Posted on 07/26/2010 6:37:01 PM PDT by pissant
It’s no “attack”. It’s the absolute truth.
That is smart like the Iranian mullahs and the Taliban are smart when they demand that women cover their faces with nurkahs , stay home and not be heard from.
Here, you might want to look at this. Fits right in with your agenda:
Women: Know Your Limits! Harry Enfield
http://www.bing.com/videos/watch/video/women-know-your-limits-harry-enfield-bbc-comedy/155193ce50eb8f7a89d0155193ce50eb8f7a89d0-165675992049?q=youtube%20women%20know%20your%20liits&FORM=VIRE2
Oh gosh no. These people I do not view as my “enemies”.
There would clearly be some cognitive dissonance occuring if that were the case, since I stated clearly that these were people that I liked and respected.
You and I live in the “hated” Northeast. We have to figure something out before the really motivated Freepers decide we are guilty by assciation and we end up on the wrong side due to geography...:)
Here is my approach to dealing with liberalism without losing my grip. I view liberalism as the enemy, not ALL the adherents to it as a rule, because not all of them ARE aherents to liberalism. They just don’t know history and haven’t thought it through. (Note: Category 1 and Category 3 below are “adherents” in my opinion.)
As for the woman in the anecdote, I didn’t say I got through to her. The point was, she listened, really listened, which gives me some hope. (and I told her this) She isn’t an example of someone I “got through to”. She is an example of the best of category 2 listed below.
I abhor Liberalism because I view it as the greatest threat to our country. But I don’t view ALL liberals in the same light.
Perhaps it will help if I explain how I classify liberals (because I DO categorize them...they are not all “the same” to me)
1.) Hard Core Leftists: These people understand the effects of liberalism, but they are interested in their ideology, the redistribution of wealth, equality of outcomes, diversity, gender neutrality, citizens of the world, etc. etc. etc. This encompasses devoted members of organizations such as ANSWER, Code Pink, MoveOn.org, and so on, in addition to activists on the Left of many stripes. I detest and despise these people.
2.) Caring and Sensitive Liberals: These are people who, for the most part, genuinely care. They generally aren’t ideologically driven. They see and feel suffering and feel compelled to help in some way. They are the targets of the liberal politicians, because they can be swayed by emotion and single stage thinking. For example, they often don’t have a problem with the concept of welfare, because they cannot imagine what could be wrong with helping out someone who doesn’t have enough money to buy clothes and food by giving them money. A lot of them subscribe to the concept that if someone has done evil, it wasn’t their fault because society let them down, they had a bad childhood, they don’t have enough money or whatever. They are big into “root causes”, because people aren’t evil, they are made evil by circumstances. If we address that by rehabilitating them, giving them money, or a better place to live, they will be productive citizens. This accounts for the majority of liberals that I know. I often feel anger for their stands on certain issues, and when I don’t, I sometimes feel frustrated by simply observing them. I recognize that these people may be as great a danger to our republic as the Hard Core Leftists due to their numbers and support of politicians that have and are damaging our country. But I don’t think many of these folks are beyond redemption. I view many of them as intelligent, thoughtful people who would think differently if they were forced by either circumstance or simple introspection to honestly re-examine their views in a new light and think things through. I have many people I know, love and respect who fall into this category. I don’t hate or dislike these people.
3.) Dumb-Ass Liberals: These are the people who will pull the lever for a Democrat no matter what. They don’t think about the issues. They don’t consider the consequences. They couldn’t tell you at any time who their representatives are and couldn’t even guess at the three branches of our government. But they will faithfully vote Democrat because the candidate is the right party/color/race/gender and has a “D” after their name. They go into the voting booth and put marks on one side of the ballot without knowing or caring who the candidates are or what they stand for. I have a contempt and distaste for this stripe of Liberal.
Pissant, I see you waded into the ‘women’s vote’ battle!
I made that mistake several years ago and got about the same responses. IF I could assure all the liberal women (and TOO many so called conservatives) could not be allowed to vote, I would gladly give up my vote. Women watch too much Oprah and the view and still don’t understand what power they have.
A good example is Hillary....we should have a man, a STRONG man for Secty. of State, especially dealing with all the machismo coming out of the middle east and south of the border. On the world stage we need strong men, not women.
I know it’s a shock for some.....but women are NOT qualified for every job.
“So it doesn’t even faze you that she has said Global warming is real or that she supports the LOST Treaty? Or was she for it before she was against it?”
Or how about her ‘path to legalization’ ....
OR her support of McCain’s tarp where she belittled the rest of the republican congress for not going along with him on it??
That doesn’t faze them either.
Hunter/Bachmann 2012
It’s mostly a tongue in cheek argument about women voting. There is slim to no chance that it would ever be repealed. Even if the 19A was overturned, most states, if not all, would allow female voting. But it’s a great issue to rile the newly minted Palin feminists.
Yep. :<)
I can’t wait until 2012, when the gop decides it’s Romney/Palin. What will they do then?
by golly, that’s exactly what a pioneering female leader, who damn near singlehandedly killed off the egregious ERA (with Reagan’s help), is like. The taliban.
It is hopeless until the hard cold truth hits them in the face. It will eventually.
Even then, denial will prevail for a while.
Remember, McCain chose her because she was a woman and she was a maverick by going against her party. Those were the two reasons he gave.
Bite your tongue!!!
(though its a distinct possibility)
I wonder how much of those comments were taken out of context....Schlafly usually says ar more...also, read the author’s bio..she “once danced across the stage at the National Theater with Liberace”
I wonder how much of those comments were taken out of context....Schlafly usually says far more...also, read the author’s bio..she “once danced across the stage at the National Theater with Liberace”
Nothing phases the cultists.
Exhibit #3, your honor, demonstrating that these people, who claim to be conservatives, are in fact, a CULT.
As far as her ideas on females being president are concerned, she is no different from the Taliban.
Neither she nor I have said never to a female prez. It just offends you that we don’t think Palin is the one.
“Best Post of The Thread”
I second that.
/back to sleep now
Phyllis Schlafly is the “original mama grizzlie”?
Since when?
“and doesn’t back Palin.”
How many voters under 30 have even heard of Phyllis Schlafly?
Wonder how the Palinstinians are going to spin this one?
Spin what?
Sarah Palin endorses, and things start moving. Exactly how relevant is Phyllis Schlafly right now?
We will see if things start moving in the general elections.
One thing that isn’t going to be moving, to our dismay, is Juan McCain. That appears to be one big success in the Palin endorsement book.
Yippee
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.