Hillary Photo

[Richard G]

http://boortz.com/images/hitlery_priceless.jpg

[Ed]

You think he is really slipping her the digit?

Where did this come from any background?

[WildCat]

But look where Hillary's left hand is!

[Suddenly]

I'm trying to figure out the insult. Is it her being elite? Smart? Or is it the fat thing, since we know a woman's only worth is her physical appearance...


Anyway...


I would like to thank RichardG for pointing out that the right has now retaken the "stupidist political insult photo" back from the left's equally stupid but at least not misogynic "Bush holding the book upside down" photo.

[aerocontrols]

So he's got his fingers crossed. Big deal. Unless I'm missing something...

It seems to me that the 'best' this is is a childish prank. Woopity. Hillary was just doing her job.


Originally posted by Suddenly
I would like to thank RichardG for pointing out that the right has now retaken the "stupidist political insult photo" back from the left's equally stupid but at least not misogynic "Bush holding the book upside down" photo.

The upside down book photo is a fake. This one seems real.

MattJ

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Suddenly
I'm trying to figure out the insult. Is it her being elite? Smart? Or is it the fat thing, since we know a woman's only worth is her physical appearance...


Anyway...


I would like to thank RichardG for pointing out that the right has now retaken the "stupidist political insult photo" back from the left's equally stupid but at least not misogynic "Bush holding the book upside down" photo.

Considering this is RichardG we're talking about here, I'd say it's being smart.

Sour grapes and all that.

[Suddenly]

Originally posted by aerocontrols


The upside down book photo is a fake. This one seems real.



Is that a good or bad thing?

I knew the book was fake, which is why it goes under the "stupid insult" category. It also, ironically, seemed to illustrate the shortcomings of the side producing it, a vicious readyness to pounce on any percieved intellectual weakness.



This picture seems likewise to be consistant with several stereotypes about the right.

Of course not all liberals are smug know-it-alls, and not all righties are immature punks that fear strong women, but the irony of these pictures is striking in that regard.

[Otther]

Where is the misogyny in the picture? Is it just me or is Suddenly grasping for something? For the love of God, you can dislike someone irregardless of their gender. Next time a woman disagrees with me I'll jump up and down and say the only reason she's saying that is because she hates men.

[Troll]

Originally posted by Otther
Where is the misogyny in the picture? Is it just me or is Suddenly grasping for something? For the love of God, you can dislike someone irregardless of their gender. Next time a woman disagrees with me I'll jump up and down and say the only reason she's saying that is because she hates men.

he's just really in touch with his feminine side, and he tends to lean towards the left, as such he feels all things about any woman is misogynistic, and or the result of someone allegedly fearing a woman with any sort of power.

[Zep]

Gosh.

Who's to say that the conversation just prior to this didn't go like this:

Hillary: Do you think you will be home soon?

Grunt: I'm due to go home in a month, ma'am, with luck (shows crossed fingers).

Hillary: You've done a fine job, young man. Let me congratulate you.

{camera catches the moment}

:p :p :p

[Suddenly]

Originally posted by Otther
Where is the misogyny in the picture? Is it just me or is Suddenly grasping for something? For the love of God, you can dislike someone irregardless of their gender. Next time a woman disagrees with me I'll jump up and down and say the only reason she's saying that is because she hates men.

I'll ask my wife. Maybe I am just being an idiot.

I do think that there is a difference between a disagreement and a insult mainly demeaning someone by virtue of their gender. She is "smart," "elite" and "fat". Just sounds to me like she's an "uppity smarty pants bitch" or some such.

My comments, I suspect, are going to only be agreed with by those that agree with me, and are not exactly going to have a whole lot of persuasive value. I'm just a bit sensitive about insults against women for being smart or outspoken, and that is what I see here. I've seen to many unhappy women trapped by men that use degradation and insult to keep them down. Tell her she is a worthless idiot long enough and she starts to believe it. I personally find any hint of that completely repulsive.

Maybe I'm just making up for the fact that I've had to defend to many abusive men in my life and I'm oversensitive.

I see that caption and I see in my mind a guy admitting to me he beats his wife and sees nothing wrong with it because if he didn't she "wouldn't know her place" as she is "too smart for her own good."

So maybe I am overreacting. I'm not so sure, but I can absolutely see why others would come to that conclusion.

More irony: I don't care much for Hillary either. I found her failure to acknowledge the help she got writing her last book to be inexcusable, and I don't like her ideas in general.

[Troll]

Originally posted by Zep
Gosh.

Who's to say that the conversation just prior to this didn't go like this:

Hillary: Do you think you will be home soon?

Grunt: I'm due to go home in a month, ma'am, with luck (shows crossed fingers).

Hillary: You've done a fine job, young man. Let me congratulate you.

{camera catches the moment}

:p :p :p

Most excellent point. But what's wrong with using it in fun and without fear of being called a misongynist?;)

[Zep]

Suddenly, at least your dislike of Hillary stems from something vaguely rational and sensible. I would expect the situation is that you could shake her hand too, but you wouldn't vote for her.

FYI, I chose to ignore the mind-set of the caption-writer. Acknowledging them just encourages them, draws attention.

[Troll]

Originally posted by Suddenly


I'll ask my wife. Maybe I am just being an idiot.

I do think that there is a difference between a disagreement and a insult mainly demeaning someone by virtue of their gender. She is "smart," "elite" and "fat". Just sounds to me like she's an "uppity smarty pants bitch" or some such.

My comments, I suspect, are going to only be agreed with by those that agree with me, and are not exactly going to have a whole lot of persuasive value. I'm just a bit sensitive about insults against women for being smart or outspoken, and that is what I see here. I've seen to many unhappy women trapped by men that use degradation and insult to keep them down. Tell her she is a worthless idiot long enough and she starts to believe it. I personally find any hint of that completely repulsive.

Maybe I'm just making up for the fact that I've had to defend to many abusive men in my life and I'm oversensitive.

I see that caption and I see in my mind a guy admitting to me he beats his wife and sees nothing wrong with it because if he didn't she "wouldn't know her place" as she is "too smart for her own good."

So maybe I am overreacting. I'm not so sure, but I can absolutely see why others would come to that conclusion.

More irony: I don't care much for Hillary either. I found her failure to acknowledge the help she got writing her last book to be inexcusable, and I don't like her ideas in general.

Hey, I've searched her voting record and as I've said before, she ain't the worst I've seen. But I don't support her because she's not the best either. We've had this discussion before which is why I took a personal issue with you claiming misogyny and fear of powerful women. I could list you several women of power that I admire and do not fear and aerocontrols asked me about one in particular to make that point quite clear the last time this subject came up.

My only disappointment here is that you seemed to have ignored all things prior to now.:(

[Troll]

Originally posted by Zep
Suddenly, at least your dislike of Hillary stems from something vaguely rational and sensible. I would expect the situation is that you could shake her hand too, but you wouldn't vote for her.

FYI, I chose to ignore the mind-set of the caption-writer. Acknowledging them just encourages them, draws attention.

And yet yopu posted in response to it? Seems to have gained your attention.:p

[Otther]

Out of curiosity... what is the picture's "smartest woman on earth" thing in reference to?

[Zep]

Originally posted by Troll
And yet you posted in response to it? Seems to have gained your attention.:p Yours too, I see. Or was it just that I was here?

[Troll]

Originally posted by Zep
Yours too, I see. Or was it just that I was here?

yeah but see, I'm defending the first amendment. You're just going off on someone's use of it. :p haha

[Zep]

Originally posted by Troll

yeah but see, I'm defending the first amendment. You're just going off on someone's use of it. :p haha I am? I'm just ignoring them, and suggesting others do the same. The first ammendment guarantees free SPEECH, not a free HEARING.

Incidentally, since when does the US first constitutional ammendment apply over here on the other side of the Pacific Ocean? Not that I'm decrying it, mind.

[Suddenly]

Originally posted by Troll


Hey, I've searched her voting record and as I've said before, she ain't the worst I've seen. But I don't support her because she's not the best either. We've had this discussion before which is why I took a personal issue with you claiming misogyny and fear of powerful women. I could list you several women of power that I admire and do not fear and aerocontrols asked me about one in particular to make that point quite clear the last time this subject came up.

My only disappointment here is that you seemed to have ignored all things prior to now.:(

This has nothing to do with Hillary, rather the implication that she is bad because she is smart and outspoken. That is the point, I find it abhorrant to imply that it is wrong for a woman to be smart, confident, and to speak her mind. I have stated my reasons why I may be a little sensitive in this regard. You seem to be missing the point.

Bluntly speaking, Regardless of your personal opinion of the particular woman, do you think it is acceptable to imply that a woman should be ashamed to be smart, confident or outspoken?

1) I think that is the implication of the caption
2) I think that message is misogyny, pure and simple.


One may disagree with my interpretation of the caption. That is understandable. What I don't understand is the apparant belief that I am saying: "Everyone that dislikes Hillary does so because they fear strong women."

I'm saying that in my opinion it is an awful thing to imply a woman should be ashamed for being smart, outspoken and confident. I think that is the upshot of the caption. You may disagree on that point, and I understand. Yes, I may be a bit sensitive about this, but I have good reason.

[Suddenly]

Originally posted by Troll


yeah but see, I'm defending the first amendment. You're just going off on someone's use of it. :p haha

As soon as I am the government attempting to censor speech, you can say you are defending the first amendment. Actually defending constitutional rights involves a little more than just posting on a message board. It usually involves personal risk, taking on the majority, and a hostile government.


If this picture was sought out to be censored for the very same reasons I am using to criticize it, I would not hesitate for a second to do whatever I could fight that censorship. I would hope you would have the sense to be able to distinguish between criticism and attempts to silence, and maybe you are just talking out your rear end on that point, so I'll just let go at that.

[Troll]

Originally posted by Suddenly


This has nothing to do with Hillary, rather the implication that she is bad because she is smart and outspoken. That is the point, I find it abhorrant to imply that it is wrong for a woman to be smart, confident, and to speak her mind. I have stated my reasons why I may be a little sensitive in this regard. You seem to be missing the point.

Bluntly speaking, Regardless of your personal opinion of the particular woman, do you think it is acceptable to imply that a woman should be ashamed to be smart, confident or outspoken?

1) I think that is the implication of the caption
2) I think that message is misogyny, pure and simple.


One may disagree with my interpretation of the caption. That is understandable. What I don't understand is the apparant belief that I am saying: "Everyone that dislikes Hillary does so because they fear strong women."

I'm saying that in my opinion it is an awful thing to imply a woman should be ashamed for being smart, outspoken and confident. I think that is the upshot of the caption. You may disagree on that point, and I understand. Yes, I may be a bit sensitive about this, but I have good reason.

No. The picture has nothing to do with anything than someone more right of her making a joke along the lines of many current popular jokes. Nothing to really do with her level of real intelligence, or her level of being a so caled elitist, or to be even more concise, the size of her nose which as far as liberals go, it's tiny compared to Streisands. haha

Don't take right wing jokes so serious unless you're going to apply it to the left as well. All of this was just a humor thing focused on a particular group. Nothing to fight against here. No rights to protect other than those of the guy that created the dumb thing.

Now if you want to fight it hard, then all I ask is that you apply the same to the opposing side and go back and say the same in roughly 50 or more posts that slammed the right, even if the posts weren't about women.

[Theodore Kurita]

Hey guys, I think it is fake.

Take a look at this zoomed in photo.

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Troll

Don't take right wing jokes so serious unless you're going to apply it to the left as well.

(snip)
Now if you want to fight it hard, then all I ask is that you apply the same to the opposing side and go back and say the same in roughly 50 or more posts that slammed the right, even if the posts weren't about women.

He does. Look at the very first post he put in this thread. See? I knew you had a short memory, but gee-whiz...

[Troll]

Originally posted by Suddenly


As soon as I am the government attempting to censor speech, you can say you are defending the first amendment. Actually defending constitutional rights involves a little more than just posting on a message board. It usually involves personal risk, taking on the majority, and a hostile government.


If this picture was sought out to be censored for the very same reasons I am using to criticize it, I would not hesitate for a second to do whatever I could fight that censorship. I would hope you would have the sense to be able to distinguish between criticism and attempts to silence, and maybe you are just talking out your rear end on that point, so I'll just let go at that.

dude, you, ass, out of, talk, too much.

That post was a joke to Zep. If you take offense to it then I think maybe you need to learn to focus and relax. You seem to be taking this way too freaking personal and to be honest, I think Hillary would have blown it off as a joke and not commented half as hard as you've tried to do here.

*edited to add the following*

Would defending the first amendment also constitue serving in the military and defending all americans regardless of their politcal affiliation? Is there a risk involved there? or did I waste my time because people like you can't see through the political fog?

[Troll]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto


He does. Look at the very first post he put in this thread. See? I knew you had a short memory, but gee-whiz...

You mean this one?


"I'm trying to figure out the insult. Is it her being elite? Smart? Or is it the fat thing, since we know a woman's only worth is her physical appearance...


Anyway...


I would like to thank RichardG for pointing out that the right has now retaken the "stupidist political insult photo" back from the left's equally stupid but at least not misogynic "Bush holding the book upside down" photo."

Seems like an oversensitive thing in the pondering of a "woman only being worth her physical appearance", to me. No. I stand by claims 100%. He began with a "defend women" and followed with a "this is misogynistic and hateful of women in power" thing, and overlooked the joke about one woman.

[Suddenly]

Originally posted by Troll


No. The picture has nothing to do with anything than someone more right of her making a joke along the lines of many current popular jokes. Nothing to really do with her level of real intelligence, or her level of being a so caled elitist, or to be even more concise, the size of her nose which as far as liberals go, it's tiny compared to Streisands. haha So you disagree with my interpretation. I can understand that. I only made that point like 435565 times, give or take several thousand... However, I'm not sure defending is as being "along the lines of many current popular jokes" is much of a defense.

Don't take right wing jokes so serious unless you're going to apply it to the left as well. All of this was just a humor thing focused on a particular group. Nothing to fight against here. No rights to protect other than those of the guy that created the dumb thing. Protect his rights? That is asinine. There is a difference between disliking speech and trying to use the government to silence someone. Either you haven't yet read the last post, or you are being willfully ignorant. I think the message the caption conveys is awful. You are making that opinion into my campaign of censorship to stop everyone from ever saying anything bad about women and trying to position yourself as some sort of noble defender of rights. Bizzare.

As far as going after the left, go back and read the first post. I know in your head I'm some sort of leftist, but as I've said before, it only seems that way because the representivives of the right on this board tend to make poor arguments. The last lawyer that had the office next to mine was convinced I was a die-hard Bushie. She was a lefty, and made silly assertions backed by poor argument. So I argued with her.

During a mock impeachment trial back in '98 I managed to convict Clinton in front of a senate that trended roughly 75% democrat. I'm not a die-hard lefty, but if that makes you feel better to think that, go ahead.



Now if you want to fight it hard, then all I ask is that you apply the same to the opposing side and go back and say the same in roughly 50 or more posts that slammed the right, even if the posts weren't about women.

So, when I say over and over I have a particular problem with implying it is wrong for a woman to be smart and that is the crux of my objection, now you seem to imply that my motives stem from some sort of left-wing allegence. So, are you not paying attention or is this some sort of claim that I am being dishonest about my motivation? Again, look at my first post. See the part about the Bush "book" picture. That was one of the things I drove that aforementioned lefty lawyer crazy over.

Is it that you don't understand that I may see that message different than you, based on my life experiences?

What is it?

[Mr Manifesto]

My guess is that either Troll really is that thick, or he's been taking lessons from Steve Grerard.

[specious_reasons]

You know, I may be a humorless lefty, but if the photo's not faked, he looks like he's crossing his fingers. I just don't get the joke...

Someone willing to explain it?

[Troll]

Originally posted by Suddenly
So you disagree with my interpretation. I can understand that. I only made that point like 435565 times, give or take several thousand... However, I'm not sure defending is as being "along the lines of many current popular jokes" is much of a defense.[/B] Protect his rights? That is asinine. There is a difference between disliking speech and trying to use the government to silence someone. Either you haven't yet read the last post, or you are being willfully ignorant. I think the message the caption conveys is awful. You are making that opinion into my campaign of censorship to stop everyone from ever saying anything bad about women and trying to position yourself as some sort of noble defender of rights. Bizzare.

As far as going after the left, go back and read the first post. I know in your head I'm some sort of leftist, but as I've said before, it only seems that way because the representivives of the right on this board tend to make poor arguments. The last lawyer that had the office next to mine was convinced I was a die-hard Bushie. She was a lefty, and made silly assertions backed by poor argument. So I argued with her.

During a mock impeachment trial back in '98 I managed to convict Clinton in front of a senate that trended roughly 75% democrat. I'm not a die-hard lefty, but if that makes you feel better to think that, go ahead.



So, when I say over and over I have a particular problem with implying it is wrong for a woman to be smart and that is the crux of my objection, now you seem to imply that my motives stem from some sort of left-wing allegence. So, are you not paying attention or is this some sort of claim that I am being dishonest about my motivation? Again, look at my first post. See the part about the Bush "book" picture. That was one of the things I drove that aforementioned lefty lawyer crazy over.

Is it that you don't understand that I may see that message different than you, based on my life experiences?

What is it? [/B]

sorry if I put you on the defensive. But you also repeated the clap-trap of misogyny and fear of a powerful woman. I'm inclined to believe that is the point for you as you keep bringing it up. And that, my friend, is what I'm calling you on, and what you fail to address outside of a "Maybe I'm just making up for the fact that I've had to defend to many abusive men in my life and I'm oversensitive." comment.

Guess what? You are trying to make up for it. It's a freaking joke and all you had to say was, "It's a freaking joke, so what?" Not the repeat of claims you made before.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Why is the fact that he has his fingers crossed an insult? Am I the only one who doesn't get it?

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Originally posted by Theodore Kurita
Hey guys, I think it is fake.

Take a look at this zoomed in photo.

I see the faces of the fallen. Demons. Lyndale was right!

[Troll]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto
My guess is that either Troll really is that thick, or he's been taking lessons from Steve Grerard.

yeah but then you're heavy on the [b]guesswork[/b[ and low on the substance.

And who the hell is Steve Grerard? Seriously?

[Zep]

Yeah. What specious said...

[Troll]

Originally posted by The Central Scrutinizer
Why is the fact that he has his fingers crossed an insult? Am I the only one who doesn't get it?

it's an old childhood thing. a kid makes a promise or other statement and has his fingers crossed and according to the kid it means that he didn't mean it. so in this case it means something along the lines of " I'm shaking hands with a senator like I am happy to see her here, but not really"

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by The Central Scrutinizer
Why is the fact that he has his fingers crossed an insult? Am I the only one who doesn't get it?

I think it's meant to convey the handshake is insincere. If the photo isn't fake, and a soldier, a grown man, does that while shaking hands with a politician, I think it says more about the soldier than the politician.

Troll: Don't you see someone using the fact a woman is 'smart' as grist for a negative joke as a problem?

[Troll]

Originally posted by specious_reasons
You know, I may be a humorless lefty, but if the photo's not faked, he looks like he's crossing his fingers. I just don't get the joke...

Someone willing to explain it?


it's an old childhood thing. a kid makes a promise or other statement and has his fingers crossed and according to the kid it means that he didn't mean it. so in this case it means something along the lines of " I'm shaking hands with a senator like I am happy to see her here, but not really"]

So the real joke is on anyone thinking it's anything more than a childish joke. Like claiming fear of pwerful women and whatnot.

[Troll]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto


I think it's meant to convey the handshake is insincere. If the photo isn't fake, and a soldier, a grown man, does that while shaking hands with a politician, I think it says more about the soldier than the politician.

Troll: Don't you see someone using the fact a woman is 'smart' as grist for a negative joke as a problem?

No more so than a fat joke, a political affilaition joke, a harvard versus yale joke, a difference in miltary branch joke. It's all based upon nothing of any substance. I find being upset by it more of a problem.

And if you doubt it, do a search of the board and find where I've defended or was upset by any less than flattering pisctures of Bush and company.

the only one's freaking here are the left wingers and liberals. :p

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Troll


No more so than a fat joke, a political affilaition joke, a harvard versus yale joke, a difference in miltary branch joke. It's all based upon nothing of any substance. I find being upset by it more of a problem.

And if you doubt it, do a search of the board and find where I've defended or was upset by any less than flattering pisctures of Bush and company.

the only one's freaking here are the left wingers and liberals. :p

Suddenly has said that he might be a little over-sensitive. I can understand that. I've seen women with blacked eyes and knocked-out teeth go back to their partners again and again because they were 'worthless'. I heard one woman give an articulate, insightful speech about how the welfare system could be improved in front of total strangers- someone who was a high school dropout. She had her front teeth missing. That's why I'm a bit sensitive about this sort of joke, too. You can laugh if you like, but I suspect you only find it's funny because you haven't seen what bastards some people can be.

In other words, you're too elite.

[Troll]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto


Suddenly has said that he might be a little over-sensitive. I can understand that. I've seen women with blacked eyes and knocked-out teeth go back to their partners again and again because they were 'worthless'. I heard one woman give an articulate, insightful speech about how the welfare system could be improved in front of total strangers- someone who was a high school dropout. She had her front teeth missing. That's why I'm a bit sensitive about this sort of joke, too. You can laugh if you like, but I suspect you only find it's funny because you haven't seen what bastards some people can be.

In other words, you're too elite.

dude, assuming what I've sen and or been through myself? and you take your postings seriously?

Your annecdote of someone's misfortune isn't enough to cover all and or be all encompassing. You've seen the results? Ever have the guy pull a gun on you when you intervened?

I think it's funny because it's merely a joke and it's got squat to do with a woman being beaten. How freaking melodramatic of a claim are you and the other leftwing nutters going to make to try to say a pic of Hillary and a soldier being used as a joke shows support of abuse by anyone that finds it funny?

I said it yesterday and I'll say it again, You freaking people really reach and grasp at straws to make ties. And frankly you suck at doing it.

and if I'm elite, it's in the sense that I'm above the cheap and lame crap you try to pull.

[DavidJames]

I used to think this kind of thing was funny, when I was 11.

[Troll]

Originally posted by DavidJames
I used to think this kind of thing was funny, when I was 11.

exactly.

But now that you're older, would you call it an offense to women everywhere, or a show of support for guys that beat women?

[DavidJames]

"But now that you're older, would you call it an offense to women everywhere, or a show of support for guys that beat women?"

I don't understand your question. I was refering to the picture with the comments in the first post.

[Troll]

Originally posted by DavidJames
"But now that you're older, would you call it an offense to women everywhere, or a show of support for guys that beat women?"

I don't understand your question. I was refering to the picture with the comments in the first post.

sorry. I'm refering to posts from others that claimed that laughing at the childish joke meant you feared powerful women or supported beating women, which I found about as equally childish in their claims. Bad joke does not mean woman hater or beater.

[Suddenly]

Originally posted by Troll


exactly.

But now that you're older, would you call it an offense to women everywhere, or a show of support for guys that beat women?

I give up.

My claim that it perpetuates a harmful perception of women hardly equates to "Offensive to all women" in that I'm sure many women just don't care at all, and the two are not equal one little bit. Nor is it equal to direct support of violence against women.

I can see that any elaboration on the effect of that perception is somehow now being seen as additional positive claims.

I find the caption contains elements implying that a woman shouldn't be smart or aspire to be elite and so forth, and that idea is harmful.

You may think those elements are no big deal, or even claim that those elements don't exist, but to distort my claim into something like this "How freaking melodramatic of a claim are you and the other leftwing nutters going to make to try to say a pic of Hillary and a soldier being used as a joke shows support of abuse by anyone that finds it funny?" is pretty poor work. I'm sorry that you have trouble seeing that the abuse references were elaboration of why I maybe notice and take those elements seriously. Somehow you now seem to say I am accusing you of supporting abuse if you think that caption is funny, and like I said a bunch of times, you just may not see the caption as I do.

That doesn't make you a fan of wife beaters. It doesn't make you anything, except someone that doesn't agree with me. Which again, I spoke of in my initial posts. I've been trying to explain and set this straight, but it is becoming clearer that you are assuming accusations that do not exist, and I have enough other things to worry about than your misapprehension of my claims.

I'm sure you will continue with an exagerated version of my claims, which does beg the final brickbat I will fling your way on this subject:

Do you not see the irony in your showing such offense at my (allegedly) being offended?

[Troll]

Originally posted by Suddenly


I give up.

My claim that it perpetuates a harmful perception of women hardly equates to "Offensive to all women" in that I'm sure many women just don't care at all, and the two are not equal one little bit. Nor is it equal to direct support of violence against women.

I can see that any elaboration on the effect of that perception is somehow now being seen as additional positive claims.

I find the caption contains elements implying that a woman shouldn't be smart or aspire to be elite and so forth, and that idea is harmful.

You may think those elements are no big deal, or even claim that those elements don't exist, but to distort my claim into something like this "How freaking melodramatic of a claim are you and the other leftwing nutters going to make to try to say a pic of Hillary and a soldier being used as a joke shows support of abuse by anyone that finds it funny?" is pretty poor work. I'm sorry that you have trouble seeing that the abuse references were elaboration of why I maybe notice and take those elements seriously. Somehow you now seem to say I am accusing you of supporting abuse if you think that caption is funny, and like I said a bunch of times, you just may not see the caption as I do.

That doesn't make you a fan of wife beaters. It doesn't make you anything, except someone that doesn't agree with me. Which again, I spoke of in my initial posts. I've been trying to explain and set this straight, but it is becoming clearer that you are assuming accusations that do not exist, and I have enough other things to worry about than your misapprehension of my claims.

I'm sure you will continue with an exagerated version of my claims, which does beg the final brickbat I will fling your way on this subject:

Do you not see the irony in your showing such offense at my (allegedly) being offended?

dude, I'm not making up squat. everything i quoted you on was , well, a quote of yours.

Face it, you overreacted, then later claimed you may have. Now you tell me I'm the one doing so in accordance to your postings?

I'm not offended by what you post so much as astonished that you can do so and try to maintain credibility

[DavidJames]

ahhh...

"I'm refering to posts from others that claimed that laughing at the childish joke meant you feared powerful women or supported beating women, which I found about as equally childish in their claims."

I wouldn't say it was childish, I would say it was a premature conclusion. I happen to be one who believes there might be a germ of truth in that thought process, but by no means would I suggest simply thinking the picture was funny, by itself, would mean those things.

"Bad joke does not mean woman hater or beater."

Agreed.

FWIW. I'm pretty liberal and supported BC while he was president. To this day, I think some of the funniest presidential jokes were at his expense. About the only Bush related joke that I recall really laughing at was the SNL skit where Will Ferrell (as Bush) is juggling the ball of string. No deep psychological reason why, just because it's a funny image. Replace Bush with any serious person and I'd still think it was funny. Go figure.

[Zep]

I'm not a Libertarian right-wing militarist sorta guy, but... I admire Hillary for her demonstrated abilities the same way I admire Colin Powell and Connie Rice for theirs, although I do not necessarily agree with every word they utter or action they take. I loathe and detest abusers of women. And children. And any more defenceless than themselves.

The picture is inconsequential and means nothing beyond what it is - a photo op. The caption is a piss-weak low-IQ subteen joke and needs no further comment than that. That the image appeared here at all is testament to the original poster's immaturity, nothing else.

[NightG1]

Originally posted by Richard G

Mmmmm. Time to trot out this timeless classic:

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/nightg1/dopeygeorge.jpg

[aerocontrols]

snopes (http://www.snopes.com/photos/binoculars.asp)

Looks to me like in your photo, NightG1, Bush has yet to finish pulling the binoculars up to his face, and is reaching out with his pinky to pop off the lenscap.

Compare to the images at the bottom of the page, in the second he has finished pulling the binoculars up and the pinky has gone to a more comfortable position.

[rikzilla]

After reading this thread I have to say I'm with Suddenly on most of this. And Ed knows, I don't care for Billary one little bit. Also, I don't get whats even so funny about this. Maybe if the soldier was giving her the finger in a sly way?? But the pic is so blurry I can't really tell what his hand is doing. Another thing, I wish folks would stop with the Visa card joke format already. It's tired, hackneyed, and all around un-original. (yawn)

As for being demeaning to smart women, I don't really see that. I believe Elizabeth Dole, and Margret Thatcher are strong, smart women. I doubt they would be affronted by a joke on Hillary Clinton. Especially one so stupid.

Lastly, can inappropriate humor be funny? C'mon Suddenly, you know it can. I vividly remember the most horrible joke I've ever heard...and laughed at....and then promptly hated myself for laughing at. I won't repeat it because it was a repulsive Jew baiting joke, and I'm no Jew-basher. But was it funny? Damn me, but yeah, it really was in a black-humor kind of way. Kind of like the enjoyment one gets from reading a bloody Stephen King novel. Don't ask me why folks dig stuff like that, maybe we're all just barbarians under a thin veneer of civilization? All the more reason to struggle to increase the thickness of that veneer.

I don't regularly agree with Suddenly, my barbarian comes out more regularly than his, but I do appreciate the quality and strength of his veneer. :)

-z

[Richard G]

You guys are hilarious. The soldier is flipping her the bird.

[Suddenly]

Originally posted by rikzilla
After reading this thread I have to say I'm with Suddenly on most of this. And Ed knows, I don't care for Billary one little bit. Also, I don't get whats even so funny about this. Maybe if the soldier was giving her the finger in a sly way?? But the pic is so blurry I can't really tell what his hand is doing. Another thing, I wish folks would stop with the Visa card joke format already. It's tired, hackneyed, and all around un-original. (yawn)

As for being demeaning to smart women, I don't really see that. I believe Elizabeth Dole, and Margret Thatcher are strong, smart women. I doubt they would be affronted by a joke on Hillary Clinton. Especially one so stupid.

Lastly, can inappropriate humor be funny? C'mon Suddenly, you know it can. I vividly remember the most horrible joke I've ever heard...and laughed at....and then promptly hated myself for laughing at. I won't repeat it because it was a repulsive Jew baiting joke, and I'm no Jew-basher. But was it funny? Damn me, but yeah, it really was in a black-humor kind of way. Kind of like the enjoyment one gets from reading a bloody Stephen King novel. Don't ask me why folks dig stuff like that, maybe we're all just barbarians under a thin veneer of civilization? All the more reason to struggle to increase the thickness of that veneer.

I don't regularly agree with Suddenly, my barbarian comes out more regularly than his, but I do appreciate the quality and strength of his veneer. :)

-z

Thanks for noting what I actually said instead of a certain poster's self-martyring interprestation...

Actually, I agree with everything you are saying.


1) I never said demeaning humor wasn't funny or should be banned or meant the person who thought it funny believes bad things.

2) If liking or enoying "inappropriate" humor makes one a bad person my Dan Jenkins novels alone make me pretty evil. That's before we even get into my rap collection...

3) I just notice these things, and that's where the whole thing started. I think a perfectly appropriate response is "yeah, but so what?" My actual level of "being affronted" has been largely attributed to me rather than from me. I noted in the first post that there were these elements in the photo that I really didn't like. After that I was trying to maybe elaborate on why I saw that.

Somehow, this turned into me being some sort of left-wing toadie who was accusing anyone that liked the picture of supporting domestic violence.

4) Not only is "inappropriate" humor funny, I'd contend that most humor is funny because it is inappropriate.

I mean, if you and I are at one of Hillary's 2008 campaign speeches, shaking our heads mournfully at her plans for federal regulation of bedtime, and all at once about 30 people throw aprons on stage and start chanting "Go back in the kitchen where you belong and bake us some cookies," assuming it is done in good timing and not a "what just happened" type thing, I would first laugh, second agree that the group should be evicted from the area, and third note that the fact we may think this is funny (or at least they do) shows maybe we need to grow up a bit.

It could be funny, if done right, which doesn't excuse that when analyzed, the whole thing may be a bit troubling. But so what?

These things happen.

5) I'd agree that Elizabeth Dole, and Margret Thatcher would likely just roll their eyes at this. The offense only comes out if you take the thing more seriously than it deserves to be taken, and even then any offense is largely an academic matter. It is harmful to suppose a woman being smart is an insult in my opinon, and that is really the core point.

The world would be a better place if that were not so, but a world where we tried to force people to believe that way would be the worst world of all.

Maybe people can be persuaded, or see the harm in it, but to simply declare that someone who finds something funny is evil denies reality, and that they find it funny usually is the begining of seeing the problem with it.

[subgenius]

The Hawaiian Good Luck sign courtesy of my friend Ken....oh and GWB seems to have a drooling problem

[Suddenly]

Originally posted by Richard G
You guys are hilarious. The soldier is flipping her the bird.

Oh I see. That changes everything. Forget everything I said above. Now that I see the gesture is obscene I see that this isn't an immature and stupid piece of crap, rather a sophisicated indictment of everything Hillary stands for, an example of political discourse so apt and concise as to make Thomas Nast render his garment in envy were he here to witness it....

[Troll]

Originally posted by Suddenly


5) I'd agree that Elizabeth Dole, and Margret Thatcher would likely just roll their eyes at this. The offense only comes out if you take the thing more seriously than it deserves to be taken, and even then any offense is largely an academic matter. It is harmful to suppose a woman being smart is an insult in my opinon, and that is really the core point.

I'm going to break it down for emphasis as I read it. The emphasis is mine and mine alone. But it's what I am questioning in your post.

The offense only comes out if you take the thing more seriously than it deserves to be taken,

And this is what I was saying. That I think you took it too seriously. You even later went on to add that maybe you are. I agreed with that. Maybe I wrote what I said to show that in a manner that could have also been taken as an attack on you. If so, and if you read it as such, I apologize. My whole point here is that given some of the comments you made, I think you took it way too seriously, especially in light of all the posts by damned near everyone that say it's one of the low-brow forms of humor.

It is harmful to suppose a woman being smart is an insult in my opinon, and that is really the core point.

I'd agree with that as well but that is not even close to what the joke was trying to get across. The insult, according to the picture, was being able to get something like that by on a smart woman. Not that her being smart is an insult. And as you are claiming that the insult is based upon her intelligence, the only "harmful" element was your opinion that supposing a woman is smart is an insult. No one and not even the joke made any such claims as to insulting her because she is smart. The joke is making the claim that they were able to get the joke out under the nose of a smart lady.

In short. I got no beef with you. I just think you took this way too seriously.

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by Suddenly


Oh I see. That changes everything. Forget everything I said above. Now that I see the gesture is obscene I see that this isn't an immature and stupid piece of crap, rather a sophisicated indictment of everything Hillary stands for, an example of political discourse so apt and concise as to make Thomas Nast render his garment in envy were he here to witness it....

BWAHAHAHAH! Stop it man, the sarcasm is dripping all over my desk and making a nasty mess!

-z

[Ed]

Originally posted by rikzilla
After reading this thread I have to say I'm with Suddenly on most of this. And Ed knows, I don't care for Billary one little bit. Also, I don't get whats even so funny about this. Maybe if the soldier was giving her the finger in a sly way?? But the pic is so blurry I can't really tell what his hand is doing. Another thing, I wish folks would stop with the Visa card joke format already. It's tired, hackneyed, and all around un-original. (yawn)

Stern lecture on MasterCard Joke format: $0.02

As for being demeaning to smart women, I don't really see that. I believe Elizabeth Dole, and Margret Thatcher are strong, smart women. I doubt they would be affronted by a joke on Hillary Clinton. Especially one so stupid.

Non-sexist high ground: $2.83

Lastly, can inappropriate humor be funny? C'mon Suddenly, you know it can. I vividly remember the most horrible joke I've ever heard...and laughed at....and then promptly hated myself for laughing at. I won't repeat it because it was a repulsive Jew baiting joke, and I'm no Jew-basher. But was it funny? Damn me, but yeah, it really was in a black-humor kind of way. Kind of like the enjoyment one gets from reading a bloody Stephen King novel. Don't ask me why folks dig stuff like that, maybe we're all just barbarians under a thin veneer of civilization? All the more reason to struggle to increase the thickness of that veneer.

I don't regularly agree with Suddenly, my barbarian comes out more regularly than his, but I do appreciate the quality and strength of his veneer. :)

"Can't we all be friends" ending: Priceless

-z


Ed's attempt at humor: -256.07:D

[rikzilla]

Ed,
You've made a mockery of me!

Ed Damn you!!! :mad:

-z

[American]

The photo speaks for itself, a thousand words or more. So what's all this psychobabble you all spewed for nothing? You have to complicate everything....

[Zep]

Originally posted by American
The photo speaks for itself, a thousand words or more. So what's all this psychobabble you all spewed for nothing? You have to complicate everything.... What's to complicate? But someone who can't tell crossed-fingers from flipping the bird, and then demonstrates their ignorance here in front of us? THAT'S funny.

[Troll]

Originally posted by Zep
What's to complicate? But someone who can't tell crossed-fingers from flipping the bird, and then demonstrates their ignorance here in front of us? THAT'S funny.

Well I think it's just as funny that someone would claim this one picture is demonstrative of misogony and an insult to all women

[Ed]

Originally posted by rikzilla
Ed,
You've made a mockery of me!

Ed Damn you!!! :mad:

-z

Thos MC rip offs are pretty lame, generally. The high point was reached with that idiot that set himself on fire:D

I know some folks in management at MC and they said that they were "going after" people stealing their "intellectual capital". I suggested that they run a high visability competition. Went nowhere, naturally.

No offence, Rik.

[epepke]

Originally posted by Suddenly


Oh I see. That changes everything. Forget everything I said above. Now that I see the gesture is obscene I see that this isn't an immature and stupid piece of crap, rather a sophisicated indictment of everything Hillary stands for, an example of political discourse so apt and concise as to make Thomas Nast render his garment in envy were he here to witness it....

And you still apparently lack the honor to admit that your initial reaction that it must be something about 'She is "smart," "elite" and "fat". Just sounds to me like she's an "uppity smarty pants bitch" or some such.' was projection on your part, i.e. a tendency to read something into a situation based on your prejudices.

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by epepke


And you still apparently lack the honor to admit that your initial reaction that it must be something about 'She is "smart," "elite" and "fat". Just sounds to me like she's an "uppity smarty pants bitch" or some such.' was projection on your part, i.e. a tendency to read something into a situation based on your prejudices.

'Uppity smarty pants b!tch' is the type of comment used by wife bashers to justify their actions. That's why those who have seen this sort of thing can be sensitive to this type of comment.

[Troll]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto


'Uppity smarty pants b!tch' is the type of comment used by wife bashers to justify their actions. That's why those who have seen this sort of thing can be sensitive to this type of comment.

Oh geez. Hey, how's moron work for you? Oh sorry, that's a phrase used by someone that knows you're a moron. It's painfully obvious that you're oblivious as to the last post and the meaning behind it. But then posting blind is what works for you, isn't it?

go back, remove the bias, take your time, and read again.

[Suddenly]

Originally posted by epepke


And you still apparently lack the honor to admit that your initial reaction that it must be something about 'She is "smart," "elite" and "fat". Just sounds to me like she's an "uppity smarty pants bitch" or some such.' was projection on your part, i.e. a tendency to read something into a situation based on your prejudices.

Heh Heh. Yeah, I definately left no room for dissent. Anyone that disagrees with me hates women, and is too stupid to understand that eveyone not on the left should be drowned in the nearest body of water. Plus, I think that caption is such an obvious insult that anyone that doesn't think so is such an obvious wife-beater that he (or even she) should turn him(her)self into the police, even if he or she isn't married.

Here are examples where I make my uncompromising position clear:



Here's once:

I'm just a bit sensitive about insults against women for being smart or outspoken

another:

Maybe I'm just making up for the fact that I've had to defend to many abusive men in my life and I'm oversensitive.


yet a third:
So maybe I am overreacting.

Wait! Still more:

I have stated my reasons why I may be a little sensitive in this regard.

Amazing! Not done yet:
You may disagree on that point, and I understand. Yes, I may be a bit sensitive about this, but I have good reason.

More yet:
So you disagree with my interpretation. I can understand that.

[Troll]

I'm feeling sympathetic to whatever it is you're suffering from so I'll help ya out , Mr. Manifesto.

epepke's use of "'Uppity smarty pants b!tch'" is done so to show that that is how someone read the post. There's some that see racism everywhere, there's some that see misogyny everywhere, once people thought they saw witches everywhere and burned them.

If you look for something too hard, sooner or later you'll think you found it, even in the face of it's not existing. The picture has squat to do with a bad attitude towards women, be they smart or dumb, nor is it condoning wife-beating. How the hell can you go from a post about wife beating to a "Jew issue" in another thread while going from a lame joke to a "wife beating" issue in this one?

[Troll]

Originally posted by Suddenly


Heh Heh. Yeah, I definately left no room for dissent. Anyone that disagrees with me hates women, and is too stupid to understand that eveyone not on the left should be drowned in the nearest body of water. Plus, I think that caption is such an obvious insult that anyone that doesn't think so is such an obvious wife-beater that he (or even she) should turn him(her)self into the police, even if he or she isn't married.

Here are examples where I make my uncompromising position clear:



Here's once:



another:



yet a third:


Wait! Still more:



Amazing! Not done yet:


More yet:


I disagree with having good reason. If previous things cause a bias, you're no good to future situations that require you not to have said bias.

A black man attacked me.
A black man insulted me.
A couple of black men beat me.

Would you excuse me for having a reason for bias if I saw a black man and assumed he was going to do something to harm me?

Women beat men, men beat women, men beat men, women beat women, a mix of each beats kids, a mix of each beats animals. Seeing more of one over another doesn't excuse false claims.

[Suddenly]

Originally posted by Troll


I disagree with having good reason. If previous things cause a bias, you're no good to future situations that require you not to have said bias.

A black man attacked me.
A black man insulted me.
A couple of black men beat me.

Would you excuse me for having a reason for bias if I saw a black man and assumed he was going to do something to harm me?

Women beat men, men beat women, men beat men, women beat women, a mix of each beats kids, a mix of each beats animals. Seeing more of one over another doesn't excuse false claims.

So we are assuming my claims are "false" now? Nice.

My remarks of possible bias was not me asking for forgiveness from you for my sin of daring to speak my mind. Those remarks were noting a possibility that I was wrong, a possibility that never comes into the mind of people that treat discussion like it is combat.

I thought maybe somebody would want to intelligently explore that possibility, rather than leap on those remarks like the critical weakness of an enemy. This obviously did not happen, and perhaps I was being naive to think it would.

In this thread you have distorted my original claims, accused me of leveling some pretty serious insults, and are still refusing to let it go, no matter what. Now you suggest I am somehow personally permanently damaged because I mention the possibility of bias.

Based on your inane comparision of the sensitivity towards certain language and attiudes I speak of to racism, I'd say again that I doubt you understand what I am saying, but I'm sure you would take offense, as you are incapable of bias and know that you are right, and I am wrong.

Must be nice.

[Troll]

Originally posted by Suddenly


So we are assuming my claims are "false" now? Nice.

My remarks of possible bias was not me asking for forgiveness from you for my sin of daring to speak my mind. Those remarks were noting a possibility that I was wrong, a possibility that never comes into the mind of people that treat discussion like it is combat.

I thought maybe somebody would want to intelligently explore that possibility, rather than leap on those remarks like the critical weakness of an enemy. This obviously did not happen, and perhaps I was being naive to think it would.

In this thread you have distorted my original claims, accused me of leveling some pretty serious insults, and are still refusing to let it go, no matter what. Now you suggest I am somehow personally permanently damaged because I mention the possibility of bias.

Based on your inane comparision of the sensitivity towards certain language and attiudes I speak of to racism, I'd say again that I doubt you understand what I am saying, but I'm sure you would take offense, as you are incapable of bias and know that you are right, and I am wrong.

Must be nice.

No but i'm beginning to assumne you twist things to suit you. I never said your claims were false. I just said you can't use past experiences in relation to bad treatment of women to form a bias when it comes to humor at one woman's expense.

yes men have abused women, and all other forms of abuse have occured in a wide variety of forms among the sexes.

What the hell does that have to do with a stupid joke of a picture?!?!?!?!?!

Answer. Nothing. You're on a freaking witch hunt and are seeing things where it doesn't exist. Is the guy beating her and are we laughing at that? No. Come back to reality. Holy crap dude. You overreacted. You had the balls to admit that was a possibility. When someone agrees with the possibility of you overreacting, don't turn around and defend it. You just look confused when you do. It's like saying "I may be wrong. but if you agree that I am then I'll have to prove to you that I'm not"

[Suddenly]

When someone agrees with the possibility of you overreacting, don't turn around and defend it. You just look confused when you do. It's like saying "I may be wrong. but if you agree that I am then I'll have to prove to you that I'm not

According to you:

If I admit X is possible.

Then you claim X as fact.

I should not then argue that X is not fact because I will look "confused."

So, if I admit it is possible that O.J. is innocent.

And O.J. shows up and says he is in fact innocent.

If I then argue with him I will look "confused."

So, since I admitted to possible bias.

And you then claimed I am biased, so...

I'm not allowed to point out that you are badly exaggerating my claims and what I mean by bias -- wait ,, lets ignore that aspect--- I'm not allowed to contend that I'm not biased.

Wow

I had no idea that admitting that a position is not watertight forfeits all future right to defend that position. Thanks for clearing that up.

[Troll]

Originally posted by Suddenly


According to you:

If I admit X is possible.

Then you claim X as fact.

I should not then argue that X is not fact because I will look "confused."

So, if I admit it is possible that O.J. is innocent.

And O.J. shows up and says he is in fact innocent.

If I then argue with him I will look "confused."

So, since I admitted to possible bias.

And you then claimed I am biased, so...

I'm not allowed to point out that you are badly exaggerating my claims and what I mean by bias -- wait ,, lets ignore that aspect--- I'm not allowed to contend that I'm not biased.

Wow

I had no idea that admitting that a position is not watertight forfeits all future right to defend that position. Thanks for clearing that up. [/B]

still defending the admission of guilt? I never accused you of squat until you defended yourself from the very thing you admitted to. Do you need to see your own posts again?

"I'm trying to figure out the insult. Is it her being elite? Smart? Or is it the fat thing, since we know a woman's only worth is her physical appearance...


Anyway...


I would like to thank RichardG for pointing out that the right has now retaken the "stupidist political insult photo" back from the left's equally stupid but at least not misogynic "Bush holding the book upside down" photo."

There was your first post. You claimed misogyny from a stupid photo joke.

Shall I continue?

"I'll ask my wife. Maybe I am just being an idiot.

I do think that there is a difference between a disagreement and a insult mainly demeaning someone by virtue of their gender. She is "smart," "elite" and "fat". Just sounds to me like she's an "uppity smarty pants bitch" or some such.

My comments, I suspect, are going to only be agreed with by those that agree with me, and are not exactly going to have a whole lot of persuasive value. I'm just a bit sensitive about insults against women for being smart or outspoken, and that is what I see here. I've seen to many unhappy women trapped by men that use degradation and insult to keep them down. Tell her she is a worthless idiot long enough and she starts to believe it. I personally find any hint of that completely repulsive.

Maybe I'm just making up for the fact that I've had to defend to many abusive men in my life and I'm oversensitive.

I see that caption and I see in my mind a guy admitting to me he beats his wife and sees nothing wrong with it because if he didn't she "wouldn't know her place" as she is "too smart for her own good."

So maybe I am overreacting. I'm not so sure, but I can absolutely see why others would come to that conclusion.

More irony: I don't care much for Hillary either. I found her failure to acknowledge the help she got writing her last book to be inexcusable, and I don't like her ideas in general."

You were being an idiot. I agreed with you and then you went all defensively wiggy on us.

I said this is agreement with your last post

"Hey, I've searched her voting record and as I've said before, she ain't the worst I've seen. But I don't support her because she's not the best either. We've had this discussion before which is why I took a personal issue with you claiming misogyny and fear of powerful women. I could list you several women of power that I admire and do not fear and aerocontrols asked me about one in particular to make that point quite clear the last time this subject came up.

My only disappointment here is that you seemed to have ignored all things prior to now."

And then you got really defensive and we got to where we are now.

See you next post

"This has nothing to do with Hillary, rather the implication that she is bad because she is smart and outspoken. That is the point, I find it abhorrant to imply that it is wrong for a woman to be smart, confident, and to speak her mind. I have stated my reasons why I may be a little sensitive in this regard. You seem to be missing the point.

Bluntly speaking, Regardless of your personal opinion of the particular woman, do you think it is acceptable to imply that a woman should be ashamed to be smart, confident or outspoken?

1) I think that is the implication of the caption
2) I think that message is misogyny, pure and simple.


One may disagree with my interpretation of the caption. That is understandable. What I don't understand is the apparant belief that I am saying: "Everyone that dislikes Hillary does so because they fear strong women."

I'm saying that in my opinion it is an awful thing to imply a woman should be ashamed for being smart, outspoken and confident. I think that is the upshot of the caption. You may disagree on that point, and I understand. Yes, I may be a bit sensitive about this, but I have good reason."

Now I ask you, yet again, who the hell was insulting a woman for being smart? Not the picture, not the poster, not any poster during all of this.

At one point you admit you may have cocked it up and you explained why. All I'm saying is that your excuse was not an excuse and you should strive not to cock things up like this again.

and here we are. you arguing with me because I agreed you cocked it up and that there is no excuse for doing so. You messed up in the beginning. Be a man, or a smart woman and admit it. Stop defending the mistake just because others agreed that you made one.

this could have been over hours ago. But so long as you try to twist my reasonings behind my posts about your failures in accepting responsibility for the false claims you made, I'm on your tush like the crabs you get from your cousin. It could be a male cousin so don't assume I'm making some comment about women. :p

[Dorian Gray]

HEY! A picture is worth a thousand words - BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE ALL WANT TO SEE THE THOUSAND WORDS!

Who cares? The only people who will jump for joy that this pic may degrade smart women are people who think that way in the first place. Guess what? Some smart, funny, witty, intelligent women are absolute bitches who deserve ridicule. Just as there are some who deserve ridicule in every group - priests, teachers, world leaders, my side of the family, etc.

If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. And no, the 'kitchen' reference is not some goddamned deep-seated subconscious expression of my desire to June Cleaverize women. But no one is above ridicule, and if you don't believe me, listen to a couple of George Carlin records.

And for crying out loud, duct tape your knees to your chair next time you read this forum. It may prevent the knees from jerking so much.

P.S. I may deserve to have my mouth washed out with soap right now, but at least I am not standing on a box of it.

P.P.S. I took it as "I am shaking her hand right now, and she thinks I support her, but LOOKY! I am crossing my fingers! Hee hee!" Thank god this man is defending my right to mock him. And her, for that matter.

P.P.P.S. The phrase "thank god" is just an expression, not an implicit attempt to convert, proclaim, or proselytize.

[Dorian Gray]

P.P.P.P.S. Besides, how smart could she be? She stayed married to a man who cheated on her constantly!

[Suddenly]

this could have been over hours ago. But so long as you try to twist my reasonings behind my posts about your failures in accepting responsibility for the false claims you made, I'm on your tush like the crabs you get from your cousin. It could be a male cousin so don't assume I'm making some comment about women. :p

Uh huh.

I still can't figure out your point, beyond the fact that you dodged the fact that as revealed in your last post that the reasoning behind your whole tantrum is faulty.

"Accepting responsibility for the false claims you made"

Hmmm...

So last post, the one where you claimed I was "twisting" your words and you said: No but i'm beginning to assumne you twist things to suit you. I never said your claims were false.

So, were you lying or have you in this short span changed your mind?

I suspect you are just trolling. Nobody is this dense.

Your last statement is basically what I expect from a person of your intellectual caliber. If you want to make further purile insults I direct you to the Flame War area. I won't be responding for awhile as I have more important things to attend to this weekend, although given your last post I'm not sure I can identify something less important that subjecting myself to your discourse.

[LTC8K6]

There is no way he could give her the #1 sign while his superiors and others are watching. While Hillary can't see him, everyone else around can see him. He is definitely crossing his fingers to indicate insincerity.

That says a lot more about him than it does about her.

http://www.snopes.com/photos/military/crossed.asp

[Zero]

And Bush looks like a chimp...

[LTC8K6]

What Bush looks like is not relevant. Hatred of Bush would not entitle a soldier to take such childish actions. It is unprofessional no matter who we are talking about.

If he doesn't agree with Hillary, then he shouldn't shake her hand and smile for the photo op. If he dislikes her, then let him say so loudly and publicly. If he is unable to stand up for what he believes, and can only sneak around behind her back to express himself, then again I say that says more about him than her.

It would have been a much greater statement, if he really wanted to make one, to have refused to shake her hand on camera, don't you think? That would require courage, though.

Would this soldier protect Hillary Clinton with his life like he should, or will he let his childishness about his disagreements with her interfere with his duty? Will that inability to seperate slow him down just enough at a critical moment?

He seems unable to maintain objectivity. Do I want this kind of person promoted?

That's what I'm wondering if I am his superior and I see the photo.

Now granted, I don't know if that 82nd airborne soldier is assigned to help protect her, but I was just trying to make a point.

Edit: Catn spelle

[Zero]

Originally posted by LTC8K6
What Bush looks like is not relevant. That was sort of my point.:p

[Troll]

Originally posted by Suddenly


Uh huh.

I still can't figure out your point, beyond the fact that you dodged the fact that as revealed in your last post that the reasoning behind your whole tantrum is faulty.

"Accepting responsibility for the false claims you made"

Hmmm...

So last post, the one where you claimed I was "twisting" your words and you said:

So, were you lying or have you in this short span changed your mind?

I suspect you are just trolling. Nobody is this dense.

Your last statement is basically what I expect from a person of your intellectual caliber. If you want to make further purile insults I direct you to the Flame War area. I won't be responding for awhile as I have more important things to attend to this weekend, although given your last post I'm not sure I can identify something less important that subjecting myself to your discourse.

Dude. You initially made the claim of misogyny and hating women. I base that only on your own damned words
"I would like to thank RichardG for pointing out that the right has now retaken the "stupidist political insult photo" back from the left's equally stupid but at least not misogynic "Bush holding the book upside down" photo."

What the hell was misogynistic about it?

This is now the third time you've been asked (maybe more than three)?

and your PM response doesn't help you any. You just attempted to support you claims that this whole thing is anti-woman. Peopel are badmouthing Maggie in another thread, I expect to see you post there and defend her as a woman or drop the silly crap altogether

[Dorian Gray]

I can't link to the photo, so where can I link to it? Please?

[Troll]

Originally posted by Dorian Gray
I can't link to the photo, so where can I link to it? Please?

If you mean the phot in question here it's at

http://boortz.com/images/hitlery_priceless.jpg

Anyone that knows of Boortz would have known not to take this too seriously. But then some people don't know Boortz from their own backsides apparently

[Blondin]

They say a picture is worth a thousand words but I really think this one was only worth dozen or so.

A couple that spring to mind are "disrespectful" and "juvenile", which might apply more to whoever composed the "priceless" blurb than the subject or the photographer, but "misogynist" wouldn't have occured to me. Some people might only dislike Hillary Clinton because of her politics.

I agree that these endless "priceless" photos are getting a little tedious and some of them are actually less funny with some moron's attempt to point out the "joke" than they would be if left to their own merits.

With all due respect, though, I have to say that this Yogi Berra'ish statement gave me a giggle:

My comments, I suspect, are going to only be agreed with by those that agree with me