A Georgian's perspective

silvermani wrote:

kinnera-temp wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

kinnera-temp wrote:Learn to respect women, all women first.

I don't plan to do that any time soon. I don't have to respect a human being for a characteristic they possess as a result of nature, in which their free will did not play a role. I don't have to respect all left-handed people, or those with a mole on their right cheek either.

'Caribou Barbie' and 'the stripper woman' are pretty demeaning sexist comments. If you think you are a jerk, act like one and don't mind being perceived as one, nobody gives a hoot to what you say (unless it's your workplace where you can get fired for sexual harassment/misconduct). But the problem is, you believe that you are a thorough gentleman who is very intelligent, sauve, sophisticated, open minded, liberal, a champion of women, gays and all and take a high ground while putting down others. Sorry to burst your bubble,  you are anything but those. 

As I said before, if you want to take a high ground, you got to act upon it too. Else, be who you are.

Don't waste your time trying to talk sense into the hypocrite. He repeatedly calls Trump "the leper" oblivious to the fact that leprosy is a deadly disease which makes life miserable for its victims. It is not a word one would use to insult another person.

Hellsangel wrote:

silvermani wrote:

kinnera-temp wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

kinnera-temp wrote:Learn to respect women, all women first.

I don't plan to do that any time soon. I don't have to respect a human being for a characteristic they possess as a result of nature, in which their free will did not play a role. I don't have to respect all left-handed people, or those with a mole on their right cheek either.

'Caribou Barbie' and 'the stripper woman' are pretty demeaning sexist comments. If you think you are a jerk, act like one and don't mind being perceived as one, nobody gives a hoot to what you say (unless it's your workplace where you can get fired for sexual harassment/misconduct). But the problem is, you believe that you are a thorough gentleman who is very intelligent, sauve, sophisticated, open minded, liberal, a champion of women, gays and all and take a high ground while putting down others. Sorry to burst your bubble,  you are anything but those. 

As I said before, if you want to take a high ground, you got to act upon it too. Else, be who you are.

Don't waste your time trying to talk sense into the hypocrite. He repeatedly calls Trump "the leper" oblivious to the fact that leprosy is a deadly disease which makes life miserable for its victims. It is not a word one would use to insult another person.

I am sure Il Professore was trying to be PC and not use the word 'untouchable'.

1.1 A person who is shunned or rejected by others for moral or social reasons.
‘the story made her out to be a social leper’

2:  a person shunned for moral or social reasons

2. a person who has been rejected or ostracized for unacceptable behavior, opinions, character, or the like; anathema; outcast.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:

silvermani wrote:

kinnera-temp wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

I don't plan to do that any time soon. I don't have to respect a human being for a characteristic they possess as a result of nature, in which their free will did not play a role. I don't have to respect all left-handed people, or those with a mole on their right cheek either.

'Caribou Barbie' and 'the stripper woman' are pretty demeaning sexist comments. If you think you are a jerk, act like one and don't mind being perceived as one, nobody gives a hoot to what you say (unless it's your workplace where you can get fired for sexual harassment/misconduct). But the problem is, you believe that you are a thorough gentleman who is very intelligent, sauve, sophisticated, open minded, liberal, a champion of women, gays and all and take a high ground while putting down others. Sorry to burst your bubble,  you are anything but those. 

As I said before, if you want to take a high ground, you got to act upon it too. Else, be who you are.

Don't waste your time trying to talk sense into the hypocrite. He repeatedly calls Trump "the leper" oblivious to the fact that leprosy is a deadly disease which makes life miserable for its victims. It is not a word one would use to insult another person.

I am sure Il Professore was trying to be PC and not use the word 'untouchable'.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/leper

1.1 A person who is shunned or rejected by others for moral or social reasons.
‘the story made her out to be a social leper’

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/leper?utm_campaign=sd&utm_medium=serp&utm_source=jsonld

2:  a person shunned for moral or social reasons

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/leper?s=t

2. a person who has been rejected or ostracized for unacceptable behavior, opinions, character, or the like; anathema; outcast.

• anathema outcast   untouchable
  

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:Thanks! That's the context in which I used leper. While pariah in the Indian context may mean literally untouchable, it is has been co-opted by English as a synonym of the second meaning of leper, a social outcast.

Here is an example -- Colin Powell calling Trump an international pariah:
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/14/politics/colin-powell-dcleaks/index.html

In fact I may occasionally use Orange Pariah for variety in the future.

Hellsangel wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:Thanks! That's the context in which I used leper. While pariah in the Indian context may mean literally untouchable, it is has been co-opted by English as a synonym of the second meaning of leper, a social outcast.

Here is an example -- Colin Powell calling Trump an international pariah:
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/14/politics/colin-powell-dcleaks/index.html

In fact I may occasionally use Orange Pariah for variety in the future.

Like g-k said - the same way impotent Iranian crowds burn US and Israeli flags.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:Thanks! That's the context in which I used leper. While pariah in the Indian context may mean literally untouchable, it is has been co-opted by English as a synonym of the second meaning of leper, a social outcast.

Here is an example -- Colin Powell calling Trump an international pariah:
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/14/politics/colin-powell-dcleaks/index.html

In fact I may occasionally use Orange Pariah for variety in the future.

Like g-k said - the same way impotent Iranian crowds burn US and Israeli flags.

Irrelevant! Stick to the topic. We are discussing the acceptability of my use of the words leper and now based on your suggestion, pariah, to refer to The Orange.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:Too bad you think it's impotent. Calling out Trump and the GOP's shenanigans is the most powerful thing people in opposition can do.  A power granted to us by the first amendment. Too bad you think so little of it.

silvermani wrote:The dictionary has many offensive words which decent people don't use. 

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/half-breed

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=mongrel

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mulatto

kinnera-temp wrote:Mysogyny thrives because of hypocrites, the ones who pose like the champions of women, but who in fact are anything but that. It's not fun, but enraging. Learn to respect women, all women first. And Women don't need any patronisation from the hypocritical males. They can do just fine without the psedo champions. Thank you!
You don't vote for anyone just because she's a woman. That is so humiliating to womanhood, as I said. Look at her credentials objectively, not with a 'she's a woman and we got to support a woman, however she is. And if anyone doesn't do that, let's label them as mysogynists and let's take a higher stand than them.' That's so frinkking humiliating to us women. You know who the real mysogynists are? The ones who do that. So you guys quit being these disgusting male chauvinists and mysogynists and hypocrites. Shame on you all!

Idéfix wrote:For all the nonsensical defenses of the indefensible, calling a woman shrill, when her voice isn't particularly shrill compared to other women, is misogynistic. It is interesting to note that HA has not offered an "alternative fact" for his use of this particular insult. So all the distractions and faux outrage ring completely hollow.

confuzzled dude wrote:

Idéfix wrote:For all the nonsensical defenses of the indefensible, calling a woman shrill, when her voice isn't particularly shrill compared to other women, is misogynistic. It is interesting to note that HA has not offered an "alternative fact" for his use of this particular insult. So all the distractions and faux outrage ring completely hollow.

He probably will hide behind Rashmun or some other handle.

Hellsangel wrote:

confuzzled dude wrote:

Idéfix wrote:For all the nonsensical defenses of the indefensible, calling a woman shrill, when her voice isn't particularly shrill compared to other women, is misogynistic. It is interesting to note that HA has not offered an "alternative fact" for his use of this particular insult. So all the distractions and faux outrage ring completely hollow.

He probably will hide behind Rashmun or some other handle.

Ha ha ha, that shows your libby intelligence, Comrade, if you think I use another handle.

confuzzled dude wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:

confuzzled dude wrote:

Idéfix wrote:For all the nonsensical defenses of the indefensible, calling a woman shrill, when her voice isn't particularly shrill compared to other women, is misogynistic. It is interesting to note that HA has not offered an "alternative fact" for his use of this particular insult. So all the distractions and faux outrage ring completely hollow.

He probably will hide behind Rashmun or some other handle.

Ha ha ha, that shows your libby intelligence, Comrade, if you think I use another handle.

You missed my point or deliberately deflecting; I meant you're as gutless as one can get, going by your history here on such. Now it is time for  you to disappear for a few days and have someone open a slew of threads in your defense or mudslinging either max or idefix

Hellsangel wrote:

confuzzled dude wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:

confuzzled dude wrote:

Idéfix wrote:For all the nonsensical defenses of the indefensible, calling a woman shrill, when her voice isn't particularly shrill compared to other women, is misogynistic. It is interesting to note that HA has not offered an "alternative fact" for his use of this particular insult. So all the distractions and faux outrage ring completely hollow.

He probably will hide behind Rashmun or some other handle.

Ha ha ha, that shows your libby intelligence, Comrade, if you think I use another handle.

You missed my point or deliberately deflecting; I meant you're as gutless as one can get, going by your history here on such. Now it is time for  you to disappear for a few days and have someone open a slew of threads in your defense or mudslinging either max or idefix

Comrade, I'm right here. I understand you're whining in frustration after the Modi and Trump met and your Hizbul pal was designated a global terrorist. So if it makes you feel  better,  whine away.

confuzzled dude wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:

confuzzled dude wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:

confuzzled dude wrote:
He probably will hide behind Rashmun or some other handle.

Ha ha ha, that shows your libby intelligence, Comrade, if you think I use another handle.

You missed my point or deliberately deflecting; I meant you're as gutless as one can get, going by your history here on such. Now it is time for  you to disappear for a few days and have someone open a slew of threads in your defense or mudslinging either max or idefix

Comrade, I'm right here. I understand you're whining in frustration after the Modi and Trump met and your Hizbul pal was designated a global terrorist. So if it makes you feel  better,  whine away.

If you're not a trumpturd as you claim I'm yet to see you critique any of his acts other than mindlessly dragging Hillary into every conversation. If you had any guts you wouldn't be hiding behind Hillary. Btw, calling names is another key trait of a coward.

Guest wrote:So Jon Ossoff lost. It did come as a big surprise to me. With the kind of money he spent and the heavy campaigning he did, like i've never before, I thought he'd easily win. No one has ever spent that much amount on such elections in history, i believe. 

Someone was saying that his campaigning was like 'the fourth burger syndrome'. You enjoy the first burger, somehow gulp in the second one, force yourself to the third, but puke yourself sick with the fourth. His canvassing was like that. By the end, it was too much for anyone to take. The daily numerous text messages, phone calls, knocks on the door had became a big nuisance. There were numerous placards on every street corner. On top of that, he was shoved on to our faces on facebook, youtube, tv and what not! He has a cute face, but still! It was a lot for anyone to bear. I heard that people who didn't even care about these elections before actually went and voted for Karen Handell because of this heavy canvassing. 

As for Karen Handell, we didn't get to see her placards on the street side until maybe two weeks before the elections. I wondered why she didn't even care to canvass. 

Anyway, she took the republican stand on issues, while Ossoff seemed less convinced about taking the democratic stance (A comment: Democrats don't believe in what they stand for. They never were). People didn't even know what his agenda was. He seemed to be parroting about fighting against washington's overspending and doing whatever the people want him to do. He didn't seem convincing. Handell attack on him as an 'outsider', as he doesn't even live in the sixth district seems to have stuck. He's viewed as a carpetbagger. That seems to have hurt him big time. She also cunningly connected him to Nancy Palosi, who ppl hate as much as Hillary. That hurt him too. 

People also got sick of all the money he raised to win this election. The perception is that most of it came from California. So the mood was, 'Those californians are not going to control our elections with their money. No one can buy the elections with the money power'. 'With all the money he's taking from the outsiders, he'll more loyal to them, not us.'

Lessons to Democrats:
1. Don't overcanvass. 
2. Don't overspend (Hillary did that too)
3. Field a candidate who people can feel is their own, who they can connect with.
4. Be convinced about what you stand for and present it clearly to the people (Hillary didn't do this either and that's where she lost. She focused more on negative campaigning and throwing mud on Trump instead of talking about issues)

PS: I voted for Ossoff coz i was sick of Trump's rejection of the Paris environmental deal. I wanted to send a message to that moron that he needs to go. (I voted early, before the fourth burger syndrome kicked in)