rigorousintuition.ca

Clinton is currently getting an ass whoopin' over her emails and is looking like:

Emails and Syria.

Nordic » Sun Oct 09, 2016 6:23 pm wrote:Agreed, in that what Trump said is something that cannot be defended in any way. It wasn't the word "pussy" but the gleeful admission to serial sexual assault

So they have to bail on him lest they be tarred with the "he supported the guy who said_______" brush.

Poof!

I agree with you and Jack Riddler on the point. I feel tho, as a flailing hail Mary, it was a good move for Trump to bring out some of Clinton's abuse victims at
the debate and before the debate. It's hard for Democrats and Clinton to deflect or defend that. As much as Huffpo will try.
I guess Trump figures, if the ship is the Hendenberg, he might as well try and crash the other blimp as well.

It's a weird election, as less than even a decade ago you'd never see a Republican nominee not only trashing the Iraq war or calling it based on lies, but
dropping verbal nukes continuously on the Bush family, Mccain, the neocons and the rest of the GOP establishment. Very odd times

again blame the woman for her husbands deeds.....misogyny


if when he wasn't convicted of anything ...she is still responsible ......yes of course some think women are responsible for what men do

misogynistic pigs

So why, to Democrats(and Republicans), crass behavior worse than mass murder in Libya, Iraq, ect?

8bitagent » Mon Oct 10, 2016 2:11 am wrote:So why, to Democrats(and Republicans), crass behavior worse than mass murder in Libya, Iraq, ect?

That's the million dead-body question, isn't it?

From FB

Luciane Bohne

Threats against Russia

You know that threatening a nation violates the UN Charter, right?
And you know that violating the UN Charter is violating the Constitution, right? And of course you know that the Constitution bids us "to cultivate the good opinion of the world," right?

But you're still voting for Clinton?

So why, to Democrats(and Republicans), crass behavior worse than mass murder in Libya, Iraq, ect?

Kind of a rhetorical question, I presume, but I would say that mass murder in foreign countries is something Americans have come to expect, except it is framed as "defense of liberty" and "fighting them over there before they come here" and other such nonsense... the vast majority hardly pay attention to international news. Most Americans get what little news they absorb from TV, and most networks barely cover international news these days. Print media is only marginally better, and much of what is covered is so full of propaganda it's like a fish not recognizing water.
Most assume (rightly, I suspect), no matter who is nominally in charge, we will and should continue our never-ending war on the nebulous enemy of "terror.". Actually, scratch that, most don't think about it whatsoever, and you would be the Debbie Downer of any social gathering to bring up such a topic and likely reported by half the people there as a potential terrorist who has been radicalized. Most Americans don't care what kind of scorched Earth we leave in the wake of our military misadventures as long as they can feel like they're standing for something by agreeing with their preferred echo chamber that either Trump or Clinton is "just the absolute worst," mostly because we pay a lot more attention as a nation and culture to one than the other.

Based on some conversations I've had tonight, it's a lot easier for Americans to consider that Trump is a misogynist who sets both a horrible example for their children and a frightening direction for our country than it is to consider that the whole tree is rotten. American use of military force has become so blasé, and its consequences so ignored, that it barely registers as background noise. Sad but true.

The US has successfully built war in the middle east into its definition of normal. What is strange to me is how many of the same people and entities who were most opposed to Iraq are equivocal on Syria.

Nordic » Mon Oct 10, 2016 7:21 am wrote:

8bitagent » Mon Oct 10, 2016 2:11 am wrote:So why, to Democrats(and Republicans), crass behavior worse than mass murder in Libya, Iraq, ect?

That's the million dead-body question, isn't it?

<Albright> ".... it is very difficult, but we think the price is worth it" </>
<L'Oreal> It's cos we're worth it </>

....again blame the woman for her husbands deeds....

....surely the substance of the accusation is her highly politically-involved role as Bill's unofficial under-boss covering-up for and trying to silence or discredit the women complaining about his predatory behaviour iirc....

semper occultus » Mon Oct 10, 2016 12:45 pm wrote:

....again blame the woman for her husbands deeds....

....surely the substance of the accusation is her highly politically-involved role as Bill's unofficial under-boss covering-up for and trying to silence or discredit the women complaining about his predatory behaviour iirc....

Totally.

Hilary is an opportunistic misogynist who is only interested in "women's issues" in as far as it will increase her chances of election / access to power.

She would throw the right of due process under the bus OR throw rape victims under a train (just like the Mena kids, eh), whatever was the flavour of the moment.

how dare a wife be pissed at a woman

men telling a woman how to react ...of course

she has to react the way a man says she has to react..that's the law


not only is a woman responsible for her husbands deeds....she has to react to them in a manner a man approves of

Follow
Joy Behar Verified account
@JoyVBehar
Comedian, Writer, Actor and Co-Host of The View. Instagram: joyvbehar
PatsyLong Retweeted
ABC News Politics ‏@ABCPolitics 13h13 hours ago
FLASHBACK: Trump called Bill Clinton "terrific," his accusers "terrible" and "unattractive" http://abcn.ws/2dpfTvp

PatsyLong ‏@SweetPeaPatsy Oct 8
The Trump women learned long ago how to protect their privates parts when Trump is around them.

seemslikeadream » Mon Oct 10, 2016 1:11 pm wrote:how dare a wife be pissed at a woman

men telling a woman how to react ...of course

she has to react the way a man says she has to react..that's the law


not only is a woman responsible for her husbands deeds....she has to react to them in a manner a man approves of

Are you saying -

Anything said criticizing a woman is misogyny
Hilary is a woman
So anything said against Hilary is misogyny.

So anyone who criticizes Hilary is a misogynist.

?