Kamala blasts Pence for refusing to meet women alone

[_Some Schmo]

Ahhhh, I really don't care if you accept it or not.

Look at that - rare honesty from Ceeboo.

Yes, it's quite clear you don't care if anyone (not just me) takes you seriously. Quite a fortunate thing, given your situation.

[_EAllusion]

EAllusion

I haven't replied to several of your posts directed at me by design. in my opinion, just like an ever-growing number of my fellow American citizens, I have long past reached the point of simply rejecting/ignoring the nonsense that radical leftists like you continue to spew.

Am I right? I dunno but I guess we shall see come 2020.

”Radical leftism” in this case refers to the idea that it is professionally harmful to women and wrong of men to refuse to meet with them alone while not doing the same with men.

This is a fairly ordinary view if you don’t hail from a fundamentalist religious culture that promotes gender segregation. In fact, depending on the circumstances, the kind of discrimination you are talking about may be illegal. It is neither “radical” nor “leftist” in the way those terms are used in political jargon. This is one of those classic cases of someone with a profoundly conservative view looking at the full expanse of the political spectrum disagreeing with them and writing it off as radical leftism. If you want to live somewhere where my view is radical, move to Saudi Arabia.

[_EAllusion]

It's breathtaking that you actually believe that Trump won because he campaigned heavily on Islamophobia. Like so many other things, you are and remain completely clueless.

Trump’s more full throated support of Islamophobic themes was a factor in his success at winning the Republican primary, yes. But you are missing some steps in logic here. Donald Trump proposed a religious test on entering the country targeting Muslims. A lot of right-wing voters, voters like yourself, took a look at that and didn’t find it disqualifying. That should give you some information about their attitudes about Muslims and what sorts of preoccupations are tolerated or supported.

I have been going with LOL's for most of this thread with you so I think that's fair.

Maybe turn on Fox News today and see how long it takes for Muslims to be referenced.

[_Some Schmo]

And by the way, that there is even an argument that it's a good idea to not meet with women alone shows how little some people want to think things through.

My career, as others noted in this thread about their work, would be impossible in those circumstances. I'm thinking of a female colleague right now that would have been professionally screwed recently if I couldn't have spent an entire week alone with her in training.

It was tough, but I managed not to jump her. That was a close one. I had to distract myself by... what was it again? Oh yeah... doing my job.

[_Some Schmo]

I will accept this rebuke if you can define what a bigot is.

Ahhhh, I really don't care if you accept it or not. You are an intolerant bigot of extreme measure.

It's fun to notice here: Ceeboo opted not to define what he thinks bigotry is. Based on his use of the word, he seems to think it means "disagreeing with Ceeboo's dumb crap."

What could possibly be the reason for not just coming out and saying what it is? I wonder. I mean, there's always dictionary.com. It's not like he doesn't have access to the information.

Could it be that, after hundreds of instances of misusing the word, he finally looked it up and realized how stupid he must have sounded all this time?

Hmmm... that's a pretty generous hypothesis. It implies intellectual effort and self-awareness. I think we can dismiss that idea.

He's probably just aping antiquated opinions he thinks carry weight. It's much less effort and requires no mental prowess, which is more Ceeboo's speed.

[_Res Ipsa]

Ceeboo,

It sounds to me that you think there is something intrinsically wrong with talking about groups. When Mike Pence said that he wouldn't have dinner alone with any woman other than his wife, isn't he doing exactly what you object to so vociferously? Not only that, he isn't just talking about groups, as I have been, he says he treats people differently depending on which group they are a member of. He doesn't base his decision after meeting each woman and considering them as individuals -- he just sees the group. Does that make him a radical leftist? Where's your outrage, Ceeboo?

The NRA defense the rights of "gun owners." "Gun owners" is a group. They consider only the interests of this group, and not each individual maimed or killed by guns. Are they "radical leftists?" Where's your outrage, Ceeboo?

During the campaign, Donald Trump proposed a ban against Muslims entering the United States. Muslims is a group. He didn't propose to make the decision based on assessing the individual to determine whether they were a threat. He saw only the group. Is Donald Trump a radical leftist? Where was your outrage, Ceeboo?

Ceeboo rails against "radical leftists," saying that they will destroy America. "Radical leftists" is a group. He sees only the group -- he doesn't listen to what the individual is actually saying or doing. Is Ceeboo a "radical leftist"? Where's your outrage, Ceeboo?

[_Maksutov]

Ceeboo,

It sounds to me that you think there is something intrinsically wrong with talking about groups. When Mike Pence said that he wouldn't have dinner alone with any woman other than his wife, isn't he doing exactly what you object to so vociferously? Not only that, he isn't just talking about groups, as I have been, he says he treats people differently depending on which group they are a member of. He doesn't base his decision after meeting each woman and considering them as individuals -- he just sees the group. Does that make him a radical leftist? Where's your outrage, Ceeboo?

The NRA defense the rights of "gun owners." "Gun owners" is a group. They consider only the interests of this group, and not each individual maimed or killed by guns. Are they "radical leftists?" Where's your outrage, Ceeboo?

During the campaign, Donald Trump proposed a ban against Muslims entering the United States. Muslims is a group. He didn't propose to make the decision based on assessing the individual to determine whether they were a threat. He saw only the group. Is Donald Trump a radical leftist? Where was your outrage, Ceeboo?

Ceeboo rails against "radical leftists," saying that they will destroy America. "Radical leftists" is a group. He sees only the group -- he doesn't listen to what the individual is actually saying or doing. Is Ceeboo a "radical leftist"? Where's your outrage, Ceeboo?

This is your brain on Prager "University".

[_EAllusion]

I took a look at Fox’s home page for kicks and the top story is “Caliphate Conquered!” in reference to the ISIS defeat at Baghouz.

The article is replete with themes of the US crushing an Islamic empire, not my words, and I just laughed. The framing is *chef’s kiss*.

(for what it's worth, the first three comments to the story I read 1) Compared Democrats to ISIS, 2) implored Trump to move on to other Muslim strongholds, and 3) implied Obama was secretly allied with ISIS.)

[_canpakes]

I can’t seem to find the talking point I’ve supposedly repeated that you’re referring to. Are you imagining this?

You can't seem to find it? I'll help you then (That's the kind of guy I am) - The talking point I am referring to is your suggestion (wrong headed as it surely is) that "many on the right have a preoccupation with Muslim folks, transgender/gay people, feminazis and black people." The truth (not a leftist value by the way) is that the great great great great majority of those on the right have entirely zero worries about "Muslims folks" or "black people" or "transgender/gay people". Most of the people on the right (at least the great majority of people that I know) care about the BEHAVIOR/ACTIONS of individual people - and could,'t care less about their skin color or their religious beliefs.

Are you sure you didn't make a typo - And you meant to suggest that many people on the left have this preoccupation? (Obsession in my opinion)

(ETA: this is probably where you stop engaging ...)

Yeah - probably.

Ceebs, good to see you’re still in. : )

Now, to your reply - I’d like to use as example just two very recent incidents, from a source watched far and wide by millions of ‘right-leaning’ folks, and committed by famous ‘right-leaning’ mouthpieces: Tucker Carlson telling his viewers that immigrants make this nation ‘dirtier’, and Janine Pirro telling her listeners that a non-Christian congresscritter’s choice of religious headgear is antithetical to the Constitution.

Because I’m typing this in a car after getting some fuel, I’m not going to go on a full-fledged search for another few hundred items to list, but I can certainly do so, later. In the meantime, the two individuals above - preaching on a national platform during prime time, to millions of right-leaning listeners - are good enough to establish that the problem you speak of is far from limited to anarcho-leftist feminazi antifa members (the ranks of whom seem to include virtually anyone whose opinion differs from your own).

[_EAllusion]

I decided to look up Muslim ban polling on a lark because I am vaguely aware that it is disturbingly popular on the right.

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/c ... 160325.pdf

A few months after Trump first proposed a ban on Muslims entering the United States, You Gov conducted a poll and found that Republicans supported it by a margin of 81% to 13% with 6% undecided. 51% of the entire sample supported it in that poll.

In the same poll, Republicans supported Ted Cruz's call for police to "patrol and secure" Muslim neighborhoods by a margin of 74% to 16% with 11% undecided. (Rounded, of course).

So the notion that banning Muslims from the United States is just something Donald Trump thinks and doesn't reflect broader attitudes on the right is disconnected from reality.