for secretary of state until all this was found out...he was 'anti-gun' unless he was running htem himself

what's unclear to me is how this is related to some republican whoever in wherevertown USA

i've noticed that housh always drops into the politics thread on fridays are drops a lil nugget to fire pacino up and ruin his weekend. v sneaky

the response I would like is a little perspective to realize that it's a stupid idea that some backwater Republican mayor making a racist comment reflects significantly on the Republican party

td11 wrote:i've noticed that housh always drops into the politics thread on fridays are drops a lil nugget to fire pacino up and ruin his weekend. v sneaky

oh no way am i getting into this on my day off. sorry pac!! and godspeed

poll and after poll shows that a republican voter is more racist than and independent or democrat tends to be. one person doesn't show that, but polls do. not sure what else to say and im havin' a friday, so i'll bow out now.

yeah and Team Blue keeps repping a prez who gives no fucks about torture or civil liberties

we win I guess

sorry I'm kinda drunk I'll stop

jesus christ

Houshphandzadeh wrote:yeah and Team Blue keeps repping a prez who gives no fucks about torture or civil liberties

we win I guess

sorry I'm kinda drunk I'll stop

Dont forget that Rupublicans hate women!

Stay thirsty, my friend.

Werthless wrote:

Houshphandzadeh wrote:yeah and Team Blue keeps repping a prez who gives no #$!&@ about torture or civil liberties

we win I guess

sorry I'm kinda drunk I'll stop

Dont forget that Rupublicans hate women!

Stay thirsty, my friend.

Do you really dispute that there's much more of an emphasis on the Republican side on controlling women's sexuality? If you have examples of Democrats wanting to limit access to condoms because "actions should have consequences" or whatever, please, share.

Tom Edsall in the NYT had a piece about this the other day, on why abortion remains as divisive as ever even as marriage equality declines as an issue.

both sides do it

with each other

pacino wrote:poll and after poll shows that a republican voter is more racist than and independent or democrat tends to be. one person doesn't show that, but polls do. not sure what else to say and im havin' a friday, so i'll bow out now.

:computernumbers:

dajafi wrote:

Werthless wrote:

Houshphandzadeh wrote:yeah and Team Blue keeps repping a prez who gives no #$!&@ about torture or civil liberties

we win I guess

sorry I'm kinda drunk I'll stop

Dont forget that Rupublicans hate women!

Stay thirsty, my friend.

Do you really dispute that there's much more of an emphasis on the Republican side on controlling women's sexuality? If you have examples of Democrats wanting to limit access to condoms because "actions should have consequences" or whatever, please, share.

Tom Edsall in the NYT had a piece about this the other day, on why abortion remains as divisive as ever even as marriage equality declines as an issue.

Yes, some Republicans have unsavory opinions about women that I disagree with. But to piggy-back on Housh's comments about generalizing from them, liberal politicians often paint the GOP as a collection of women haters. And that's not fair to the vast majority of conservative politicians who don't share the views of Todd Akin. One other example of the gender-baiting (can I call it a dog-whistle, or is that reserved for conservatives?) that tends to come up as we approach elections is the earning power of women vs. men. I don't think I need to explain why "77%" is both misleading and divisive, and a wedge statistic that liberals use. President Obama doesn't pay his female cabinet members the same salaries as the men, but that's not likely to get liberals excited, is it? I understand that politicians are trying to win elections, but we're passing laws with demonstrable costs on businesses to address problems that are largely not present.

Dajafi, I think you missed Housh's point. It's not that liberals are sometimes anti-women, too. It's that most conservatives aren't either. The better analogy would be if I had claimed, in response to the story about Yee, that liberals were all selfish hypocritical law-breakers. (I'm sure there is some conservative in the blogosphere who made that very argument.) I do enjoy generalizing about liberals, but I usually am quoting the actual words of liberals in this thread when I do.

Here's an interesting article i read the other day on differences between men and women: http://www.theatlantic.com/features/arc ... ap/359815/


As an aside, and this is my opinion, the standing of men in divorce court proceedings tends not to be one of equality. These aren't gender-neutral proceedings when both parents request custody of children. Whether you think that is right or wrong is a separate story, but I would appreciate it if liberals would apply the same stringent criteria of disparate impact even to policies that they support. I think I posted this article before, but it appears that the Consumer Protection Bureau may be racist (according to disparate impact analysis)!!111!!

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1 ... 1516531650

Based on how they vote, certainly at the state level, I think you're dead wrong that the "vast majority" of Republican officeholders don't share Todd Akin's worldview. Whether or not that makes them "women haters," I'd feel pretty comfortable arguing that most Republican officials, with the possible exception of those on the coasts, are "slut shamers" who, to use Edsall's frame, are very comfortable condemning those who have sex outside of marriage.

As for your "generalizing about liberals," I know you think it's adorable and charming. For what it's worth, I think it makes you look unserious and at least a little dishonest. But by all means, carry on.

Well, you are very serious. Always. You can take that as a compliment, since the reverse was meant as an insult to me!