View Full Version : NOW chief: some women are just whores
speechlesstx
Oct 16, 2010, 05:39 AM
Timeline:
Jerry Brown campaign worker calls Meg Whitman a whore.
NOW endorses Jerry Brown.
NOW backtracks after backlash
NOW calls Whitman a whore
That's right, the head of California's National Organization for (certain) Women has endorsed not only hate speech, but hate speech against women.
California NOW President Patty Bellasalma told Talking Points Memo in an interview Thursday that "Meg Whitman could be described as 'a political whore.' Yes, that's an accurate statement (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/14/meg-whitman-whore-now_n_763211.html)."
Now that's the problem with the left, they self-righteously proclaim to be the champion of the little guy, blacks, women and whatever other disaffected group of the day - but in practice they only fight for the 'authentic' remnants of that group.
Condi Rice - not an authentic black
Colin Powell - 15 minutes of authenticity
Marco Rubio - not an authentic Hispanic
Meg Whitman - not an authentic woman
Christine O'Donnell - not an authentic woman
Sharron Angle - not an authentic woman
Nikki Haley - not an authentic Indian-American woman
I'm sure Allen West (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fHEqSG2KD0) is a traitor to his race as well.
NOW also endorsed Alan "Scum of the earth" Grayson, who called Linda Robertson, an adviser to Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, a “K Street whore," and in a year when record numbers of Republican women are running and doing well, USA Today's Susan Page says this could be "the Year of the Setback" for women.
It might have been another good year for women and minorities if it weren't for all those whores and traitors.
Mindwaves
Oct 16, 2010, 06:32 AM
As a man I respect women I can't understand why you have such a vision of women but in your case its not just women but men are not angels either we as humans all have faults & when one becomes his/her own self critic we stop pointing fingers at others be it man or woman, in simple words it often takes two to create a problem - now ask yourself why you think its just women to blame or just men to blame..
NeedKarma
Oct 16, 2010, 06:36 AM
Some women are indeed whores. Some men are whores too.
excon
Oct 16, 2010, 07:13 AM
Hello Steve:
Yeah, people shouldn't throw around names like, whore, socialist, Nazi, illegal president, secret Muslim, Scum of the Earth...
But, they do... I don't know why. We should be nicer to each other.
excon
cdad
Oct 16, 2010, 08:06 AM
They have no clue to the toxicity they create. Just look at who they are endorsing. Its all part of the playbook. If they actually stood for women's rights then they would have to draw lines as they do. Instead they would rather be a cancer to the country then to advance a agenda that at one time needed a great amount of looking after. Since they can't afford to lose their financial base they just follow the party line.
NeedKarma
Oct 16, 2010, 08:29 AM
Hello Steve:
Yeah, people shouldn't throw around names like, whore, socialist, Nazi, illegal president, secret Muslim, Scum of the Earth...
But, they do.... I dunno why. We should be nicer to each other.
exconLOL! Greenie for you.
excon
Oct 16, 2010, 08:50 AM
They have no clue to the toxicity they create. Just look at who they are endorsing. Its all part of the playbook. If they actually stood for womens rights then they would have to draw lines as they do. Instead they would rather be a cancer to the country then to advance a agenda that at one time needed a great amount of looking after. Since they can't afford to lose thier financial base they just follow the party line.Hello again, dad:
I agree wholeheartedly... They suck...
excon
Mindwaves
Oct 16, 2010, 09:40 AM
In life we know good & bad will always be - but the good people will always win this is due to the reason for being a good person but as many think that the bad only understand force or other only allows the bad to win sympathy by those less educated in life.
As for men & women of whatever race etc are part of good & bad so by calling them names or other doesn't change them or does it so we should use the approach that will help change a bad person...
cdad
Oct 16, 2010, 12:42 PM
In life we know good & bad will always be - but the good people will always win this is due to the reason for being a good person but as many think that the bad only understand force or other only allows the bad to win sympathy by those less educated in life.
As for men & women of whatever race etc are part of good & bad so by calling them names or other doesnt change them or does it so we should use the approach that will help change a bad person...
I hate to disagree but there is actually 3 types. Good bad and just plain evil. Its up to the person to determine which one your dealing with. And in politics it seems evil is making headway inside the spectrum.
speechlesstx
Oct 16, 2010, 01:01 PM
As a man I respect women I can't understand why you have such a vision of women but in your case its not just women but men are not angels either we as humans all have faults & when one becomes his/her own self critic we stop pointing fingers at others be it man or woman, in simple words it often takes two to create a problem - now ask yourself why you think its just women to blame or just men to blame...?
That was one long run-on sentence I still don't understand, so I'll says it's liberals to blame.
speechlesstx
Oct 16, 2010, 01:02 PM
Yeah, people shouldn't throw around names like, whore, socialist, Nazi, illegal president, secret Muslim, Scum of the Earth...
But, they do.... I dunno why. We should be nicer to each other.
We should, especially those who live in glass houses.
Mindwaves
Oct 17, 2010, 02:55 AM
Plain evil people I do not class as part of human race as for good & bad people is what makes up this world, what really gets me is people who show simpathy to plain evil people & for that they win support & simpathy from those that are less educated.
The problem is we in the western world need to understand that evil people be they in politics or other use the less educated to win support & to prevent this support is to use an approach that does not involve calling of names or isolating such people as such people then can change it is isolation in my view that forces them to turn to those like them?
Even evil people must have a good side to them well every human does so surely they can be changed well that's my view but I do believe it's the isollation that prevents from changing we need to use an approach to help change them again be it politics or other.
Calling names or distancing them away only makes them believe they were right which is what & how they win simpathy & support we must not let that happen which is why we need to use a softer approach if we need to change such people.
Evil people can't win without simpathy & support & we in the western world oftern help win them simpathy & support by using names - you try calling just any good/ bad person names & the next thing he/she will do is to give you a BAD NAME so can you understand my view of how evil people win support?
cdad
Oct 17, 2010, 04:41 AM
Plain evil people I do not class as part of human race as for good & bad people is what makes up this world, what really gets me is people who show simpathy to plain evil people & for that they win support & simpathy from those that are less educated.
The problem is we in the western world need to understand that evil people be they in politics or other use the less educated to win support & to prevent this support is to use an approach that does not involve calling of names or isolating such people as such people then can change it is isolation in my view that forces them to turn to those like them?
Even evil people must have a good side to them well every human does so surely they can be changed well thats my view but I do believe its the isollation that prevents from changing we need to use an approach to help change them again be it politics or other.
Calling names or distancing them away only makes them believe they were right which is what & how they win simpathy & support we must not let that happen which is why we need to use a softer approach if we need to change such people.
Evil people can't win without simpathy & support & we in the western world oftern help win them simpathy & support by using names - you try calling just any good/ bad person names & the next thing he/she will do is to give you a BAD NAME so can you understand my view of how evil people win support?
I understand how they gain support. The problem is that they also have to be recognised for who and what they are. That way you can deal with them at the appropriate level. How can you fight an enemy that you don't understand? You cant. It's that simple.
Mindwaves
Oct 17, 2010, 06:06 AM
I fully agree with you on that even take for example muslims who are good peace loving have that difficulty even in a country where such evil people have no care for who they harm so your not on your own - a plain evil person has no care for anyone!
Mindwaves
Oct 17, 2010, 06:23 AM
We all share the same pain & worry as evil knows no love or care - what hurts most is less educated fall into the trap through simpathy & support? Do they not think twice that these people are those who are using them as their strength? Do not see or hear that these people target anyone & everyone so why do they simpathise with them?
These people are trully one of a kind - PLAIN CARELESS EVIL the question is how to know so in my view it's the worst approach to make is to do their work for them which is show them simpathy? Those who preach hate in my view are signs of these careless FOR ANYONE plain evil people which makes them enemy of human race.
Such people were well known to be in afghanistan but now moved into pakistan just like a house which has rats but bring a cat in & the rats move next door I rest my case on such people that I think have no selection but are plain enemy of entire human race - they are reconised through preaching hate!
smoothy
Oct 18, 2010, 05:29 AM
Shows that NOW isn't really an organisation meant to help women... its to support their Messiah and the political agenda of the extreme left.
Shame... but not surprising.
NeedKarma
Oct 18, 2010, 05:48 AM
Shows that NOW isn't really an organisation meant to help women....its to support their Messiah and the political agenda of the extreme left.
I believe when you say "messiah" you are referring to President Obama. N.O.W. has been active since 1966.
a) why do you have a religious reverence for Obama?
b) N.O.W. has been active since 1966, was it's plan all along to wait for your messiah?
You fail logically, perhaps it's your dependence on religion.
smoothy
Oct 18, 2010, 05:54 AM
I believe when you say "messiah" you are referring to President Obama. N.O.W. has been active since 1966.
a) why do you have a religious reverence for Obama?
b) N.O.W. has been active since 1966, was it's plan all along to wait for your messiah?
You fail logically, perhaps it's your dependence on religion.
Oh trust me... Its sarcasm... I think the man is a two bit con man that got himself in WAY over his head. I have NO personal political or religious reverence for Obama in any way, shape or form.
Yeah I know NOW has been around for a very long time... but they have always held a radical left wing stance. I'm not saying their basic premise for existing never had merit... I'm only stating they were hijacked by people with other political agendas than their root cause for existence.
Their actions show that their extreme left wing Ideology is more important than the women they are supposed to be advocating. Or their support of women and women's issues would be non-partisan.
speechlesstx
Oct 18, 2010, 10:28 AM
On NOW's original purpose:
Analoyce Clapp wrote, "28 women met to set up a temporary organization for this purpose: To take action to bring women into full participation in the mainstream of American society now, assuming all the privileges and responsibilities thereof in truly equal partnership with men."
Meg Whitman is the epitome of success according to their founding vision. A successful CEO of a major corporation running for the highest office in the state of California. For NOW to call her a whore is damned hypocritical and they ought to be ashamed.
NeedKarma
Oct 18, 2010, 10:36 AM
For NOW to call her a whore is damned hypocritical and they ought to be ashamed.I agree.
Xan-Kriegor
Oct 18, 2010, 10:38 AM
Some women are indeed whores. Some men are whores too.
Not whores but gigolos
NeedKarma
Oct 18, 2010, 10:41 AM
Not whores but gigolosI think both are used. In the same way that women are actresses or actors.
tomder55
Oct 18, 2010, 12:03 PM
A “poor choice,” but “the description was accurate”...
... shades of the Dan Rather defense .
I wonder what would've happened if someone in the Fiorina campaign called Boxer a whore ? Or remember when Alan Simpson called Social Security a “Cow with 310 million tits" ? Oh the outrage!!! or when Beck called Mary Landrieu a "high-class prostitute " ?
Want to Insult a Powerful Woman? Call Her a Prostitute (http://www.now.org/issues/media/hall-of-shame/index.php/objectification-of-women/want-to-insult-a-powerful-woman-call-her-a-prostitute)
But that was then... this is NOW .
speechlesstx
Dec 2, 2010, 09:21 AM
But that was then
Even during 4 years of the first female Speaker of the House, men could walk a few steps from the House chambers to use the restroom while women had to traipse across Statuary Hall to the Lindy Claiborne Boggs room to do the same.
... this is NOW .
For some reason it took a male Speaker of the House to accomplish this (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/12/john-boehner-house-womens-restroom.html):
The nearly six dozen female members of the incoming House of Representatives will have a new restroom just as close to the chamber's floor as their male colleagues. A sometimes significant comfort, given legislators' propensity to blather.
Ohio's Rep. John Boehner, who retakes the Speaker's gavel from Nancy Pelosi come the new Congress in January, is ordering up a myriad of changes symbolic and meaningful in the chamber to underline the transition to the leadership of a Republican majority this time.
His transition team under Rep. Greg Walden is still drawing up lists.
Out, for instance, go the frivolous House resolutions on somebody's birthday or some team's victory. And now we learn, in comes a brand-new restroom for the 71 female members of the House. And it'll be bipartisan too.
Finally, potty parity in the House...
excon
Dec 2, 2010, 09:26 AM
Finally, potty parity in the House...Hello again, Steve:
I'm a Boehner booster.
excon
smoothy
Dec 2, 2010, 10:41 AM
Darn... no more paparazzi shots of the female members squating in a dark corner of the hallway showing up on the internet...
speechlesstx
Mar 22, 2011, 01:49 PM
Some women are apparently just "dumb tw@ts," too. That's what Bill Maher called Sarah Palin (http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2011/03/22/maher-calls-sarah-palin-female-vulgarism-stays-mum/#ixzz1HMb8mA6X) on his show Friday:
“Did you hear this – Sarah Palin finally heard what happened in Japan and she’s demanding that we invade ‘Tsunami,’” Maher said. “I mean she said, ‘These ‘Tsunamians’ will not get away with this.’ Oh speaking of dumb tw**s, did you...”
Once again, NOW is AWOL in defending a prominent woman against vulgar, sexist attacks. All just part of the "new era of civility" I'm sure.
NeedKarma
Mar 22, 2011, 02:31 PM
Some women are apparently just "dumb tw@ts," too. That's what Bill Maher called Sarah Palin (http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2011/03/22/maher-calls-sarah-palin-female-vulgarism-stays-mum/#ixzz1HMb8mA6X) on his show Friday:
"I suspect NOW hasn't come to Palin's defense because the group agrees with Maher,”
LOL!
smoothy
Mar 22, 2011, 03:26 PM
Bill Maher shows that some guys really don't have the mental capacity in their cranial cavity that their schlong has.
He's just jealous Sarah wouldn't even give him the time of day IF she was single and looking.
NeedKarma
Mar 22, 2011, 05:21 PM
Bill Maher shows that some guys really don't have the mental capacity in their cranial cavity that their schlong has.
He's just jealous Sarah wouldn't even give him the time of day IF she was single and looking.People would bang her all day long, as long as she doesn't run a country or you don't have to take out with your friends.
smoothy
Mar 22, 2011, 06:32 PM
People would bang her all day long, as long as she doesn't run a country or you don't have to take out with your friends.
I trust her more than Obama ( people who waffle and don't take responsibility have something to hide)... and Biden puts his foot in his mouth 3 out of 4 times he's behind a microphone.. ( for all I know they might actually be nice guys... but I think they suck as politicians).. She's got a better track record than either of those two.
excon
Mar 22, 2011, 06:51 PM
She's got a better track record than either of those two.Hello again, smoothy:
I don't know. Quitting ain't a good thing for the people who voted for her. Those guys never quit.
excon
cdad
Mar 22, 2011, 07:23 PM
Hello again, smoothy:
I dunno. Quitting ain't a good thing for the people who voted for her. Those guys never quit.
excon
Are you sure about this? Seems MrBig told his supporters that he was in it for the long haul and then did this :
Clout St: Obama will resign Senate seat Sunday (http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/clout_st/2008/11/obama-will-resi.html)
tomder55
Mar 23, 2011, 02:11 AM
Hello again, smoothy:
I dunno. Quitting ain't a good thing for the people who voted for her. Those guys never quit.
excon
It was a good thing for the people who voted her in. It saved the taxpayers a ton of money in legal costs related to the phoney ethics charges . They also got in return a Governor who could run the state without the distractions that those bogus charges brought.
speechlesstx
Mar 23, 2011, 03:52 AM
"I suspect NOW hasn't come to Palin's defense because the group agrees with Maher,”
LOL!
Obviously, you approve of the hypocrisy.
NeedKarma
Mar 23, 2011, 04:01 AM
Obviously, you approve of the hypocrisy.
Don't even know what that means but I do know she's dumb as a stump. Well she does know how to soak money out of dumb people.
smoothy
Mar 23, 2011, 05:25 AM
Really... what proof is there of that.
Obama says he visited 57 states, and said it more than once.
Unless there are 7 states that are secret to the American public... thats stupidity of an epic level.
tomder55
Mar 23, 2011, 05:34 AM
Did anyone read or see the speech she made in India last week ? It was outstanding ,as good as anything coming out of any other American politician .
It was much better than the President saying he would fund Brazil deep water drilling so they could sell it to us http://indiatoday.intoday.in/site/Story/132915/india/sarah-palin-america-and-india-are-a-testament-to-the-positive-force-of-human-aspirations.html
excon
Mar 23, 2011, 05:41 AM
did anyone read or see the speech she made in India last week ? It was outstanding ,as good as anything coming out of any other American politician Hello again, tom:
The problem is, she hasn't LEARNED anything since it became obvious that she didn't KNOW anything... Being from Wasilla, and/or being a Governor of Alaska didn't require that she have a comprehensive view of the world.. Back then, I said that, that she'd be a formidable candidate if she'd just LEARN a little bit...
Guess what?? She can still see Russia from her house.
excon
tomder55
Mar 23, 2011, 05:43 AM
I just linked to her address to India . You did not have the time to read it before your baseless claim.
excon
Mar 23, 2011, 05:50 AM
You did not have the time to read it before your baseless claim.Hello again, tom:
It's true, I don't follow her hoping that she'll all of a sudden make sense... Oh, that girl can give a speech... She can rile up a crowd... But, that doesn't mean she knows anything - she doesn't.
excon
tomder55
Mar 23, 2011, 06:15 AM
Was Maher referring to 'The War Against Terrorists' ?
speechlesstx
Mar 23, 2011, 06:25 AM
Was Maher referring to 'The War Against Terrorists' ?
Ba dum bump. :D
speechlesstx
Apr 19, 2011, 10:40 AM
Ex, this girl can make sense, she's even a conservative atheist, but the Goracle's new Current TV chief thinks S.E. Cupp should have never been born. Last week Olby tweeted (http://twitter.com/KeithOlbermann/status/58582265495683072):
On so many levels she's a perfect demonstration of the necessity of the work Planned Parenthood does
When Cupp objected to the idea he thinkd her parents should have aborted her he continued (http://twitter.com/KeithOlbermann/status/58610981579919361):
she's an idiot - and her gender is irrelevant to that truth. Like Palin.
Good to know Olby is on board with Obama's "new era of civility," especially when it comes to women. I hope Al Gore is proud of his new hire.
excon
Apr 19, 2011, 10:53 AM
Hello again, Steve:
Yeah, the goricle and his crew... What bastards..
Didja catch Hannity last night? He looked his guest in the eye, and with a straight face, asked her what is causing all those tornado's? She didn't know either?? They both threw up their hands and looked dumbfounded.
I wonder why he didn't ask the 600 lb gorilla sitting in the room... Bwa, ha ha ha.
excon
tomder55
Apr 19, 2011, 11:17 AM
S.E. CUPP replies :
I want to take a moment to comment on the incident that occurred last week. In case you were all busy doing other things, and missed it (wish I could say the same) Current TV news director Keith Olbermann took to Twitter on Thursday to, well, wish me unborn. Yes, seriously. I was, in all honesty, prepared to let this dumb story carry on in the gutter without any help from me, but unfortunately Keith is still prattling on about it, the media is still addressed it, and I feel as though I have an obligation to my fans, my employer, and most importantly, my parents to address it myself, here, on my own show. So here goes.
To briefly recap, on Wednesday of last week I was invited on the Joy Behar Show on CNN HLN, where Joy, Jerry Springer and I had a civilized, albeit pointed discussion about Planned Parenthood. I said that I didn’t think I should have to fund with my tax dollars an organization that I fundamentally disagree with, as someone who is pro-life. The conversation was robust but at times conciliatory. And I think we all left feeling like we had a good debate on a very serious issue.
The next day I took off for Ohio to give a speech at Miami University, and later that afternoon someone alerted me to the following post by Olbermann on Twitter:
“On so many levels she’s a perfect demonstration of the necessity of the work Planned Parenthood does.”
Later in the day, when pressed by outraged readers, he kind of clarified, writing:
“I never mentioned abortion. I said her parents could have used counseling by PP rather than get the results they did.”
And then:
“I insinuated her parents would’ve helped the earth had they consulted PP for birth control”
And then:
“I didn’t say she should have been aborted. I said her parents could’ve used PP to learn how not to raise a moron.”
If you’re confused, that’s probably because backpeddling can be incredibly disorienting. I don’t know if his attempts at clarifying hurt his cause or help him, but over the weekend he has continued to dig himself deeper, bizarrely accusing me of lying but refusing to say about what.
The good folks at Mediaite, National Review, FoxNews.com and dozens of other outlets have pointed out that nothing I said in the Joy Behar interview was inaccurate or dishonest. And most people have also pointed out that Keith Olbermann’s nasty suggestion that I shouldn’t exist is, to put it mildly, hitting below the belt. I won’t waste my time and yours pointing out the flaws in his “arguments” or telling you what you already know – that wishing someone dead is a lousy way to make a point.
But I do want to say a couple things.
First, I’m Sorry.
I’m sorry to my parents. I’m a pundit and a columnist and an author, and I choose to write and speak about controversial issues. For that, sometimes I am rewarded with death threats and hate mail. It’s part of the job, but you never get used to hearing that someone wants you dead. Nonetheless, this career was my choice.
But my parents never asked to be challenged on their politics, and they especially never asked to be challenged on their personal decisions, decisions like whether they wanted to keep me or not. They are quite simply, the greatest people I know, so calling into question their character is something I’m not okay with.
But rather than say something I would later regret in the heat of the moment, I allowed my mother to respond to Mr. Olbermann. It’s currently up on the Blaze, and it is better than anything I could write on the matter.
Two, this is bigger than Mr. Olbermann (as most things are.) For many of us, on both sides of the aisle, abortion is a VERY serious and sensitive matter. We care deeply about right-to-life issues, and those of us who are fortunate enough to have a public platform through with to speak about them – either on the pro-life or pro-choice side – recognize that that mantle is a privilege and an honor, and should not be treated lightly or taken for granted. Abortion isn’t a punch line, nor is it a weapon. And if we’re going to have a meaningful conversation about it, well it CERTAINLY shouldn’t be within the crass and limiting confines of 140 characters. Twitter isn’t the best place to debate the value of life. And I’m sure Mr. Olbermann regrets not choosing his words more carefully.
Finally, what now? While the media and the blogosphere debate the imprudence of Olbermann’s words, the voices that should be speaking out are strangely silent. So I’ll ask directly:
Are you proud, Mr. Gore, of your new hire? Are you comfortable allowing Mr. Olbermann to represent your media venture? He’s the face of Current TV?
Planned Parenthood: Keith Olbermann does you no favors speaking on your behalf. If your goal is to convince the country that abortion assistance isn’t the primary focus of your organization, well certainly seems like he’s unaware of that. Do you approve of Mr. Olbermann’s cheapening of the abortion issue?
And NOW, the National Organization for Women: Where are you? I’m a woman. Women’s rights and in particular the abortion issue are huge parts of your national platform. Anything to say? Any fingers to wag? Any comment at all?
I’m happy to debate women’s rights, and do so often and with alacrity. If anyone from Current TV, Planned Parenthood, or NOW wants to have a meaningful discussion about those issues, this chair is open. Come on in.
Until then, I’m sure Keith Olbermann will be more than happy to fill the vacuum left by your deafening silence.
speechlesstx
Apr 19, 2011, 11:21 AM
Hello again, Steve:
Yeah, the goricle and his crew... What bastards..
Didja catch Hannity last night?? He looked his guest in the eye, and with a straight face, asked her what is causing all those tornado's? She didn't know either??? They both threw up their hands and looked dumbfounded.
I wonder why he didn't ask the 600 lb gorilla sitting in the room... Bwa, ha ha ha.
excon
I don't watch Hannity either. Was SE Cupp or Sarah Palin the 600 lb gorilla in the room? Otherwise I have no idea what this has to do with anything I posted.
NeedKarma
Apr 19, 2011, 11:27 AM
Otherwise I have no idea what this has to do with anything I posted.Idiots on both sides say dumb things. I thought that was obvious. You only show one side of the story.
excon
Apr 19, 2011, 11:42 AM
I don't watch Hannity either. Was SE Cupp or Sarah Palin the 600 lb gorilla in the room? Otherwise I have no idea what this has to do with anything I posted.Hello again, Steve:
I thought we were talking about dumb things people on TV say. Guess not.
excon
speechlesstx
Apr 19, 2011, 01:41 PM
Idiots on both sides say dumb things. I thought that was obvious. You only show one side of the story.
Sure looks like to me that both sides are represented, Olby made an a$$ of himself and Cupp responded, tom posted it up there. By all means, though, show us what idiotic thing she said that deserved the head of a TV network publicly wishing she had been aborted. Come on, put up or shut up.
speechlesstx
Apr 19, 2011, 01:42 PM
Hello again, Steve:
I thought we were talking about dumb things people on TV say. Guess not.
excon
No, this thread is about insensitivity - hatred toward is more like it - to women and the hypocrisy of the left on the issue.
NeedKarma
Apr 19, 2011, 01:54 PM
No, this thread is about insensitivity - hatred toward is more like it - to women and the hypocrisy of the left on the issue.I completely dispute the charaterization of what the 'left' believes.
speechlesstx
Apr 19, 2011, 02:22 PM
I completely dispute the charaterization of what the 'left' believes.
And I'm still waiting for you to put up or shut up on what idiotic thing Cupp said that deserved Olbermann publicly wishing she had been aborted. I've supported my case on liberal hypocrisy toward women, your turn.
NeedKarma
Apr 19, 2011, 02:32 PM
I answered you here: Ask Me Help Desk - View Single Post - NOW chief: some women are just whores (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/2777238-post48.html)
Try to keep up.
Thank goodness there's no conservative hypocrisy eh? LOL!
speechlesstx
Apr 19, 2011, 03:04 PM
I answered you here: Ask Me Help Desk - View Single Post - NOW chief: some women are just whores (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/2777238-post48.html)
Try to keep up.
Try to keep up? Exactly, NK. That's the claim you made that I've twice now asked you to back up. What idiotic thing did Cupp say? Prove your claim.
NeedKarma
Apr 19, 2011, 03:25 PM
What idiotic thing did Cupp say? Prove your claim.I never claimed such a thing - you are lying through your teeth writing here that I did say that. I'm not surprised at this.
speechlesstx
Apr 19, 2011, 04:56 PM
I never claimed such a thing - you are lying through your teeth writing here that I did say that. I'm not surprised at this.
I'm not surprised that you're this clueless.