General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRalph Nader Slams Hillary Clinton With Sexist Rant About “The Problem Of Women”
But the sickening part is that hes got a horribly sexist explanation for his contempt for Hillary Clinton, and for other women in positions of power.
http://www.hillarymojo.com/2015/06/07/ralph-naders-sexist-rant-about-the-problem-of-women-in-positions-of-power-will-disgust-you/
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)War is bad. Men make war, always have. Bad.
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)Hillary is not on the top of my list for a few reasons, but this is uncalled for. It denigrates women in all political endeavors and sets a standard which would prohibit women from entering in the highest office in the land.
bigbrother05
(5,995 posts)Thinking in terms of how PBO's election was proof that we are a post-racial nation, the right felt they were freed from any pretense of even-handedness. Look at their attacks on the President, civil rights, and voting.
Given the stepped up attacks on women's rights, health and pay, what will we see once an election of HRC "proves" that women are equal in America and therefore legal protections, etc. are no longer needed.
The mind shudders to consider how ugly an openly misogynist GOP will be.
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)What do you think all of the anti-women legislation is about? The legislating of barefoot and pregnant has been going on for several years now.
bigbrother05
(5,995 posts)Who imagined what we've seen since 2009 based on the lead in to Nov 2008?
The voter suppression, etc. during the Bush years was only the prelude, 2017 will look like the zombie apocalypse.
lovemydog
(11,833 posts)MBS
(9,688 posts)I thank him for his earlier work on consumer protections, but as for the rest. . not helpful, to say the least.
Frank Cannon
(7,570 posts)I used to be huge fan. Somewhere around the turn of the century he went from being a real crusader to an enormous douchnozzle.
MBS
(9,688 posts)leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Itchinjim
(3,085 posts)OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/04/22/us-usa-politics-iran-idUSN2224332720080422
On the day of a crucial vote in her nomination battle against fellow Democrat Barack Obama, the New York senator said she wanted to make clear to Tehran what she was prepared to do as president in hopes that this warning would deter any Iranian nuclear attack against the Jewish state.
"I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran (if it attacks Israel)," Clinton said in an interview on ABC's "Good Morning America."
"In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them," she said.
"That's a terrible thing to say but those people who run Iran need to understand that because that perhaps will deter them from doing something that would be reckless, foolish and tragic," Clinton said.
boston bean
(36,228 posts)is what she is speaking of..
That is the right thing to say, in order deter any such action.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)We can trust Bibi not to stage a false flag.
boston bean
(36,228 posts)OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)would not result in obliterating Iran?
Would decimating Iran be better?
boston bean
(36,228 posts)I'm not engaging further.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)She isn't talking now, so I have to go on what she's said in the past.
Since she's willing to start a war with Iran on Israel's behalf, would she let the NSA continue to provide raw intelligence to Israel?
If you could provide a link to answer my question, that would be greatly appreciated.
boston bean
(36,228 posts)her response is justified.
That you want to ignore the context of the article that you yourself posted, go ahead.
I'm not going to deal with the type of misrepresentation you are trying to make here.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)They've got their own nukes.
An eagerness to participate in a nuclear war is not an admirable quality.
"Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran"
boston bean
(36,228 posts)JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)I agree, as does every presidential candidate and 95% of America.
onehandle
(51,122 posts)Of more immediate interest, at least to Al Gore, are Nader's respectable poll numbers: 7 to 10 percent in California as of June, 6 percent nationally. If California tips Green enough, Bush could win the state and the whole damn election.
Which, Nader confided to Outside in June, wouldn't be so bad. When asked if someone put a gun to his head and told him to vote for either Gore or Bush, which he would choose, Nader answered without hesitation: "Bush."
http://www.outsideonline.com/1837851/ralph-nader-2000-campaign-interview
Nader flew back and forth between California and Florida, finally spending the most of the last few weeks in Florida, and fulfilling his goal of a Bush Presidency.
Mission Accomplished! Eight years of Bush. Thirty years of a right-wing SCOTUS. Citizens United. Massive illegal redistricting. Permanent state of war. Etc, etc, etc...
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)Trying to derail the presumptive Democratic candidate. Nader's problem is nobody cares about his sexist hate.
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)This was unacceptable, period. Yes, you can mention Maggie and Golda and others, but you do not go ahead and speak of all women that way.
Then again, this is Ralph, the guy stumping for Rand Paul.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)He did great things in the 1970's, but he's worse than useless now.
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)If anyone wants to make this a more public argument count me in.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)boston bean
(36,228 posts)against her...
So, maybe it is. Is Nader supporting Bernie?
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)So I just went with it.
Logical
(22,457 posts)Gothmog
(146,012 posts)MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Fuck the misogynistic POS.
Nothing more to be said.
CanSocDem
(3,286 posts)...Is not ALL women.
Just those women who choose to project appearance of '...aggression and machismo'.
A woman waging war is no less evil than a man waging war.
They really did have a "tradition of peace" and a matriarchal persona that always fueled my desire for more women in government. Now it seems they are ready to sacrifice those values for power.
.
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)The progressive male's way of shutting down the possibility of expanding women's roles in leadership.
Beacool
(30,254 posts)People would have been outraged and he would have been summarily excoriated by the media and civil rights activists.
Say the same thing about a woman and it's crickets all around........
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Beacool
(30,254 posts)Gee........What was he thinking?