Indeed. Pretty sure that’s precisely what Hoyer is saying. The party’s general pro-choice platform isn’t going to change, but if some of them have a different belief on this or that issue…doesn’t mean they should be kicked out or their alliance should be refused.
3 Likes
Women’s rights to control their own bodies are apparently negotiable if you support other issues of “extreme importance.”
We should not be “welcoming” people who believe this. A women’s right to control their own bodies and healthcare and a doctor’s right to provide women healthcare are not negotiable.
5 Likes
No, it’s because I’m a rational, pragmatic person, not a purist ideologue.
2 Likes
Lovely mischaracterization of everything I’ve said. Couldn’t come up with an argument against what I’ve actually said so you had to engage the ole poetic license, eh? Do another…make Frost proud.
2 Likes
Not even close. I’m not here to defend Lipinski by any means. I just think that Democrats need to be smarter and more precise in how they discuss this issue. Make clear we support reproductive freedom with no exceptions and your personal beliefs don’t matter as long as that’s the case.
3 Likes
Changing parties…
If you’re gonna do it, just do it.
For now, it would be a good idea to do it without discussion…in silent contrition, change parties.
Any trumpets blaring won’t sound good to a loyal base.
Announce after you do it, not before.
Wow. Dismissing a person’s awareness about the current trends in right-wing anti-abortion thinking as “a purist idelogue”.
Look, if personal autonomy doesn’t matter to you, you’re really not as pro-choice as you think you are. It’s just another card to play for you. But people are going to get really pissed off at you for having that attitude, and dismissing them as “purist” only shows how badly you are missing the point here.
Would you be OK with welcoming in politicians who favored lowering the age of consent to 13? 12? Or would that be an issue where you hold an unwavering position?
Dismissing strong beliefs as “purity” is really a nasty rhetorical trick. You’re only convincing yourself.
11 Likes
Nice midcharacterization. Do you guys have ANY other trolling tricks or is “I’d rather argue against this mischaracterization of what you said” the only one they teach you at Team Unicorn College?
Ah yes, that’s right, the other trick is “if you don’t accept the purist position I’m stating, then it means you agree with the other side fully.” Hint: nope, it doesn’t.
Boy, you’re really schooling me today. I forgot that trick #3 was “here’s a terrible and inept analogy that functions as a loaded question”.
You really gave a master class in the Team Unicorn playbook there, professor.
Bookended with a reprise of the mischaracterization game. Nice. I’m not criticizing strong belief as purity. Rather, I’m criticizing as “purity testing” the argument/belief that we should ostracize potential allies on other issues based solely on their differing view on one particular issue. It’s the difference between criticizing the underlying belief about abortion (which I’m not doing) versus criticizing the resulting belief that “because I believe X about abortion, here is how we should act on that.” If that’s too much nuance for you, I’m not surprised.
2 Likes
Lipinski also refused to support Barack Obama’s re-election in 2012.
And we’re the purists? I repeat my question: what use is this guy? We should welcome a replacement for any so-called Democrat who refuses to support a sitting President seeking re-election.
5 Likes
And Bernie refuses to register as a Democrat while demanding he be allowed to run as one and use the party apparatus, funding and data to try to beat the candidates actually registered to the party.
3 Likes
Oh, Steny.
Go mainline a half-bottle of Metamucil and STFU.
3 Likes
GeorgeH’s Law: “People who call people ‘purists’ are the ones who are the most intolerant of opinions that differ from their own.”
You can take that to the bank everytime.
3 Likes
Once you get to a list like that, yeah, they should be kicked to the curb as their “alliance” is illusory. My point is simply that had the list been something like “he’s anti-abortion…BUT he voted FOR the ACA, Dream Act, etc. etc. etc.”, then him being anti-abortion or having some other issue on which he deviates from the general party consensus, then at least he’s useful and the “alliance” means something.
Just to be clear though…nothing I’ve said is A defense of or IN defense of Lipinski. That guy is as useless as tits on a computer.
2 Likes
Let us all hope that Dan Lipinski and Steny Hoyer are never forced by federal law to obtain an abortion they don’t want.
6 Likes
Let us all hope that Dan Lipinski and Steny Hoyer are never forced by federal law to obtain an prostrate surgery they don’t want.
2 Likes
Sorry, but Faux News and Rove already own the “accuse the other guy of what you’re doing wrong” game.
The fact is, your attempt to claim that someone defending the idea of people still having value to an alliance, a unified liberal front, even if they differ on some of the policy issues, is the one who is intolerant of other opinions just fails every test of rational reasoning you can throw at it. It’s pure, unadulterated doublethinker nonsense. You sound exactly like the fanatical Trump KKKultist meatheads on Faux News’ kkkomment boards reflexively barking like trained seals that anyone accusing them or Trump or police or other institutions of being racist “are the real racists.”
3 Likes
nailed it.
5 Likes
It’s called being receptive to people with whom you disagree on some issues and agree on other issues.
In a few words—it’s being an adult.
3 Likes
Why would they want to have surgery while lying on their stomachs?
Unless it’s a hemorrhoid excision.
What is Hoyer’s position on LGBTQ rights? Does anyone know if he’d welcome people who are anti-LGBTQ rights into the party?