Total Posts:22|Showing Posts:1-22
Jump to topic:

Late Hilary Rosen topic

Frederick53
Posts: 1,037
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2012 9:16:26 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
So I was just thinking, has anyone realized how UTTERLY hypocritical the conservative reaction to Hilary Rosen was? They always whine and complain about 'political correctness' interfering with telling the truth, and then when Rosen told the truth, she was shunned for it because conservatives (and liberals... the ones without spines anyway) said she was being politically incorrect!

Am I missing something, or do conservatives just reject and embrace PC whenever it suits them?
In 1975, the Second Vietnam War began -1Historygenius

Like no wonder that indian dude rejected you.- Darkkermit to royalpaladin

Social Darwinism is a justification- 1Historygenius

Equal opportunity exists, so there is no problem- EvanK
NixonianVolkswagen
Posts: 481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2012 10:13:32 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/11/2012 9:16:26 AM, Frederick53 wrote:
So I was just thinking, has anyone realized how UTTERLY hypocritical the conservative reaction to Hilary Rosen was? They always whine and complain about 'political correctness' interfering with telling the truth, and then when Rosen told the truth, she was shunned for it because conservatives (and liberals... the ones without spines anyway) said she was being politically incorrect!

Am I missing something, or do conservatives just reject and embrace PC whenever it suits them?

PC is such a nebulous term, the fiction of it is rejected on an ideological basis, the reality of it is difficult to. What you're referencing seems to be an example of that tension.
"There is an almost universal tendency, perhaps an inborn tendency, to suspect the good faith of a man who holds opinions that differ from our own opinions."

- Karl "Spartacus" Popper
thett3
Posts: 14,334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2012 10:20:56 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
They didnt get angry because it wasnt politically correct, they got angry because 1. It's a political opportunity, and 2. it was a lie. Like Ann Romney tweeted, she raised 5 boys and it was hard work.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Frederick53
Posts: 1,037
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2012 11:05:14 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/11/2012 10:13:32 AM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
At 8/11/2012 9:16:26 AM, Frederick53 wrote:
So I was just thinking, has anyone realized how UTTERLY hypocritical the conservative reaction to Hilary Rosen was? They always whine and complain about 'political correctness' interfering with telling the truth, and then when Rosen told the truth, she was shunned for it because conservatives (and liberals... the ones without spines anyway) said she was being politically incorrect!

Am I missing something, or do conservatives just reject and embrace PC whenever it suits them?

PC is such a nebulous term, the fiction of it is rejected on an ideological basis, the reality of it is difficult to. What you're referencing seems to be an example of that tension.

I entirely agree with you. I really hate people who use 'political incorrectness' as a shield against criticism. It is generally a term used by people who are trying to appear rebellious when they're really just looking for an excuse to be rude @ssholes. But when those same people use the principles of 'PC' to defend their position, it just seems hypocritical.
In 1975, the Second Vietnam War began -1Historygenius

Like no wonder that indian dude rejected you.- Darkkermit to royalpaladin

Social Darwinism is a justification- 1Historygenius

Equal opportunity exists, so there is no problem- EvanK
Frederick53
Posts: 1,037
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2012 11:12:56 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/11/2012 10:20:56 AM, thett3 wrote:
They didnt get angry because it wasnt politically correct, they got angry because 1. It's a political opportunity, and 2. it was a lie. Like Ann Romney tweeted, she raised 5 boys and it was hard work.

Yes I'm aware of that. She was also born with a silver spoon in her mouth, as was her husband. I'm not attacking them for being born into wealth, and therefore into an easier life, but raising 5 children while also working 2 jobs and struggling to pay the bills is infinitely harder work. You have to look at her situation with perspective. On the scale of how hard you've had to work in your life, Anne would be pretty close to the bottom. That's obviously what Hilary Rosen meant by her remark- she wasn't attacking stay at home mom's like even the liberals rushed to claim.
In 1975, the Second Vietnam War began -1Historygenius

Like no wonder that indian dude rejected you.- Darkkermit to royalpaladin

Social Darwinism is a justification- 1Historygenius

Equal opportunity exists, so there is no problem- EvanK
thett3
Posts: 14,334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2012 11:17:11 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/11/2012 11:12:56 AM, Frederick53 wrote:
At 8/11/2012 10:20:56 AM, thett3 wrote:
They didnt get angry because it wasnt politically correct, they got angry because 1. It's a political opportunity, and 2. it was a lie. Like Ann Romney tweeted, she raised 5 boys and it was hard work.

Yes I'm aware of that. She was also born with a silver spoon in her mouth, as was her husband. I'm not attacking them for being born into wealth, and therefore into an easier life, but raising 5 children while also working 2 jobs and struggling to pay the bills is infinitely harder work.

I would be willing to bet that >.001% of all mothers have 5 children while working 2 jobs.

Besides, saying that some people work harder doesnt mean that she hasnt worked a day in her life. Taking your logic to its full conclusion, the only person who's worked "a day in their life" is the hardest working person on Earth.

You have to look at her situation with perspective. On the scale of how hard you've had to work in your life, Anne would be pretty close to the bottom.

Are you kidding? First of all, there's no objective way to measure that, but it should be obvious to all that raising 5 children is a HELL of a lot of work. And even if it doesnt, that has literally nothing to do with anything. It's just an unfounded, rude, and pathetic attack.

That's obviously what Hilary Rosen meant by her remark- she wasn't attacking stay at home mom's like even the liberals rushed to claim.

No, she was just saying they dont work hard.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
NixonianVolkswagen
Posts: 481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2012 11:24:14 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/11/2012 10:30:28 AM, Apollo.11 wrote:
Let's settle this. Michele Obama vs. Anne Romney. Boxing match.

Round 1.

*bell rings*

Aight, Anne Romney raised five kids. That's a job, right? So there's no such thing as an "unemployed single mother", right? Those single mothers who receive welfare checks are just getting from the state, rightly or wrongly (and in appropriate proportion or not), that which they deserve for raising their children, right?
"There is an almost universal tendency, perhaps an inborn tendency, to suspect the good faith of a man who holds opinions that differ from our own opinions."

- Karl "Spartacus" Popper
thett3
Posts: 14,334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2012 11:26:00 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/11/2012 11:24:14 AM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
At 8/11/2012 10:30:28 AM, Apollo.11 wrote:
Let's settle this. Michele Obama vs. Anne Romney. Boxing match.

Round 1.

*bell rings*

Aight, Anne Romney raised five kids. That's a job, right? So there's no such thing as an "unemployed single mother", right? Those single mothers who receive welfare checks are just getting from the state, rightly or wrongly (and in appropriate proportion or not), that which they deserve for raising their children, right?

Employment is not the same as work.

Work:

Activity involving mental or physical effort done in order to achieve a purpose or result.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
NixonianVolkswagen
Posts: 481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2012 11:29:16 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/11/2012 11:26:00 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 8/11/2012 11:24:14 AM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
At 8/11/2012 10:30:28 AM, Apollo.11 wrote:
Let's settle this. Michele Obama vs. Anne Romney. Boxing match.

Round 1.

*bell rings*

Aight, Anne Romney raised five kids. That's a job, right? So there's no such thing as an "unemployed single mother", right? Those single mothers who receive welfare checks are just getting from the state, rightly or wrongly (and in appropriate proportion or not), that which they deserve for raising their children, right?


Employment is not the same as work.

Work:

Activity involving mental or physical effort done in order to achieve a purpose or result.

Employment is just work you do in exchange for things which have a cash-value, usually cash.
"There is an almost universal tendency, perhaps an inborn tendency, to suspect the good faith of a man who holds opinions that differ from our own opinions."

- Karl "Spartacus" Popper
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2012 11:30:27 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/11/2012 10:30:28 AM, Apollo.11 wrote:
Let's settle this. Michele Obama vs. Anne Romney. Boxing match.

Round 1.

*bell rings*

That would be something to watch.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
thett3
Posts: 14,334
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2012 11:31:16 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/11/2012 11:29:16 AM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
At 8/11/2012 11:26:00 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 8/11/2012 11:24:14 AM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
At 8/11/2012 10:30:28 AM, Apollo.11 wrote:
Let's settle this. Michele Obama vs. Anne Romney. Boxing match.

Round 1.

*bell rings*

Aight, Anne Romney raised five kids. That's a job, right? So there's no such thing as an "unemployed single mother", right? Those single mothers who receive welfare checks are just getting from the state, rightly or wrongly (and in appropriate proportion or not), that which they deserve for raising their children, right?


Employment is not the same as work.

Work:

Activity involving mental or physical effort done in order to achieve a purpose or result.

Employment is just work you do in exchange for things which have a cash-value, usually cash.

Exactly. Which is why saying that a mother of 5 children has never worked a day in her life is fallacious. Maybe shes never been employed. Not the same.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
NixonianVolkswagen
Posts: 481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2012 11:33:52 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/11/2012 11:31:16 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 8/11/2012 11:29:16 AM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
At 8/11/2012 11:26:00 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 8/11/2012 11:24:14 AM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
At 8/11/2012 10:30:28 AM, Apollo.11 wrote:
Let's settle this. Michele Obama vs. Anne Romney. Boxing match.

Round 1.

*bell rings*

Aight, Anne Romney raised five kids. That's a job, right? So there's no such thing as an "unemployed single mother", right? Those single mothers who receive welfare checks are just getting from the state, rightly or wrongly (and in appropriate proportion or not), that which they deserve for raising their children, right?


Employment is not the same as work.

Work:

Activity involving mental or physical effort done in order to achieve a purpose or result.

Employment is just work you do in exchange for things which have a cash-value, usually cash.

Exactly. Which is why saying that a mother of 5 children has never worked a day in her life is fallacious. Maybe shes never been employed. Not the same.

You're right, I was sloppy there. There's no such thing as a single mother who doesn't work. But there's no, like, moral difference between the two - I was sort of critiquing the animosity that's felt towards the aforementioned single mothers by those who may be defending Anne Romney.
"There is an almost universal tendency, perhaps an inborn tendency, to suspect the good faith of a man who holds opinions that differ from our own opinions."

- Karl "Spartacus" Popper
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2012 11:52:56 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Work, in that context, is the obtainment of payment coupled with risk of failure. From a gene point of view, your children hold your genes and therefore time and energy should be devoted to them to preserve your own genes. The payment in this sense is the longevity of your immortal genes while the risk is the possibility of failure, which ultimately entails your children not being able to further your genes via reproductive, economical, or psychological failure.

She worked for payment and with risk. K?

Btw, this has nothing to do with PC. Instead, this has to do with the cheap-shots that the left-wing has recently become fervently addicted to in trying to discredit Romney and his associates by their personal traits and characteristics, instead of actual fiscal and social policy.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Frederick53
Posts: 1,037
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2012 12:02:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/11/2012 11:17:11 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 8/11/2012 11:12:56 AM, Frederick53 wrote:
At 8/11/2012 10:20:56 AM, thett3 wrote:
They didnt get angry because it wasnt politically correct, they got angry because 1. It's a political opportunity, and 2. it was a lie. Like Ann Romney tweeted, she raised 5 boys and it was hard work.

Yes I'm aware of that. She was also born with a silver spoon in her mouth, as was her husband. I'm not attacking them for being born into wealth, and therefore into an easier life, but raising 5 children while also working 2 jobs and struggling to pay the bills is infinitely harder work.

I would be willing to bet that >.001% of all mothers have 5 children while working 2 jobs.


I know a family in that exact situation, but I guess you don't have to take that to mean anything since I could easily be lying.

Besides, saying that some people work harder doesnt mean that she hasnt worked a day in her life. Taking your logic to its full conclusion, the only person who's worked "a day in their life" is the hardest working person on Earth.


Ok, that's true.

You have to look at her situation with perspective. On the scale of how hard you've had to work in your life, Anne would be pretty close to the bottom.

Are you kidding? First of all, there's no objective way to measure that, but it should be obvious to all that raising 5 children is a HELL of a lot of work. And even if it doesnt, that has literally nothing to do with anything. It's just an unfounded, rude, and pathetic attack.


But having a child and raising it, while it is an exhausting, stressful, life altering process, is something that many many women do who also have jobs. What I'm getting at is, while some women may choose not to have children, for the most part raising at least 1 child is a part of a woman's life. In that respect I don't think that it qualifies as the type of work that Rosen was referring to. That is, work that is done in addition to personal duties, like a job.


That's obviously what Hilary Rosen meant by her remark- she wasn't attacking stay at home mom's like even the liberals rushed to claim.

No, she was just saying they dont work hard.

Like I said above, raising a child is a different kind of work- it's a personal duty. It's the logical conclusion of choosing to have a child. It's different than being employed. I'm not saying that raising a child isn't emotionally and physically strenuous. But also remember that the conditions in which you raise a child also alter how difficult the task is. And obviously, Anne would have had a much easier time physically raising her children than a middle class or working class mother. Mentally the stress would be the same.
In 1975, the Second Vietnam War began -1Historygenius

Like no wonder that indian dude rejected you.- Darkkermit to royalpaladin

Social Darwinism is a justification- 1Historygenius

Equal opportunity exists, so there is no problem- EvanK
Frederick53
Posts: 1,037
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2012 12:05:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/11/2012 11:52:56 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Work, in that context, is the obtainment of payment coupled with risk of failure. From a gene point of view, your children hold your genes and therefore time and energy should be devoted to them to preserve your own genes. The payment in this sense is the longevity of your immortal genes while the risk is the possibility of failure, which ultimately entails your children not being able to further your genes via reproductive, economical, or psychological failure.

She worked for payment and with risk. K?

Btw, this has nothing to do with PC. Instead, this has to do with the cheap-shots that the left-wing has recently become fervently addicted to in trying to discredit Romney and his associates by their personal traits and characteristics, instead of actual fiscal and social policy.

I'm not convinced.
In 1975, the Second Vietnam War began -1Historygenius

Like no wonder that indian dude rejected you.- Darkkermit to royalpaladin

Social Darwinism is a justification- 1Historygenius

Equal opportunity exists, so there is no problem- EvanK
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2012 12:26:58 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/11/2012 12:05:57 PM, Frederick53 wrote:
At 8/11/2012 11:52:56 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Work, in that context, is the obtainment of payment coupled with risk of failure. From a gene point of view, your children hold your genes and therefore time and energy should be devoted to them to preserve your own genes. The payment in this sense is the longevity of your immortal genes while the risk is the possibility of failure, which ultimately entails your children not being able to further your genes via reproductive, economical, or psychological failure.

She worked for payment and with risk. K?

Btw, this has nothing to do with PC. Instead, this has to do with the cheap-shots that the left-wing has recently become fervently addicted to in trying to discredit Romney and his associates by their personal traits and characteristics, instead of actual fiscal and social policy.

I'm not convinced.

So you content that what she did fits under your narrow definition of "work?" Awesome.

Saying somebody "never worked a day in their lives" is not politically incorrect. Political correctness would be saying "Black person" instead of "Nigga;" there are no substitutes for "not working a day in your life." She was attacked for saying things that weren't true.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
NixonianVolkswagen
Posts: 481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2012 12:58:49 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/11/2012 12:26:58 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 8/11/2012 12:05:57 PM, Frederick53 wrote:
At 8/11/2012 11:52:56 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Work, in that context, is the obtainment of payment coupled with risk of failure. From a gene point of view, your children hold your genes and therefore time and energy should be devoted to them to preserve your own genes. The payment in this sense is the longevity of your immortal genes while the risk is the possibility of failure, which ultimately entails your children not being able to further your genes via reproductive, economical, or psychological failure.

She worked for payment and with risk. K?

Btw, this has nothing to do with PC. Instead, this has to do with the cheap-shots that the left-wing has recently become fervently addicted to in trying to discredit Romney and his associates by their personal traits and characteristics, instead of actual fiscal and social policy.

I'm not convinced.

So you content that what she did fits under your narrow definition of "work?" Awesome.

Saying somebody "never worked a day in their lives" is not politically incorrect. Political correctness would be saying "Black person" instead of "Nigga;" there are no substitutes for "not working a day in your life." She was attacked for saying things that weren't true.

Sure it is, political correctness is voluntarily attempting to soften language, or minimize offense, whatever. Dismissing a stay-at-home-mom as having "never worked a day in her life" is politically incorrect insofar as you're being gratuitously derogatory. It's contextual, but in this context you're arguing that it's intent was dismissive, ergo...
"There is an almost universal tendency, perhaps an inborn tendency, to suspect the good faith of a man who holds opinions that differ from our own opinions."

- Karl "Spartacus" Popper
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2012 1:28:14 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/11/2012 12:58:49 PM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
At 8/11/2012 12:26:58 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 8/11/2012 12:05:57 PM, Frederick53 wrote:
At 8/11/2012 11:52:56 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Work, in that context, is the obtainment of payment coupled with risk of failure. From a gene point of view, your children hold your genes and therefore time and energy should be devoted to them to preserve your own genes. The payment in this sense is the longevity of your immortal genes while the risk is the possibility of failure, which ultimately entails your children not being able to further your genes via reproductive, economical, or psychological failure.

She worked for payment and with risk. K?

Btw, this has nothing to do with PC. Instead, this has to do with the cheap-shots that the left-wing has recently become fervently addicted to in trying to discredit Romney and his associates by their personal traits and characteristics, instead of actual fiscal and social policy.

I'm not convinced.

So you content that what she did fits under your narrow definition of "work?" Awesome.

Saying somebody "never worked a day in their lives" is not politically incorrect. Political correctness would be saying "Black person" instead of "Nigga;" there are no substitutes for "not working a day in your life." She was attacked for saying things that weren't true.

Sure it is, political correctness is voluntarily attempting to soften language, or minimize offense, whatever. Dismissing a stay-at-home-mom as having "never worked a day in her life" is politically incorrect insofar as you're being gratuitously derogatory. It's contextual, but in this context you're arguing that it's intent was dismissive, ergo...

That's not derogatory at all. I find the whole concept of PC laughable at best because all you are doing is stating a normative point without any positive application. Those who actually take offence at non-PC talk are committing an Is/Ought fallacy in their head.

Regardless, all of the attacks from the right onto Rosen were because she was lying. I dare you to find me one mention of Hannity, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, or Gretchen saying that what she said was bad because it was not politically correct.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Frederick53
Posts: 1,037
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2012 2:31:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/11/2012 1:28:14 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 8/11/2012 12:58:49 PM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
At 8/11/2012 12:26:58 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 8/11/2012 12:05:57 PM, Frederick53 wrote:
At 8/11/2012 11:52:56 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Work, in that context, is the obtainment of payment coupled with risk of failure. From a gene point of view, your children hold your genes and therefore time and energy should be devoted to them to preserve your own genes. The payment in this sense is the longevity of your immortal genes while the risk is the possibility of failure, which ultimately entails your children not being able to further your genes via reproductive, economical, or psychological failure.

She worked for payment and with risk. K?

Btw, this has nothing to do with PC. Instead, this has to do with the cheap-shots that the left-wing has recently become fervently addicted to in trying to discredit Romney and his associates by their personal traits and characteristics, instead of actual fiscal and social policy.

I'm not convinced.

So you content that what she did fits under your narrow definition of "work?" Awesome.

Saying somebody "never worked a day in their lives" is not politically incorrect. Political correctness would be saying "Black person" instead of "Nigga;" there are no substitutes for "not working a day in your life." She was attacked for saying things that weren't true.

Sure it is, political correctness is voluntarily attempting to soften language, or minimize offense, whatever. Dismissing a stay-at-home-mom as having "never worked a day in her life" is politically incorrect insofar as you're being gratuitously derogatory. It's contextual, but in this context you're arguing that it's intent was dismissive, ergo...

That's not derogatory at all. I find the whole concept of PC laughable at best because all you are doing is stating a normative point without any positive application. Those who actually take offence at non-PC talk are committing an Is/Ought fallacy in their head.

Regardless, all of the attacks from the right onto Rosen were because she was lying. I dare you to find me one mention of Hannity, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, or Gretchen saying that what she said was bad because it was not politically correct.

Of course they wouldn't phrase it that way, but it's the same idea. People got offended when Rosen said that Romney had never worked a day in her life- had she used a more 'correct' term (within the context of the conversation) such as "been employed" then there wouldn't have been a huge uproar.

Saying 'she's never worked a day in her life' instead of 'she's never been employed a day in her life' is no different than saying that someone 'associates with niggers' instead of 'associates with black people'. One is meant to be offensive, and the other is considerate.
In 1975, the Second Vietnam War began -1Historygenius

Like no wonder that indian dude rejected you.- Darkkermit to royalpaladin

Social Darwinism is a justification- 1Historygenius

Equal opportunity exists, so there is no problem- EvanK
NixonianVolkswagen
Posts: 481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2012 3:46:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/11/2012 1:28:14 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 8/11/2012 12:58:49 PM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
At 8/11/2012 12:26:58 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 8/11/2012 12:05:57 PM, Frederick53 wrote:
At 8/11/2012 11:52:56 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Work, in that context, is the obtainment of payment coupled with risk of failure. From a gene point of view, your children hold your genes and therefore time and energy should be devoted to them to preserve your own genes. The payment in this sense is the longevity of your immortal genes while the risk is the possibility of failure, which ultimately entails your children not being able to further your genes via reproductive, economical, or psychological failure.

She worked for payment and with risk. K?

Btw, this has nothing to do with PC. Instead, this has to do with the cheap-shots that the left-wing has recently become fervently addicted to in trying to discredit Romney and his associates by their personal traits and characteristics, instead of actual fiscal and social policy.

I'm not convinced.

So you content that what she did fits under your narrow definition of "work?" Awesome.

Saying somebody "never worked a day in their lives" is not politically incorrect. Political correctness would be saying "Black person" instead of "Nigga;" there are no substitutes for "not working a day in your life." She was attacked for saying things that weren't true.

Sure it is, political correctness is voluntarily attempting to soften language, or minimize offense, whatever. Dismissing a stay-at-home-mom as having "never worked a day in her life" is politically incorrect insofar as you're being gratuitously derogatory. It's contextual, but in this context you're arguing that it's intent was dismissive, ergo...

That's not derogatory at all. I find the whole concept of PC laughable at best because all you are doing is stating a normative point without any positive application. Those who actually take offence at non-PC talk are committing an Is/Ought fallacy in their head.

Regardless, all of the attacks from the right onto Rosen were because she was lying. I dare you to find me one mention of Hannity, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, or Gretchen saying that what she said was bad because it was not politically correct.

Either this statement is true:

"Btw, this has nothing to do with PC. Instead, this has to do with the cheap-shots that the left-wing has recently become fervently addicted to in trying to discredit Romney and his associates by their personal traits and characteristics, instead of actual fiscal and social policy."

Or this statement is true:

"That's not derogatory at all. I find the whole concept of PC laughable at best"

To argue for both is to make the same error that I and Frederick (if I may call you such, Frederick53?) were highlighting earlier in this discussion, namely, to oppose Political Correctness in ideological theory, whilst agreeing with it in practice.

I don't know where the Is/Ought supposition is coming from; Political Correctness is the normative claim that society would be nicer if our speech was more sensitive to the perspectives of others, usually those who have historically been ridiculed or excluded.

Also, you surely know that "Political Correctness" isn't some magic term? You don't need to incant it thrice and slay a rooster - one can conform to its concepts without ever having heard it. Indeed, to reiterate, you can actually belittle it whilst subscribing to it.
"There is an almost universal tendency, perhaps an inborn tendency, to suspect the good faith of a man who holds opinions that differ from our own opinions."

- Karl "Spartacus" Popper
Frederick53
Posts: 1,037
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2012 9:12:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/11/2012 3:46:42 PM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
At 8/11/2012 1:28:14 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 8/11/2012 12:58:49 PM, NixonianVolkswagen wrote:
At 8/11/2012 12:26:58 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 8/11/2012 12:05:57 PM, Frederick53 wrote:
At 8/11/2012 11:52:56 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Work, in that context, is the obtainment of payment coupled with risk of failure. From a gene point of view, your children hold your genes and therefore time and energy should be devoted to them to preserve your own genes. The payment in this sense is the longevity of your immortal genes while the risk is the possibility of failure, which ultimately entails your children not being able to further your genes via reproductive, economical, or psychological failure.

She worked for payment and with risk. K?

Btw, this has nothing to do with PC. Instead, this has to do with the cheap-shots that the left-wing has recently become fervently addicted to in trying to discredit Romney and his associates by their personal traits and characteristics, instead of actual fiscal and social policy.

I'm not convinced.

So you content that what she did fits under your narrow definition of "work?" Awesome.

Saying somebody "never worked a day in their lives" is not politically incorrect. Political correctness would be saying "Black person" instead of "Nigga;" there are no substitutes for "not working a day in your life." She was attacked for saying things that weren't true.

Sure it is, political correctness is voluntarily attempting to soften language, or minimize offense, whatever. Dismissing a stay-at-home-mom as having "never worked a day in her life" is politically incorrect insofar as you're being gratuitously derogatory. It's contextual, but in this context you're arguing that it's intent was dismissive, ergo...

That's not derogatory at all. I find the whole concept of PC laughable at best because all you are doing is stating a normative point without any positive application. Those who actually take offence at non-PC talk are committing an Is/Ought fallacy in their head.

Regardless, all of the attacks from the right onto Rosen were because she was lying. I dare you to find me one mention of Hannity, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, or Gretchen saying that what she said was bad because it was not politically correct.

Either this statement is true:

"Btw, this has nothing to do with PC. Instead, this has to do with the cheap-shots that the left-wing has recently become fervently addicted to in trying to discredit Romney and his associates by their personal traits and characteristics, instead of actual fiscal and social policy."

Or this statement is true:

"That's not derogatory at all. I find the whole concept of PC laughable at best"

To argue for both is to make the same error that I and Frederick (if I may call you such, Frederick53?) were highlighting earlier in this discussion, namely, to oppose Political Correctness in ideological theory, whilst agreeing with it in practice.

I don't know where the Is/Ought supposition is coming from; Political Correctness is the normative claim that society would be nicer if our speech was more sensitive to the perspectives of others, usually those who have historically been ridiculed or excluded.

Also, you surely know that "Political Correctness" isn't some magic term? You don't need to incant it thrice and slay a rooster - one can conform to its concepts without ever having heard it. Indeed, to reiterate, you can actually belittle it whilst subscribing to it.

Thank you, and yes it's Frederick.
In 1975, the Second Vietnam War began -1Historygenius

Like no wonder that indian dude rejected you.- Darkkermit to royalpaladin

Social Darwinism is a justification- 1Historygenius

Equal opportunity exists, so there is no problem- EvanK