2008 So
posted by on June 12 at 11:43 AM
Since Fox News has decreed that it’s OK to refer to Michelle Obama as the Democratic nominee’s “baby mama”—after all, Michelle Malkin writes, Mrs. Obama called Barack her “baby daddy” on the stump—I assume we can expect to see them use this headline in the near future?
After all, that’s what John McCain called his wife Cindy during his ‘92 Senate campaign. Fair’s fair, right?
ECB = Misogynist.
Amazing. I look forward to this Fox broadcast, but honestly it's more likely to come from MSNBC. Here's hopin'!
That nails that one shut - thanks, ECB!
Awesome. Just awesome. ECB, you're on a roll here!
Gee McCain or any spouse could've called each other nasty names when they have arguments. Michele said that enthusiastically during her introduction to his Senate victory speech. There is no comparison. Is Fox slimy in their way ? Of course but this is such a freaking non-issue by the paranoid Odrama supporters.
ECB do you really not understand the difference between a term of endearment used by a spouse in public on the stump and a testy term of disparagement used by a spouse in "private" after being teased about going bald? Or are you really just that stupid?...
I wonder what we would have to call Bill Clinton using that standard?...
Gee McCain or any spouse could've called each other nasty names when they have arguments. Michele said that enthusiastically during her introduction to his Senate victory speech. There is no comparison. Is Fox slimy in their way ? Of course but this is such a freaking non-issue by the paranoid Odrama supporters.
that should be a question mark, not a period.
See, this is what I feared. ECB is trying to help Obama by dragging the rhetoric down into the muck. Please stop, Erica. Smearing this slime in every direction just makes it worse.
@6. Are you really that stupid that you don't really this is a joke?
I'll take an attactive older blonde who owns a massive beer distribution company over a whiny lawyer any day of the week.
You have to ask yourself why McCain hates the 99.9 percent of America that his "tax cuts" would INCREASE taxes on so that his comrades amongst the ultra-rich 0.1 percent of America can rip us off even more in the long toboggan-ride down to Hades he and Comrade Bush have our nation on ....
Maybe he is the Manchurian Candidate?
What YGBKM @6 said.
(That's twice in one day we've agreed. Did I eat something I shouldn't have...?)
I officially love ECB all over again.
@10
Impossible.
Everyone knows that feminists have no sense of humor.
Especially concerning words like “cunt”.
Cindy McCain eats babies...It's true!
#10, are you really that stupid that you don't get that ECB is trying to make a point?
Granted, her point makes no sense, so I could see where you could have gone wrong.
Gee Odrama, I wonder what word you were googling which led you to this page?
God I hate conservatives. What if Michelle had called Obama her "baby"... would Fox throw that up? Wouldn't it be appropriate to use quotes if you're going to start riffing on what candidates are saying (or using that as your shit justification?)
Rather than as in this case making the term look like a pseudo-quote from some "liberals" who didn't actually say it?
No.
I'm with #14.
I think "Cunt faced trollop" would be a nicer way of putting that...
First of all, thank you ECB for rightfully calling out FOX on this one.
and secondly...
Wow, so Odrama, You_Gotta_be_kidding_me and others have taken the side of... Michelle fucking Malkin on this one. congrats on officially greasing your slippery slope to hell. I think any sane adult can see the difference between "term of endearment used by a spouse in public on the stump", as is pointed out @6, and what FOX is implying here.
Simple rule, people, If Michele Fucking Malkin (or Odrama, for that matter) say it, it is batshit fucking evil. period. Is that so complicated?
@23 paraphrased:
criticizing ECB's false analogy = siding with Michelle Malkin and Fox News
or
You're either with us or against us.
@22 Ultimately, I'm with you, but "Trollop-faced cunt" has a certain non-sensical charm.
#24, it's a pretty common occurrence here on Slog for someone who criticizes ECB's glaring logical fallacy (there's one in every post) to be attacked by some humorless fangirl (or fanboy) with a similar dearth of logic who, invariably, claims that ECB's attempt at making an argument was actually just a "joke", when in fact, if it were a joke instead of just a poorly constructed "point" disguised with mildly humorous elements, it wouldn't even be funny.
Did I forget anything?
It's nice to see McCain's "at least I don't plaster on the makeup like a trollop, you cunt" freakout getting a little bit of press, such as it is.
It's also funny to see all of these 'distinction without a difference' types tripping all over themselves to get at ECB. Yeah, Michelle O said the baby daddy thing on the stump whereas McCain only called his wife a cunty trollop-face in front of a couple of campaign staffers and a few reporters. How exactly is that the undoing of ECB's post, though?
It's always nice to see McCain's "at least I don't plaster on the makeup like a trollop, you cunt" freakout getting a little bit more press, such as it is.
It's also funny to see all of these 'distinction without a difference' types tripping all over themselves to get at ECB. Yeah, Michelle O said the baby daddy thing on the stump whereas McCain only called his wife a cunty trollop-face on the campaign trail in front of a couple of staffers and a few reporters. How exactly is that the undoing of ECB's post, though?
You can't undo ECB's posts, Bison. You can prove her wrong, but she won't listen.
Is that some sort of meta-irony, elenchos? As in, you're offering a 'prove wrong'/undo distinction without a difference in answer to my complaints about distinctions without differences?
Bison @27/28:
a. Pointing out that the person you called "baby mama" had herself used "baby daddy" as an affectionate label for her own husband is a plausible argument for "baby mama" not being unacceptably hurtful.
b. The overtly hostile source for "trollop-faced cunt" only reinforces its unacceptability.
Stir in context and simmer for 2-3 seconds: ECB's analogy of the two insults and defenses is false.
It's nice that you know the phrase "distinction without a difference." It'd be nicer if you understood it.
I'm sorry, but pointing out a false analogy is not a "distinction without a difference" argument.
Bison @27/28:
a. Pointing out that the person you called "baby mama" had herself used "baby daddy" as an affectionate label for her own husband is a plausible argument for "baby mama" not being unacceptably hurtful.
b. The overtly hostile source for "trollop-faced cunt" only reinforces its unacceptability.
Stir in context and simmer for 2-3 seconds: ECB's analogy of the two insults and defenses is false.
It's nice that you know the phrase "distinction without a difference." It'd be nicer if you understood it.
Sorry all for the double post. I'm having Slog comment weirdness here.
@31,32,33
It's nice that you guys are trying now, but you're still not there. You need to actually bother to get ECB's point before you can rebut it. Hint: she's offered parallel if/thens, not an analogy. Further hint: if you substitute your own 'if' for hers, then you haven't engaged her argument, you've attacked her premise.
Now have at it!
Bison @35:
Now we have a distinction without a difference!
Except that ECB's if/thens aren't parallel (see @31).
This distinction isn't quite bereft of difference, but what's your point? Revealing someone's premise as flawed is a pretty effective rebuttal.
Are you sure we're the ones who are substituting?
The flaw in ECB's "parallel if/thens" has been explicated clearly by multiple commenters, but I've yet to see a coherent explanation of your position, Bison.
Bored now.
Dude, I get her argument. She's offering the following analogy.
"Michelle calls Barack her baby daddy in public" is to "Fox News calls Michelle Barack's baby mama in public" as "John calls Cindy a trollop-faced cunt in private" is to "Fox news calls Cindy a trollop-faced cunt in public"
It should be painfully obvious that the analogy is flawed. Even if you take the "in public"/"in private" modifiers out, it's *still* flawed.
(In case you still don't get it, the logical extension would be to call John the male version of a "trollop-faced cunt", which frankly doesn't really exist, further pointing out the absurdity of this post).
I am also bored now.
Also, an argument by analogy can be thought of as "parallel if/thens":
If case A, then x
Case B is like case A
Therefore, if case B, then x
I am even more bored now.
Ah*AH*AAAAH*photoshop*CHOOOO!!!!!
Comments Closed
Comments are closed on this post.