4 ms·

This is such absurd mental gymnastics, I think this amounts to trolling. 1. Hillary never voted against marriage equality as a senator. You blame her for what

by cmurf 10y ago

This is such absurd mental gymnastics, I think this amounts to trolling. 1. Hillary never voted against marriage equality as a senator. You blame her for what her husband did in 1996, which he has since said was a mistake. Do you hold any of the over 300 Republicans who voted in favor of DOMA accountable? Do you hold any of the Republicans to this day who disagree with the Obergefell ruling, including Donald Trump, and want to unwind it at a local level? Saying Hillary is a bigot is demonstrably wrong, at least she is completely committed to the Obergefell ruling at the national and local level. Unlike Trump who has clearly said he does not favor gay marriage. And yes, Trump is a blatant racist. You have to be exceptionally oblivious to ignore even the recent examples of birtherism, and the Central Park 5 - who by the way are innocent and Trump still said last week nope, nope, they were guilty. He's a loon or he's a con, take your pick. 3. Wrong, something was done. Counties across the country got conned into buying fancy electronic voting machines, which are now sufficiently obsolete the companies that sold them do not exist, do not support that hardware anymore, and we're at a net higher risk than we were before. We had a bunch of high tech nut cases who sold governments across the country a bill of goods. Next time, try pen and paper.

striking 10y ago
1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6I1-r1YgK9I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6I1-r1YgK9I She was against it at some point, for sure.
- cmurf 10y ago
  Do you realize that video is her arguing against a constitutional amendment to define marriage as ONLY between a man and a women? And which is the better moral position: flip flopping, if in fact she did, on gay marriage where today she very clearly supports it and has precisely articulated why including fully supporting the Obergefell vs Hodges ruling; or someone who explicitly stands against it, in favor of states making their own decisions, and is in favor of a judge who was no friend of the LGBT community? Trump says he would defend the LGBTQ community. How? By nominating another Scalia, he has said. Scalia in Lawrence vs Texas, is lamenting that mere disagreement with people's choices (i.e. sexual behavior) can no longer be a reason for putting them in jail. That's who Donald consistently claims he wants as a judge on the Supreme Court. Whether it's bigotry or bad judgement, it is bad policy. And only one party right now stands on the side of LGBT rights, and it is not the Republican party at all by a very wide margin.
  - hiringmanager 10y ago
    She gets no credit for pretending to be pro-gay rights after the fact. IT's not flip flopping its pandering. Trump doesn't pander. He doesn't care about gays much he's not courting the gay vote, but that's appropriate- government should be out of our lives not denying our rights. Obama could have taken action in 2008. He didn't. He continued to oppose gay marriage. Did hillary stand up to him? Of course not. You guys think we have to vote for you otherwise we're self hating or some other bullshit.... but we don't. You are going to be in big trouble when the republicans implode and are replaced by libertarians, or they loosen up on social issues and obsolete the libertarian that way. The religious right is dying out. So when a serious party offers both economic freedom and social freedom, the democrats-- who pretend to offer social freedom and don't even pretend to offer economic freedom -- are going to be DOA. Unless you fool all the people all the time that all the people are racist and sexist.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - cmurf 10y ago
      You cannot prove she's pretended or pandering. But let's play a game where we have proof she's merely accommodating gay marriage advocacy, but personally doesn't actually agree with it. Which is the better political bet? To vote for the person who gives you what you seek? Or vote for the person who states, without reservation that they are opposed to gay marriage, support states right to unwind the Obergefell ruling, and nominate socially conservative judges like Antonin Scalia who happened to vote against Obergefell, the very ruling that grants you that which you claim to seek. You're simply not credible on this. You're willfully delusional or ignorant on the topic. You have grossly and very obviously mistaken the forest for the trees.
    - spdustin 10y ago
      I applaud you for standing up to those who would defend your rights as a gay man, asserting your strength of character and courage of conviction. I have nothing I'll to say about your choosing to support a candidate who gives you that freedom to fight your own battles as you see fit. Consider this, in addition to your position: Your assertion that Hillary is pandering to the LGBTQ community may be based on a faulty premise. You're convinced of Donald's position on gay rights as laissez-faire, and that informs your view of Hillary's "pandering". But what if, as is the hope of anyone who speaks out about their beliefs to a political leader whose support would help their cause, Hillary was truly convinced that she was wrong, and has legitimately changed her mind? Isn't that the outcome the LGBTQ community would want? To have effectively changed the mind of such a political leader? Further, is it possible that it's closed-minded to refuse to acknowledge that Hillary may have learned something? That she accepted new facts, and adjusted her position as a result of them? Finally, can you appreciate the perspective that others may have, when they witness a gay man deny that Hillary may have actually, sincerely, really and truly changed her mind, and that she now stands with the gay community? The perspective: "This guy is just as closed minded as he claims Hillary is."
hiringmanager 10y ago
> This is such absurd mental gymnastics Gee thanks for giving me credit for daring to express an opinion in what is well known to be territory hostile to anything that isn't left of stalin. But your presumptions about me are exactly the kind of arrogance and disdain that reveals the left for how illiberal they really are. 1. I blame Hillary for her public statements. You don't get to put words in my mouth, which is effectively lying. Shame on you. Since you bring up the number of republicans who voted in favor of DOMA, you know that 3/4 of congressional democrats voted for it too, right? You're trying to desperately paint me with the brush of hypocrisy, but you're falling subject to your own bigotry. I'm not a republican, silly. >And yes, Trump is a blatant racist. Do you think if you repeat it enough times that will make it true? Do you care that Hillary talks about "needy latinos" and was friends with Robert Byrd? Do you realize that just constantly asserting he is racist, after 8 years of you guys saying the ONLY POSSIBLE REASON one could disagree with Obama is they are racist? You realize how arrogant asinine and anti-intellectual it is to reduce every conversation about every topic to an accusation of racism or sexism, especially when you guys engage in both constantly? > recent examples of birtherism A campaign tactic that Hillary started in the primaries against Obama, and yet you blame Trump for. Talk about mental gymnastics! 3. ITs the electronic voting machines which are the source of voter fraud I'm talking about. I even mentioned the software... please try and pay attention. You guys are too easy to trigger with your flames. Yes, I'm gay. Yes, I am not a leftist. Get over it. Try opening your mind to the possibilities that I might be a rational person and understand why. After all, this government controlled, one size fits all "we know best" approach is exactly why your policies constantly fail the american people and in fact why we have not recovered from the crash of 2008.

by cmurf 10y ago

striking 10y ago

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6I1-r1YgK9I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6I1-r1YgK9I She was against it at some point, for sure.

cmurf 10y ago
Do you realize that video is her arguing against a constitutional amendment to define marriage as ONLY between a man and a women? And which is the better moral position: flip flopping, if in fact she did, on gay marriage where today she very clearly supports it and has precisely articulated why including fully supporting the Obergefell vs Hodges ruling; or someone who explicitly stands against it, in favor of states making their own decisions, and is in favor of a judge who was no friend of the LGBT community? Trump says he would defend the LGBTQ community. How? By nominating another Scalia, he has said. Scalia in Lawrence vs Texas, is lamenting that mere disagreement with people's choices (i.e. sexual behavior) can no longer be a reason for putting them in jail. That's who Donald consistently claims he wants as a judge on the Supreme Court. Whether it's bigotry or bad judgement, it is bad policy. And only one party right now stands on the side of LGBT rights, and it is not the Republican party at all by a very wide margin.
- hiringmanager 10y ago
  She gets no credit for pretending to be pro-gay rights after the fact. IT's not flip flopping its pandering. Trump doesn't pander. He doesn't care about gays much he's not courting the gay vote, but that's appropriate- government should be out of our lives not denying our rights. Obama could have taken action in 2008. He didn't. He continued to oppose gay marriage. Did hillary stand up to him? Of course not. You guys think we have to vote for you otherwise we're self hating or some other bullshit.... but we don't. You are going to be in big trouble when the republicans implode and are replaced by libertarians, or they loosen up on social issues and obsolete the libertarian that way. The religious right is dying out. So when a serious party offers both economic freedom and social freedom, the democrats-- who pretend to offer social freedom and don't even pretend to offer economic freedom -- are going to be DOA. Unless you fool all the people all the time that all the people are racist and sexist.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - cmurf 10y ago
    You cannot prove she's pretended or pandering. But let's play a game where we have proof she's merely accommodating gay marriage advocacy, but personally doesn't actually agree with it. Which is the better political bet? To vote for the person who gives you what you seek? Or vote for the person who states, without reservation that they are opposed to gay marriage, support states right to unwind the Obergefell ruling, and nominate socially conservative judges like Antonin Scalia who happened to vote against Obergefell, the very ruling that grants you that which you claim to seek. You're simply not credible on this. You're willfully delusional or ignorant on the topic. You have grossly and very obviously mistaken the forest for the trees.
  - spdustin 10y ago
    I applaud you for standing up to those who would defend your rights as a gay man, asserting your strength of character and courage of conviction. I have nothing I'll to say about your choosing to support a candidate who gives you that freedom to fight your own battles as you see fit. Consider this, in addition to your position: Your assertion that Hillary is pandering to the LGBTQ community may be based on a faulty premise. You're convinced of Donald's position on gay rights as laissez-faire, and that informs your view of Hillary's "pandering". But what if, as is the hope of anyone who speaks out about their beliefs to a political leader whose support would help their cause, Hillary was truly convinced that she was wrong, and has legitimately changed her mind? Isn't that the outcome the LGBTQ community would want? To have effectively changed the mind of such a political leader? Further, is it possible that it's closed-minded to refuse to acknowledge that Hillary may have learned something? That she accepted new facts, and adjusted her position as a result of them? Finally, can you appreciate the perspective that others may have, when they witness a gay man deny that Hillary may have actually, sincerely, really and truly changed her mind, and that she now stands with the gay community? The perspective: "This guy is just as closed minded as he claims Hillary is."

hiringmanager 10y ago

> This is such absurd mental gymnastics Gee thanks for giving me credit for daring to express an opinion in what is well known to be territory hostile to anything that isn't left of stalin. But your presumptions about me are exactly the kind of arrogance and disdain that reveals the left for how illiberal they really are. 1. I blame Hillary for her public statements. You don't get to put words in my mouth, which is effectively lying. Shame on you. Since you bring up the number of republicans who voted in favor of DOMA, you know that 3/4 of congressional democrats voted for it too, right? You're trying to desperately paint me with the brush of hypocrisy, but you're falling subject to your own bigotry. I'm not a republican, silly. >And yes, Trump is a blatant racist. Do you think if you repeat it enough times that will make it true? Do you care that Hillary talks about "needy latinos" and was friends with Robert Byrd? Do you realize that just constantly asserting he is racist, after 8 years of you guys saying the ONLY POSSIBLE REASON one could disagree with Obama is they are racist? You realize how arrogant asinine and anti-intellectual it is to reduce every conversation about every topic to an accusation of racism or sexism, especially when you guys engage in both constantly? > recent examples of birtherism A campaign tactic that Hillary started in the primaries against Obama, and yet you blame Trump for. Talk about mental gymnastics! 3. ITs the electronic voting machines which are the source of voter fraud I'm talking about. I even mentioned the software... please try and pay attention. You guys are too easy to trigger with your flames. Yes, I'm gay. Yes, I am not a leftist. Get over it. Try opening your mind to the possibilities that I might be a rational person and understand why. After all, this government controlled, one size fits all "we know best" approach is exactly why your policies constantly fail the american people and in fact why we have not recovered from the crash of 2008.