Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
John McCain. For one. It's a ridiculous question.
What's ridiculous is how radically far right-wing the Republican Party has become.
yep. what did Mitten's have to say in order for the teapublicans to accept him? Oh yeah- "I'm an extreme conservative"
But now, Yow!!! I never saw such a war on women in my whole life, and it's from REPUBLICANS??????? Darn. They nominate just frankly sex criminals (Herman Cain), men with HAREMS (Newt Gingrich), men stuck in 1929 (Santorum), and two candidates for the SENATE who were in love with rape. Republican men HATE WOMEN!! Who knew?
How does the Republican party 'hate' women? I never did get this sort of thing people keep saying. There are just about as many women in the Republican party as men. Probably more so since exit polls show more Republicans on polls than Democrats.
No, plainly there are not as many women in the GOP, certainly not anymore. You are simply asserting that, but it's false on the face of it.
Let's see, women are 55% of the electorate, or more. We have a majority of the population and we vote more than men do. Obama was elected with the so-called "women's vote." (Not mine, but still.) Poll after poll show women bailing out of Republican positions and candidates and electing Obama and other Dems. Therefore, there cannot possibly be as many Republican women as there used to be.
And lemme tell ya ---- when *I* leave the Republican Party, that's definitely a sinking ship. I wouldn't have left if there was any hope. But migod, those worthless candidates. Those awful warmongering policies. The continual attempted or desired maltreatment of women.
Republicans don't actually succeed in maltreating women because women don't allow that sort of thing these days. But we notice you run brainless boob jobs for vice president and sex criminals for the White House and Senate. Remember Jack Ryan? He's why Obama is now president. Shopped his wife around sex clubs: she didn't cooperate either, divorced him for it and somehow that got out during the Illinois Senate race.........but he tried.
I'm not interested in men who try to control and maltreat women.
Well, naturally.
I suggest you Republicans try to do without 55% of the electorate because you hate women: that'll really work.
No, plainly there are not as many women in the GOP, certainly not anymore. You are simply asserting that, but it's false on the face of it.
Let's see, women are 55% of the electorate, or more. We have a majority of the population and we vote more than men do. Obama was elected with the so-called "women's vote." (Not mine, but still.) Poll after poll show women bailing out of Republican positions and candidates and electing Obama and other Dems. Therefore, there cannot possibly be as many Republican women as there used to be.
And lemme tell ya ---- when *I* leave the Republican Party, that's definitely a sinking ship. I wouldn't have left if there was any hope. But migod, those worthless candidates. Those awful warmongering policies. The continual attempted or desired maltreatment of women.
Republicans don't actually succeed in maltreating women because women don't allow that sort of thing these days. But we notice you run brainless boob jobs for vice president and sex criminals for the White House and Senate. Remember Jack Ryan? He's why Obama is now president. Shopped his wife around sex clubs: she didn't cooperate either, divorced him for it and somehow that got out during the Illinois Senate race.........but he tried.
I'm not interested in men who try to control and maltreat women.
Well, naturally.
I suggest you Republicans try to do without 55% of the electorate because you hate women: that'll really work.
Ironically we Dem's need an opposition party that at least has the appearance of being formidable. Along those lines, I hope they don't Primary-out the few moderates that are left because then they will just be seen as a fringe/insignificant opposition
What is the difference between Democrats Warmongering policies and Republican Warmongering policies?
You are defining the actions of an entire party based on one person. I can't tell you how illogical that sounds. Men mistreat women all of the time. That's not indicative of a political party or a particular ideology. I know plenty of men who only see women as objects of gratification and only good for one thing: being a sex symbol. I don't remember any of them voting for Romney in the last election. Many of them are in the entertainment industry. Many of them are Obama's biggest supporters. Hell, Obama even considered one of them to be 'his favorite rapper."
So you are using a circular argument. Or maybe you didn't understand the question, which is my fault because it was probably ill-phrased.
How exactly does the Republican Party (policy wise, politically) hate women?
Who are 'you Republicans?' I'm in a room by myself and I don't see any Republicans.
It's the "we never saw a war we didn't want to jump into with all four feet" continual war promotion by the Republican Wall Street Journal and the Weekly Standard. If they had their way, we'd be at war with 1) Iran, 2) North Korea, 3) Syria right this moment. In addition to the others we're already fighting, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, whatever. Every time any war opportunity comes up, it's "let's do it! Let's do it!!" --- like the Libya thing, just had to jump in there, according to them, to save Western Civilization, or whatever. As if.
Also, and more important, Republican wars since Bush are the long, ten-year losing-losing-losing wars. The Dem war was Clinton's 10 1/2 week winner, a quick success. I actually have no objection to wars: presidents all want one, it seems to be a perk of office. But to LOSE, repeatedly, for ten and twelve years at a time??? Providing the single greatest expense that is driving us into deficit, like all wars drive all failed governments into bankruptcy? This is no good.
And Obama hasn't exactly gotten out of them with any alacrity, either. On the other hand, he didn't dive into another one. Yet. I think he MAY have Clinton's strategy: weep, weep for the poor Rwandans ------ but never land a single soldier or any supplies, ever.
I can't understand Republican warmongering. It is obvious to me that Syrians are enemies: the more they kill each other and fatally weaken this client state of Iran's, the better off we are! So just mind our own business and stay OUT of it, instead of rushing in there and losing another war for ten years.
The difference is that Republicans lose wars for ten years at a whack and thus ruin our economy; Dems, at least since Vietnam, haven't done that.
Okay, I'll try: politically the Republican Party hates women because they choose horrific sex criminal candidates for high office (Cain, Ryan) or they demean women: the first female vice president was supposed to be a bimbo boob job because she turned on McCain sexually??? Darn. That's really pathetic.
A lot of us were so angry about the Palin disaster because it was so incredibly disrespectful of women to choose someone for high office who was really lacking in IQ -- for her looks!
Reminds me when some of these governors -- Spitzer, Ehrlich -- choose gravely handicapped Lt. Govs. to run with them so they won't have to bother with them later, usually a blind black or a blind woman so they get a twofer. I think that kind of thing is pretty sorry. The Senate candidates, plural, who were cool with rape. It goes on and on. Fundamentalist Mormons are criminally cruel to women all the time and go to jail for it, and so who does the GOP run for president? Yep, a Mormon, thanks a lot. How can I vote for that?? How can any man expect any woman to vote for Newt Gingrich? I mean, really. What woman could? He's the ex out of a horrorbook.
Policy-wise, we see a plethora of Republican state legislator moves to stop abortion, demean and control women with horrible medical forcings like these awful ultrascans they want to do invasively and demeaningly to torture women who are trying to get abortions --- jeepers, that's about the worse thing I ever heard of.
On forums, the posters who froth at the mouth about abortion are 133% male Republicans or other conservatives. It's a higher percentage, even, who want assault rifles available to every psychotic who wants to shoot up a school.
Women don't like our children shot up in schools and movies and malls. I know the Second Amendment is supposed to be a lot more important than children, but you know, women are just funny that way. Have you ever noticed that whenever there is a mass shooting most victims are women and children? Because I have. I notice that every time.
All these awful, awful men are the Republican candidates we're supposed to vote for: yeah, when pigs fly. All these awful, awful policies are Republican obsessions, and they all seem to be meant to hurt women and children and control women.
Republican males can do all that on their own time; I'm not helping them with any of it.
You are saying you are not a Republican? You originally said, "How does the Republican party 'hate' women? I never did get this sort of thing people keep saying." This is a typical Republican protest, so I assumed you are a Republican, protesting my characterization.
I wonder what ever happened to the old William F. Buckley republican's?If so, who are they?
If not, why not?
Also, post your definition of a moderate Republican.
Don't forgot to include why you're for/against them.
My goodness, that was certainly a hostile reply.
Okay, never mind.
It's to get HIS/THEIR definition of the term.What's the argument?No - you ask a loaded question designed SPECIFICALLY to induce argument. Do you still beat your Wife?
The question is subjective buttmunch.
Only in your delusional RW head is it a loaded question.
Get a grip dude...seriously.
*SMH*
why would you say he is RW when you have to ask what RW is?
What is the difference between Democrats Warmongering policies and Republican Warmongering policies?
It's the "we never saw a war we didn't want to jump into with all four feet" continual war promotion by the Republican Wall Street Journal and the Weekly Standard. If they had their way, we'd be at war with 1) Iran, 2) North Korea, 3) Syria right this moment. In addition to the others we're already fighting, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, whatever. Every time any war opportunity comes up, it's "let's do it! Let's do it!!" --- like the Libya thing, just had to jump in there, according to them, to save Western Civilization, or whatever. As if.
Also, and more important, Republican wars since Bush are the long, ten-year losing-losing-losing wars. The Dem war was Clinton's 10 1/2 week winner, a quick success. I actually have no objection to wars: presidents all want one, it seems to be a perk of office. But to LOSE, repeatedly, for ten and twelve years at a time??? Providing the single greatest expense that is driving us into deficit, like all wars drive all failed governments into bankruptcy? This is no good.
And Obama hasn't exactly gotten out of them with any alacrity, either. On the other hand, he didn't dive into another one. Yet. I think he MAY have Clinton's strategy: weep, weep for the poor Rwandans ------ but never land a single soldier or any supplies, ever.
I can't understand Republican warmongering. It is obvious to me that Syrians are enemies: the more they kill each other and fatally weaken this client state of Iran's, the better off we are! So just mind our own business and stay OUT of it, instead of rushing in there and losing another war for ten years.
The difference is that Republicans lose wars for ten years at a whack and thus ruin our economy; Dems, at least since Vietnam, haven't done that.
You are defining the actions of an entire party based on one person. I can't tell you how illogical that sounds. Men mistreat women all of the time. That's not indicative of a political party or a particular ideology. I know plenty of men who only see women as objects of gratification and only good for one thing: being a sex symbol. I don't remember any of them voting for Romney in the last election. Many of them are in the entertainment industry. Many of them are Obama's biggest supporters. Hell, Obama even considered one of them to be 'his favorite rapper."
So you are using a circular argument. Or maybe you didn't understand the question, which is my fault because it was probably ill-phrased.
How exactly does the Republican Party (policy wise, politically) hate women?
Okay, I'll try: politically the Republican Party hates women because they choose horrific sex criminal candidates for high office (Cain, Ryan) or they demean women: the first female vice president was supposed to be a bimbo boob job because she turned on McCain sexually??? Darn. That's really pathetic. A lot of us were so angry about the Palin disaster because it was so incredibly disrespectful of women to choose someone for high office who was really lacking in IQ -- for her looks! Reminds me when some of these governors -- Spitzer, Ehrlich -- choose gravely handicapped Lt. Govs. to run with them so they won't have to bother with them later, usually a blind black or a blind woman so they get a twofer. I think that kind of thing is pretty sorry. The Senate candidates, plural, who were cool with rape. It goes on and on. Fundamentalist Mormons are criminally cruel to women all the time and go to jail for it, and so who does the GOP run for president? Yep, a Mormon, thanks a lot. How can I vote for that?? How can any man expect any woman to vote for Newt Gingrich? I mean, really. What woman could? He's the ex out of a horrorbook.
Policy-wise, we see a plethora of Republican state legislator moves to stop abortion, demean and control women with horrible medical forcings like these awful ultrascans they want to do invasively and demeaningly to torture women who are trying to get abortions --- jeepers, that's about the worse thing I ever heard of. On forums, the posters who froth at the mouth about abortion are 133% male Republicans or other conservatives. It's a higher percentage, even, who want assault rifles available to every psychotic who wants to shoot up a school. Women don't like our children shot up in schools and movies and malls. I know the Second Amendment is supposed to be a lot more important than children, but you know, women are just funny that way. Have you ever noticed that whenever there is a mass shooting most victims are women and children? Because I have. I notice that every time.
All these awful, awful men are the Republican candidates we're supposed to vote for: yeah, when pigs fly. All these awful, awful policies are Republican obsessions, and they all seem to be meant to hurt women and children and control women.
Republican males can do all that on their own time; I'm not helping them with any of it.
Who are 'you Republicans?' I'm in a room by myself and I don't see any Republicans.
You are saying you are not a Republican? You originally said, "How does the Republican party 'hate' women? I never did get this sort of thing people keep saying." This is a typical Republican protest, so I assumed you are a Republican, protesting my characterization.
If so, who are they?
If not, why not?
Also, post your definition of a moderate Republican.
Don't forgot to include why you're for/against them.
If so, who are they?
If not, why not?
Also, post your definition of a moderate Republican.
Don't forgot to include why you're for/against them.
If so, who are they?
If not, why not?
Also, post your definition of a moderate Republican.
Don't forgot to include why you're for/against them.
a better question is why were the moderates driven out of the Democratic Party.
Doesn't anyone post anything meaningful around here?
It's to get HIS/THEIR definition of the term.What's the argument?
The question is subjective buttmunch.
Only in your delusional RW head is it a loaded question.
Get a grip dude...seriously.
*SMH*
why would you say he is RW when you have to ask what RW is?
Did I really have to spell that out?
It's to get HIS/THEIR definition of the term.why would you say he is RW when you have to ask what RW is?
Did I really have to spell that out?
evidently you already have preconceived notions, so why even start thread when you have an obvious bias anyway?
I'm not certain every GOP member is in lock step.
too many isses that can go either way depending on the individual
Bobby Jindal
