Selective Feminism

[Iceman]

Maybe that's because some truths are self-evident.

If it is self evident, than you should be able to explain it...

If you knew that the definition of self-evident is...

1. not needing to be demonstrated or explained; obvious.

...you wouldn't make that post.

Need? That is rather subjective. If it is obvious, than it should be easy to explain, go on, enlightened one...

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Why is equality a good thing in of itself?

Because it conforms to the Constitution and its case law, reflecting the original intent of the Framers.

Due process, equal protection doctrine, and the rule of law in general are predicated on the fact that in a free and just society such as our Constitutional Republic, all citizens are treated as equal by the state.

The 14th Amendment wasn't part of the initial Constitution, or the original Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights weren't even part of the original Constitution. So that nonsense about the "original intent" is bunk.

Why is the 14th Amendment good in of itself?

The American people are first and foremost citizens of the United States, where their inalienable rights cannot be violated by their respective states of residence:

[N]ational citizenship has privileges and immunities protected from state abridgement by the force of the Constitution itself…[e]ven before the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment…

[T]hat federal rights flow to the people of the United States by virtue of national citizenship is beyond dispute.

U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 514 U.S. 779 (1995).

Consequently, the 14th Amendment reaffirms this basic, settled, and fundamental principle of National citizenship, where one’s civil liberties are not subject to majority rule, where one does not forfeit his civil liberties merely as a consequence of his state of residence, and where the states are compelled to obey the Federal Constitution, affording the American citizens living within the states due process and equal protection of the law, as originally intended by the Framers.

 

[Iceman]

Jesus, talk about revisionist history.

If the founders intended to give everyone equal rights, why didn't they?

If the basis of what is morally good is the position of Founding Fathers, than you should support recognizing blacks as 3/5ths of a person, denying them the vote, denying women the vote as well, along with denying those who don't own land the right to vote as well. Along with this, if the Founders' intent is the basis of moral good, than the morally proper position would be also to restrict immigration to Whites only.

I don't think you support these things.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Jesus, talk about revisionist history.

If the founders intended to give everyone equal rights, why didn't they?

If the basis of what is morally good is the position of Founding Fathers, than you should support recognizing blacks as 3/5ths of a person, denying them the vote, denying women the vote as well, along with denying those who don't own land the right to vote as well. Along with this, if the Founders' intent is the basis of moral good, than the morally proper position would be also to restrict immigration to Whites only.

I don't think you support these things.

Say that again.

People think they wanted this really badly they just didnt want it bad enough to fight for it...or want it in public. But they really really did tho

 

[Michelle420]

Have you seen the news over the past couple of years? Sure you have. If you haven't, you've missed a broiling debate on the issue of abortion and contraception, not to mention some deep and wounding misogynistic commentary issued by opponents and supporters of this right passed you by. But enough of that.

In the midst of this heated debate I have noticed something. I have observed how some women treat other women differently than others. I have again noticed how this behavior is widely influenced by political or societal events. I also have taken notice of the hypocrisy that it entails. What I am referring to is known as selective feminism. No doubt you have heard the comments issued forth by the right wing political shock trooper Rush Limbaugh in reference to Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke, and the firestorm that ensued afterwards.

In this instance you have Democrats, pro abortionists and feminists all across America crying bloody murder, saying that Limbaugh should be taken off the air for his comments. In fact, they have said things to the extent of "Fluke is just an ordinary woman, how dare he say such mean things about her?", "He should be taken off the air or apologize post haste!" (Which he did not soon after).

These very same people have gone on to say that Republicans only want to take away their rights to contraceptives and birth control pills, and that the men, as well as the government, should keep their nose out from between their legs, which I find odd to say the least, since they want a right only the government itself can provide, and also that they allow certain men to fight for them and their "freedom." Okay, lets jump the fence here, to the other side of the political spectrum. I made reference to Fluke and Limbaugh, now lets examine David Letterman and Bill Maher, both Liberals, and their comments about Sarah Palin In June of 2009, David Letterman was caught on air making reference to Sarah Palin as a "slutty flight attendant," going on to make a less than polite joke about her underage daughter Willow:

"One awkward moment for Sarah Palin at the Yankee game," Letterman said, "during the seventh inning, her daughter was knocked up by Alex Rodriguez."

After Letterman's comment, Sarah Palin immediately responded, accusing him of making inappropriate and sexually perverted statements that he would "have never said about anyone else's daughter, and that "acceptance of sexually inappropriate jokes about someone's underage daughter, who could be anyone's daughter, contributes to the atrociously [sic] high rate of sexual exploitation of minors by older men who use and abuse others," she went on to say. But wait! We then have Bill Maher who, after finding out that Palin had accepted a job as a contributor to Fox News, made this remark about her and her child, Trig, who has Down Syndrome:

“Sarah Palin agreed to do commentary at Fox News, which is actually very similar to her day job, talking to a baby with Down syndrome. Speaking of dumb s**ts, it’s not because they have breasts. It’s because they are boobs."

Once again Palin and the Republican party were outraged. As you know, Sarah Palin is widely known as Republican nominee John McCain's VP candidate, and a Republican herself. In this instance, only the women on the right wing side of the aisle were heard condemning the remarks. Now, here's the kicker, where were the feminists? Where, indeed, were the female Democrats? Not one was to be heard burning her brassiere over these sexually tinged comments, which leads me to my point.

What you saw here was members of feminism being selective of which women to defend, after she is slandered. But then again, a woman is a woman, right? Wrong. Somehow only a Liberal woman is worth defending, but a Conservative one, well, she's on her own. If you happen to be a Liberal woman reading right now, here is a question for you. How come you will defend a woman such as Sandra Fluke, but not ones such as Sarah Palin? They are both women. How can you not be angered when a woman, akin to yourself in all senses of the word, is sexually denigrated by other men? Might it be because she is a conservative? Or maybe it is because she is a pro life advocate? I fail to see the logic in this rationale that one woman is somehow different than another.

If Liberal women (men too, to an extent) are to be angry at Rush Limbaugh for inappropriately targeting Fluke, they should be equally angry when someone like Bill Maher or David Letterman make crude and sexist comments about Sarah Palin, her daughter, or her mentally afflicted son. To ignore it is to be a hypocrite, to defend it is foolish, and to do so is to take part in the act of selective feminism. Come on ladies, where did all the girl power go? Palin has the same set of ovaries and sexual organs you do, so why is she so vastly different? A woman should be quick to defend one of her own, whether be she a Liberal or Conservative, pro-life or pro-choice. If you are going to be sympathetic toward one woman, be so for all of them. If you are going to be outraged at a man who slanders another woman, again be outraged in unison with her and with all of womankind. These feelings should be indiscriminate. A woman is a woman, regardless of what she believes in or what viewpoints she holds to be true. To borrow a couple of verses, love your enemies as yourself. Do to others as you would have them do to you.

Finally, take heed readers, that some of this can be said for Conservative women too. Remember, every woman should be in this together!

You should credit the author.

Selective Feminism | AthensTalks.com

 

[TemplarKormac]

Have you seen the news over the past couple of years? Sure you have. If you haven't, you've missed a broiling debate on the issue of abortion and contraception, not to mention some deep and wounding misogynistic commentary issued by opponents and supporters of this right passed you by. But enough of that.

In the midst of this heated debate I have noticed something. I have observed how some women treat other women differently than others. I have again noticed how this behavior is widely influenced by political or societal events. I also have taken notice of the hypocrisy that it entails. What I am referring to is known as selective feminism. No doubt you have heard the comments issued forth by the right wing political shock trooper Rush Limbaugh in reference to Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke, and the firestorm that ensued afterwards.

In this instance you have Democrats, pro abortionists and feminists all across America crying bloody murder, saying that Limbaugh should be taken off the air for his comments. In fact, they have said things to the extent of "Fluke is just an ordinary woman, how dare he say such mean things about her?", "He should be taken off the air or apologize post haste!" (Which he did not soon after).

These very same people have gone on to say that Republicans only want to take away their rights to contraceptives and birth control pills, and that the men, as well as the government, should keep their nose out from between their legs, which I find odd to say the least, since they want a right only the government itself can provide, and also that they allow certain men to fight for them and their "freedom." Okay, lets jump the fence here, to the other side of the political spectrum. I made reference to Fluke and Limbaugh, now lets examine David Letterman and Bill Maher, both Liberals, and their comments about Sarah Palin In June of 2009, David Letterman was caught on air making reference to Sarah Palin as a "slutty flight attendant," going on to make a less than polite joke about her underage daughter Willow:

"One awkward moment for Sarah Palin at the Yankee game," Letterman said, "during the seventh inning, her daughter was knocked up by Alex Rodriguez."

After Letterman's comment, Sarah Palin immediately responded, accusing him of making inappropriate and sexually perverted statements that he would "have never said about anyone else's daughter, and that "acceptance of sexually inappropriate jokes about someone's underage daughter, who could be anyone's daughter, contributes to the atrociously [sic] high rate of sexual exploitation of minors by older men who use and abuse others," she went on to say. But wait! We then have Bill Maher who, after finding out that Palin had accepted a job as a contributor to Fox News, made this remark about her and her child, Trig, who has Down Syndrome:

“Sarah Palin agreed to do commentary at Fox News, which is actually very similar to her day job, talking to a baby with Down syndrome. Speaking of dumb s**ts, it’s not because they have breasts. It’s because they are boobs."

Once again Palin and the Republican party were outraged. As you know, Sarah Palin is widely known as Republican nominee John McCain's VP candidate, and a Republican herself. In this instance, only the women on the right wing side of the aisle were heard condemning the remarks. Now, here's the kicker, where were the feminists? Where, indeed, were the female Democrats? Not one was to be heard burning her brassiere over these sexually tinged comments, which leads me to my point.

What you saw here was members of feminism being selective of which women to defend, after she is slandered. But then again, a woman is a woman, right? Wrong. Somehow only a Liberal woman is worth defending, but a Conservative one, well, she's on her own. If you happen to be a Liberal woman reading right now, here is a question for you. How come you will defend a woman such as Sandra Fluke, but not ones such as Sarah Palin? They are both women. How can you not be angered when a woman, akin to yourself in all senses of the word, is sexually denigrated by other men? Might it be because she is a conservative? Or maybe it is because she is a pro life advocate? I fail to see the logic in this rationale that one woman is somehow different than another.

If Liberal women (men too, to an extent) are to be angry at Rush Limbaugh for inappropriately targeting Fluke, they should be equally angry when someone like Bill Maher or David Letterman make crude and sexist comments about Sarah Palin, her daughter, or her mentally afflicted son. To ignore it is to be a hypocrite, to defend it is foolish, and to do so is to take part in the act of selective feminism. Come on ladies, where did all the girl power go? Palin has the same set of ovaries and sexual organs you do, so why is she so vastly different? A woman should be quick to defend one of her own, whether be she a Liberal or Conservative, pro-life or pro-choice. If you are going to be sympathetic toward one woman, be so for all of them. If you are going to be outraged at a man who slanders another woman, again be outraged in unison with her and with all of womankind. These feelings should be indiscriminate. A woman is a woman, regardless of what she believes in or what viewpoints she holds to be true. To borrow a couple of verses, love your enemies as yourself. Do to others as you would have them do to you.

Finally, take heed readers, that some of this can be said for Conservative women too. Remember, every woman should be in this together!

You should credit the author.

Selective Feminism | AthensTalks.com

No need. I AM THE AUTHOR. How many times must I get that through people's thick skulls?

 

[Michelle420]

Have you seen the news over the past couple of years? Sure you have. If you haven't, you've missed a broiling debate on the issue of abortion and contraception, not to mention some deep and wounding misogynistic commentary issued by opponents and supporters of this right passed you by. But enough of that.

In the midst of this heated debate I have noticed something. I have observed how some women treat other women differently than others. I have again noticed how this behavior is widely influenced by political or societal events. I also have taken notice of the hypocrisy that it entails. What I am referring to is known as selective feminism. No doubt you have heard the comments issued forth by the right wing political shock trooper Rush Limbaugh in reference to Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke, and the firestorm that ensued afterwards.

In this instance you have Democrats, pro abortionists and feminists all across America crying bloody murder, saying that Limbaugh should be taken off the air for his comments. In fact, they have said things to the extent of "Fluke is just an ordinary woman, how dare he say such mean things about her?", "He should be taken off the air or apologize post haste!" (Which he did not soon after).

These very same people have gone on to say that Republicans only want to take away their rights to contraceptives and birth control pills, and that the men, as well as the government, should keep their nose out from between their legs, which I find odd to say the least, since they want a right only the government itself can provide, and also that they allow certain men to fight for them and their "freedom." Okay, lets jump the fence here, to the other side of the political spectrum. I made reference to Fluke and Limbaugh, now lets examine David Letterman and Bill Maher, both Liberals, and their comments about Sarah Palin In June of 2009, David Letterman was caught on air making reference to Sarah Palin as a "slutty flight attendant," going on to make a less than polite joke about her underage daughter Willow:

"One awkward moment for Sarah Palin at the Yankee game," Letterman said, "during the seventh inning, her daughter was knocked up by Alex Rodriguez."

After Letterman's comment, Sarah Palin immediately responded, accusing him of making inappropriate and sexually perverted statements that he would "have never said about anyone else's daughter, and that "acceptance of sexually inappropriate jokes about someone's underage daughter, who could be anyone's daughter, contributes to the atrociously [sic] high rate of sexual exploitation of minors by older men who use and abuse others," she went on to say. But wait! We then have Bill Maher who, after finding out that Palin had accepted a job as a contributor to Fox News, made this remark about her and her child, Trig, who has Down Syndrome:

“Sarah Palin agreed to do commentary at Fox News, which is actually very similar to her day job, talking to a baby with Down syndrome. Speaking of dumb s**ts, it’s not because they have breasts. It’s because they are boobs."

Once again Palin and the Republican party were outraged. As you know, Sarah Palin is widely known as Republican nominee John McCain's VP candidate, and a Republican herself. In this instance, only the women on the right wing side of the aisle were heard condemning the remarks. Now, here's the kicker, where were the feminists? Where, indeed, were the female Democrats? Not one was to be heard burning her brassiere over these sexually tinged comments, which leads me to my point.

What you saw here was members of feminism being selective of which women to defend, after she is slandered. But then again, a woman is a woman, right? Wrong. Somehow only a Liberal woman is worth defending, but a Conservative one, well, she's on her own. If you happen to be a Liberal woman reading right now, here is a question for you. How come you will defend a woman such as Sandra Fluke, but not ones such as Sarah Palin? They are both women. How can you not be angered when a woman, akin to yourself in all senses of the word, is sexually denigrated by other men? Might it be because she is a conservative? Or maybe it is because she is a pro life advocate? I fail to see the logic in this rationale that one woman is somehow different than another.

If Liberal women (men too, to an extent) are to be angry at Rush Limbaugh for inappropriately targeting Fluke, they should be equally angry when someone like Bill Maher or David Letterman make crude and sexist comments about Sarah Palin, her daughter, or her mentally afflicted son. To ignore it is to be a hypocrite, to defend it is foolish, and to do so is to take part in the act of selective feminism. Come on ladies, where did all the girl power go? Palin has the same set of ovaries and sexual organs you do, so why is she so vastly different? A woman should be quick to defend one of her own, whether be she a Liberal or Conservative, pro-life or pro-choice. If you are going to be sympathetic toward one woman, be so for all of them. If you are going to be outraged at a man who slanders another woman, again be outraged in unison with her and with all of womankind. These feelings should be indiscriminate. A woman is a woman, regardless of what she believes in or what viewpoints she holds to be true. To borrow a couple of verses, love your enemies as yourself. Do to others as you would have them do to you.

Finally, take heed readers, that some of this can be said for Conservative women too. Remember, every woman should be in this together!

You should credit the author.

Selective Feminism | AthensTalks.com

No need. I AM THE AUTHOR. How many times must I get that through people's thick skulls?

Ok so you are the Author: RightWingExtremist ? ( still better for you to state it upfront in my opinion)

I don't like any party demeaning women.

 

[BDBoop]

Not your writing style, not even close.

 

[Dragonlady]

And Fluke wasn't paying for birth control, it wasn't part of her policy. That means her health insurance company was not charging her for it. If you have evidence that her health insurance company was charging her for birth control coverage, then provide it. But so far, you haven't.

Fluke was ASKING that birth control be included in her health insurance policy as REQUIRED by the ACA. She was NOT asking the taxpayers to pay for her birth control which is what Rush Limbaugh told you she was asking for, and you dutifully parroted.

Wow, you repeated what MS-NBC told you perfectly, good job.

No, I wrote what I heard her say when I watched her testimony on TV, and what I read in the transcripts of her testimony. I'm quite capable of forming my own opinions and expressing them in writing, based on original material. I don't need to filter them through the media.

 

[kaz]

Fluke was ASKING that birth control be included in her health insurance policy as REQUIRED by the ACA. She was NOT asking the taxpayers to pay for her birth control which is what Rush Limbaugh told you she was asking for, and you dutifully parroted.

Wow, you repeated what MS-NBC told you perfectly, good job.

No, I wrote what I heard her say when I watched her testimony on TV, and what I read in the transcripts of her testimony. I'm quite capable of forming my own opinions and expressing them in writing, based on original material. I don't need to filter them through the media.

OMG, liberals are so dumb it's funny. Liberals are so arrogant that you can't detect OBVIOUS sarcasm. I was mocking your shallow point, and you didn't get it. Neither
did the Dumb Doras who thanked and probably repped you. The usual suspects of cluelessness, BDBoop, CandyCorn and Pogo, predictably at your side not getting the sarcasm either even when it's in your actual post.

If you were not so shallow, you could have formed an argument with actual words, logic and content. But you are shallow, and so you go the route of Rush Limbaugh told you that!

And then you even quote it and still don't get it! BDBoop is obsessed with me BTW, she thanks every shallow liberal poster like you who writes these clueless posts to me full of sanctimony and devoid of content.

 

[Dragonlady]

OMG, liberals are so dumb it's funny. Liberals are so arrogant that you can't detect OBVIOUS sarcasm. I was mocking your shallow point, and you didn't get it. Neither did the Dumb Doras who thanked and probably repped you. The usual suspects of cluelessness, BDBoop, CandyCorn and Pogo, predictably at your side not getting the sarcasm either even when it's in your actual post.

I saw your supposed sarcasm, which is really one of your standard insults in dimissing anyone who counters with reasonable arguments or facts. As a Canadian, I don't even follow MSNBC or any US media. I get my news from the Canadian media or online, and mostly through reading, not watching TV news.

On this site, I've been accused of parroting talking points, or cutting and pasting, more than once. I do neither. But I note that the things that you and others on the right on this board think are important (Benghazi, the IRS scandal, and Fast & Furious) are not even discussed outside of Fox TV and the US rightwing bubble.

Fox promotes these "scandals" to distract the public from the real issues of income inequity, outsourcing of jobs and the transfer of the nation's wealth to the wealthiest corporations and individuals. It's definitely working with rightwing voters, who seem to think these are the big issues.

For the rest of the world, conservatives are picking up the peanuts while being trampled by the elephants.

 

[kaz]

OMG, liberals are so dumb it's funny

I saw your supposed sarcasm, which is really one of your standard insults in dimissing anyone who counters with reasonable arguments or facts.

Which ... hello ... is what YOU did that I was mocking! My God woman, you continue to demonstrate my point. What "Rush" said is not an argument, I was mocking you for that.

I did like your do as you say, not as your do argument though.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Most Georgetown students are required - by the university - to have health insurance that meets the university's standards,

and if they have to get it from Georgetown, they PAY for it.

Student Health Insurance - Student Health Services

 

[bendog]

I think Mahr's comments were offensive to Faux viewers rather than women. Of course I find him too annoying to listen too

 

[Dragonlady]

I think Mahr's comments were offensive to Faux viewers rather than women. Of course I find him too annoying to listen too

I'm a woman and a liberal and I've found many of his comments about Sarah Pallin extremely offensive. I don't think that referring to a woman as a "****" is the slightest bit funny, although Andrew Dice Clay made a healthy living off it for a time.

But then I found the Republican leaders calling Hillary Clinton a "bitch" to be pretty offensive too, mainly because they called her a bitch like it was a bad thing. If you have to resort to name calling like this in a political battle, it really says you don't have much. Profanity is the attempt of the feeble mind to express itself forcefully.

 

[bendog]

I think Mahr's comments were offensive to Faux viewers rather than women. Of course I find him too annoying to listen too

I'm a woman and a liberal and I've found many of his comments about Sarah Pallin extremely offensive. I don't think that referring to a woman as a "****" is the slightest bit funny, although Andrew Dice Clay made a healthy living off it for a time.

But then I found the Republican leaders calling Hillary Clinton a "bitch" to be pretty offensive too, mainly because they called her a bitch like it was a bad thing. If you have to resort to name calling like this in a political battle, it really says you don't have much. Profanity is the attempt of the feeble mind to express itself forcefully.

I was referencing his comments vis a vis faux viewers and downs babies. Like I said, I don't listen to the guy.

Is there selective feminism? I have trouble with that too. One needent be a feminist to not like mysoginist statements.

You bring up an interesting pt, imo. I can say "Bill Clinton's a bastard." That's rude. But is calling Hill a bitch any different? I dunno. I think it's less gentlemanly to use bitch than bastard, but I'm probably a male chauvinist.

 

[Pogo]

Wow, you repeated what MS-NBC told you perfectly, good job.

No, I wrote what I heard her say when I watched her testimony on TV, and what I read in the transcripts of her testimony. I'm quite capable of forming my own opinions and expressing them in writing, based on original material. I don't need to filter them through the media.

OMG, liberals are so dumb it's funny. Liberals are so arrogant that you can't detect OBVIOUS sarcasm. I was mocking your shallow point, and you didn't get it. Neither
did the Dumb Doras who thanked and probably repped you. The usual suspects of cluelessness, BDBoop, CandyCorn and Pogo, predictably at your side not getting the sarcasm either even when it's in your actual post.

If you were not so shallow, you could have formed an argument with actual words, logic and content. But you are shallow, and so you go the route of Rush Limbaugh told you that!

And then you even quote it and still don't get it! BDBoop is obsessed with me BTW, she thanks every shallow liberal poster like you who writes these clueless posts to me full of sanctimony and devoid of content.

I love to watch torrents of Kaz posts where she tries to squirm out of something she previously said.
It's a boat ride up the river DeNial, blown by the hot air of ad hominem. And it's always a fun cruise.

 

[kaz]

I love to watch torrents of Kaz posts where she tries to squirm out of something she previously said.
It's a boat ride up the river DeNial, blown by the hot air of ad hominem. And it's always a fun cruise.

Denial? LOL. Highlighting that you didn't get this sarcasm?

Fluke was ASKING that birth control be included in her health insurance policy as REQUIRED by the ACA. She was NOT asking the taxpayers to pay for her birth control which is what Rush Limbaugh told you she was asking for, and you dutifully parroted.

Wow, you repeated what MS-NBC told you perfectly, good job.

No, I wrote what I heard her say when I watched her testimony on TV, and what I read in the transcripts of her testimony. I'm quite capable of forming my own opinions and expressing them in writing, based on original material. I don't need to filter them through the media.

Nice to see you again though. I hadn't heard from you since I quoted all the posts for you that you said you never said.

I also like your insinuation that to be stupid and in denial is female.

 

[bendog]

I love to watch torrents of Kaz posts where she tries to squirm out of something she previously said.
It's a boat ride up the river DeNial, blown by the hot air of ad hominem. And it's always a fun cruise.

Denial? LOL. Highlighting that you didn't get this sarcasm?

Wow, you repeated what MS-NBC told you perfectly, good job.

No, I wrote what I heard her say when I watched her testimony on TV, and what I read in the transcripts of her testimony. I'm quite capable of forming my own opinions and expressing them in writing, based on original material. I don't need to filter them through the media.

Nice to see you again though. I hadn't heard from you since I quoted all the posts for you that you said you never said.

I also like your insinuation that to be stupid and in denial is female.

hmmm, those seem male traits to me. (-;

Rodney Dangerfield's Best One-Liners | Steven B. Harper

 

[Pogo]

I love to watch torrents of Kaz posts where she tries to squirm out of something she previously said.
It's a boat ride up the river DeNial, blown by the hot air of ad hominem. And it's always a fun cruise.

Denial? LOL. Highlighting that you didn't get this sarcasm?

Wow, you repeated what MS-NBC told you perfectly, good job.

No, I wrote what I heard her say when I watched her testimony on TV, and what I read in the transcripts of her testimony. I'm quite capable of forming my own opinions and expressing them in writing, based on original material. I don't need to filter them through the media.

Nice to see you again though. I hadn't heard from you since I quoted all the posts for you that you said you never said.

I also like your insinuation that to be stupid and in denial is female.

Aaaaannd Kaz desperately counters with the Checkers Speech Strawman.

(Or for those not old enough to get that, the Sarah Palin "Lipstick on a Pig" martyr complex)