SKANK 14,288 Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 3 minutes ago, En_Sabah_Nur said: Not at all. But people tend to see a double standard when she gets 80% of the flack & her opponent gets 20% or less... This was the same dynamic when Obama ran against her... The media fawned over him & barely looked into his background & history as a senator in Illnois... But with Hillary, we knew everything from the songs she listens to, to the nail polish she wears... Smh Oh and let's not forget the entire news panel discussions they would have about her wearing pants suits. So nothing wrong with criticism, but when it is overly skewed towards her… Then people see hypocrisy & tend to get pissed! The post you dismissed in this thread contained fair criticism of her, this thread is itself about an apology she had to make for a legitimately offensive gaffe, so while I don't disagree that she receives a disproportionate amount of hate, this probably isn't the time to pull that card. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
En_Sabah_Nur 9,366 Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 1 minute ago, SKANK said: The post you dismissed in this thread contained fair criticism of her, this thread is itself about an apology she had to make for a legitimately offensive gaffe, so while I don't disagree that she receives a disproportionate amount of hate, this probably isn't the time to pull that card. Yes it is a good time to pull that card. Because weren't all the Bernie Supporters out in force last week trying to defend the offensive gaffes he made during the debate about "ghetto" & "whites don't know what it's like to be poor?" So why does he get a pass for what he said, because it was just an honest mistake/gaffe & she doesn't for what she said this week?? Egypt. W Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKANK 14,288 Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 14 minutes ago, En_Sabah_Nur said: Yes it is a good time to pull that card. Because weren't all the Bernie Supporters out in force last week trying to defend the offensive gaffes he made during the debate about "ghetto" & "whites don't know what it's like to be poor?" So why does he get a pass for what he said, because it was just an honest mistake/gaffe & she doesn't for what she said this week?? Those gaffes are not comparable, one is rooted in truth and the other is not. There is a subjective difference between Sander's inarticulate but ultimately correct statment that African Americans experience poverty differently than their white peers due to institutionalized racism and a corrupt criminal justice system, compared to Hillary Clinton praising the AIDS advocacy of a homophobe who turned a blind eye to the deaths of thousands of gay men. Even if you don't agree that those gaffes are fundamentally different, when you compare the frequency in which these two politicians make gaffes, it explains why Sander's supporters are more willing to give him a free pass. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
En_Sabah_Nur 9,366 Posted March 13, 2016 Share Posted March 13, 2016 12 minutes ago, SKANK said: Those gaffes are not comparable, one is rooted in truth and the other is not. There is a subjective difference between Sander's inarticulate but ultimately correct statment that African Americans experience poverty differently than their white peers due to institutionalized racism and a corrupt criminal justice system, and Hillary Clinton praising the AIDS advocacy of a homophobe who turned a blind eye to the deaths of thousands of gay men. Even if you don't agree that those gaffes are fundamentally different, when you compare the frequency in which these two politicians make gaffes, it explains why Sander's supporters are more willing to give him a free pass. The second paragraph you stated is probably true, but the first half is not entirely true. You are correct when you say African-Americans experience poverty on a different level than their fellow white counterparts do, but not all blacks live in ghettos!! And I know a few black supporters of Bernie who were very offended by that statement & cringed when he said it. But the fact of the matter at hand is, as long as she gets a huge disproportionate amount of flake/hate! The more her supporters will come to her defense like they always have. And when people are making excuses for their own personal favorite candidates & then turning around and coming for her with everything they got! It just makes their resolve even stronger like I previously said. Because the nuances you just stated to differentiate the differences between what he said & what she said. I could do the same for her & would conversely probably be called out for making excuses for her... I could say she got Nancy's advocacy for stem cell research mixed up with their blatant denial of the AIDS epidemic of the 80's... But would that sway anyone, I highly doubt it. Egypt. W Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andres Miller 206 Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 On March 12, 2016 at 9:43 PM, En_Sabah_Nur said: Yah Yah Yah - Hillary is the Devil! Been hearing this since the early 1990's, what else is new?! Smh I'm not crucifying her. I'm calling it like it is. Shake your head all you want... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Peters 10,776 Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 can she stop beating a dead horse, good god. emma roberts is an abuser Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luiz 4,253 Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 i really need to know where this "beating a dead horse " phrase came from. who beats horses enough that beating a horse even after its dead became a common phrase? edit: thank you wiki Spoiler Flogging a dead horse (alternatively beating a dead horse, or beating a dead dog in some parts of the Anglophone world) is an idiom that means a particular request or line of conversation is already foreclosed or otherwise resolved, and any attempt to continue it is futile; or that to continue in any endeavour (physical, mental, etc.) is a waste of time as the outcome is already decided. According to the Oxford English Dictionary,[1] the first recorded use of the expression in its modern sense was by the English politician and orator John Bright, referring to the Reform Act of 1867, which called for more democratic representation in Parliament. Trying to rouse Parliament from its apathy on the issue, he said in a speech, would be like trying to flog a dead horse to make it pull a load. The Oxford English Dictionary cites The Globe, 1872, as the earliest verifiable use of flogging a dead horse, where someone is said to have "rehearsed that [. . .] lively operation known as flogging a dead horse".[2 However Jay Dillon[3] has discovered an earlier instance attributed to the same John Bright thirteen years earlier: speaking in Commons 28 March 1859, Lord Elcho (Francis Charteris, 10th Earl of Wemyss) remarked that Bright had not been "satisfied with the results of his winter campaign" and that "a saying was attributed to him [Bright] that he [had] found he was 'flogging a dead horse.'"[4] I disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
En_Sabah_Nur 9,366 Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 4 hours ago, Andres Miller said: I'm not crucifying her. I'm calling it like it is. Shake your head all you want... 🙄 🙄 Egypt. W Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Featured Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.