Elect More Women in 2012 [Archive] - Debate Policy

View Full Version : Elect More Women in 2012

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 09:41 AM

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 09:44 AM

The women’s issues lobby (http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?cycle=2010&ind=Q08) consists of a variety of organizations that focus on promoting women’s interests regarding matters such as abortion, education, women and children’s health and fair pay. These groups work to enhance women’s rights and influence legislation regarding issues that primarily affect women.
http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=q08

Noir

04-28-2012, 09:52 AM

or vote for whoever you think is best to represent you, regardless of their sex or other unimportant factors.

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 09:54 AM

or vote for whoever you think is best to represent you, regardless of their sex or other unimportant factors.

Do you think it's right that only 16% of Congress is female? Wake up.

That means 84% of Congress is male. Do you really think men care about women's issues? I don't.

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:00 AM

Firsts for Women in U.S. Politics 
<TBODY>
1848
The first women's rights convention in the U.S. took place in Seneca Falls, New York. Convened by Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Lucretia Mott, and others active in the anti-slavery movement, it resulted in a Declaration of Sentiments modeled on the Declaration of Independence. The Declaration demanded a variety of rights for women, including suffrage.

1866
Elizabeth Cady Stanton was the first woman to run for the U.S. House of Representatives, even though she was not eligible to vote. She ran as an Independent from New York State, receiving 24 votes of 12,000 that were cast.

1872
Victoria Woodhull, a stockbroker, publisher, and protégé of Cornelius Vanderbilt, ran for president of the United States on the Equal Rights Party ticket.

1884
Belva Lockwood, the first woman admitted to practice law before the U.S Supreme Court, ran for president on the Equal Rights Party Ticket; she did so again in 1888.

1887
Susanna Salter was elected mayor of Argonia, Kansas – the first woman mayor in the country.

1894
Three women were elected to the Colorado House of Representatives, the first women elected to any state legislature. They were Clara Cressingham, Carrie C. Holly, and Frances Klock.

1896
Martha Hughes Cannon was elected to the Utah State Senate, becoming the first woman state senator.

1900
Frances Warren of Wyoming became the first woman delegate to a Republican National Convention. In the same year, Elizabeth Cohen of Utah was chosen as an alternate to the Democratic National Convention. When another delegate became ill, Cohen became the first woman delegate to a Democratic National Convention.

1917
Jeannette Rankin, a Republican from Montana, entered the U.S. House of Representatives, the first woman ever elected to Congress. She served from 1917 to 1919 and again from 1941 to 1942; a pacifist, she was the only lawmaker to vote against U.S. entry into both world wars.

1920
After 72 years of struggle, the 19th Amendment to the Constitution was ratified, giving women the right to vote.

1920
The League of Women Voters was founded by members of the National American Woman Suffrage Association as a means of encouraging informed participation by the new female electorate.

1922
Rebecca Latimer Felton, a Georgia Democrat, became the first woman to serve in the U.S. Senate. She was appointed to fill a vacant seat temporarily; she served for only two days before giving up her seat to the man who had been elected to it.

1924
Bertha K. Landes, Republican city council president at the time, became acting mayor of Seattle, the first woman to lead a major American city. Two years later she was elected mayor in her own right in a campaign run by women. She lost in her bid for a second full term.

1924
Lena Springs of South Carolina chaired the credentials committee at the Democratic National Convention and received several votes for the Vice Presidential nomination.

1925
Nellie Tayloe Ross, a Wyoming Democrat, became the nation's first woman governor, elected to replace her deceased husband. She served for two years. Later, she became vice chair of the Democratic National Committee and director of the U.S. Mint. At the 1928 Democratic National Convention, she received 31 votes on the first ballot for Vice President.

1925
Representative Mae Ella Nolan (R-CA) became the first woman to chair a congressional committee when, during the 68th Congress, she chaired the Committee on Expenditures in the Post Office Department.

1931
Hattie Wyatt Caraway (D-AR), was appointed to the U.S Senate to succeed her late husband; she was the first of many women to reach the Senate in this way. She subsequently became the first woman ever elected to the Senate, where she served two full terms. She was the first woman to chair a Senate committee – the Committee on Enrolled Bills, a minor post.

1933
With her appointment by President Franklin D. Roosevelt as Secretary of Labor, Frances Perkins became the first woman ever to serve in a presidential cabinet. She served until 1945.

1933
Ruth Bryan Owen, a former congresswoman, became the first woman to hold a major diplomatic post when she was appointed by President Roosevelt as minister to Denmark. She held that post until 1936, when her marriage to a Dane and resulting dual citizenship made her ineligible to serve.

1933
Minnie Davenport Craig (R-ND) became the first woman to hold the position of speaker of the House in a state legislature.

1945
Representative Chase G. Woodhouse (D-CT) was the first woman to hold the position of secretary in the House Democratic Caucus.

1952
Two women – India Edwards and Judge Sarah Hughes were proposed as Democratic Vice Presidential candidates. Both withdrew their names before the balloting so the choice of presidential nominee Adlai Stevenson, Senator Estes Kefauver, could be nominated by acclamation.

1955
Consuelo Bailey, a Vermont Republican, became the first woman ever elected lieutenant governor of a state. In that role, she served as president of the state Senate. Since, she had previously served as speaker of the state House of Representatives, she thus became the only woman in the country ever to preside over both chambers of a state legislature.

1963
Justice Lorna Lockwood of Arizona became the first woman in the U.S. to serve as chief justice of a state supreme court.

1964
Senator Margaret Chase Smith, a Maine Republican, was nominated for the presidency by Vermont Senator George Aiken at the Republican national convention. Smith had campaigned briefly for the post, limiting herself to periods when the Senate was not in session. Elected to the House of Representatives in 1940 (to replace her dying husband) and the Senate in 1948, Smith had already made history by becoming the first woman to serve in both houses of Congress.

1965
Patsy Takemoto Mink, a Democrat from Hawaii, became the first woman of color and the first woman of Asian-Pacific Islander descent in the House of Representatives. She served until 1977 and was re-elected in 1990.

1966
The National Organization for Women was established to combat discrimination against women in every sphere. Its aim was to "bring women into full participation in the main- stream of American Society now."

1968
Shirley Chisholm, a New York Democrat, became the first Black woman to serve in Congress. She remained in the House of Representatives until 1982.

1971
Center for the American Woman and Politics founded at the Eagleton Institute of Politics at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey.

1971
The National Women's Political Caucus was formed at a Washington, D.C. meeting of more than 300 feminists. Its aims were to increase women's access to political power in the major parties and to encourage and support women committed to women's rights who seek elective and appointive office.

1972
Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm ran for president in the Democratic primaries. At the party's national convention, she garnered 151.25 delegate votes before Senator George McGovern clinched the nomination. At the same convention, Frances (Sissy) Farenthold, a former Texas state legislator who twice ran for governor of that state, finished second in the balloting for the Vice Presidential nomination, receiving more than 400 votes.

1972
Jean Westwood was named by presidential nominee George McGovern to chair the Democratic National Committee. The first woman to hold that position, she served until just after the election, when she was replaced by Robert Strauss.

1974
The Women's Campaign Fund was formed for the purpose of "electing qualified progressive women of both parties to public office at every level." It was the first national political action committee with the specific goal of funding women's campaigns.

1977
Patricia Roberts Harris was appointed by President Jimmy Carter to serve as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development during 1977-1979. From 1979-1981, she served as Secretary of Health and Human Services. She was the first Black woman to serve in a presidential cabinet and the first woman to hold two different cabinet positions.

1978
Nancy Landon Kassebaum, a Kansas Republican, was elected to the United States Senate. Prior to her election, all of the women who served in the Senate had succeeded their husbands in Congress or had first been appointed to fill out unexpired terms.

1980
For the first time, a national party's nominating convention delegates included equal numbers of men and women. At its convention in New York, the Democratic party also added to its charter a requirement that future conventions have equal numbers of female and male delegates.

1981
Sandra Day O'Connor, a former Republican state legislator from Arizona who had served on a state appeals court, was appointed by President Ronald Reagan as the first woman ever to sit on the U.S. Supreme Court.

1983
Vesta Roy , a Republican from New Hampshire, became the first woman to hold the position of president of a state senate (1983-1986).

1984
Arlene Violet (R-RI), a former nun, became the first woman elected as a state's attorney general, serving from 1985-87.

1984
Congresswoman Lynn Morley Martin (R-IL) is elected to the first of two terms as vice chair of the Republican Conference in the House, the first time a woman held an elected position in the congressional party's hierarchy.

1984
Third-term Congresswoman Geraldine A. Ferraro (D-NY), secretary of the House Democratic Caucus, became the first woman ever to run on a major party's national ticket when she was selected by Walter F. Mondale as his Vice Presidential running mate. The ticket was decisively defeated, capturing only 13 electoral votes, and few analysts felt that Ferraro's presence had a strong impact - positive or negative – on the outcome.

1985
Madeline Kunin, a Democrat, was elected governor of Vermont. She became the first woman to serve three terms as governor (1985-1991).

1986
Barbara Ann Mikulski, a Maryland Democrat, became the first Democratic woman elected to the Senate without previously filling an unexpired Congressional term. She was re-elected in 1992, 1998, and 2004.

1987
Kay Orr, a Republican from Nebraska, was the first Republican woman elected governor of a state, as well as the first woman to defeat another woman in a gubernatorial race.

1989
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a Florida Republican, became the first Hispanic woman and first Cuban American to be elected to Congress. She was elected in August 1989 in a special election and continues to serve.

1990
Joan Finney, a Kansas Democrat, became the first woman to defeat an incumbent governor. She served as governor from 1991-1995.

1991
Representative Barbara Kennelly (D-CT) became the first woman to hold the position of House Democratic chief deputy whip.

1992
Nydia Velasquez, a New York Democrat, was elected in 1992, becoming the first Puerto Rican woman to serve in Congress. She continues to serve.

1992
Carol Moseley Braun, an Illinois Democrat, became the first African- American woman and the first woman of color to be elected to the U.S. Senate. She had also been the first African-American woman to win a major party Senate nomination. She defeated the incumbent in the primary and won the resulting open seat in the general election. Her term ended in 1999 when she lost her re-election bid.

1993
Janet Reno became the first woman to serve as U.S. Attorney General. She served in President Bill Clinton's cabinet from 1993-2001. She ran unsuccessfully for governor in the 2002 Florida Democratic primary.

1993
Representative Nancy L. Johnson (R-CT) became the first woman to hold the position of secretary in the House Republican Conference during the 103rd Congress (1993-1995).

1993
Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) became the first woman to hold the position of secretary to the House Democratic Conference in the 103rd Congress (1993-1995). She later served as assistant to the House Democratic Leader in the 107th Congress.

1995
Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) became the first woman to hold the position of secretary to the Senate Democratic Conference in the 104th Congress (1995-1997).

1995
Senator Nancy Landon Kassebaum (R-KS) became the first woman to chair a major Senate committee, the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.

1997
Madeleine K. Albright, became the first woman to serve as U.S. Secretary of State, serving from 1997-2001. She became the highest-ranking woman in the U.S. government but, as a naturalized citizen, she would not have been eligible to become President. She had previously served as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations from 1993-1997.

1997
Aida Alvarez became the first Hispanic women, as well as the first person of Puerto Rican heritage, to hold a cabinet-level position when she was appointed administrator of the U.S. Small Business Administration in the Clinton administration.

1998
Tammy Baldwin, a Democrat from Wisconsin, became the first openly gay or lesbian person elected to Congress as a non-incumbent. She was also Wisconsin's first woman in Congress.

2001
Hillary Rodham Clinton became the first woman elected to the U.S. Senate from New York, the only First Lady ever elected to public office. She won an open seat in a general election.

2001
Condoleezza Rice became the first woman to hold the post of National Security Advisor (formally known as Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs) when she was appointed by President George W. Bush.

2001
Elaine Chao became the first Asian-American woman to serve in a presidential cabinet when she was appointed Secretary of Labor by President George W.Bush.

2001
Gale Norton became the first woman to serve as Secretary of the Interior, appointed by President George W. Bush. Norton was the first woman elected as Colorado's Attorney General and served that position for two terms.

2001
Ann Veneman was appointed by President George W. Bush to be the first female Secretary of Agriculture. She had previously been the first woman to serve as Secretary of the California Department of Food and Agriculture.

2001
Christine Todd Whitman of New Jersey became the first female former governor to serve in a presidential cabinet-level position when she was appointed administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency by President Bush. She had been the first woman elected governor in New Jersey and served two terms in that position.

2001
Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) became the first woman to hold the position of vice-chair of the Senate Republican Conference during the 107th Congress (2001-2003).

2001
Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) became the first woman to serve as chair of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

2001
Representative Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) was elected by her colleagues as House Democratic Whip, the highest-ranking woman in the history of the U.S. Congress.

2001
Representative Nita Lowey (D-NY) became the first woman to chair the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. She also served as House Minority Whip-at-Large.

2001
Sila Calderon (Popular Democratic Party), former mayor of San Juan, became the first woman governor of Puerto Rico.

2002
Representative Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) became the first woman to head her party in Congress when she was elected by her colleagues as House Democratic Leader.

2002
The election to Congress of Linda Sanchez (D-CA) meant that for the first time, two sisters served together in the House. Representative Loretta Sanchez (D-CA) was first elected to the House in 1996.

2003
Arizona became the first state where a woman governor succeeded another woman governor. Jane Dee Hull (R) was succeeded by Janet Napolitano (D).

2005
Dr. Condoleezza Rice became the first Republican woman and the first African American woman to serve as U.S. Secretary of State.

2005
Washington State became the first state to have both a woman governor (Christine Gregoire, D) and two women serving in the U.S. Senate (Patty Murray, D and Maria Cantwell, D).

2007
Representative Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) became the first woman to serve as Speaker of the U.S. House.

2007
Three congresswomen became the first women of color to chair congressional committees: Representative Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D-OH), Committee on Ethics; Representative Juanita Millender-McDonald (D-CA), Committee on House Administration; and Representative Nydia Velasquez (D-NY), Committee on Small Business.

2007
Colleen Hanabusa (D-HI) becomes the first woman of color to serve as president of a state senate.

2008
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton was the first woman to win a major party's presidential primary for the purposes of delegate selection when she won the primary in New Hampshire on January 8. She also became the first woman to be a presidential candidate in every primary and caucus in every state.

2008
Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, selected by Senator John McCain as his vice presidential running mate, became the first woman on a national GOP ticket.

2008
Karen Bass (D-CA) becomes the first woman of color to serve as speaker of a state house.

2009
Janet Napolitano, governor of Arizona, was appointed Secretary of Homeland Security by President Barack Obama, the first woman to hold that post since the Department of Homeland Security was created in 2003.

2009
Sonia Sotomayor was appointed as an associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court by President Barack Obama, becoming the first Hispanic and third female member of the Court. Sotomayor had previously been appointed to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York by President George H. W. Bush in 1991 and to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit by President Bill Clinton.

2011
Two women of color, both Republicans elected in November 2010, took office as governors, the first women chief executives in any states. Susana Martinez, a Latina, became governor of New Mexico, and Nikki Haley, an Asian American, became governor of South Carolina.

</TBODY>



Home (http://www.debatepolicy.com/index.php) | Facts (http://www.debatepolicy.com/fast_facts/index.php) | Research & Scholarship (http://www.debatepolicy.com/research/index.php) | Education & Training (http://www.debatepolicy.com/education_training/index.php) | Press Room (http://www.debatepolicy.com/press_room/index.php) | About CAWP (http://www.debatepolicy.com/about_cawp/index.php) | Support CAWP (http://www.debatepolicy.com/support_cawp/index.php) | Contact CAWP (http://www.debatepolicy.com/contact_cawp/index.php) | Site Map (http://www.debatepolicy.com/about_cawp/sitemap.php) 

© Copyright 2012 Center for American Women and Politics
Eagleton Institute of Politics (http://www.eagleton.rutgers.edu/)
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
191 Ryders Lane, New Brunswick, NJ 08901-8557
(732) 932-9384 - Fax: (732) 932-6778

Trigg

04-28-2012, 10:02 AM

Do you think it's right that only 16% of Congress is female? Wake up.

That means 84% of Congress is male. Do you really think men care about women's issues? I don't.

I know for a fact that men care about women's issues.

To your question, it would be nice to see more women in congress. However, I don't base my vote on sex or race, I base it on the issues and my perception of that persons ability.

I'd love to see a woman run for President, but if she's incompetant like Bachmann or Palin they won't get my vote. Hillary would have done a good job for the dems. but again, I wouldn't vote for her because I disagree with her position on the issues.

jimnyc

04-28-2012, 10:02 AM

Do you think it's right that only 16% of Congress is female? Wake up.

That means 84% of Congress is male. Do you really think men care about women's issues? I don't.

Are women running? And who is voting? Women must first run, and then the community must vote for them.

And ANOTHER victim post. Men DO care about women's issues, just as I know the women in congress care about issues regarding men.

Noir

04-28-2012, 10:03 AM

Do you think it's right that only 16% of Congress is female? Wake up.

That means 84% of Congress is male. Do you really think men care about women's issues? I don't.

I don't care how many men, woman, gays, blacks, deaf or other groups of people there are in congress. The people who are there are there because they were chosen by the public. You should not vote for someone just because of their sex, race, disabilities etc, but on how you feel they represent you.

Its a little condescending to be telling people to 'wake up' and vote how you think they should vote.

Also, as a man myself, and despite your inferences otherwise, i like to think of myself as both caring of and sympathetic to womens issues, thanks.

Anton Chigurh

04-28-2012, 10:04 AM

Bigot much?

Why does anyone consider gender, skin color, region, etc as a reason to elect or not elect someone?

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:06 AM

I know for a fact that men care about women's issues.

To your question, it would be nice to see more women in congress. However, I don't base my vote on sex or race, I base it on the issues and my perception of that persons ability.

I'd love to see a woman run for President, but if she's incompetant like Bachmann or Palin they won't get my vote. Hillary would have done a good job for the dems. but again, I wouldn't vote for her because I disagree with her position on the issues.

You can't expect men to do anything other than what they usually do, look out for the interests of the status quo--the good ol boys network.

jimnyc

04-28-2012, 10:08 AM

You can't expect men to do anything other than what they usually do, look out for the interests of the status quo--the good ol boys network.

You're a sexist bitch. You must have been severely abused or something to have such hatred and contempt for men. Either way, that's your business and I don't give a shit, but your emotional state shouldn't have you condemning every man in the world.

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:10 AM

Anton Chigurh

04-28-2012, 10:10 AM

Broad brushing, erecting straw men, appeal to authority.... I can't even count the fallacies with this.

Not to mention the outright, unabashed bigotry displayed.

jimnyc

04-28-2012, 10:12 AM

Anton Chigurh

04-28-2012, 10:13 AM

The US trails the world in female representation in government. Why?Possible that US women are generally far more intelligent than US men, and know instinctively US politics is crooked, and they don't want to be crooked?

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:15 AM

You're a sexist bitch. You must have been severely abused or something to have such hatred and contempt for men. Either way, that's your business and I don't give a shit, but your emotional state shouldn't have you condemning every man in the world.

Damn right I'm a sexist bitch and proud of it.

Look at how angry you are for me starting a thread encouraging more women to enter politics.

Nowhere do I condemn every man in the world. It's human nature that men will continue to practice good ol boy networking. Why shouldn't women help each other more?

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:16 AM

Broad brushing, erecting straw men, appeal to authority.... I can't even count the fallacies with this.

Not to mention the outright, unabashed bigotry displayed.

The facts speak for themselves. 86% of Congress is male.

Anton Chigurh

04-28-2012, 10:17 AM

The facts speak for themselves. 86% of Congress is male.Like I said.... Perhaps because US women in general are smarter, know it's a crooked game, and don't want to wallow in the mud.

Present company excepted, of course.

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:17 AM

“There cannot be true democracy unless women’s voices are heard.”

Hillary Rodham Clinton

jimnyc

04-28-2012, 10:18 AM

Damn right I'm a sexist bitch and proud of it.

Look at how angry you are for me starting a thread encouraging more women to enter politics.

Nowhere do I condemn every man in the world. It's human nature that men will continue to practice good ol boy networking. Why shouldn't women help each other more?

You mistake my disgust for anger. Not even the women coming to this thread will agree with you. There are MANY women in office and more and more entering the fray every year. They are welcome to run just as all the men are. It's up to how good they campaign that determines who the community votes for. Once in office, it's how well they do their job that determines if they get re-elected or not. And it's not your encouraging women to enter politics that is disgusting, but your continuing condemnation for everything man and playing a different victim as a result of man every day. Everything to you is sex and race, no in between.

Trigg

04-28-2012, 10:19 AM

The US trails the world in female representation in government. Why?
Statistics offer a more fundamental explanation:
•Men make up 83% of Congress.
•Incumbents win more than 90% of the time.

So despite the fact that women are just as likely to win open seats as men and just as likely to be able to draw the financial means, they remain at a structural disadvantage (http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/2010-10-04-1Awomen04_CV_N.htm) from which they are unlikely to achieve equality within our lifetimes.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-10-13-column13_ST_N.htm

Of the 25 nations that have realized a greater than 30% female participation in their governments, 90% (http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/ResearchPublications/prb0562-e.htm#fn23) required some form of temporary jump-start to secure permanent gains.In March, India voted to require 30% female representation in government. In January, France voted to require 40% female board membership in business. Today, half of all national governments include some form of legally required minimums (http://www.quotaproject.org/aboutquotas.cfm) for women, while the U.S. remains on the sidelines of an international race to equality

Further down in your article I found this little gem.

I'd love to see strong competant women run for office more often.

However, I disagree with affermative action in our police force, fire fighters and college addmittance, and I certainly disagree with affermative action in our government.

It may take the US a little longer to get there, but when we do I want to know that the women we have representing us are the BEST for the job. Not someone who got the job because of their gender.

jimnyc

04-28-2012, 10:19 AM

“There cannot be true democracy unless women’s voices are heard.”

Hillary Rodham Clinton

"I'll stand side by side with my husband as he gets off in the oval office with another woman"

Shrillary Clinton

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:20 AM

You mistake my disgust for anger. Not even the women coming to this thread will agree with you. There are MANY women in office and more and more entering the fray every year. They are welcome to run just as all the men are. It's up to how good they campaign that determines who the community votes for. Once in office, it's how well they do their job that determines if they get re-elected or not. And it's not your encouraging women to enter politics that is disgusting, but your continuing condemnation for everything man and playing a different victim as a result of man every day. Everything to you is sex and race, no in between.

86% of Congress is male. Wake up. The women on this thread are all heterosexual. They may disagree with me. There is a reason lesbian women are often at the forefront of women's politics. We don't have to worry about fighting with our husbands.

This is an excellent resource:

http://www.huntalternatives.org/pages/7_the_initiative_for_inclusive_security.cfm

Shadow

04-28-2012, 10:21 AM

Damn right I'm a sexist bitch and proud of it.

Look at how angry you are for me starting a thread encouraging more women to enter politics.

Nowhere do I condemn every man in the world. It's human nature that men will continue to practice good ol boy networking. Why shouldn't women help each other more?

Yep...we have all seen just how much the women "help" each other when one of them enters the political arena too...especially if they are on the other/wrong side of another females political beliefs. The women can be the MOST abusive parties to their own gender. Maybe women don't want to have to fight the "good ol boys" and the out right bitches at the same time. :rolleyes:

jimnyc

04-28-2012, 10:22 AM

86% of Congress is male. Wake up.

Ain't mans fault if women don't run and they can't convince the public at large to vote for them.

tailfins

04-28-2012, 10:22 AM

Although females outnumber males in the general population, almost five times as many men hold elected office in the US as women. On average, Congress is only 16% female (http://womensissues.about.com/b/2009/12/07/why-do-we-need-more-women-in-government-heres-why.htm) in any given year.

http://womensissues.about.com/od/thepoliticalarena/a/Electing-More-Women-In-2012-Increasing-The-Number-Of-Women-In-Politics.htm

Does that include re-elect Michele Bachmann to the house and elect Sarah Steelman and Heather Wilson to the US Senate? Does that mean if Elizabeth Childs wins the primary that you support her over Joe Kennedy III in my Congressional district?

Anton Chigurh

04-28-2012, 10:23 AM

“There cannot be true democracy unless we completely do away with the US Constitution and write a new one. Because the US isn't a democracy and was never intended to be one.”

Fixed for ya!

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:25 AM

"I'll stand side by side with my husband as he gets off in the oval office with another woman"

Shrillary Clinton

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton knows how to prioritize what's important. I would think YOU"D love it that she stayed with Bill. Look, how it pushed her political ambitions.

She is a smart woman and I have the utmost respect for her.

Anton Chigurh

04-28-2012, 10:26 AM

Maybe you would like it better if a law was passed requiring a certain percentage of women to run for office, chosen lottery style, removing their free choice?

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:27 AM

Yep...we have all seen just how much the women "help" each other when one of them enters the political arena too...especially if they are on the other/wrong side of another females political beliefs. The women can be the MOST abusive parties to their own gender. Maybe women don't want to have to fight the "good ol boys" and the out right bitches at the same time. :rolleyes:

This post is full of internalized oppression. I feel sad that you feel this way.

Anton Chigurh

04-28-2012, 10:28 AM

This post is full of internalized oppression.Classic Freudian projection. To add to the rapidly piling up list of fallacies here.

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:28 AM

Maybe you would like it better if a law was passed requiring a certain percentage of women to run for office, chosen lottery style, removing their free choice?

No. You're wrong about my view. IMO, we have to look at the power structure of government and discover why it is that more women aren't in Congress and address that.

Noir

04-28-2012, 10:29 AM

you know your post hit home, when it gets several thanks, but is ignored by who it was directed towards...

Anton Chigurh

04-28-2012, 10:29 AM

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton knows how to prioritize what's important. I would think YOU"D love it that she stayed with Bill. Look, how it pushed her political ambitions.

She is a smart woman and I have the utmost respect for her.Yes, "Stand by your man" only when it's politically expedient.

Trigg

04-28-2012, 10:29 AM

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/socdemo/voting/publications/p20/2010/tables.html

table 5

shows that more women voted in Nov. 2010 than men.

I think we're doing a good job of getting out to vote and picking the people WE think will do the best job.

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:29 AM

Fixed for ya!

I think this post should be deleted. I never made that statement.

Anton Chigurh

04-28-2012, 10:29 AM

No. You're wrong about my view. IMO, we have to look at the power structure of government and discover why it is that more women aren't in Congress and address that.I already gave you a much better theory on that, than yours is.

jimnyc

04-28-2012, 10:30 AM

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton knows how to prioritize what's important. I would think YOU"D love it that she stayed with Bill. Look, how it pushed her political ambitions.

She is a smart woman and I have the utmost respect for her.

She's an old hag that has more wrinkles than my dog.

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:31 AM

Classic Freudian projection. To add to the rapidly piling up list of fallacies here.

Do you know what internalized oppression is? It's when the oppressed group takes on the characteristics of the oppressor. Shadow's comment about all women being bitches.

I guess she travels in circles of women competing for men. I don't.

Anton Chigurh

04-28-2012, 10:31 AM

I think this post should be deleted. I never made that statement.Where does it say you did?

Anton Chigurh

04-28-2012, 10:32 AM

Do you know what internalized oppression is? It's when the oppressed group takes on the characteristics of the oppressor. Shadow's comment about all women being bitches.I somehow missed that.

Now you're erecting a straw man via broad brushing, a compound fallacy!

You're getting really good at fail!:laugh:

Trigg

04-28-2012, 10:32 AM

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:33 AM

She's an old hag that has more wrinkles than my dog.

She has more intelligence than you do. She's the Secretary of State. Whether she has wrinkles or not. You are so shallow all you can focus on with women is what they look like.

Pathetic. Golda Meier had a ton of wrinkles and she was a brilliant leader. Mother Teresa every wrinkled. These women accomplished a lot and earned their wrinkles the natural way.

I'm sure your women would need to have boob jobs and face lifts as a condition for them to run for President.

Trigg

04-28-2012, 10:35 AM

post number 35

what do you think about the fact that more women vote than men?

jimnyc

04-28-2012, 10:35 AM

She has more intelligence than you do. She's the Secretary of State. Whether she has wrinkles or not. You are so shallow all you can focus on with women is what they look like.

Pathetic. Golda Meier had a ton of wrinkles and she was a brilliant leader. Mother Teresa every wrinkled. These women accomplished a lot and earned their wrinkles the natural way.

I'm sure your women would need to have boob jobs and face lifts as a condition for them to run for President.

Hillary is a skank and has been involved with so much political crap behind the scenes that she gets no respect from me whatsoever. She's dishonest and a liar. And looks like a lesbians wet dream.

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/12_03/clintonAP1712_468x592.jpg

Anton Chigurh

04-28-2012, 10:36 AM

You're as boring and as predictable as a punching bag. Fun for a bit, but gets old really fast.

Toodles.

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:37 AM

you know your post hit home, when it gets several thanks, but is ignored by who it was directed towards...

You know I don't want to read your post now because you assumed I had ignored it. I just didn't see it. But now that I know you hold this attitude, there is no point in me reading it and addressing it.

Why don't you just post my imagined response. Thats all you want to do anyway.

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:37 AM

You're as boring and as predictable as a punching bag. Fun for a bit, but gets old really fast.

Toodles.

Bye. One less redneck in the pile on.

jimnyc

04-28-2012, 10:39 AM

You know I don't want to read your post now because you assumed I had ignored it. I just didn't see it. But now that I know you hold this attitude, there is no point in me reading it and addressing it.

Why don't you just post my imagined response. Thats all you want to do anyway.

Ok, I'll play, that's easy. 97% of your posts say the same thing:

"I'm a victim"

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:39 AM

Hillary is a skank and has been involved with so much political crap behind the scenes that she gets no respect from me whatsoever. She's dishonest and a liar. And looks like a lesbians wet dream.

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/12_03/clintonAP1712_468x592.jpg

Let's see how many wrinkles you have when you hold the fate of the world on your shoulders. You petty, narrow minded, twit.

Anton Chigurh

04-28-2012, 10:40 AM

Bye. One less redneck in the pile on.It's actually, one less person whose posts you have no answers for.

You're the exact type of poster who can kill a board really fast.

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:40 AM

Ok, I'll play, that's easy. 97% of your posts say the same thing:

"I'm a victim"

Everyone of my posts advocates civil rights strongly. What you can't handle is my power. I'm indefeatible. You're the one whining like a victim because I champion women's rights.

jimnyc

04-28-2012, 10:41 AM

Let's see how many wrinkles you have when you hold the fate of the world on your shoulders. You petty, narrow minded, twit.

Nitwit drama queen. She holds no weight and can't make a decision without approval. Condi had a MUCH MUCH MUCH higher approval rating from her work in dealing with foreign leaders. What does Shrillary do? Drinks shots and embarrasses her country, while Obama's men are out with hookers. Great team! LOL

Trigg

04-28-2012, 10:41 AM

why don't you ignor Jim's baiting and try to defend your position to elect women based on gender alone.

That is a much more interresting posltion/discussion to have.

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:42 AM

post number 35

what do you think about the fact that more women vote than men?

Why do you think congress is 86% women?

Apparently, you're satisfied we can vote. I want more than that.

Noir

04-28-2012, 10:43 AM

You know I don't want to read your post now because you assumed I had ignored it. I just didn't see it. But now that I know you hold this attitude, there is no point in me reading it and addressing it.

Why don't you just post my imagined response. Thats all you want to do anyway.

Its mature responses like this that have earned you the respect and gravitas you have on this board.

jimnyc

04-28-2012, 10:44 AM

Everyone of my posts advocates civil rights strongly. What you can't handle is my power. I'm indefeatible. You're the one whining like a victim because I champion women's rights.

What made you so emotionally unavailable and such an emotional wreck? The doctor is in, let me help you with your myriad issues!

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:44 AM

Nitwit drama queen. She holds no weight and can't make a decision without approval. Condi had a MUCH MUCH MUCH higher approval rating from her work in dealing with foreign leaders. What does Shrillary do? Drinks shots and embarrasses her country, while Obama's men are out with hookers. Great team! LOL

Hillary Clinton could wipe the floor with you.

Trigg

04-28-2012, 10:44 AM

Why do you think congress is 86% women?

Apparently, you're satisfied we can vote. I want more than that.

I'm satisfied because we can vote for whomever we choose to vote for.

You seem to be in favor of affermative action, is that what you're advocating in order to ballance things out?

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:45 AM

Its mature responses like this that have earned you the respect and gravitas you have on this board.

You assumed I ignored you. You lose. Now I will ignore you.

tailfins

04-28-2012, 10:45 AM

Damn right I'm a sexist bitch and proud of it.

Now that you acknowledge that, you should recuse yourself from situations where your bias would violate the principles rooted in the Constitution. This is especially true if you engage in activity that effects child custody or divorce terms. If you don't recuse yourself, you're just a corrupt zealot, kind of like the President. It's OK, I understand. My parents were avid racists and grandparents full-fledged Klansmen. I don't judge because EVERYBODY is prejudiced. However prejudice demands mitigation.

jimnyc

04-28-2012, 10:46 AM

Hillary Clinton could wipe the floor with you.

I'm not worried about her, even McChimpy in Chief tossed her aside like a hunk of garbage.

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:46 AM

I'm satisfied because we can vote for whomever we choose to vote for.

You seem to be in favor of affermative action, is that what you're advocating in order to ballance things out?

No, I'm not. Why aren't you interested in seeing more women run for office? Frankly, I think women could turn this country around.

Shadow

04-28-2012, 10:46 AM

Yes, "Stand by your man" only when it's politically expedient.

Nope...that will only apply to a woman with a (d) next to her name. If it is a republican woman she would be met with contempt.

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:47 AM

I'm not worried about her, even McChimpy in Chief tossed her aside like a hunk of garbage.

Who cares what choices she made in her marriage.

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:48 AM

Nope...that will only apply to a woman with a (d) next to her name. If it is a republican woman she would be met with contempt.

Plenty of Republican women are putting up with their politician husbands fucking around. It's not a dem or repug issue.

jimnyc

04-28-2012, 10:48 AM

Who cares what choices she made in her marriage.

I was talking about Nobama. She couldn't even beat a man with 143 days of inexperience in office!

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:49 AM

Now that you acknowledge that, you should recuse yourself from situations where your bias would violate the principles rooted in the Constitution. This is especially true if you engage in activity that effects child custody or divorce terms. If you don't recuse yourself, you're just a corrupt zealot, kind of like the President. It's OK, I understand. My parents were avid racists and grandparents full-fledged Klansmen. I don't judge because EVERYBODY is prejudiced. However prejudice demands mitigation.

I'm a proud uppity woman.

Trigg

04-28-2012, 10:50 AM

No, I'm not. Why aren't you interested in seeing more women run for office? Frankly, I think women could turn this country around.

I've stated repeatedly that I'd love to see more women run for office.

What I'm trying to discuss with you is whether you'd vote for ANY woman regardless of political ideals and whether you are in favor of affermative action in our government?

if you are against affermative action than how do you think we can get more women elected? Since more women vote than men?

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:50 AM

I was talking about Nobama. She couldn't even beat a man with 143 days of inexperience in office!

That's true. It still matters whether you're male or female over what color you are when it comes to being elected to the highest office in the land.

Don't you think we should change that?

tailfins

04-28-2012, 10:51 AM

Plenty of Republican women are putting up with their politician husbands fucking around. It's not a dem or repug issue.

Some habits die hard! Your Democrat Underground lingo comes through "REPUG"??

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:52 AM

I've stated repeatedly that I'd love to see more women run for office.

What I'm trying to discuss with you is whether you'd vote for ANY woman regardless of political ideals and whether you are in favor of affermative action in our government?

if you are against affermative action than how do you think we can get more women elected? Since more women vote than men?

1. I would not vote for any candidate based on gender. I just want more women to run.

2. No, on making quotas to get more women in office.

3. Please stop asking me the same question over and over AFTER I've answered you. Thank you.

jimnyc

04-28-2012, 10:52 AM

That's true. It still matters whether you're male or female over what color you are when it comes to being elected to the highest office in the land.

Don't you think we should change that?

What happened was Democrats not giving a shit about intelligence & experience, and voted for someone who was good at reading off of a teleprompter. Yes, I think we should educate voters and see if we can change that.

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:53 AM

Some habits die hard! Your Democrat Underground lingo comes through "REPUG"??

I couldn't resist. Have to give the status quo a tweak. You're all right wingers, right?

Trigg

04-28-2012, 10:53 AM

That's true. It still matters whether you're male or female over what color you are when it comes to being elected to the highest office in the land.

Don't you think we should change that?

How would you change that?

If a republican woman and a demograte man were running agaist each other. WHO WOULD YOU VOTE FOR?

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:53 AM

What happened was Democrats not giving a shit about intelligence & experience, and voted for someone who was good at reading off of a teleprompter. Yes, I think we should educate voters and see if we can change that.

Thank you. That's all I'm interested in too.

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:55 AM

How would you change that?

If a republican woman and a demograte man were running agaist each other. WHO WOULD YOU VOTE FOR?

I vote for the candidate that I think is imminently more qualified. How do we change the status quo? Excellent question. Women have a much harder time raising money for campaigns, for one thing. We have to fund raise more and we have to CARE if women get in office.

Shadow

04-28-2012, 10:55 AM

Do you know what internalized oppression is? It's when the oppressed group takes on the characteristics of the oppressor. Shadow's comment about all women being bitches.

I guess she travels in circles of women competing for men. I don't.

No... I just know a hypocritcal statement when I see one. Blaming the men for keeping women down. When it has been seen in recent elections that if a woman runs but holds different political beliefs than the self described "feminists"...they will try and take her out no holes barred. No female "slurs" or "sterotypes" condemend or avoided when used toward these females either. Your argument would hold more water if we hadn't just witnessed the whining about sexism for Hillary...but ignored and even praised when it was directed at Palin or Bachmann.

Trigg

04-28-2012, 10:58 AM

1. I would not vote for any candidate based on gender. I just want more women to run.

2. No, on making quotas to get more women in office.

3. Please stop asking me the same question over and over AFTER I've answered you. Thank you.

I hope you can understant my confusion. YOU posted an article about women in high office that stated we are at the bottom of the pile BECAUSE the other countries imposed quotas.

Until I asked that question I did not see where you were against it. I'm happy to see you are.

I also had't seen where you were against voting based ONLY on gender. Again, I was confused because I pointed out that MORE WOMEN vote than men.

It would seem to me that if more of us are voting than we are indeed CHOOSING the people WE THINK will do the best job of representing us.

What are your ideas on how to get more women to run for office??

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 10:58 AM

What made you so emotionally unavailable and such an emotional wreck? The doctor is in, let me help you with your myriad issues!

Oh, does baby need his binky again? I'm not "emotionally available" enough to you? Mommy didn't give you enough attention?

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 11:00 AM

I hope you can understant my confusion. YOU posted an article about women in high office that stated we are at the bottom of the pile BECAUSE the other countries imposed quotas.

Until I asked that question I did not see where you were against it. I'm happy to see you are.

I also had't seen where you were against voting based ONLY on gender. Again, I was confused because I pointed out that MORE WOMEN vote than men.

It would seem to me that if more of us are voting than we are indeed CHOOSING the people WE THINK will do the best job of representing us.

What are your ideas on how to get more women to run for office??

First of all, do you expect me to know how to solve every issue I raise? I don't. At least we're talking about this. I suggest that we all educate ourselves more and look at what has worked in other countries.

I don't think quotas would be politically possible in the US. Yes, more women vote than men, but we have to choose from available candidates and most of those are male.

Do you think men occupy 86% of Congress because women are less intelligent or less qualified to run for office? IMO, it's still an issue of economics and employment opportunities.

Shadow

04-28-2012, 11:01 AM

Plenty of Republican women are putting up with their politician husbands fucking around. It's not a dem or repug issue.

Then it must be the part where Hillary uses her relationship and Bill as a stepping stone that you admire then. Not the fact that she was a loyal wife and partner.

jimnyc

04-28-2012, 11:03 AM

Oh, does baby need his binky again? I'm not "emotionally available" enough to you? Mommy didn't give you enough attention?

I'm not referring to being available to me, I suggest you look up the phrase if it escapes that little walnut of yours!

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 11:05 AM

I'm not referring to being available to me, I suggest you look up the phrase if it escapes that little walnut of yours!

Sure you are. You personalize most of posts to yourself. No one who knows me in my real life would ever accuse me of being emotionally unavailable to ANYONE.

tailfins

04-28-2012, 11:05 AM

I'm a proud uppity woman.

That's your right. Just remember that if that effect anything you do under authority of law that it puts you in the same category as a racist Sheriff that knocks out the teeth of black inmates.

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 11:06 AM

Then it must be the part where Hillary uses her relationship and Bill as a stepping stone that you admire then. Not the fact that she was a loyal wife and partner.

No, I was quite disheartened that Hillary stayed with Bill. I changed parties from dem to independent over Monicagate.

jimnyc

04-28-2012, 11:07 AM

Sure you are. You personalize most of posts to yourself. No one who knows me in my real life would ever accuse me of being emotionally unavailable to ANYONE.

No, dumbass, it reflects a "disconnect" of sorts, and why you have SO many issues interacting with EVERYONE you post with.

And also look up "emotionally unstable", as I think that one fits MUCH better.

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 11:07 AM

That's your right. Just remember that if that effect anything you do under authority of law that it puts you in the same category as a racist Sheriff that knocks out the teeth of black inmates.

I have no idea what you're talking about here. What are you worried about? All I'm doing is having a big mouth on a forum. Get over it.

Wind Song

04-28-2012, 11:08 AM

No, dumbass, it reflects a "disconnect" of sorts, and why you have SO many issues interacting with EVERYONE you post with.

And also look up "emotionally unstable", as I think that one fits MUCH better.

You continually complain that I make all threads about ME when it is YOU who do that. This isn't the place for that conversation.

We're talking politics.

Not my posting style.

Shadow

04-28-2012, 11:12 AM

No, I was quite disheartened that Hillary stayed with Bill. I changed parties from dem to independent over Monicagate.

You said that you admired Hillary for knowing how to prioritize what is important (ie her political career). And basically using her relationship with Bill to promote it. :rolleyes:

Trigg

04-28-2012, 11:13 AM

First of all, do you expect me to know how to solve every issue I raise? I don't. At least we're talking about this. I suggest that we all educate ourselves more and look at what has worked in other countries.

I don't think quotas would be politically possible in the US. Yes, more women vote than men, but we have to choose from available candidates and most of those are male.

Do you think men occupy 86% of Congress because women are less intelligent or less qualified to run for office? IMO, it's still an issue of economics and employment opportunities.

Aggressive much? yes, if you raise a topic I expect you to have some ideas.

I also agree with you that fewer women run because of economic issues. Women probably run less because they raise families and running for office is harder on a woman with children.

I think a woman with young children trying to get elected would get slammed by other women for ignoring her kids. Look at Palin, she was slammed on every news cast for somhow allowing her teenager to get pregnant. The underlying message, this woman can't even run her house do we want her one step from President?

tailfins

04-28-2012, 11:34 AM

I have no idea what you're talking about here. What are you worried about? All I'm doing is having a big mouth on a forum. Get over it.

I'm concerned that you're some kind of rogue social worker that breaks up perfectly good families and assists women in misusing abuse laws to manipulate divorce proceedings that you perhaps help instigate. If that's the case you're in the same category of a racist Sheriff that knocks out the teeth of black inmates.

Anton Chigurh

04-28-2012, 06:08 PM

Why do you think congress is 86% women?So, what do you want? 100% maybe? :lol:

DragonStryk72

04-28-2012, 06:28 PM

Do you think it's right that only 16% of Congress is female? Wake up.

That means 84% of Congress is male. Do you really think men care about women's issues? I don't.

He literally just said "Vote for women if women are better for the job", and you turned it in to a slight somehow. You do remember Susan B. Anthony, who pushed to be sent to prison just like her male counterparts because equality was so paramount? Thanks for pissing on her legacy.

DragonStryk72

04-28-2012, 06:35 PM

tailfins

04-28-2012, 07:17 PM

You are sexist, horribly so. My god, how you degrade them, and you just condemned every man in the world literally once sentence after saying you don't. I mean, seriosuly, do you even get how much of a judgmental bigot you are?

Interesting: Since I honed in on her as a full time homewrecker, she seems to have disappeared now for about eight hours. I hope we can all stay detached. It seems the comparison to a rogue, racist Sheriff has hit home for her. All she is good for is as a walking episode of Jerry Springer.

gabosaurus

04-28-2012, 10:50 PM

or vote for whoever you think is best to represent you, regardless of their sex or other unimportant factors.

I vote for candidates. If you are the best candidate, I don't care if you are male or female. I also don't care about your race, ethnicity, religion or if your dad was a pot smoking hippy.
The last candidate I voted for specifically because she was a woman was Dianne Feinstein. Was that ever a stupid mistake.
Now I look past the label to see the person.

krisy

04-29-2012, 08:53 AM

86% of Congress is male. Wake up. The women on this thread are all heterosexual. They may disagree with me. There is a reason lesbian women are often at the forefront of women's politics. We don't have to worry about fighting with our husbands.

This is an excellent resource:

http://www.huntalternatives.org/pages/7_the_initiative_for_inclusive_security.cfm

This statement is just flat out WRONG. What male/female relationship are you basing your opinions on? Do you honestly believe that hetero women don't get into politics as much because they worry about fighting with their husbands?!! That we all believe what our husbands tell us to believe because if we don't he might get out the belt and give us a talkin too.

There isn't one ,man that I know that in my family or friends that would discourage his wife from believing in whatever she wants. You say that lesbain women are often at the forefront of polititcs as if your the only ones who have the "balls" to stand up for what they believe. Really silly and you seem to have the wrong idea or generalize all hetero relationships and marriages.

Wind Song

04-29-2012, 10:38 AM

You said that you admired Hillary for knowing how to prioritize what is important (ie her political career). And basically using her relationship with Bill to promote it. :rolleyes:

That's not what I meant. She thought of her daughter, how long she'd been married to Bill, his career and hers.

Wind Song

04-29-2012, 10:41 AM

So, what do you want? 100% maybe? :lol:

How about 50%? Would that be fair?

Wind Song

04-29-2012, 10:42 AM

I'm concerned that you're some kind of rogue social worker that breaks up perfectly good families and assists women in misusing abuse laws to manipulate divorce proceedings that you perhaps help instigate. If that's the case you're in the same category of a racist Sheriff that knocks out the teeth of black inmates.

I'm not a rogue social worker who breaks up families. I don't have anything to do with divorce. I work on a crisis line.

Anton Chigurh

04-29-2012, 02:40 PM

How about 50%? Would that be fair?You already have 86, according to your post I quoted.

Must be a really self loathing and miserable, humorless life you have. I was making fun of a typo, dummy.

Here's what you posted:
Why do you think congress is 86% women?

ConHog

04-29-2012, 02:54 PM

You're a sexist bitch. You must have been severely abused or something to have such hatred and contempt for men. Either way, that's your business and I don't give a shit, but your emotional state shouldn't have you condemning every man in the world.

You're not exactly helping the matter here. Yes , of course Dorothy is wrong. Men are capable of being, and in fact many are, concerned with women's concerns; but it is also a fact that most of the time people are going to be most concerned with issues that actually affect them. And none of that matters anyway. You don't need to be calling her a sexist bitch for having the opinion that women should vote for women. I have no doubt in my mind that if Abbey had written the exact same thing here that Dorothy did you wouldn't have OVER REACTED the way you did.

If you want WS to calm down and be a better poster , how about if you stop jumping her ass EVERY time she posts? Just let some things go..........

ConHog

04-29-2012, 02:59 PM

How about 50%? Would that be fair?

How about if we don't worry about percentages WS? Are you saying you want us to start disqualifying candidates if they aren't the right race/gender/or what have you for what your numbers suggest?

Oh, and that's what lobbies are for? Or are you suggesting there aren't women's lobbies lobbying congress on behalf of their issues?

jimnyc

04-29-2012, 04:10 PM

You're not exactly helping the matter here. Yes , of course Dorothy is wrong. Men are capable of being, and in fact many are, concerned with women's concerns; but it is also a fact that most of the time people are going to be most concerned with issues that actually affect them. And none of that matters anyway. You don't need to be calling her a sexist bitch for having the opinion that women should vote for women. I have no doubt in my mind that if Abbey had written the exact same thing here that Dorothy did you wouldn't have OVER REACTED the way you did.

If you want WS to calm down and be a better poster , how about if you stop jumping her ass EVERY time she posts? Just let some things go..........

Oh please, fuck off. I condemn and give it to her when she deserves it. You will not find me giving her a hard time when she's a pleasant poster or if she's not purposely being obtuse and playing the victim woman. I called her what I did because she outright said that men don't care about women's issues, not that some may care less. I asked her to clarify her statement, she insisted, then I said what I did.

Also, please stop acting like her savior and telling me how to interact with her. It's really none of your business. She's a big girl and I can handle myself too.

ConHog

04-29-2012, 05:17 PM

Oh please, fuck off. I condemn and give it to her when she deserves it. You will not find me giving her a hard time when she's a pleasant poster or if she's not purposely being obtuse and playing the victim woman. I called her what I did because she outright said that men don't care about women's issues, not that some may care less. I asked her to clarify her statement, she insisted, then I said what I did.

Also, please stop acting like her savior and telling me how to interact with her. It's really none of your business. She's a big girl and I can handle myself too.

Actually it IS my business if you want me to continue posting here. I'm frankly sick of seeing every fucking thread turned into Jim vs Sky. It was cute and funny to begin with, but now it's just old. You obviously don't like her, she obviously doesn't care for you. She obviously isn't intelligent enough to stay away from the baiting, but I KNOW you're intelligent enough to admit that that is exactly what you do. You bait and bait and bait her, KNOWING she will react the way she does; then you toy with her until she finally explodes then you give her a 24 hour ban.

And you can make it personal all you want, the FACT is that you are ruining your own board. Just fucking ignore her if she isn't breaking the rules.

Or just keep pretending like you aren't equally part of the problem. Whatever...............

I've defended and defended that this place isn't USMB, prove I'm right.

jimnyc

04-29-2012, 05:27 PM

Actually it IS my business if you want me to continue posting here. I'm frankly sick of seeing every fucking thread turned into Jim vs Sky. It was cute and funny to begin with, but now it's just old. You obviously don't like her, she obviously doesn't care for you. She obviously isn't intelligent enough to stay away from the baiting, but I KNOW you're intelligent enough to admit that that is exactly what you do. You bait and bait and bait her, KNOWING she will react the way she does; then you toy with her until she finally explodes then you give her a 24 hour ban.

And you can make it personal all you want, the FACT is that you are ruining your own board. Just fucking ignore her if she isn't breaking the rules.

Or just keep pretending like you aren't equally part of the problem. Whatever...............

I've defended and defended that this place isn't USMB, prove I'm right.

WS can chime in on this as well, but she's not been banned. She was banned from a couple of threads in the past, but even those bans I lifted. Other than my verbal "assault", she has not been moderated at all. So I'm unsure why you would mention things that aren't true, or just made up.

And that's my point, she DOESN'T NEED defending. Her and I get along just fine in certain threads, and in others we do. Maybe both of our posting styles will change as we get to know one another better. But either way, it's still really none of your business.

But if the community thinks "I'm ruining my own board" - I will happily take a step back. But I won't post differently. I post with people AS I AM AND WHO I AM or I don't post. If others join in and state along with you that I'm ruining things for the board, again, I'll take a step back. Until such time, my passion in posting seems more prevalent at times as WS can come in and make 200 posts in one day.

Kathianne

04-29-2012, 05:29 PM

WS can chime in on this as well, but she's not been banned. She was banned from a couple of threads in the past, but even those bans I lifted. Other than my verbal "assault", she has not been moderated at all. So I'm unsure why you would mention things that aren't true, or just made up.

And that's my point, she DOESN'T NEED defending. Her and I get along just fine in certain threads, and in others we do. Maybe both of our posting styles will change as we get to know one another better. But either way, it's still really none of your business.

But if the community thinks "I'm ruining my own board" - I will happily take a step back. But I won't post differently. I post with people AS I AM AND WHO I AM or I don't post. If others join in and state along with you that I'm ruining things for the board, again, I'll take a step back. Until such time, my passion in posting seems more prevalent at times as WS can come in and make 200 posts in one day.

:beer:

DragonStryk72

04-29-2012, 06:38 PM

Actually it IS my business if you want me to continue posting here. I'm frankly sick of seeing every fucking thread turned into Jim vs Sky. It was cute and funny to begin with, but now it's just old. You obviously don't like her, she obviously doesn't care for you. She obviously isn't intelligent enough to stay away from the baiting, but I KNOW you're intelligent enough to admit that that is exactly what you do. You bait and bait and bait her, KNOWING she will react the way she does; then you toy with her until she finally explodes then you give her a 24 hour ban.

And you can make it personal all you want, the FACT is that you are ruining your own board. Just fucking ignore her if she isn't breaking the rules.

Or just keep pretending like you aren't equally part of the problem. Whatever...............

I've defended and defended that this place isn't USMB, prove I'm right.

The central problem, though, is it takes two to tango. How many times did she demand to be put on ignore, or be banned? And still, Jim hasn't banned her.

She is epic at misinterpreting, purposely or otherwise, peoples' posts and taking the worst possible interpretation of their meaning. I mean, hell, She's left wing and even Noir and Gabs won't back her up anymore. How far off the reservation do you have to go when even others on the left are looking at you like you've lost it?

And WS doesn't limit her bile to Jim. Myself, you, even Sassy have gotten it thrown at us.

tailfins

04-29-2012, 06:44 PM

Toro

04-29-2012, 07:27 PM

In Italy, they elected a porn star to Parliament.

http://www.imow.org/dynamic/user_images/user_images_file_name_3563.jpg

http://www.imow.org/wpp/stories/viewstory?storyid=1205

Kathianne

04-29-2012, 07:34 PM

In Italy, they elected a porn star to Parliament.

http://www.imow.org/dynamic/user_images/user_images_file_name_3563.jpg

http://www.imow.org/wpp/stories/viewstory?storyid=1205

Are you implying WS is a porn star?

Toro

04-29-2012, 07:54 PM

We should have more women elected to Congress. Particularly women like Christine O'Donnell, Sharon Angle, Anne Coulter, Margaret Thatcher, etc.

Toro

04-29-2012, 07:54 PM

Are you implying WS is a porn star?

Ya gotta admit, WS looks pretty good in her avie.

Toro

04-29-2012, 07:57 PM

This post is full of internalized oppression. I feel sad that you feel this way.

JvKIWjnEPNY

Wind Song

04-29-2012, 08:54 PM

How about if we don't worry about percentages WS? Are you saying you want us to start disqualifying candidates if they aren't the right race/gender/or what have you for what your numbers suggest?

Oh, and that's what lobbies are for? Or are you suggesting there aren't women's lobbies lobbying congress on behalf of their issues?

I'm saying we're not doing everything we can to encourage more women to run for public office.

Wind Song

04-29-2012, 08:56 PM

How about if we don't worry about percentages WS? Are you saying you want us to start disqualifying candidates if they aren't the right race/gender/or what have you for what your numbers suggest?

Oh, and that's what lobbies are for? Or are you suggesting there aren't women's lobbies lobbying congress on behalf of their issues?

I think since 86% of all Congress is male and only 14% is female, it is seriously out of balance.

Wind Song

04-29-2012, 08:57 PM

You already have 86, according to your post I quoted.

Must be a really self loathing and miserable, humorless life you have. I was making fun of a typo, dummy.

Here's what you posted:

Thanks for pointing out an error I made.

Anton Chigurh

04-29-2012, 08:58 PM

Thanks for pointing out an error I made.Which, like the sycophant idiot you are, you then compounded.

tailfins

04-29-2012, 08:58 PM

I think since 86% of all Congress is male and only 14% is female, it is seriously out of balance.

I helped elect Diane Black to Congress. Does that make me your hero?

Wind Song

04-29-2012, 08:59 PM

I helped elect Diane Black to Congress. Does that make me your hero?

Yes.

tailfins

04-29-2012, 09:18 PM

Yes.

Here is a news story about her:

Diane Black... top the list of U.S. House’s most conservative members

http://blogs.tennessean.com/politics/2012/diane-black-stephen-fincher-top-the-list-of-u-s-houses-most-conservative-members/

She got the top 94% conservative rating from National Journal. She's one of the few decent aspects I left behind in Tennessee. In spite of being a conservative, she doesn't act like an inbred.

Wind Song

04-29-2012, 09:22 PM

Here is a news story about her:

http://blogs.tennessean.com/politics/2012/diane-black-stephen-fincher-top-the-list-of-u-s-houses-most-conservative-members/

She got the top 94% conservative rating from National Journal. She's one of the few decent aspects I left behind in Tennessee. In spite of being a conservative, she doesn't act like an inbred.

Good for you.

ConHog

04-29-2012, 09:25 PM

The central problem, though, is it takes two to tango. How many times did she demand to be put on ignore, or be banned? And still, Jim hasn't banned her.

She is epic at misinterpreting, purposely or otherwise, peoples' posts and taking the worst possible interpretation of their meaning. I mean, hell, She's left wing and even Noir and Gabs won't back her up anymore. How far off the reservation do you have to go when even others on the left are looking at you like you've lost it?

And WS doesn't limit her bile to Jim. Myself, you, even Sassy have gotten it thrown at us.

ExaCTLY MY point DS. It takes TWO (or more) to tango. Sky's little rants can't gain any steam if Jim doesn't let them. Or whomever. I mean don't act like I haven't called her out to. She bears plenty of the blame here.

Wind Song

04-29-2012, 09:26 PM

DS and CH

I took 24 hours off to reflect on feedback from members. Try judging my posts from today on.

Wind Song

04-29-2012, 09:31 PM

Elect Liz Johnson Judge.

Northern California.

Anton Chigurh

04-29-2012, 09:32 PM

Elect Liz Johnson Judge.

Northern California.Why?

Wind Song

04-29-2012, 09:36 PM

Why?

She is honest, has integrity, has already contributed a great deal to the community. She is smart and has great heart. She was the county attorney for children's court.

Anton Chigurh

04-29-2012, 09:38 PM

She is honest, has integrity, has already contributed a great deal to the community. She is smart and has great heart. She was the county attorney for children's court.She is everything you're not?

ConHog

04-29-2012, 09:43 PM

She is honest, has integrity, has already contributed a great deal to the community. She is smart and has great heart. She was the county attorney for children's court.

Honest question here. Do you like Nancy Pelosi she's since she's a woman?

jimnyc

04-29-2012, 09:45 PM

You bait and bait and bait her, KNOWING she will react the way she does; then you toy with her until she finally explodes then you give her a 24 hour ban.

You can retract this falsehood anytime you like.

Anton Chigurh

04-29-2012, 09:47 PM

You can retract this falsehood anytime you like.Remember, he only pretends to apologize.

tailfins

04-29-2012, 10:01 PM

You can retract this falsehood anytime you like.

Banning someone's IP address has the same effect as banning the user.

Wind Song

04-29-2012, 10:37 PM

She is everything you're not?

She has qualities. So do you.

Wind Song

04-29-2012, 10:38 PM

Honest question here. Do you like Nancy Pelosi she's since she's a woman?

I don't know her personally. I respect her work.

ConHog

04-29-2012, 10:38 PM

Wind Song

04-29-2012, 10:40 PM

Wind Song

04-29-2012, 10:43 PM

Here is an article: Why Don't Women Run For Office?

http://www.cluw.org/PDF/womeninoffice.pdf

gabosaurus

04-29-2012, 11:38 PM

Inherently, women are not crooked, dishonest, devious and backstabbing enough to achieve high political office. Those are primarily male attributes. :cool:

ConHog

04-30-2012, 12:23 AM

:laugh:X
Inherently, women are not crooked, dishonest, devious and backstabbing enough to achieve high political office. Those are primarily male attributes. :cool:

Dont worry youre pretty little head about it.

DragonStryk72

04-30-2012, 01:16 AM

ExaCTLY MY point DS. It takes TWO (or more) to tango. Sky's little rants can't gain any steam if Jim doesn't let them. Or whomever. I mean don't act like I haven't called her out to. She bears plenty of the blame here.

Except there's no way to post something she won't fight us on. Noir managed to post, in this very thread, that people should vote for whomever is the best candidate, regardless of race, creed, religion, or sex, and she found a way to pick a fight on it. How the fuck do you get yourself into a fight with Noir when he's supporting your base premise?

This would all be fine if it weren't for the fact that we've tried, repeatedly and at length, to get her to see us as something other than a bunch of assholes ready to jump her at any moment, a situation she creates. It would also be fine if she didn't insist on posting more threads than RSR per day. It becomes somewhat difficult to ignore a person who is on every channel, and taking the worst possible version of what you said, and even flat out ignoring parts of what you said to keep spamming the same point again and again, then calling your a racist, sexist, bigot, or some such because you do not 100% support her wild claim.

jimnyc

04-30-2012, 05:15 AM

You can retract this falsehood anytime you like.

What falsehood Jim? you HAVE given her 24 hours bans in the past , have you not?

All I'm asking is that BOTH of you stop. On her end, I don't think she's capable. I think you could if you chose to.

Sorry man, but you're not perfect either.

Jim has never banned me. I've taunted him to ban me, but he won't.

Con, you can stop digging and making shit up, and just retract anytime you like. You and your "lectures" about how I should treat people are lame. Then outright making shit up and stating I bait and bait and bait & then ban when someone responds - outright bullshit and never happened. You were angry that I told you to fuck off and you made shit up. Now even WS was kind enough to state the truth.

tailfins

04-30-2012, 08:35 AM

Inherently, women are not crooked, dishonest, devious and backstabbing enough to achieve high political office. Those are primarily male attributes. :cool:

Bull$##t!! You apparently have never worked in the offices of a major corporation. Most American women are not technical and try to cover it up by they very characteristics mentioned above. They are masters at taking credit for other people's work, being a@@holes to create a perception of "no-nonsense", covering up or diverting blame to others for failed systems, "managing" something and palming themselves off as "experts" in the field. For example some social work major who can't calculate a square root yells at a few Engineers and shows up at few Engineering team meetings, she has then managed Engineers, she is then an Engineering Manager, thus an expert in the Engineering field. I would say that fits "all of the above" characteristics you mention.

Wind Song

04-30-2012, 09:17 AM

tailfins

04-30-2012, 09:25 AM

If more women were at the highest levels of government we would engage in less wars. That's my opinion.

Here is a Pew Research Study:
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/932/men-or-women-whos-the-better-leader

You just caused me to realize why more American women don't win elections: Feminism has made them unlikable. Most people don't want to vote for a cranky, contentious woman.

Wind Song

04-30-2012, 09:27 AM

You just caused me to realize why more American women don't win elections: Feminism has made them unlikable. Most people don't want to vote for a cranky, contentious woman.

Thank you, Rush Limbaugh. People still care MORE about what women politician look like than what their politics are.

tailfins

04-30-2012, 09:33 AM

Thank you, Rush Limbaugh. People still care MORE about what women politician look like than what their politics are.

Well, if you insist on making it gender neutral, most people don't want to vote for ANYONE who is cranky and contentious.

Wind Song

04-30-2012, 09:34 AM

Well, if you insist on making it gender neutral, most people don't want to vote for ANYONE who is cranky and contentious.

We will vote for strong candidates, and all of us differ on what we think makes a strong candidate for public office.

Women get labelled many negative words for doing the same things men do.

Peach

04-30-2012, 09:36 AM

We will vote for strong candidates, and all of us differ on what we think makes a strong candidate for public office.

Women get labelled many negative words for doing the same thing men do.

It would be good to see elected representatives that reflect the population, yes.

Wind Song

04-30-2012, 09:37 AM

Despite Hillary Clinton’s groundbreaking run, Nancy Pelosi’s preeminence as the first woman Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, and women like Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice holding top administrative positions, the dial for women in political leadership has moved excruciatingly slowly, from 3 percent of Congress in 1979 to 16 percent in 2008.

Ninety-two years after Jeannette Rankin of Montana became the first woman elected to the House, America stacks up an embarrassing eighty-fourth among nations in the proportion of women holding national legislative office—far behind Rwanda, Austria, and Cuba. Men run City Hall in 90 of 100 largest cities; women make up just 16 percent of state governors and less than a quarter of state legislators. Even though women comprise the majority of voters, men, by and large, still decide the laws that govern our lives, from war and peace and equal pay policies to reproductive freedom. Just what is standing in the way of gender equality in political leadership? Where are all the women in this so-called representative democracy, and why aren’t they running?
http://craigeisele.wordpress.com/2012/03/01/strong-female-politicians-emerge/

Wind Song

04-30-2012, 09:41 AM

Powerful women in India:

http://www.merinews.com/article/top-10-powerful-women-politicians-of-india/15767848.shtml

Wind Song

04-30-2012, 09:42 AM

http://www1.cuny.edu/portal_ur/content/womens_leadership/women_politics.html

jimnyc

04-30-2012, 12:59 PM

Banning someone's IP address has the same effect as banning the user.

Missed this earlier.... But to expand on things, WS has not had her account banned or her IP address. We RARELY ban here and the history speaks for itself. Someone has to REALLY push to get banned. The implication was that I goaded WS, or other members, and then banned them when they got out of line in replying to me. Simply not true, and never was. I KNOW I can be just as much of a jerk at times as others, so I certainly wouldn't ban based on my own behavior.

Peach

04-30-2012, 01:12 PM

http://www1.cuny.edu/portal_ur/content/womens_leadership/women_politics.html

India, UK, Iceland, the list of female heads of state worldwide is long. I do not vote based solely on gender but it MAY be a factor.

tailfins

04-30-2012, 01:16 PM

Missed this earlier.... But to expand on things, WS has not had her account banned or her IP address. We RARELY ban here and the history speaks for itself. Someone has to REALLY push to get banned. The implication was that I goaded WS, or other members, and then banned them when they got out of line in replying to me. Simply not true, and never was. I KNOW I can be just as much of a jerk at times as others, so I certainly wouldn't ban based on my own behavior.

:lol: I was wondering how long it would take you. I didn't say YOU did anything. I just pointed out that bans CAN be implemented by IP AND was trying to yank your chain. I thought you were just refusing to take the bait. :lol:

jimnyc

04-30-2012, 01:29 PM

:lol: I was wondering how long it would take you. I didn't say YOU did anything. I just pointed out that bans CAN be implemented by IP AND was trying to yank your chain. I thought you were just refusing to take the bait. :lol:

Yep, we can technically give an IP ban where an address wouldn't even be able to see the site let alone have trouble logging in. The only times I've ever had to deal with that was with persistent spammers.

jimnyc

05-01-2012, 10:19 AM

What falsehood Jim? you HAVE given her 24 hours bans in the past , have you not?

All I'm asking is that BOTH of you stop. On her end, I don't think she's capable. I think you could if you chose to.

Sorry man, but you're not perfect either.

Being that you outright refuse to retract your comments, I can only assume that you are just lying. If it were a mistake, you would retract your comments when proven wrong, again. Instead, you make your lame accusations and then disappear. Your comments were not only out of line - BUT 100% WRONG - and then, as usual, you can't simply admit you were wrong.

Wind Song

05-01-2012, 10:25 AM

This is Conhog's "protection" method that he expects me to stroke. I don't need this kind of protection from things that don't happen. I bet you CH will be mad at me for telling the truth.

tailfins

05-01-2012, 10:30 AM

This is Conhog's "protection" method that he expects me to stroke. I don't need this kind of protection from things that don't happen. I bet you CH will be mad at me for telling the truth.

You need protection sweethaht.

http://tvrecappersanonymous.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/silvio-sopranos.jpg

Wind Song

05-01-2012, 10:34 AM

You need protection sweethaht.

http://tvrecappersanonymous.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/silvio-sopranos.jpg

I take care of myself pretty well, I don't need some pickle puss like that one staring me in the face.

Trigg

05-01-2012, 10:35 AM

India, UK, Iceland, the list of female heads of state worldwide is long. I do not vote based solely on gender but it MAY be a factor.

The list is long because countries imposed affermative action. Which I personally think is an awful idea.

The US will catch up on it's own, we don't need the gov. rigging the results.

I would never vote based only on gender, it just doesn't make any sense. However, if a competant republican/independent woman was running against a competant republican/independent man........I'd probably vote for the woman.

Wind Song

05-01-2012, 10:49 AM

The list is long because countries imposed affermative action. Which I personally think is an awful idea.

The US will catch up on it's own, we don't need the gov. rigging the results.

I would never vote based only on gender, it just doesn't make any sense. However, if a competant republican/independent woman was running against a competant republican/independent man........I'd probably vote for the woman.

Why do you think affirimative action is a bad idea since it's obviously worked well in other countries?

fj1200

05-01-2012, 01:18 PM

fj1200

05-01-2012, 01:21 PM

“There cannot be true democracy unless women’s voices are heard.”

Hillary Rodham Clinton

They are heard... every two years... in November...

Wind Song

05-01-2012, 01:22 PM

Do you support campaign finance reform laws?

Yes. Unfortunately, corrupt politicians know how to get around them.

Kathianne

05-01-2012, 01:23 PM

They are heard... every two years... in November...

Too true. I'm a woman, though hetero. ;) I've never missed a vote since I was 18. I've been active in local, state, and national campaigns.

Wind Song

05-01-2012, 01:25 PM

Too true. I'm a woman, though hetero. ;) I've never missed a vote since I was 18. I've been active in local, state, and national campaigns.

Do you usually introduce yourself as "woman, hetero"? WTF does that have to do with voting? BTW FF I've decided to stick around just to make you miserable.

Kathianne

05-01-2012, 01:25 PM

Why do you think affirimative action is a bad idea since it's obviously worked well in other countries?

It is a terrible idea, if it ever had any merit it's usefulness is done. I hope the SCOTUS rules just that:

http://reason.com/blog/2012/05/01/affirmative-action-and-the-supreme-court

Affirmative Action and the Supreme Court (http://reason.com/blog/2012/05/01/affirmative-action-and-the-supreme-court)

Damon W. Root (http://reason.com/people/damon-w-root) | May 1, 2012
In its upcoming October 2012 term, the Supreme Court will consider the case of Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin (http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/11-345.htm). At issue is whether or not this public university violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment by using race as a factor in deciding undergraduate admissions. At The New Yorker, liberal legal writer Jeffrey Toobin, a supporter of affirmative action and other race-conscious government policies, has an interesting preview of the case. What’s perhaps most notable is the fact that Toobin thinks the Texas policy—and possibly even affirmative action itself—may be in real jeopardy. He writes:

The Texas case only concerns admissions practices at public universities, but based on past practices, the courts will likely apply the resulting ruling at private schools as well. The case will also not deal directly with affirmative action in the workplace, but, again, the same standards will likely be applied in that context. The great national experiment with affirmative action began in the Johnson Administration, thrived in the Nixon years, and has survived, embattled but enduring, ever since. We may now be in its final chapter.

In a way, it would not be surprising if the Court sent affirmative action to its doom. No figure in public life, including President Obama, has made a full-throated defense of the practice in years. On an aggressively conservative Court like the current one, that relative silence could well be seen as an invitation to dismantle the practice.

Read the rest here (http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2012/05/the-other-big-supreme-court-case.html). Shikha Dalmia discussed the Fisher case in a recent column (http://reason.com/archives/2012/03/13/the-supreme-court-cant-fix-university-ad).

Wind Song

05-01-2012, 01:26 PM

If it's such a poor idea, why does it work so well for other countries?

Kathianne

05-01-2012, 01:27 PM

Do you usually introduce yourself as "woman, hetero"? WTF does that have to do with voting? BTW FF I've decided to stick around just to make you miserable.

You are unable to make me 'miserable' as you provide scads of laughs. Settle in.

As for my sexual orientation, just making sure everyone knows. I do hope they don't pick on me.

jimnyc

05-01-2012, 01:29 PM

BTW FF I've decided to stick around just to make you miserable.

What does FF stand for? I hope it's not "fuck face", as if so, that's my word. :coffee:

Wind Song

05-01-2012, 01:31 PM

You are unable to make me 'miserable' as you provide scads of laughs. Settle in.

As for my sexual orientation, just making sure everyone knows. I do hope they don't pick on me.

Who cares what your sexual orientation is?

Actually, I know how miserable you are.

fj1200

05-01-2012, 01:35 PM

Yes. Unfortunately, corrupt politicians know how to get around them.

You should pay more attention because it is exactly those CFR laws that you support that are responsible for giving increased power to incumbents. Yet again, you are for policies which exacerbate other issues that you are against. Removal of CFR laws will give challengers more power.

Trigg

05-01-2012, 01:36 PM

Why do you think affirimative action is a bad idea since it's obviously worked well in other countries?

You stated earlier in this thread that you didn't agree with affermative action.

To answer your question though.

I disagree with affermative action in any capacity. I think the person who is best for the job should get it regardless of race, religion or gender.

Women vote in higher numbers than men therefore we are choosing the person we think best represents our interrests.

Wind Song

05-01-2012, 01:37 PM

What does FF stand for? I hope it's not "fuck face", as if so, that's my word. :coffee:

I'm not sayin...

Kathianne

05-01-2012, 01:39 PM

Who cares what your sexual orientation is?

Actually, I know how miserable you are.

and we all know you are a married lesbian, community activist, victim of police, neighbors, and messageboard posters how?

Wind Song

05-01-2012, 01:40 PM

and we all know you are a married lesbian, community activist, victim of police, neighbors, and messageboard posters how?

The only thing true is married lesbian. The rest is interpretation and judgment--your favorite activity. Are you trolling for men? Is that why you announced your sexuality?

Kathianne

05-01-2012, 01:43 PM

The only thing true is married lesbian. The rest is interpretation and judgment--your favorite activity. Are you trolling for men? Is that why you announced your sexuality?

Oh more from the Sky of the 'new & improved', anti-violent in words and deeds.

Kathianne

05-01-2012, 01:45 PM

and we all know you are a married lesbian, community activist, victim of police, neighbors, and messageboard posters how?

Oh, a starting place for understanding. You lied about being involved in your community? That the police failed in taking a report you wanted taken? That your neighbor hit you? As for the messageboards, sorry you'd have to really change to get that image different.

Wind Song

05-01-2012, 01:47 PM

Oh more from the Sky of the 'new & improved', anti-violent in words and deeds.

What's violent about putting it out there? Best of luck to you. I hope you catch one soon, it may improve your outlook.

Trigg

05-01-2012, 01:50 PM

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Kathianne again.

Wind Song

05-01-2012, 01:51 PM

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Kathianne again.

Kathianne definitely needs help with her reputation. Spread it around! She's lookin for a life one and isn't too choosy.

Trigg

05-01-2012, 01:58 PM

Kathianne definitely needs help with her reputation. Spread it around! She's lookin for a life one and isn't too choosy.

you actually almost started to debate.

Lets try again post #174

I answered your question, now it's your turn.

Wind Song

05-01-2012, 02:01 PM

you actually almost started to debate.

Lets try again post #174

I answered your question, now it's your turn.

I don't agree that the kind of affirmative action that helped more women candidates get elected in the rest of the world would work in the US. American's just don't give a shit about electing women candidates.

You have to care.

Kathianne

05-01-2012, 02:01 PM

you actually almost started to debate.

Lets try again post #174

I answered your question, now it's your turn.

Yeah, about me! LOL! She can't debate topics so she'll grasp at anything.

Wind Song

05-01-2012, 02:03 PM

Yeah, about me! LOL! She can't debate topics so she'll grasp at anything.

I'm not finished paying you back.

Trigg

05-01-2012, 02:10 PM

I don't agree that the kind of affirmative action that helped more women candidates get elected in the rest of the world would work in the US. American's just don't give a shit about electing women candidates.

You have to care.

Well then we agree on affermative action.

As for the rest of your assinine post. You realize that the US is filled with 150 million women and we have a higher voter turnout rate than men. So what you are saying is that women don't care about electing women.

And by the way that would include you also, if you're right, because YOU stated that YOU wouldn't vote for a woman if you disagreed with her. WHY DO YOU HATE WOMEN???

Kathianne

05-01-2012, 02:11 PM

I'm not finished paying you back.

I didn't know you were indebted to me.

Wind Song

05-01-2012, 02:17 PM

Well then we agree on affermative action.

As for the rest of your assinine post. You realize that the US is filled with 150 million women and we have a higher voter turnout rate than men. So what you are saying is that women don't care about electing women.

And by the way that would include you also, if you're right, because YOU stated that YOU wouldn't vote for a woman if you disagreed with her. WHY DO YOU HATE WOMEN???

I'm saying that it isn't an American priority to get women in politics but it is in other countries.

tailfins

05-01-2012, 02:17 PM

If it's such a poor idea, why does it work so well for other countries?

Have you actually tried to live in one of those countries? When you fiddle with equal representation at the voting booth, you are fiddling with government by consent of the governed.

Here is a list of the percentages:

http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/classif.htm

Notice how Cuba ranks third in the world. If you just appoint legislators, you could guarantee any percentage you want.

Kat

05-01-2012, 02:19 PM

Kathianne definitely needs help with her reputation. Spread it around! She's lookin for a life one and isn't too choosy.

You won't find a more honorable person than Kathianne. And hmm...thought you were ''soooo scared'' of her.
Lies and you are mean as well. MEAN. Full of hatred!

Kat

05-01-2012, 02:20 PM

I'm saying that it isn't an American priority to get women in politics but it is in other countries.

We don't need more women in politics. How ignorant. We just need some trustworthy politicians.

logroller

05-01-2012, 02:22 PM

Do you really think men care about women's issues? I don't.

The US trails the world in female representation in government. Why?

What issues; like, what your friend said to you about blah blah blah drama something or another? Yeah, no-- don't care about that. And seeing how the majority of the american public is female and is drastically under-represented in Congress, neither do all the women.

Wind Song

05-01-2012, 02:23 PM

Have you actually tried to live in one of those countries? When you fiddle with equal representation at the voting booth, you are fiddling with government by consent of the governed.

Here is a list of the percentages:

http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/classif.htm

Notice how Cuba ranks third in the world. If you just appoint legislators, you could guarantee any percentage you want.

I've lived in India.

Many European countries, have such policies, the only requirement is that women make up half of the candidates. Quotas at least force voters to look at women candidates.

logroller

05-01-2012, 02:24 PM

We don't need more women in politics. How ignorant. We just need some trustworthy politicians.

That's an oxymoron, like jumbo shrimp.

Kat

05-01-2012, 02:25 PM

That's an oxymoron, like jumbo shrimp.

LOL Yep, kinda sorta..:laugh:

Wind Song

05-01-2012, 02:27 PM

That's an oxymoron, like jumbo shrimp.

It's not an oxymoron. You're a cynic. We need less cynics in this country.

Kat

05-01-2012, 02:28 PM

It's not an oxymoron. You're a cynic. We need less cynics in this country.

We need more honorable people. Less liars..less attention whores.

Wind Song

05-01-2012, 02:31 PM

We need more honorable people. Less liars..less attention whores.

In government, it would be great to have more honorable people.

Who are you?

Thunderknuckles

05-01-2012, 02:50 PM

Why would anyone advocate voting for someone based on their gender, color of their skin, etc.
Isn't that the same idea that frustrated you in the first place?

Wind Song

05-01-2012, 02:52 PM

Why would anyone advocate voting for someone based on their gender, color of their skin, etc.
Isn't that the same idea that frustrated you in the first place?

When there are obvious disparities, such as 86% of Congress is male, and only 14% is female, we ought to be doing more to encourage women in politics.

Kathianne

05-01-2012, 02:54 PM

Why would anyone advocate voting for someone based on their gender, color of their skin, etc.
Isn't that the same idea that frustrated you in the first place?

Because they are racist and/or sexist.

Wind Song

05-01-2012, 02:56 PM

We need to look to other countries for leadership. The US is really behind so many other western countries in providing women with opportunities to participate strongly in politics.

Kat

05-01-2012, 02:57 PM

We need to look to other countries for leadership. The US is really behind so many other western countries in providing women with opportunities to participate strongly in politics.

I agree. Obama has no leadership. But, must ask you this: why do you hate this country so much you would suggest it needs to look at other countries. The USA is STILL the best in the world!

Kathianne

05-01-2012, 02:59 PM

We need to look to other countries for leadership. The US is really behind so many other western countries in providing women with opportunities to participate strongly in politics.

No we don't 'need' to do any such thing. If women want to run, they should. If not, they are fine too. If those running win, more power to them. If not, they need to figure out what went wrong and try again.

Women are quite capable of succeeding without a leg up.

fj1200

05-01-2012, 03:05 PM

Wind Song

05-01-2012, 03:08 PM

They have the opportunity, it's just a form and a couple bucks. Now about those CFR laws that favor the incumbent...

It's more complex than that. Why aren't you interested in studying this? I could guess, because you don't care that 86% of Congress is male. That means the US power structure is overwhelmingly in the hands of men.

fj1200

05-01-2012, 03:12 PM

It's more complex than that. Why aren't you interested in studying this? I could guess, because you don't care that 86% of Congress is male. That means the US power structure is overwhelmingly in the hands of men.

Yes, raising funds to mount a campaign, campaigning so that a majority of the voters will cash their vote in your direction, knowing how the issues affect your potential constituents... Of course it's more complex but you mentioned the opportunity. That is fairly simple. Why aren't you interested in how CFR laws are detrimental to your stated goal?

tailfins

05-01-2012, 03:25 PM

We need to look to other countries for leadership. The US is really behind so many other western countries in providing women with opportunities to participate strongly in politics.

Cuba seems to have that under control. Like I said, gender disparities could be remedied immediately if we dissolved Congress and had a socially responsible board appoint them all. It could be ratified with a vote using weighted representation where some people get multiple votes and others only get fractional votes with the numbers decided by the same board.

Thunderknuckles

05-01-2012, 03:37 PM

It's more complex than that. Why aren't you interested in studying this? I could guess, because you don't care that 86% of Congress is male. That means the US power structure is overwhelmingly in the hands of men.
What's their to study? Nothing stands in the way of women running for office in this country. Could it be that women just aren't as interested in political office as men? If so, your statement about encouraging women to run for office is valid.

Next up:
We have far too many women involved in Education and some of them will need to be re-trained in order to fill the serious gap in female fork lift operators we have in this country.

SassyLady

05-01-2012, 06:10 PM

Kathianne definitely needs help with her reputation. Spread it around! She's lookin for a life one and isn't too choosy.

Wow, WS .... thought you didn't like it when people make judgments about you, but here you are making judgments about Kathianne. Why do you want a double standard?

Seems that you also want a double standard for using foul language and calling people names.

Oh, and a double standard for being accepted for who you are ... when you so clearly are unaccepting of how others are.

SassyLady

05-01-2012, 06:12 PM

I'm saying that it isn't an American priority to get women in politics but it is in other countries.

And why must we conform to what other countries are doing?

Kathianne

05-01-2012, 06:14 PM

Wow, WS .... thought you didn't like it when people make judgments about you, but here you are making judgments about Kathianne. Why do you want a double standard?

Seems that you also want a double standard for using foul language and calling people names.

Oh, and a double standard for being accepted for who you are ... when you so clearly are unaccepting of how others are.

She hates strong hetero women. It's who she is.

SassyLady

05-01-2012, 06:16 PM

No we don't 'need' to do any such thing. If women want to run, they should. If not, they are fine too. If those running win, more power to them. If not, they need to figure out what went wrong and try again.

Women are quite capable of succeeding without a leg up.

I think this is what upsets me the most about this whole idea of affirmative action/quotas. It implies that women are incapable of succeeding without it. Pisses me off, actually.

Kathianne

05-01-2012, 06:17 PM

I think this is what upsets me the most about this whole idea of affirmative action/quotas. It implies that women are incapable of succeeding without it. Pisses me off, actually.

Me too. Must be a hetero vs homo issue? LOL! I don't think so, just a Sky issue.

SassyLady

05-01-2012, 06:17 PM

logroller

05-01-2012, 06:33 PM

I think this is what upsets me the most about this whole idea of affirmative action/quotas. It implies that women are incapable of succeeding without it. Pisses me off, actually.
Worse still, IMO , when one does succeed, it's discounted; be it affirmative action or 'she slept her way to the top'-- haters be hating. I'll be honest though, capable and self-confident women are intimidating, and new trends in human resources seek to capitalize on the advantage such women bring to an organization.

Kathianne

05-01-2012, 06:34 PM

Worse still, IMO , when one does succeed, it's discounted; be it affirmative action or 'she slept her way to the top'-- haters be hating. I'll be honest though, capable and self-confident women are intimidating, and new trends in human resources seek to capitalize on the advantage such women bring to an organization.

Yep, same problem for minorities. I've known black men that curse it, for just this reason.

ConHog

05-02-2012, 09:07 AM

Con, you can stop digging and making shit up, and just retract anytime you like. You and your "lectures" about how I should treat people are lame. Then outright making shit up and stating I bait and bait and bait & then ban when someone responds - outright bullshit and never happened. You were angry that I told you to fuck off and you made shit up. Now even WS was kind enough to state the truth.

SHUT UP!

J/K. Oh and I wasn't mad that you told me to fuck off. unlike Dorothy I realize that it's just your asshole nature. So fuck you!

But yes I thought you had banned Dorothy when you had not. My mistake there I should have looked better before I typed it.

jimnyc

05-02-2012, 09:14 AM

SHUT UP!

J/K. Oh and I wasn't mad that you told me to fuck off. unlike Dorothy I realize that it's just your asshole nature. So fuck you!

But yes I thought you had banned Dorothy when you had not. My mistake there I should have looked better before I typed it.

Thank you...

I just wanted it clear, that while people may come here with brains the size of walnuts, we don't ban unless the written rules are broken, and even then I try to hesitate to the point I have little choice.

Wind Song

05-02-2012, 09:28 AM

Thank you...

I just wanted it clear, that while people may come here with brains the size of walnuts, we don't ban unless the written rules are broken, and even then I try to hesitate to the point I have little choice.

OMG we are still discussing that! I give up.

tailfins

05-02-2012, 09:33 AM

SHUT UP!

But yes I thought you had banned Dorothy when you had not. My mistake there I should have looked better before I typed it.

I don't know about that. Irritating people just to be doing it has its rewards. I know my popcorn consumption went up.

jimnyc

05-02-2012, 09:55 AM

OMG we are still discussing that! I give up.

No one is discussing you. And there is no "we" unless you feel the need to chime in.

Wind Song

05-02-2012, 10:01 AM

No one is discussing you. And there is no "we" unless you feel the need to chime in.

Fuck off.

jimnyc

05-02-2012, 10:04 AM

Fuck off.

Saved, before you edit yourself, fuckface. I don't care at all if you call me names, but will shove it down your throat when you whine about others doing so to you!

Anton Chigurh

05-02-2012, 10:05 AM

No one is discussing you. And there is no "we" unless you feel the need to chime in.I totally get the "wind" part of Wind Song. Well over 120 windy and substance lacking posts just yesterday alone. Is the "chime" the song part?:laugh:

jimnyc

05-02-2012, 10:07 AM

I totally get the "wind" part of wind song. Well over 120 windy and substance lacking posts just yesterday alone. Is the "chime" the song part?:laugh:

If someone recorded the posts as audio, and played it over and over for you - you would be institutionalized and sitting in the corner drooling in a rocking chair.

Anton Chigurh

05-02-2012, 10:14 AM

If someone recorded the posts as audio, and played it over and over for you - you would be institutionalized and sitting in the corner drooling in a rocking chair.Nah, I would just mute it or change the channel, much Like I do when Obama is on.

ConHog

05-02-2012, 01:05 PM

If someone recorded the posts as audio, and played it over and over for you - you would be institutionalized and sitting in the corner drooling in a rocking chair.

I have a new avatar suggestion for Dorothy

3424

tailfins

05-02-2012, 01:07 PM

If someone recorded the posts as audio, and played it over and over for you - you would be institutionalized and sitting in the corner drooling in a rocking chair.

Maybe the military could use it for enhanced interrogation techniques.