Tomorrow we will be holding our Airing of Grievances. Don’t forget to pull your list together.
Comments are closed.
by John Cole| 39 Comments
This post is in: Site Maintenance
Tomorrow we will be holding our Airing of Grievances. Don’t forget to pull your list together.
Comments are closed.
Good, I was considering some kind of Blog related airing of grievances contest. This may or may not be that, but I’ll wait and see.
don’t even get me started…
I’ll have to air my grievances early since I’ll be on a jet plane from the liberal elite city of Hollywood to the liberal elite city of New York and won’t be able to post.
Please. Oh Please. Stop saying “Clinton did it” or “Clinton approved it” or “Clinton’s people thought it was OK”. It makes me want to rip my shirt Incredible Hulk style and SMASH! SMASH! SMASH!
Happy Holidays! Merry Christmas! Happy Channukah! Happy Kwanzaa! Happy Solstice! And Festivus for the rest of us.
Some people really don’t like to be faced with their party’s hypocrisy, I guess. The past is forbidden! History started in January 2001! How conveeeeeeeenient.
I believe that also qualifies as an after-dinner “feat of strength,” no?
Anyway, glad the Festivus Season is again upon us, because I got a lot of problems with you people!
Mac Buckets, that’s not it at all. The fact is, _you guys_ were rending your garments over this stuff and much, much less when Clinton was doing it. So for you to turn around and offer it as a defense is pretty outrageous. And I would’ve been on your side about it, back then.
Festivus?! I must alert Herr O’Reilly of this new front in the War on Christmas!
This thread on RS.
Sexism doesn’t exist, I swear.
It’s not that.
It’s that you keep wanting us all to forget about Vince Foster and the Black Helicopters, and then have the gaul of calling us conspircy theorists for suggesting just maybe the President’s policies are bad.
Could you explain the point of this more specifically? Is this just an opportunity to let people slash at each other or is there a purpose behind your madness? What do you hope to gain? If we know this, perhaps some of us could provide you with better info (or not).
No kidding…wow, for a site that doesn’t let one say bad words, they are sure on a roll. Can’t wait till Nick Danger gets there (rolls eyes).
Grievances? The “War on Christmas”, “Clinton did it too”,
The whole ID thing, this Admin making me never wanting to vote for ANY Republican as long as I live and making me a liberal when all I really wanted was a nice cozy spot in the middle…
Oh, and the guy in the Serenity thread that gave away plot deatails from the movie I haven’t seen yet…grrrrrr.
For the love of all that is holy, that post on RS is vile.
Never underestimate the power of small-penised men to think they are bedroom he-men because they can say things like, “I had her.”
I thought I left that behind in, oh, junior high?
Then again, it is RedState.org – your family values website.
All I can say is, “what he said.”
Perhaps DougJ (bow down to the master of all snark, beside whose l33t p4r0dy skillz ours are as nothing) can find something useful to say about it. For my part…yeuch.
I freaking love that quote and use it often, typically pronounced with the Frank Costanza yell.
Here’s a nonpolitical grievance I’m sure John will sign on with: Tommy Maddox
I’m waiting for the Feats of Strength, myself. Who is the master of the household, however, and how do I pin him or her electronically?
Maybe I should just have something better to do.
The Disenfranchised Voter
And how is that any different from your constant claim that history started on September 11th, 2001?
Wow, that post on redstate was just…phenomenal. I love their claim that feminists aren’t “much interested in sex”.
Sorry sweetie…they’re just to smart to be interested in sex with what is evidently the missing link.
I realize there’s no place on the itinerary for Festivus Grievance rebuttals, but allow me this one.
Huh? That post is like a Walmart Strawman Supercenter. I seriously have no idea what on earth you are talking about. Maybe you lot have a different notion of what exactly the “Clinton did it, too” bit is all about. Again, I only ever bring up Clinton because recalling recent history is the easiest way to show hypocrisy, isn’t it?
But let’s just put our cards on the table. I’ve got a deal for you. When you guys stop mentioning the Republican president who left office 17 years ago and the Republican president who left office 31 years ago, we’ll stop mentioning the most recent Democrat to sit in the Big Chair. Deal or no deal?
So, let me get this straight? You’re willing to stop saying “Clinton did it, so it should be legal now, whether or not it was legal then” if I’m willing to stop saying “Nixon did it, so it should be legal now, whether or not it was legal then”? Well, I don’t think you’ll be terribly happy with the deal, but that sounds fair to me.
Well, mentioning Clinton doesn’t exactly show hypocrisy as much as it shows a willingness to make excuses for the current Administration. It’s the “torture is fine because other people do it too” argument all over again, unless you think that Clinton sets the standards of White House ethics. Most people didn’t, but you’re entitled to an opinion.
But pretty much the only time the President who left office 17 years ago gets mentioned around here these days is when another one of his advisors or appointees or immediate family members speaks out against the President who’s still relevant to current events or when another one of the judges he appointed is labeled a liberal activist by the supporters of the President who’s still relevant to current events. And the President who left office 31 years ago and the President who left office 6 years ago both faced impeachment over lesser violations of the public trust than the President who’s still in office (when he’s not on a 6-week vacation) has committed. Still, that’s pretty much common knowledge to anyone over 25, and the young’uns should have covered it in high school history.
So as far as I’m concerned, deal’s on.
Whatever economic problems we may now face (even though we totally don’t) are Nixon’s faul. . .
OOOOH stopped in my tracks. Man, this is going to be an impossible promise to keep.
I hate when I’m eating at a restaurant and the waiter/ess comes over, peers at my plate and asks, “Are you still working on that?”
The Other Steve
Not sure it matters.
Bush is still the Worst President since James Buchanan.
I hate the fact that a large coffee costs 1.98 at the local DD. Its not the price that bugs me, so much, its the fact that there’s two damn cents left over. Which creates THIS problem:
If I leave them in the tip jar it looks like I’m being cheap. If I put them in my pocket it looks like I’m being cheap.
Considering how ridiculously heavy-handed the moderation at RS is, I kept expecting them to step in, but alas, nothing. I wouldn’t expect them to acknowledge the sexism, but the straight up ad-hominems and claims of sexual conquest (occuring in the context of a marriage fully prepared to support a new child, no doubt) should have drawn some attention.
But that’s pretty much how it goes, and I know it happens among what would be regarded as lefty groups too. When the subject of discussion is an assertive woman, the rules go out the window.
Matt…have you ever read Kos when one of the big “wars” break out? Defintitely different. I’m a woman and pretty uppity (got called that once by an old guy and I liked it), but I got nothing on some of the women over there when it comes to sexism or perceived sexism. If that topic showed up on Kos it would be drowned out in 100’s of irate posts and several GBCW diaries…
You know, capelza, I don’t think I agree. I stopped finding Kos fun after the great pie fight war. I thought that the initial outrage was a trifle over the top, but I couldn’t figure out for the life of me why Kos and Armando just didn’t get it: proportional response or not, the ad was offensive. And they didn’t pull it.
While the rhetoric in that RS post and comments was a bit over the top, it is no different from the exact same terms being used to poke derision at right-wing christian women.
I’ve just as bad directed at them–why the double standard?
And I found very little ‘I’d do her/I had her’ commenting at all.
It’s wonderful how both sides can hurl the same insults–and only get offended at the tone when they’re on the recieving end.
demimondian, I am a woman and the ad did not offend me, sorry. I’m offended by a lot of things more than an ad with pie and two women…the “pie” fights were hilarious in a very sad kind of way. But the overreaction was ridiculous, and showed the worst of both sides. Does “sexism” exist in liberal circles? Oh yeah, but my point was that in those liberal circles, women will speak up and call bullshit. Saw very little of that at the RS site.
jack, the thing about the “Ugly Women” post at Red State is that that site purports to be a profanity free face of the Christian pro-life right. And yet, you find the most disparaging and cliched insults possible..plus the “had her” and “sagging sexless, etc”, while not “profanity”, certainly seems to be counter to the “Chritian” image they wish to project. I’m not a “women’s studies” feminist…and it offended me, too. If I had seen it at LGF or a place like that I wouldn’t even mention it.
The Other Steve
It depends on who you talk to whether the ad was offensive.
The most liberating aspect of women’s liberation in the past 10 years has been the exploding number of viewpoints and opinions. As such there are a lot of women who came of age in the 1990s who view sexuality as a strength, and not something to be ashamed of or hide.
I need to add, demimondian, that the “pie fights” were an indication of why the Democratic party isn’t doing so hot right (though I have a little hope lately).
If a pic of two chicks smeared in pie can splinter a group (I was one of the ones asking for parity…a nice topless Chris Cornell shot)…no wonder we can’t get stuff done. Too much “taking my ball and going home for me”. Single issue groups need to comprimise, find common ground. And fucking lighten up already.
I wouldn’t consider it a double-standard, since I’ll call bullshit on lefties saying those things as well. I also wouldn’t frame it as an issue of left vs. right. But that’s just me, and you do have a valid point that such insults are tossed around freely by both sides (on the other hand, there is at least a portion of the left eager to confront the sexism displayed in discussions like the one on RS, while you’d have a hard time even getting a right-winger to admit it was sexist to begin with).
Mmm…now that is a lovely, lovely mental image. Thank you, Capelza. You just made my “nice” list.
If you just mean in reference to that article – well, ok. It’s an absurb statement RS made. Being a feminist or not has little to do with sexual preference or frequency – or, I might add the missing link.
As I said, I thought the ad was stupid, and if not offensive, at least, out of place. (As an ad for a TV show, I thought it was fine. I thought it was not fine in that place. Is that a reasonable distinction?) The thing which upset me was the overreactions on both sides: the posters, men and women, who thought it was terrible, and the ones who said “It was just a joke/ad/small thing.”
What would have been wrong about saying something like: “Hmm. Well, it doesn’t bother me, but I see that it bothers you. I can’t take it down, because of our contract with Advertise Liberally, but I’ll express your concerns to them and see what they can do about it. Meanwhile, let’s talk about what the right response to such things will be in the future.” After all, a lot of the ads there are pretty nasty towards Republicans, and I can’t imagine Kos taking any action to pull them.
In the end, I don’t think I can complain. I didn’t care enough to try to smooth the waters there. There is a world of places to go read, and I found the whole “conspiracy theory of the day against Mother Sheehan” kind of dreary. I just moved on.
Yeah, that’s exactly what I meant. The ones who wrote that article, and those who were making the rather nasty comments about feminists. I like to presume that any woman who does consider herself a feminist would be smart enough to not bed down with an obvious misogynist (or, in my words, the missing link.)
Sorry if I was being cryptic.
That seems like a pretty odd belief, Krista. I know a fair number of women with great political insight who had absolutely dreadful interpersonal insight, some of whom were ardent feminists who wound up in borderline abusive or otherwise controlling relationships.
But I’m a man; maybe women don’t talk to me about “things like that” accurately. Can you explain why my impression (that feminists make the same mistakes everyone else does) is wrong?
demimondian, I know what you are saying. Thing is, I never even noticed it the ad really (I’m lucky like that) until the big stink started. I and a couple other females were attcked by a few of the offended ladies when we commented, they not realising that we were woman, too. Something along the line that I just don’t understnad what it’s like being a woman. blah, blah…it really irritated the living fuck out me to be honest.
I still pop in sometimes, there are some great posters there, but like anything that gets so successful, the real extremes show up, like the whole “mother sheehan” thing…the noise ratio is very loud. Sometimes it hard to get a real conversation in.
Krista, I like to think of those types not as the missing link..wait…to quote Judy Tanuda (sp?)..”I’m looking for something a little closer to the TOP of the food chain…