So the left dont consider raising 5 boys a full time job?

"inthemiddle" my ass.

Sorry, I like women.

Someone "inthemiddle" would say:

"How do we know if she worked hard as a mother? How do we know she didnt? Why are all of you on both sides so sure what the truth is?"

Why am I required to say that? So being a centrist means that I'm not allowed to make a joke? I did clearly say that the immigrant wet nurse comment was meant to be facetious.

Moving on, why is it that a centrist is, for some reason, not allowed to point out the fallacious equivocation in the OP?

"Inthemiddle"...LMFAO...

You are nothing but a phoney.

What makes me curious is why are you ashamed to admit you are a progressive?

I'm not ashamed of anything. I am a centrist. I also reject the plethora of descriptive terms that so many people like to use nowadays to describe their political affiliation. What, exactly, is "progressive" supposed to mean? Everyone has their own definitions for the multitude of terms out there, and especially on this board those definitions tend to be mostly based on emotional and rhetorical charging. I keep things simple. Either you're on the right, on the left, or in the middle and agree and disagree with issues on both sides. I support abortion rights. I also support gun rights. I support social issues, I also support fiercely strong immigration policy. I support economics in favor of the lower earners, I also support fiscal responsibility. I'm obviously not on the left, I'm obviously not on the right. On leaves one other option.
 
Do you ever get tired of pretending to be openminded?

I'm not pretending to be anything. But I can see that you're unable to actually address my point.
What point?

Rosen said Ann Romney never worked a day in her life. Period.

I think it's a matter of terminology. She wasn't professionally employed outside her home, but full-time mothering is work.

On the flip side, though, I do think that we tend to glamorize the importance of SAHMs. I live near quite a few, and I don't think they spend a lot more time parenting their kids than I have, over the years. A lot of them spend a considerable amount of time dumping their kids for tennis matches or to go to the gym or to have lunches with the ladies.

I am not sure exactly how hard a woman in Ann's position, with access to that kind of financial support, has had to work.
 
So a Democratic Adviser didn't properly frame her statement for workforce employment only and look at the feeding frenzy it produced. These Repub primaries have produced enough gaffes to last a decade. Also, Axelrod tweeted his disapproval so don't drag the WH into this.
 
This is this thread:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DBuk91phkI]Monkey peeing in his own mouth [Hilarious] - YouTube[/ame]
 
"inthemiddle" my ass.

Sorry, I like women.

Someone "inthemiddle" would say:

"How do we know if she worked hard as a mother? How do we know she didnt? Why are all of you on both sides so sure what the truth is?"

Why am I required to say that? So being a centrist means that I'm not allowed to make a joke? I did clearly say that the immigrant wet nurse comment was meant to be facetious.

Moving on, why is it that a centrist is, for some reason, not allowed to point out the fallacious equivocation in the OP?

"Inthemiddle"...LMFAO...

You are nothing but a phoney.

What makes me curious is why are you ashamed to admit you are a progressive?

I'm not ashamed of anything. I am a centrist. I also reject the plethora of descriptive terms that so many people like to use nowadays to describe their political affiliation. What, exactly, is "progressive" supposed to mean? Everyone has their own definitions for the multitude of terms out there, and especially on this board those definitions tend to be mostly based on emotional and rhetorical charging. I keep things simple. Either you're on the right, on the left, or in the middle and agree and disagree with issues on both sides. I support abortion rights. I also support gun rights. I support social issues, I also support fiercely strong immigration policy. I support economics in favor of the lower earners, I also support fiscal responsibility. I'm obviously not on the left, I'm obviously not on the right. On leaves one other option.

I have read your posts....many of them.

You are by no means a centrist.

And I am OK with that.

The question is....why are you NOT ok with that?
 
I think Mitt's wife and Obama's wife should get in a ring and box. Whoever wins their husband is President... That way we have the strongest hardest working first lady possible because either way we will get a spineless weak President.
 
Could you imagine if a conservative man had said that about a liberal woman?

WHOAH!!!!!!

the elft would be saying the exact same thing we are saying now.

The only difference?

They would hear about it on the news. I didnt hear about it until I turned on Fox....but NBC morning didnt seem to cover it....not for the 30 minutes it was on in the background this morning.
 
Could you imagine if a conservative man had said that about a liberal woman?

WHOAH!!!!!!

the elft would be saying the exact same thing we are saying now.

The only difference?

They would hear about it on the news. I didnt hear about it until I turned on Fox....but NBC morning didnt seem to cover it....not for the 30 minutes it was on in the background this morning.

Lol, I can't remember the last time I watched the "news." It never seems like I miss much.
 
Work is work...

Venn.jpg
 
Not unable, unwilling. Your nonsensical response deserved no attention.

Either way. There is nothing "nonsensical" about pointing out that you're committing fallacy of equivocation. Just because you're not willing to present a logical argument does not alleviate you from criticism for your faulty thinking.
 
Well, it'd be a good counter to the Dems running on the republican war on women.

:lol:

You goofballs shouldn't have gone there.. you're gonna get it back in spades!

So the truth finally comes out. You want to take a single comment and equate it to Republican state legislators engaging in an assault on women’s reproductive rights. From South Dakota to Virginia, a wave of state legislatures have sought to curtail these rights with extreme measures that place unnecessary roadblocks on women’s ability to have choice in their health care decisions.

Thank you for your honesty.

:clap2::clap2::clap2:

When did any republican assault a woman's right to reproduce? Are you always this dishonest?

There were over 1100 antichoice provisions introduced in 2011 and 900 antichoice provisions introduced so far in 2012. Legislators in 13 states have introduced 22 bills seeking to mandate that a woman obtain an ultrasound procedure before having an abortion. Of these, seven states are pursuing the state-rape vaginal probe variety. In addition, legislators in 13 states have sponsored right-wing "Personhood" type bills, too extreme even for the electorate of Mississippi, that could make both abortion and reproductive choices highly restricted.

Lest we think that the rhetoric around these bills might contain the damage to the GOP's standing amongst women, please note how Georgia state legislator Rep. Terry England compares women to cows and pigs on his farm in support of bill forcing women to carry even inviable fetuses to term and Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett justifies forced ultrasound bill by telling women to "just close your eyes."

The Republican 'War on Women' Is Real - Chicago Tribune
 
It's nice she gets to stay at home..since Mittens has made more in one career then some 400 middle class Americans can make in their lives.

And it's nice that the people that support him..have more money then the rest of the country..combined.
 
I beg to differ. At least my job didn't require diaper changes. I had 2 girls two years apart. They were a handful so i can't even imagine 5 boys.

If Ann Romney cannot give her opinion on workforce & employment, will none but professional athletes be allowed to discuss sports?:eusa_shhh:
 
Sorry, you defend 0bama too much for me to believe that...

Again, I'm more interested in the failings of reasoning that occur so often on this board. I defend Obama when people present irrational arguments against him. Why do I do this? Well, interestingly enough, it's because I don't much like Obama. I wish that people would actually focus on the shit that matters, as opposed to untruths and misinformation. Every time someone presents a stupid argument against Obama, it strengthens Obama's position. What I see, especially on this board, is that too many have a mentality toward Obama that is exactly the same as the irrational mentality that many directed toward Bush. So how far did that get the Democrats and John Kerry in 2004? Why in the world should I support the same BS getting Obama re-elected now?

You say "fallacious equivocation"... I say Rosen fucked up...

What does Rosen have to do with the OP's fallacious equivocation? Wait....do you know what "fallacious equivocation" means?
 

Forum List

Back
Top