Hillary clinton sexiest woman of the 21st century!

[PSGator66]

According to SNL star (SNL and star don't belong in the same sentence) Seth Meyers. Either this guy is just another blind liberal or he is on bath salts.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2013/01/16/snl-star-hillary-clinton-sexy

[wgbgator]

So, you don't find her sexy?

[orangeblueorangeblue]

I don't find her sexy.

I'm not sure I understand the SNL/star comment though.

[wgbgator]

I don't find her sexy.

I'm not sure I understand the SNL/star comment though.

I mean, he's hosted Weekend Update, the ESPYs and the WH Correspondents dinner. It doesnt get bigger than that. :)

[g8orbill]

the thought of the hildabeast and sexy in the same sentence almost made me lose my breakfast

[wgbgator]

the thought of the hildabeast and sexy in the same sentence almost made me lose my breakfast

Almost. So, the subtext here is that some part of you does find her sexy. ;)

[Gatorrick22]

So, you don't find her sexy?

Sexy as a donkey that was rode hard and put away wet. She's one sexy BEAST!

[wgbgator]

Sexy as a donkey that was rode hard and put away wet. She one sexy BEAST!

Another person who finds her sexy. And apparently farm animals too.

[rivergator]

Actually, Meyers didn't call her the sexiest woman of the century. But other than that ...

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Right, he said millennium.

[Gatorrick22]

Another person who finds her sexy. And apparently farm animals too.

:laugh::laugh:

She's ugly, but I wouldn't call her a farm animal.

[wgbgator]

That was just a prediction. There's still time for someone else to lock it down over the next 987 years. Maybe a young up and comer like Elizabeth Warren maybe?

[orangeblueorangeblue]

While I've never found Hillary Clinton attractive I don't understand the attacks on her looks. She's a 65 year old woman, I haven't encountered one that is attractive. Granted, maybe in 40 years I'll think differently.

[rivergator]

Right, he said millennium.

What he said was:

"I think somebody who is getting sexier every year is Hillary Clinton. Every year she seems better at whatever she's doing. By the end of the millennium, she's gonna have it locked down,"

So, yes, if she lives 1,000 more years ....

[orangeblueorangeblue]

You're taking this rather seriously, river.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

You guys are misrepresenting comedic writer Seth Meyers' true words!

[rivergator]

You're taking this rather seriously, river.

the entire thread is based on taking Meyers seriously.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

I mean he said she was sexy. I have to believe he meant that, hyperbole notwithstanding.

[wgbgator]

While I've never found Hillary Clinton attractive I don't understand the attacks on her looks. She's a 65 year old woman, I haven't encountered one that is attractive. Granted, maybe in 40 years I'll think differently.

Nah, she'll be like 105 then. :nervous smile:

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Well I didn't mean *that* 65 year old woman.

[rivergator]

While I've never found Hillary Clinton attractive I don't understand the attacks on her looks. She's a 65 year old woman, I haven't encountered one that is attractive. Granted, maybe in 40 years I'll think differently.

Are there any prominent Democratic women who aren't attacked for their looks by Republicans? Nancy Pelosi is about to turn 72 and conservatives are constantly attacking her looks.
It's what they do.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Well it's not like the Dems don't do similarly with Pubs.

[rivergator]

Well it's not like the Dems don't do similarly with Pubs.


I don't see the focus on looks as much.

[g8orbill]

While I've never found Hillary Clinton attractive I don't understand the attacks on her looks. She's a 65 year old woman, I haven't encountered one that is attractive. Granted, maybe in 40 years I'll think differently.

my comment has nothing to do with her looks and everything to do with her personality and what she believes in

[orangeblueorangeblue]

I don't see the focus on looks as much.

Bachmann ... Palin ... ?

[rivergator]

Bachmann ... Palin ... ?

Two threads on Bachmann:

http://www.gatorcountry.com/swampgas/showthread.php?t=246840&highlight=bachmann

http://www.gatorcountry.com/swampgas/showthread.php?t=241128&highlight=bachmann

neither mention her looks

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Both after she had left the presidential race.

Let's not be daft here.

[rivergator]

Both after she had left the presidential race.

Let's not be daft here.

I have not a clue what that's supposed to mean. We're talking about criticizing looks of female politicians. Then it's "that doesn't count, she wasn't running for president." Makes no sense.
Hillary hasn't run for president for more than four years. You figure criticism of her looks stopped back in early 2008?
Pelosi's never run for president ...

[wgbgator]

I tend to agree with river, but its probably not worth debating. The unarguable double standard is between male and female politicians in general. No one ever discusses whether Mitch McConnell is sexy or not.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

I have not a clue what that's supposed to mean. We're talking about criticizing looks of female politicians. Then it's "that doesn't count, she wasn't running for president." Makes no sense.
Hillary hasn't run for president for more than four years. You figure criticism of her looks stopped back in early 2008?
Pelosi's never run for president ...

Well there are two points:

1. I suspect most of what happened here did so when Bachmann was in the spotlight a lot more. In fact I remember quite a bit of it, posting pictures of her when she didn't look great. Those are lost to the ages. You can choose to not believe, but I suspect you know better.

2. This isn't the only place for "liberals" so using just two threads from this forum is not exactly proof positive that it doesn't happen.

[Row6]

Well it's not like the Dems don't do similarly with Pubs.

Example?

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Yeah I gave two.

[Row6]

Bachmann ... Palin ... ?

Specific examples please? I haven't seen anyone mock their looks. It is common among Republicans about Democratic women, as if their mothers didn't teach them better. My Republican mother did teach me better.

[Swampmaster]

she hasn't aged well--she looks a lot older than her age.

[Row6]

she hasn't aged well--she looks a lot older than her age.

True, but she's worked hard. She was very pretty when younger IMO and could still be so again.

[g8orbill]

she looks like what most women who are 65 and have lived the hard and fast life look like-that doesn't bother me it is what is inside that I find so damned offensive and the fact that she enabled her husband to be a womanizer in exchange for the power- having 4 daughters I don't think the message she sent to young women was the right message concerning fidelity and acceptable behavior

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Specific examples please? I haven't seen anyone mock their looks. It is common among Republicans about Democratic women, as if their mothers didn't teach them better. My Republican mother did teach me better.

Wait, are you really pretending that liberals haven't spoken poorly of either of their looks? Come on.

[gatorman_07732]

I thought those pant suits were so hot

[wygator]

Of the different types of vitriol visited on various parties and politicians, the worst comes from liberals towards conservative black male and female politicians.

[wygator]

Some find power sexy. I, on the other hand, find sexy powerful.

[dallasgatr]

True, but she's worked hard. She was very pretty when younger IMO and could still be so again.

Uh, no....

[CHFG8R]

Wait, are you really pretending that liberals haven't spoken poorly of either of their looks? Come on.

Uh oh! The (D)s are going to the mattresses, in lockstep in their conviction that (R)s are consumate black hats to (D)s consumate White Hats. How dare you point out the base hypocrisy that exists in the two-party pissing contests.

[Row6]

Wait, are you really pretending that liberals haven't spoken poorly of either of their looks? Come on.

You made the charge, so back it up. You might find someone somewhere who did but I haven't heard it, while republican comments on Hillary and Nancy are broadcast nationally almost everyday and appear regularly on backwater spots like TH. There is no equivalency and saying there is is dishonest.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Actually, the charge was made initially by river.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

And it's dishonest to pretend that liberals (both random, anonymous internet posters and pundits alike) didn't play fast and loose the same way with Palin and Bachmann.

[gatormoe1]

Row your blind party bias is overwhelmingly obvious. It's ridiculous how fast you can fill a room with chit if given the opportunity. You're like the baghdad bob of Too Hot.

By the way, Hillary was never, and will never be very pretty. Just by you saying that means two things, you're blind or you are so stuck in your Dem Vs Pub ways, you'll argue anything just for the sake of disagreeing with the other side. It's pathetic.

[wgbgator]

Pretty sure attractiveness and sexiness is entirely subjective. A fortunate thing for ugly people. :)

[Row6]

And it's dishonest to pretend that liberals (both random, anonymous internet posters and pundits alike) didn't play fast and loose the same way with Palin and Bachmann.

Again, examples please.

[Row6]

Row your blind party bias is overwhelmingly obvious. It's ridiculous how fast you can fill a room with chit if given the opportunity. You're like the baghdad bob of Too Hot.

By the way, Hillary was never, and will never be very pretty. Just by you saying that means two things, you're blind or you are so stuck in your Dem Vs Pub ways, you'll argue anything just for the sake of disagreeing with the other side. It's pathetic.

Thanks for demonstrating my point.

[gatormoe1]

Sexy implies some sort of attractiveness in general. Hillary is absolutely disgusting, no sexy qualities to her name. She is successful and thats really the only thing she has going for her that even comes close to adding sexiness.

[Row6]

Pretty sure attractiveness and sexiness is entirely subjective. A fortunate thing for ugly people. :)

Agree, and not germane to political issues, as much as our rightie brethren are fixated on it.

[gatormoe1]

Thanks for demonstrating my point.

What exactly is your point? That you are trying to argue something that you're completely wrong about? You're really going to act like people don't make fun of other peoples looks? I mean how dense or bias do you have to be to actually say/believe this stuff?

Either you aren't all there up top, or you're a really good troll. Because some of the stuff you post/argue.... :whoa:

[wgbgator]

Sexy implies some sort of attractiveness in general. Hillary is absolutely disgusting, no sexy qualities to her name. She is successful and thats really the only thing she has going for her that even comes close to adding sexiness.

Ok, but lets not pretend like this is anything other than an opinion or feeling. Unless there's an objective measure of sexiness you want to introduce to the discussion, that is.

[gatormoe1]

Agree, and not germane to political issues, as much as our rightie brethren are fixated on it.

How can you be sexy without being attractive in some way? From head to toe, she is disgusting. Please give examples of Hillary' sexiness.

[gatormoe1]

Ok, but lets not pretend like this is anything other than an opinion or feeling. Unless there's an objective measure of sexiness you want to introduce to the discussion, that is.

The above post goes for you too, please go ahead and name something sexy about Hillary. She is not attractive, so unless you're blind or 100 years old, that doesn't count.

How is hillary sexy if she isn't the least bit attractive?

[wygator]

Was any female politician, ever, assailed more on her appearance than Florida's own Katherine Harris? Cruella DeVille was one of the kinder insults she received.

[gatormoe1]

na

[wgbgator]

The above post goes for you too, please go ahead and name something sexy about Hillary. She is not attractive, so unless you're blind or 100 years old, that doesn't count.

How is hillary sexy if she isn't the least bit attractive?

I'm not generally attracted to women over 30 years older than me, so I cant tell you what's sexy about Hillary now. Maybe Bill can, or other dudes around her age looking through the eyes of an older man.

But I've seen pictures of her back in the day, she wasnt model pretty, but she was far from "disgusting." I wouldnt have turned it down. Maybe I just like nerdy girls. But that's my opinion. That neither confirms or disproves her sexiness. As I said, its entirely subjective.

[gatormoe1]

Sorry, even pictures of her younger are not flattering at all. Older, she is flat out disgusting.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Again, examples please.

Hassle river about examples first.

[CHFG8R]

I'm not generally attracted to women over 30 years older than me, so I cant tell you what's sexy about Hillary now. Maybe Bill can, or other dudes around her age looking through the eyes of an older man.

But I've seen pictures of her back in the day, she wasnt model pretty, but she was far from "disgusting." I wouldnt have turned it down. Maybe I just like nerdy girls. But that's my opinion. That neither confirms or disproves her sexiness. As I said, its entirely subjective.

I agree with this completely. But I also have a thing for nerdy girls. :joecool:

[CHFG8R]

http://www.google.com/imgres?num=10&hl=en&tbo=d&biw=1093&bih=490&tbm=isch&tbnid=pPODEcEUSnKthM:&imgrefurl=http://neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php%3Fp%3D46142556&docid=neIJDYwXV_RODM&imgurl=http://dc616.4shared.com/img/LdOc4Noq/s7/0.8227196642794354/hillary_clinton_young.jpg&w=400&h=400&ei=GmP4UNXXBYLe8ASNkoHQAw&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=828&vpy=138&dur=1605&hovh=225&hovw=225&tx=206&ty=139&sig=110398655627737025372&page=1&tbnh=125&tbnw=117&start=0&ndsp=15&ved=1t:429,r:6,s:0,i:169

[Row6]

Was any female politician, ever, assailed more on her appearance than Florida's own Katherine Harris? Cruella DeVille was one of the kinder insults she received.

How won dresses or makes themselves up - Boehner's tan or Biden's plugs - is of a different order than mocking their unchangeable physical attributes.

[Row6]

Hassle river about examples first.

Rush, TH, this and many other threads where republicans demonstrate their low standards. Your turn.

[gatormoe1]

How won dresses or makes themselves up - Boehner's tan or Biden's plugs - is of a different order than mocking their unchangeable physical attributes.

Now you're making rules of how one can be made fun of? Wow, this guy...

[CHFG8R]

Rush, TH, this and many other threads where republicans demonstrate their low standards. Your turn.

What color is the sky in Myopiaville?

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Rush, TH, this and many other threads where republicans demonstrate their low standards. Your turn.

Wait, weren't you the one demanding specific examples??

[orangeblueorangeblue]

I mean if things like that count as specific, Maher called both Bachmann and Palin "bimbos."

[orangeblueorangeblue]

He also called Palin the C-word. Olbermann called Palin an "idiot." These, I guess, are not low standards and don't count. Only the other side.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

This also doesn't count, I guess:

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/keith-olbermann-implies-michele-bachmann-is-a-pig-mocks-greta-van-susterens-speech/

Nah, only when the Pubs do it.

[CHFG8R]

He also called Palin the C-word. Olbermann called Palin an "idiot." These, I guess, are not low standards and don't count. Only the other side.

'Tis the way things work in Myopiaville. Amazing how blinded by partisanship some people are. Can't even see how silly they sound through all the rhetorical haze.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

No, no. Only the Pubs do disgusting things like that. The Dems are above it. Except when they aren't. But let's not count those times.

[Row6]

He also called Palin the C-word. Olbermann called Palin an "idiot." These, I guess, are not low standards and don't count. Only the other side.

Maher is a known shock-comic whose show airs once a week for about half of the year on paid cable. Rush is on nationally every weekday and features callers mostly agreeing with him while the small sample on TH confirms the prevalence of these poor manners by all too many right wingers. I'd like to see the posts from the left mocking Barbara or Laura Bush for their attractiveness. Calling someone an idiot is entirely different matter and I'm sure you know that.

[CHFG8R]

I find myself amazed by just the involuntary nature of the reaction. Blind defense of party is like breathing to these people.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Maher is a known shock-comic whose show airs once a week for about half of the year on paid cable. Rush is on nationally every weekday and features callers mostly agreeing with him while the small sample on TH confirms the prevalence of these poor manners by all too many right wingers. I'd like to see the posts from the left mocking Barbara or Laura Bush for their attractiveness. Calling someone an idiot is entirely different matter and I'm sure you know that.

Ah yes. In short, Maher and Olbemann don't count, Rush does.

Gotcha. Confirms my suspicion.

[CHFG8R]

Look! He's still at it.

WOW!

[orangeblueorangeblue]

"Examples, please! (so I can completely disregard them)"

[wgbgator]

If there is a partisan difference that I could point to, it would be the idea of attractiveness. The supposed sex appeal of Palin/Bachmann, etc vs. the supposed unattractiveness of Pelosi, Clinton, etc. The nastly stuff is framed a little differently. I'm not sure you could measure who, is "more" guilty. It really doesnt matter. I think female politicians of all stripes get treated differently than men based on their looks, of that, there is no doubt.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

I really don't think any of them are attractive, but like I said they're all older women and that's sort of the nature of the sexual beast. Maybe when I get older they might have more appeal.

But for that very reason I wouldn't go calling any of them hideous or ugly or whatever. They're older women. I also don't doubt that plenty of Dems have made awful, disparaging remarks about the female Pub leaders and that plenty of Pubs have done similarly. To pretend that one side is inherently "better" or "worse" is idiotic.

[CHFG8R]

If there is a partisan difference that I could point to, it would be the idea of attractiveness. The supposed sex appeal of Palin/Bachmann, etc vs. the supposed unattractiveness of Pelosi, Clinton, etc. The nastly stuff is framed a little differently. I'm not sure you could measure who, is "more" guilty. It really doesnt matter. I think female politicians of all stripes get treated differently than men based on their looks, of that, there is no doubt.

Let me fix this for you.

I think females of all stripes get treated differently than men based on their looks, of that, there is no doubt.

That's called nature. And to be honest, the feminist wing of the (D)s is just as guilty of (below) with their equally unrealistic stand on this.

If there is a partisan difference that I could point to, it would be the idea of attractiveness.

[wgbgator]

I really don't think any of them are attractive, but like I said they're all older women and that's sort of the nature of the sexual beast. Maybe when I get older they might have more appeal.

But for that very reason I wouldn't go calling any of them hideous or ugly or whatever. They're older women. I also don't doubt that plenty of Dems have made awful, disparaging remarks about the female Pub leaders and that plenty of Pubs have done similarly. To pretend that one side is inherently "better" or "worse" is idiotic.

Sure, I'm with you mostly. Based off what I've seen this board:

Pub women: usually decribed as "hot" by their supporters ---> primarily intelligence and competence questioned by other side. Is this fueled by a reaction to their appearance? I.e. "bimbos"

Dem women: described as powerful / strong /able by their supporters ---> other side question appearance, usually in worse terms than their competence or other attributres i.e. "Hildabeast." A reaction to their looks or affiliation?

I'm sure this could flip in a decade or so.

I'm not sure what I can draw from this other than politics is primarily a male dominated and driven discussion. Whatever the case, I don't see the same behavior with male politicians.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

I think that's largely due to who is at the forefront. I would be hard pressed to say Nancy Pelosi or Clinton were as or more attractive than Bachmann or Palin. So the insults gravitate to the easiest target.

I mean I saw some pretty nasty things written about Ann Coulter's appearance. It just depends.

[Row6]

Ah yes. In short, Maher and Olbemann don't count, Rush does.

Gotcha. Confirms my suspicion.

I have my reasons for the difference which you ignore, as you also ignore the examples before you on this thread and many others on TH. One cable comic does not make a pattern, while the echoing of the national leader of one party's thought process by TH posters does.

[CHFG8R]

I really don't think any of them are attractive, but like I said they're all older women and that's sort of the nature of the sexual beast. Maybe when I get older they might have more appeal.

But for that very reason I wouldn't go calling any of them hideous or ugly or whatever. They're older women. I also don't doubt that plenty of Dems have made awful, disparaging remarks about the female Pub leaders and that plenty of Pubs have done similarly. To pretend that one side is inherently "better" or "worse" is idiotic.

I do not see how a reasonable person could call the person in this link (https://www.google.com/search?num=10&hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1093&bih=490&q=young+hillary+clinton&oq=young+hillary+clinton&gs_l=img.3..0l3.1615.5399.0.5858.21.7.0.14.14.0.13 5.857.0j7.7.0...0.0...1ac.1.HKisWx40hLM_) hideous (Ok, the one with the cown pants and glasses is pretty bad). Not going to be confused with Miss Alabama, but not hideous by any means. Given what I know about her now (smart, likes politics) I might have been interested in her back then.

[Row6]

I think that's largely due to who is at the forefront. I would be hard pressed to say Nancy Pelosi or Clinton were as or more attractive than Bachmann or Palin. So the insults gravitate to the easiest target.

I mean I saw some pretty nasty things written about Ann Coulter's appearance. It just depends.

So Barbara and Laura Bush were in some higher plane of physical beauty than the current elder state ladies of the democratic party? I see.

[wgbgator]

I think that's largely due to who is at the forefront. I would be hard pressed to say Nancy Pelosi or Clinton were as or more attractive than Bachmann or Palin. So the insults gravitate to the easiest target.

I mean I saw some pretty nasty things written about Ann Coulter's appearance. It just depends.

Yeah, I can see believing that someone does this more or less than the other side. But its impossible to defend without looking stupid. And what would you gain if you could? The bragging rights of being slightly less misogynist?

[CHFG8R]

Yeah, I can see believing that someone does this more or less than the other side. But its impossible to defend without looking stupid. And what would you gain if you could? The bragging rights of being slightly less misogynist?

Rep. :laugh:

[orangeblueorangeblue]

I have my reasons for the difference which you ignore, as you also ignore the examples before you on this thread and many others on TH. One cable comic does not make a pattern, while the echoing of the national leader of one party's thought process by TH posters does.

Two cable personalities don't count, but one radio guy does.

The hypocrisy is apparent to anyone who would open their eyes to see it.

[Row6]

Yeah, I can see believing that someone does this more or less than the other side. But its impossible to defend without looking stupid. And what would you gain if you could? The bragging rights of being slightly less misogynist?

BTW, Ms Coulter has engaged in this life class nonsense herself, having declared that she and republican woman were better looking than Democrats, more than once and she was serious.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

BTW, Ms Coulter has engaged in this life class nonsense herself, having declared that she and republican woman were better looking than Democrats, more than once and she was serious.

Nobody's arguing the right doesn't do it. Just the ludicrous notion that somehow the left is inherently more noble in such regards.

[Row6]

Two cable personalities don't count, but one radio guy does.

The hypocrisy is apparent to anyone who would open their eyes to see it.

I see you're stuck in turtle mold. next time.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

I see you're stuck in turtle mold. next time.

No, turtle mold = arbitrarily refusing to accept examples that don't validate your completely backwards view of the world.

When you actually believe that one side of the political spectrum is "better" than the other, being called a turtle is actually the best you could hope for. Ostrich is far more appropriate.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

"Oh, how about that this example"

"no, that doesn't count because [fill in the blank]"

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Remember when Chris Matthews called Palin "profoundly stupid." Yeah, that doesn't count because his first name starts with a C.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

When Ed Schultz called Inghram a "slut" that didn't count because he was wearing a red tie, temporarily making him a Republican.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Wow, I never realized how easy it is to validate your own opinions by simply dismissing all evidence to the contrary. Great tip, Row!

[wgbgator]

BTW, Ms Coulter has engaged in this life class nonsense herself, having declared that she and republican woman were better looking than Democrats, more than once and she was serious.

And Bill Maher used to have sex with her. So, maybe he agreed. :joecool:

[wgbgator]

You don't have to fight every battle. Sometimes you can just believe something and let it be, because there is no argument available that is persuasive or doesnt look foolish to the persuadable.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

You don't have to fight every battle. Sometimes you can just believe something and let it be, because there is no argument available that is persuasive or doesnt look foolish to the persuadable.

While that's fair enough, sometimes a warped view of the world tends to affect the way you handle reality.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Particularly when you've invented some unsupportable view of a group of people you engage on the Internet. How can anyone be expected to engage in honest debate when they've blindly vilified someone in the face of reality?

[wgbgator]

While that's fair enough, sometimes a warped view of the world tends to affect the way you handle reality.

We're all guilty of confirmation bias. And of course, we want to think the best of people we affiliate ourselves with. Tactically speaking, there are just some arguments that are unwinnable or counterproductive, even if they are reasonably held beliefs.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

We're all guilty of confirmation bias. And of course, we want to think the best of people we affiliate ourselves with. Tactically speaking, there are just some arguments that are unwinnable or counterproductive, even if they are reasonably held beliefs.

I tend to run on the philosophy that people are people, and given any large group you will find a rather homogeneous overlap in characteristics and behaviors. This is helpful in dealing with people in a relatively neutral way be they liberal, conservative, black, gay, female or fans of Taylor Swift. It's a nice way to head off merit-less generalizations and preconceptions.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

I mean how can one engage someone in debate if that person has unmovable, unsupportable preconceptions that directly impact their view of any political issue? Why would you bother talking to someone like that?

[wgbgator]

I mean how can one engage someone in debate if that person has unmovable, unsupportable preconceptions that directly impact their view of any political issue? Why would you bother talking to someone like that?

Well, I don't consider the point of debating to be persuading your opponent. Usually, debating is about persuading others who are persuadable and sharpening your own arguments. But you do have to have some basic point of agreement to have a debate (i.e. crime is a problem). If those preconceptions don't allow that, then you really can't.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Well I certainly take a fundamentally different approach to these things.

[wgbgator]

Well I certainly take a fundamentally different approach to these things.

Yet we seem capable of having some productive discussions.

[gatormoe1]

I've known before from the threads before the election that Row was completely bias/blind but this thread right here seals it. It's impossible to take him seriously anymore when its so blatantly obvious that he completely disregards anything and everything he wants to just to make his side look as good as possible. It really is a shame that you can't be objective about anything at all... oh well, I guess thats how it goes when you're trying to load up on freebies. Lie, lie, lie --- deflect, deflect, deflect. Carry on.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Yet we seem capable of having some productive discussions.

Link?

[egator1245]

Other than C Rice she is the sexiest Sec of State.

[Swampmaster]

who's hotter: pelosi or hillary?

[Juggernautz]

Darth is failing us!

He hasn't posted any of his pix of her in this thread yet.

[Gatorrick22]

my comment has nothing to do with her looks and everything to do with her personality and what she believes in

Exactly! She's the ultimate "ugly American".

[Gatorrick22]

What exactly is your point? That you are trying to argue something that you're completely wrong about? You're really going to act like people don't make fun of other peoples looks? I mean how dense or bias do you have to be to actually say/believe this stuff?

Either you aren't all there up top, or you're a really good troll. Because some of the stuff you post/argue.... :whoa:

:laugh:


The latter.

[Row6]

Wow, I never realized how easy it is to validate your own opinions by simply dismissing all evidence to the contrary. Great tip, Row!

You're the one who is ignoring the evidence and somehow trying to pretend the issue is any criticism of women politicians (calling them idiots, etc.). I have no problem with criticizing women politicians as harshly as men. I do object to the double standard of criticizing their unchangeable physical characteristics (is Dick Cheney's butt too big? ) which is both dumb and coarse and a denigration of older women in general. That this evidence of a lowering of cultural standards and manners is most prevalent - to the point of being the daily fair of national radio and it's parroting on backwater sites like TH - on the right is undeniable to any fair minded person. You do the math on Bill Maher's influence vs Rush's. Pretending "both sides do it" is mindless split the difference laziness that misses the facts.

I have raised specific points and examples demonstrating my opinion and you continue to ignore them. I understand your difficult position and unless you break some new ground or respond specifically I'll let you have the last word.

PS:

How is calling a politician stupid or an idiot (among your supposed examples) sexist or otherwise within the realm of denigrating women in general (and older ones especially)?

Ed Schultz was forced to apologize and there was no support for his comment. Rush doesn't apologize, the leaders of the republican party apologize to him, apparently too afraid to note what a poor reflection of his parents he represents.

[g8orbill]

geez louise row-not sure how you look yourself in the face sometimes

[Row6]

geez louise row-not sure how you look yourself in the face sometimes

That's my wife's job bill.

Seriously, if you have a point with evidence, please ..... make it.

[g8orbill]

here are just a few-

Bill Maher called Sarah Palin the "C" word and a "dumb twat." Ed Schultz of MSNBC called conservative commentator Laura Ingraham a "right wing slut." Keith Olbermann said Conservative woman writer S.E. Cupp, "…should have been aborted by her parents.” He also called Michelle Malkin a "mashed-up bag of meat with lipstick." Matt Taibbi wrote, “When I read [Malkin’s] stuff, I imagine her narrating her text, book-on-tape style, with a big, hairy set of balls in her mouth.”

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2012/03/05/liberals-protect-misogynist-own

[g8orbill]

many on this thread alone

http://www.gatorcountry.com/swampgas/showthread.php?t=233433

[Row6]

here are just a few-

Bill Maher called Sarah Palin the "C" word and a "dumb twat." Ed Schultz of MSNBC called conservative commentator Laura Ingraham a "right wing slut." Keith Olbermann said Conservative woman writer S.E. Cupp, "…should have been aborted by her parents.” He also called Michelle Malkin a "mashed-up bag of meat with lipstick." Matt Taibbi wrote, “When I read [Malkin’s] stuff, I imagine her narrating her text, book-on-tape style, with a big, hairy set of balls in her mouth.”

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2012/03/05/liberals-protect-misogynist-own

I answered already on half of these, but besides for Schultz being forced to apologize and not being supported by anyone not living under a bridge, the rest of them are either by people with a severely limited audience, are not aimed at the target as women, and certainly not parroted regularly by their audience on their shows or on places like TH. Obviously this tactic resonates with "conservatives" for some reason I'm not interested in explaining.

BTW, the quoting of Breitbart - I won't challenge the authenticity of the quotes - is ironic given his expletive laden and unhinged verbal assaults on those he disagreed with politically. I'm sure you can you-tube them.

[gatormoe1]

omfg Row, you're the most ridiculous poster on Too Hot. Pathetic...

[Row6]

many on this thread alone

http://www.gatorcountry.com/swampgas/showthread.php?t=233433

?? where?

I don't have a problem with people calling women politicians idiots or imbeciles - we do that with the men and if it's a sin we admittedly all do it - it's the rude comments on unchangeable physical attributes which not only affect us all as we get older which I find repugnant, low class, and in this case misogynist, and reflect poorly on us as a society.

[gatormoe1]

Wow Row, you make a lot of rules just so you can be a hypocrite. lol

[Row6]

omfg Row, you're the most ridiculous poster on Too Hot. Pathetic...

If you ever post a comment that rises above a bark or a squeal I might respond.

[gatormoe1]

You're too irrelevant for me to put much thought into anything.

You make a ton of rules just to be a hypocrite, it's quite comical that you can actually do this and act like you're serious. You are all up in arms and ask for examples but then when someone shows you examples, you make a list of excuses for why its ok. Because they don't have a big audience, because they are stupid, because they are only making fun of someone for being stupid... etc etc

You just don't realize how pathetic you look right now. Not even the people on your side are over here agreeing with you and that says a lot. Just give it up, you've been exposed in this thread. Unsubscribe and find another post to fake intelligence on.

By the way, you did respond.

[Row6]

You're too irrelevant for me to put much thought into anything.

You make a ton of rules just to be a hypocrite, it's quite comical that you can actually do this and act like you're serious. You are all up in arms and ask for examples but then when someone shows you examples, you make a list of excuses for why its ok. Because they don't have a big audience, because they are stupid, because they are only making fun of someone for being stupid... etc etc

You just don't realize how pathetic you look right now. Not even the people on your side are over here agreeing with you and that says a lot. Just give it up, you've been exposed in this thread. Unsubscribe and find another post to fake intelligence on.

By the way, you did respond.

I gave examples, and others in rebuttal. I discussed specifically how their's did not fit the issue in question. You and they are free to respond in even more detail or with a logical explanation of how I am wrong. So far you and they have only resorted to simple declarations of this unproven assertion, a tactic I am as immune to as I am to not having a peanut gallery telling me how right I am. I know when I'm right - and admit if I'm uncertain - and the lack of reasoned counter arguments only confirm it.

[gatormoe1]

It's really not hard to figure this out Row. This is basic comprehension and understanding. You are making up a bunch of rules for something to be ok just to fit your agenda. At the end of the day, making fun of someone is making fun of someone. Both sides do it, people in general do it. But you.... you want to sit here and create rules and disregard anything from your side of the fence only to be all up in arms for the other side doing the exact same thing.

It's bad because they are making fun of something they can't change -- Well yes they can, there is surgery, which probably cost the same amount as their clothes.

It's ok to make fun of someone that is stupid -- Why? What if they can't get any smarter? You're making fun of someones mental capacity but making fun of their looks is ok?

If they don't have a big audience its ok -- Again, why? So because they have a small amount of people listening to them, its ok? Thats the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

See you can't just sit here and go willy-nilly making any rules just so your side wins a moral victory. Every politician and every government party lap dog does the same stuff. Quit acting like your chit smells any better than anyone else's.

[Row6]

It's really not hard to figure this out Row. This is basic comprehension and understanding. You are making up a bunch of rules for something to be ok just to fit your agenda. At the end of the day, making fun of someone is making fun of someone. Both sides do it, people in general do it. But you.... you want to sit here and create rules and disregard anything from your side of the fence only to be all up in arms for the other side doing the exact same thing.

It's bad because they are making fun of something they can't change -- Well yes they can, there is surgery, which probably cost the same amount as their clothes.

It's ok to make fun of someone that is stupid -- Why? What if they can't get any smarter? You're making fun of someones mental capacity but making fun of their looks is ok?

If they don't have a big audience its ok -- Again, why? So because they have a small amount of people listening to them, its ok? Thats the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

See you can't just sit here and go willy-nilly making any rules just so your side wins a moral victory. Every politician and every government party lap dog does the same stuff. Quit acting like your chit smells any better than anyone else's.

Sorry, but in my book, speaking of someone's unchangeable physical attributes - and especially when aimed only at women - is bad manners that reflects on us all. You don't agree? Fine, but don't claim it is not happening and mostly from one direction of our political sphere. the evidence says otherwise. Politician's have always and will hopefully always be subject to insults about their intelligence and opinions regardless of gender. My well mannered Republican mother would agree with that - if she were still here.

Nowhere did I say that insults of this form from those on the left was OK or excusable, though I did say - and still do - that it does not resonate with the left for some reason and is not picked up by it's general population. The lack of examples on TH - and the regular examples of this offensive behavior from many on the right here - demonstrates this point. What this says about the left and right is not that one is better than the other - in fact I have many times stated the exact opposite of that and added that some of my best friends who I consider of very high moral character are on the right politically - but that in this one particular area, many of you on the right have developed a bad habit which is lowering standards for political discourse. I think I know where it came from - the leader of party opinion is a low life - but why it resonates is beyond me.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Ed Schultz was forced to apologize and there was no support for his comment.

Therefor dismissable. Got it.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Rush, TH, this and many other threads where republicans demonstrate their low standards. Your turn.

By the way, I took my turn. You can move the goalposts all you like, but the reality is there is no fundamental difference in decency between members of the two parties.

[Row6]

By the way, I took my turn. You can move the goalposts all you like, but the reality is there is no fundamental difference in decency between members of the two parties.

Glad to clear that up but that idea was never advanced by me. I was quite specific in my charge.

[Row6]

Therefor dismissable. Got it.

No, therefore un-emblematic of leftist thought, unlike the example of Rush and his many parrots across America. Surely you get the point and only pretend otherwise.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Yes, reshaping reality again.

When a right leaning pundit says something it reflects on literally every Republican. When a left leaning pundit says something it's "un-emblematic" of leftist thought.

Amazing. Really, think about this.

[wgbgator]

This thread had more staying power than I thought.

[gatorman_07732]

This thread had more staying power than I thought.

Just based on the title of the thread I know it had awesome staying power

[Row6]

Yes, reshaping reality again.

When a right leaning pundit says something it reflects on literally every Republican. When a left leaning pundit says something it's "un-emblematic" of leftist thought.

Amazing. Really, think about this.

Of course I didn't say that either, and your ignoring salient points and rephrasing them is becoming tiresome.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

That's actually precisely what you're saying. You have no salient point; instead you have illusions and goalposts that are breaking land speed records.

[Row6]

That's actually precisely what you're saying. You have no salient point; instead you have illusions and goalposts that are breaking land speed records.

I think we're done. If you decide to focus on points instead of obfuscating let me know. My respect for your opinion can't stand much more of this.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

I did what you wanted and you found arbitrary reasons to dismiss it ... we've been "done" for a long time.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Conservatives do *this* and liberals don't!

Oh, here's a liberal doing that.

No, that doesn't count because [nonsensical reason] and you know it!

I mean it's fascinating the depths a partisan will travel to maintain delusions.

[gatorman_07732]

Wow you guys are digging in :laugh:

[orangeblueorangeblue]

It's staggering.

[gatorman_07732]

It's row :yes:
Both sides do this stuff