Hillary Clinton shatters the glass ceiling (inspiring video)

Strange combination I must say

 

I'm sorry but that is a garbled mess.....and obviously you have no idea of what "political correctness" is and have only heard from Repubs "it's bad" so you just burble along...

 

And yet, you haven't been able to cite a single instance of someone voting for a candidate because that candidate is white and male. Your argument is intellectually lazy. It's self referencing circle logic. Your argument: It is because it is.

With a little work, you might be able to locate historical evidence that a candidate was opposed for being black and female but even that doesn't support your claim that candidates were voted for for simply being white and male. And even given that line of argument I can, as I already have, present exceptional black females who were able to prove those prejudices wrong through the power of their character, and the validity of their positions long before Clinton, long before Obama, and long before you were even born. Prejudice is easily proven wrong because it is not founded in reason or logic. Your claim that many people vote for candidates because those candidates are white and male is not founded in reason or logic. It's a every bit a prejudice as the prejudice that black females are inferior, and it's easily proven so. Hell, even David Duke didn't run on the fact that he was white and male. He ran (in opposition to an opponent endorsed by the likes of Ronald Reagan, George Bush,and many other prominent Republicans) on the fact that his opponent might raise property taxes. He only served 1 pathetically ineffective term, and he was repeatedly defeated for any political position thereafter despite being the quintessential candidate to appeal to people who are interested in voting for white males. So there's your prejudicial white male's white male. Why did these many people interested in voting for white males not vote for him? It's because they are fictional. They only exist in your mind.

Such an argument cannot be supported, as evidenced by your responses. Yet, it's the same argument used by proponents of "white male privilege" and intersectional feminism to target individual social groups with politically correct scorn. It's a shame based attempt to promote preferred groups and suppress others. It's bull, and it needs to be challenged at every turn.

 

To deny that racism and sexism exist and claim they never did exist , is the height of racism and sexism.

Good bye.

 

Pathetic straw man. My challenge to your portrayal of motive is not a denial of racism or sexism.

The ball's in your court to positively support your claim that "Many people in the past have voted for people because they WERE white and male and not black or female."

Maybe it could take the form of an editorial in a main stream paper expressing the position: Candidate A is terrible in all respects, but we should vote for him because he's white and male. Or maybe it could be many references to the opposition to Shirley Chisholm's candidacy on the grounds that her opponent was male.

 

You are arguing with yourself, I never said that anyone should vote for someone based on their race or gender.

My words stand as true: """To deny that racism and sexism exist and claim they never did exist , is the height of racism and sexism.""

 

vs.

Silly attempts to reframe your statement will not change the debate to something you can win. This isn't a discussion about whether or not this should take place. This is a discussion to resolve your unsupported claim that many people voted for candidates because those candidates were white and male. I never once misunderstood that you held the position that this should happen. You clearly are attempting to smear others as supporters of it. Many others, in fact.

 

Truly inspiring example to show girls that they to can accomplish anything, if they marry the right man.

 

I think it's obvious, by Fox's inability to support his claim that folks who would vote for candidates for being white males are not many, rather they are few. These few hold their views in secret because the reality is that the majority hold these views in contempt. It is not a view that is supported socially. It is a view of a few that are condemned socially. And this is true now, as it was long before I even had the ability to protest such behavior. Did I protest when this was a practice? Nope. I wasn't alive to do such a thing.

So clearly it is a pathetic excuse to mask some other deficiency that would lead society to vote in a different direction. Like say evidence of corruption, poor values, ineffectiveness, a lack of the ability to identify the cause and solution to problems voters face. But let's not talk about those things. Let's talk about genitalia and skin color.

 

None of of you watched the video.. did you?