• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Buttigieg Presidential Campaign

You would think that would be obvious, right? Not to Politesse, who either has reading comprehension problems or loves to twist what others say so she can get on her high horse and play the moral-superiority card. It was not an attack on LGBTQ but on intolerant right wingers.

If recent elections and GOP stances have taught us anything at all, it is that a large plurality of American voters are hate-filled, imbecilic and intolerant assholes.

Has Europe had any atheist or male homosexual chiefs of government? Probably. But has any such been elected in the U.S. to a position higher than Mayor? Only defeatist Dems would run Buttigieg for the POTUS job.

There have been 50 female Prime Ministers in Europe if  Category:Women_prime_ministers_in_Europe is to be trusted. Even Thailand has had TWO female P.M.'s recently, though these two shared a surname with, and were widely viewed as surrogates for, their criminal brother/father.

A black has almost no chance of becoming POTUS. Obama won only because Bush-43 was the least competent Presidency in over a century (and McCain put his stupidity on display with the choice of Palin). Obama was re-elected in 2012 by just a 51-47 popular margin despite that his first term was unusually successful.
 
I found this interesting survey regarding the public's view on transgender issues.

Where Americans stand on 20 transgender policy issues

There is no broad consensus in the U.S. when it comes to policies that affect transgender people. No more than six in 10 Americans line up on the same side of any of 40 policies that either expand or restrict rights and protection for transgender people. Majorities agree with existing protections in the U.S. for transgender people against hate crimes and discriminatory firings, but transgender inclusion in athletics, prisons, and public bathrooms all receive more opposition than support.

In a nutshell, the majority of people are supportive of transgenders when it comes to hate crime laws, employment discrimation and even military service. The least favored transgender issue of all? Allowing transgender athletes to play on sports teams that match their gender identity. This seems to fly in the face of those who claim its all about the bigotry and hatred. If that was case, then why is there such disparity between the different issues? For example, between employment and athletics. If you want to ban transwomen from playing in female sports because you're a bigot, wouldn't you also be in favor of trans discrimination in employment? Yet, these two issues are at opposite ends of the surveys. Could it be that instead of blind hatred, most people are recognizing the pros/cons and nuances of each individual issue and have developed opinions that consider the impacts on the non-trans population?
 
I found this interesting survey regarding the public's view on transgender issues.

Where Americans stand on 20 transgender policy issues

There is no broad consensus in the U.S. when it comes to policies that affect transgender people. No more than six in 10 Americans line up on the same side of any of 40 policies that either expand or restrict rights and protection for transgender people. Majorities agree with existing protections in the U.S. for transgender people against hate crimes and discriminatory firings, but transgender inclusion in athletics, prisons, and public bathrooms all receive more opposition than support.

In a nutshell, the majority of people are supportive of transgenders when it comes to hate crime laws, employment discrimation and even military service. The least favored transgender issue of all? Allowing transgender athletes to play on sports teams that match their gender identity. This seems to fly in the face of those who claim its all about the bigotry and hatred.
Just because it is about hatred for some doesn't mean it is hatred for all. The loudest ones against it are generally the haters.
 
I do NOT fail to recognize that she had an incredibly difficult path being trans. Even more than the difficulty of attaining her station and rank, period. But the fact is that it would have been nearly impossible for her to have achieved rank without the penis and testicles.
One of the main takeaways by the UCI in their study on transgenders in sports was indeed that while generally having a male chassis appeared to provide an advantage, one of the underappreciated advantages trans athletes had was that boys are bred for sports. Boys are bred to be successful. This is an early advantage, this is a big advantage.

The people who are adamantly against Lia Thomas in swimming are generally the same people mocking the USWNT soccer team, boycotting the Women's World Cup because the women wanted better training facilities and payouts for their performances. These same people were applauding Butker for his 1950s view on women. They aren't fighting for fairness in women's sports, they just want transgender people to go away, mostly because transgender people confuse them.
Well, that and women's sports in general, because strong women ALSO confuse them.
 
There is no way redneck America is going to elect a gay man with a husband. Forget it.
Ah, a racial slur and homophobia. What a charming contribution from the (sub?)urban left.
What's homophobic about the idea homophobes won't vote for a gay man?
 
I do NOT fail to recognize that she had an incredibly difficult path being trans. Even more than the difficulty of attaining her station and rank, period. But the fact is that it would have been nearly impossible for her to have achieved rank without the penis and testicles.
One of the main takeaways by the UCI in their study on transgenders in sports was indeed that while generally having a male chassis appeared to provide an advantage, one of the underappreciated advantages trans athletes had was that boys are bred for sports. Boys are bred to be successful. This is an early advantage, this is a big advantage.

The people who are adamantly against Lia Thomas in swimming are generally the same people mocking the USWNT soccer team, boycotting the Women's World Cup because the women wanted better training facilities and payouts for their performances. These same people were applauding Butker for his 1950s view on women. They aren't fighting for fairness in women's sports, they just want transgender people to go away, mostly because transgender people confuse them.
Well, that and women's sports in general, because strong women ALSO confuse them.
I just love how the same party that shrugged away Covid deaths suddenly cares about fairness.
 
The same party that believes it's fine to have oligarchs in power, suddenly cares about fairness.
 
The same party that's taking away social security for millions, suddenly cares about fairness.
 
I do NOT fail to recognize that she had an incredibly difficult path being trans. Even more than the difficulty of attaining her station and rank, period. But the fact is that it would have been nearly impossible for her to have achieved rank without the penis and testicles.
One of the main takeaways by the UCI in their study on transgenders in sports was indeed that while generally having a male chassis appeared to provide an advantage, one of the underappreciated advantages trans athletes had was that boys are bred for sports. Boys are bred to be successful. This is an early advantage, this is a big advantage.

The people who are adamantly against Lia Thomas in swimming are generally the same people mocking the USWNT soccer team, boycotting the Women's World Cup because the women wanted better training facilities and payouts for their performances. These same people were applauding Butker for his 1950s view on women. They aren't fighting for fairness in women's sports, they just want transgender people to go away, mostly because transgender people confuse them.
My …. ambivalence about Levine is about the era of sexism that existed when she and I were young but was significantly less..,obvious for people of your generation.

Girls of my generation were told daily that boys were better at math and science—even if she was demonstrably significantly better at math and science. Speaking from personal experience. Many boys told me that girls —and I was not very good at math despite me always scoring better than they did. More than one teacher told me my perfect math score was ‘lucky’ and sent me off to help a male student who was ‘just as smart’ ( one actually was but being told he was stupid by the teacher took its toll). I briefly considered applying to the Naval Academy but knew myself well enough to know I would dislike being in the military and dropped the idea. The boy in my class who did receive an appointment was bright and a good student with test scores significantly below mine and mediocre athlete and very nice. I did not begrudge him anything that came his way. I DID begrudge him the opportunities he and other boys won by virtue of their genitalia.

At university, my male lab partners wordlessly left the lab, leaving me, the girl, to clean up. My lab TA put his arm around my shoulders telling me it was ‘ no big deal’ if I missed a point on the computer graded lab report—in a course filled with premed students who thought every point meant the world. And no one—including the TA understood the computer programs ( punch cards in those days).

My father, who was as sexist as most of his generation nonetheless told his daughters they could do anything they wanted and pushed us to excel in math and science. And told me, when I mentioned med school, that I’d forget about all of that once I married and had kids. He was my biggest supporter aside from some teachers. My mother wondered when I’d start acting like a girl, You know: wear pink, and hair curlers. My parents were the most progressive parents I knew with regards to their daughters’ ambitions. My best friend was not given a middle name because when she married, she’d use her ( father’s) family name as her middle name so to was unnecessary, I loved her parents but that still infuriates me,

Girls of my era were called ugly names for being good at math, s once, sports, mechanics, anything ‘male’ related. We were not allowed to take shop classes, mechanics or drafting, even if we wanted to be an architect, as one of my friends did.

We were presumed to be able to type, cook, see, and take care of children, without regards to our actual interests or skill set, and that would be our primary role —until the kids were in school full time at which point we were free to contribute to the family finances unless it interfered with hubby’s career or hobbies.

I honestly do not care about trans girls competing in girls sports—unless they prevent cis girls from being able to compete.

I do not care that Rachel Levinemade it to Asst. Secretary—actually I am delighted. The only part that rankles is the ‘first woman’ part because the qualifications were earned when she presented and lived her life as a male when that gave her a very very significant advantage.
 
I do NOT fail to recognize that she had an incredibly difficult path being trans. Even more than the difficulty of attaining her station and rank, period. But the fact is that it would have been nearly impossible for her to have achieved rank without the penis and testicles.
One of the main takeaways by the UCI in their study on transgenders in sports was indeed that while generally having a male chassis appeared to provide an advantage, one of the underappreciated advantages trans athletes had was that boys are bred for sports. Boys are bred to be successful. This is an early advantage, this is a big advantage.

The people who are adamantly against Lia Thomas in swimming are generally the same people mocking the USWNT soccer team, boycotting the Women's World Cup because the women wanted better training facilities and payouts for their performances. These same people were applauding Butker for his 1950s view on women. They aren't fighting for fairness in women's sports, they just want transgender people to go away, mostly because transgender people confuse them.
Well, that and women's sports in general, because strong women ALSO confuse them.
Competition from women scares them as does the idea that ‘one of their own’ might be willing to voluntarily give up male genitalia—and privilege
 
I do NOT fail to recognize that she had an incredibly difficult path being trans. Even more than the difficulty of attaining her station and rank, period. But the fact is that it would have been nearly impossible for her to have achieved rank without the penis and testicles.
One of the main takeaways by the UCI in their study on transgenders in sports was indeed that while generally having a male chassis appeared to provide an advantage, one of the underappreciated advantages trans athletes had was that boys are bred for sports. Boys are bred to be successful. This is an early advantage, this is a big advantage.

The people who are adamantly against Lia Thomas in swimming are generally the same people mocking the USWNT soccer team, boycotting the Women's World Cup because the women wanted better training facilities and payouts for their performances. These same people were applauding Butker for his 1950s view on women. They aren't fighting for fairness in women's sports, they just want transgender people to go away, mostly because transgender people confuse them.
Well, that and women's sports in general, because strong women ALSO confuse them.
Competition from women scares them as does the idea that ‘one of their own’ might be willing to voluntarily give up male genitalia—and privilege
Absolutely. Every way for their caste system to "leak" is a thing they feel they need to stop, but moreover their vary existence is "counterintuitive" enough that it's easier to get average people to attack them and gin up an enemy.
 
So what you are saying is that you are a Rockefeller Republican.
I wasn't even born when Rockefeller was Veep, so no.
I think it is quite sad that you think wanting Dems to choose a good candidate is somehow being a Republican.

Do you have any actual comments about the points I made, or do you just have snark to throw around?
So you don’t know what a Rockefeller Republican is. Google could have helped you.

Here’s a link: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockefeller_Republican


I wasn’t being snarky but trying to make a point. I actually think you would very much be in line with this ideology. That is not an insult of any kind.

You seem to be anti-‘big government’ and vehemently opposed to what you consider identity politics, at least in so far as they give equal weight to women and persons of color. I, myself wish that it were not relevant what a person’s gender or race or religion or orientation or country of origin were but we are definitely not there. YOU are very far from there as afaik, no female or POC candidate or officeholder can be mentioned without you fixating on the sex/gender and/or race.

You rail about how far left Harris is which is quite laughable. But then you think I’m far left radical. My kids tend to see me as at best, middle of the road.

My POV is that race, gender, religion, country of origin should have no role in determining fitness for any job or office. You are among those who demonstrate that those things do matter to people like you and in your mind, the only reason that individual is selected for anything good.
To be fair, I've always considered Derec was more of a McGovern Democrat anyways,
 
So what you are saying is that you are a Rockefeller Republican.
I wasn't even born when Rockefeller was Veep, so no.
I think it is quite sad that you think wanting Dems to choose a good candidate is somehow being a Republican.

Do you have any actual comments about the points I made, or do you just have snark to throw around?
So you don’t know what a Rockefeller Republican is. Google could have helped you.

Here’s a link: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockefeller_Republican


I wasn’t being snarky but trying to make a point. I actually think you would very much be in line with this ideology. That is not an insult of any kind.

You seem to be anti-‘big government’ and vehemently opposed to what you consider identity politics, at least in so far as they give equal weight to women and persons of color. I, myself wish that it were not relevant what a person’s gender or race or religion or orientation or country of origin were but we are definitely not there. YOU are very far from there as afaik, no female or POC candidate or officeholder can be mentioned without you fixating on the sex/gender and/or race.

You rail about how far left Harris is which is quite laughable. But then you think I’m far left radical. My kids tend to see me as at best, middle of the road.

My POV is that race, gender, religion, country of origin should have no role in determining fitness for any job or office. You are among those who demonstrate that those things do matter to people like you and in your mind, the only reason that individual is selected for anything good.
To be fair, I've always considered Derec was more of a McGovern Democrat anyways,
On my uncharitable days, I see him as a Goldwater Republican. Please note that I wrote and meant that this was uncharitable of me.
 
I found this interesting survey regarding the public's view on transgender issues.

Where Americans stand on 20 transgender policy issues

There is no broad consensus in the U.S. when it comes to policies that affect transgender people. No more than six in 10 Americans line up on the same side of any of 40 policies that either expand or restrict rights and protection for transgender people. Majorities agree with existing protections in the U.S. for transgender people against hate crimes and discriminatory firings, but transgender inclusion in athletics, prisons, and public bathrooms all receive more opposition than support.

In a nutshell, the majority of people are supportive of transgenders when it comes to hate crime laws, employment discrimation and even military service. The least favored transgender issue of all? Allowing transgender athletes to play on sports teams that match their gender identity. This seems to fly in the face of those who claim its all about the bigotry and hatred. If that was case, then why is there such disparity between the different issues? For example, between employment and athletics. If you want to ban transwomen from playing in female sports because you're a bigot, wouldn't you also be in favor of trans discrimination in employment? Yet, these two issues are at opposite ends of the surveys. Could it be that instead of blind hatred, most people are recognizing the pros/cons and nuances of each individual issue and have developed opinions that consider the impacts on the non-trans population?
NOT ALL BIGOTS!
 
On my uncharitable days, I see him as a Goldwater Republican. Please note that I wrote and meant that this was uncharitable of me.
Goldwater (for you younger folks) wrote a book that was kind of a bible for conservatives "Conscience of a Conservative". Hilllary Clinton was a Goldwater Girl. So today he is just another RINO.
 
On my uncharitable days, I see him as a Goldwater Republican. Please note that I wrote and meant that this was uncharitable of me.
Goldwater (for you younger folks) wrote a book that was kind of a bible for conservatives "Conscience of a Conservative". Hilllary Clinton was a Goldwater Girl. So today he is just another RINO.
My racist, conservative father thought Goldwater was a bit extreme.
 
On my uncharitable days, I see him as a Goldwater Republican. Please note that I wrote and meant that this was uncharitable of me.
Goldwater (for you younger folks) wrote a book that was kind of a bible for conservatives "Conscience of a Conservative". Hilllary Clinton was a Goldwater Girl. So today he is just another RINO.
My racist, conservative father thought Goldwater was a bit extreme.
Many did but today he is just another RINO. And he mellowed over time. I like this little ditty

When Falwell came out against the nomination of Arizonan Sandra O'Connor to the Supreme Court, an angry Goldwater said, 'Every good Christian should kick Jerry Falwell in the ass.'

Now he was asked if he still held that view.

'I might aim a little higher,' snapped Goldwater.

'You mean you would kick him in the head?'

'No. Not that high. There are other good places.'
 
On my uncharitable days, I see him as a Goldwater Republican. Please note that I wrote and meant that this was uncharitable of me.
Goldwater (for you younger folks) wrote a book that was kind of a bible for conservatives "Conscience of a Conservative". Hilllary Clinton was a Goldwater Girl. So today he is just another RINO.
My racist, conservative father thought Goldwater was a bit extreme.
Many did but today he is just another RINO. And he mellowed over time. I like this little ditty

When Falwell came out against the nomination of Arizonan Sandra O'Connor to the Supreme Court, an angry Goldwater said, 'Every good Christian should kick Jerry Falwell in the ass.'

Now he was asked if he still held that view.

'I might aim a little higher,' snapped Goldwater.

'You mean you would kick him in the head?'

'No. Not that high. There are other good places.'
I'm going to guess, because he was a Republican, he did a lot of the same things he accused those he didn't like of doing.
 
I do NOT fail to recognize that she had an incredibly difficult path being trans. Even more than the difficulty of attaining her station and rank, period. But the fact is that it would have been nearly impossible for her to have achieved rank without the penis and testicles.
One of the main takeaways by the UCI in their study on transgenders in sports was indeed that while generally having a male chassis appeared to provide an advantage, one of the underappreciated advantages trans athletes had was that boys are bred for sports. Boys are bred to be successful. This is an early advantage, this is a big advantage.

The people who are adamantly against Lia Thomas in swimming are generally the same people mocking the USWNT soccer team, boycotting the Women's World Cup because the women wanted better training facilities and payouts for their performances. These same people were applauding Butker for his 1950s view on women. They aren't fighting for fairness in women's sports, they just want transgender people to go away, mostly because transgender people confuse them.
Well, that and women's sports in general, because strong women ALSO confuse them.
Competition from women scares them as does the idea that ‘one of their own’ might be willing to voluntarily give up male genitalia—and privilege
With regard to boys being bred for sports, that's a minor issue at best. Serena (and sister Venus) Williams was trained by her father on tennis relentlessly starting from a very young age to be the best. Almost to the point of child abuse, IMHO. Despite that, she admits she can't compete with the men tennis players. If anything, she's the one who is scared of the competition from men, not the other way around. Regardless, she gets mucho respect from me for being honest, forthright and at peace with the male/female athletic differences.

 
So what you are saying is that you are a Rockefeller Republican.
I wasn't even born when Rockefeller was Veep, so no.
I think it is quite sad that you think wanting Dems to choose a good candidate is somehow being a Republican.

Do you have any actual comments about the points I made, or do you just have snark to throw around?
So you don’t know what a Rockefeller Republican is. Google could have helped you.

Here’s a link: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockefeller_Republican


I wasn’t being snarky but trying to make a point. I actually think you would very much be in line with this ideology. That is not an insult of any kind.

You seem to be anti-‘big government’ and vehemently opposed to what you consider identity politics, at least in so far as they give equal weight to women and persons of color. I, myself wish that it were not relevant what a person’s gender or race or religion or orientation or country of origin were but we are definitely not there. YOU are very far from there as afaik, no female or POC candidate or officeholder can be mentioned without you fixating on the sex/gender and/or race.

You rail about how far left Harris is which is quite laughable. But then you think I’m far left radical. My kids tend to see me as at best, middle of the road.

My POV is that race, gender, religion, country of origin should have no role in determining fitness for any job or office. You are among those who demonstrate that those things do matter to people like you and in your mind, the only reason that individual is selected for anything good.
To be fair, I've always considered Derec was more of a McGovern Democrat anyways,
Derec is a moderate, just like me. He’s a little to my right. But if we want our country back, the dems need a candidate who can appeal to the left and the middle. I liked Harris. But it drive me crazy that she couldn’t articulate an economic plan (she ran from economic issues). It was a gigantic mistake to avoid Joe Rogan. She missed out on the new media; podcasts.
 
Back
Top Bottom