It's so weird that Kamala has no children. Too busy ladder climbing I guess.
I don't believe people without kids should be running the country. No actual skin in the game.
All the Dems who just learned tonight that George Washington didn't have kids are replying.
Ok how is this -- Women shouldn't even be politicians. Women who give up on having children for their careers even more so.
25 comments
“It's so weird that Kamala has no children. Too busy ladder climbing I guess.”
Pretty sure if Trump had no kids, you’d be ecstatic that he could devote all his time to the job, huh?
“I don't believe people without kids should be running the country. No actual skin in the game.”
But we do. Liberals feel for everyone, not just outselves. You don’t want your kids in a poor school, we don’t want ANY kids in a poor school. Or without access to healthcare.
People like Ted Cruz will avoid disasters by fucking off to Acapulco, while AOC scrounged up resources to help a stqte that wasn’t even hers.
“All the Dems who just learned tonight that George Washington didn't have kids are replying.”
Well, yeah. When did YOU learn that? Before or after you criticized Harris?
“Ok how is this -- Women shouldn't even be politicians.”
No, fuck that. Women have skin in the game as demonstrated by all the men taking away their rights.
“Women who give up on having children for their careers even more so.”
Okay, you’re just inventing criteria for the sole purpose of bashing a candidate.
You guys are desperate and pathetic.
Yeah well, Kamala was a career woman for many years, that's what happens to top lawyers, her sister was the family breeder. Interesting how they are now pitching the same slings and arrows as they did at Julia Gillard, when Senator Bill Heffernan called her "deliberately barren".
So Mrs Quisling, maybe you should STFU and get back to the kitchen.
Bullshit. If she had kids at home you’d be loudly questioning her “neglect” at having a career even if they were fully grown adults while the serial adulterer and sex offender you’re rooting for is about as famous for neglecting his sons as he is for publicly stating he has the hots for one of his daughters.
Edit: And as I overlooked but has been pointed out by Shirogane she does in fact have stepchildren. But it is abundantly clear the people making these arguments are the kind of people who only have interest in offspring as property through biological claim and the idea of family as anyone else knows it is completely alien to them.
Ok how is this -- Women shouldn't even be politicians. Women who give up on having children for their careers even more so.
While wrong, there is at least some first glance intuitive sense to “childless people are not qualified to make political decisions because they have no stakes in the future”. Meanwhile, you do not give us any reason to accept your misogyny, except that it would allow you to escape the obvious trap caused by hypocrisy regarding your Founder cult that you yourself anticipated.
Anyways, have you heard of a certain Elizabeth I. Tudor, Virgin Queen of England?
I don't believe people without kids should be running the country. No actual skin in the game.
That's because you're a conservative, who won't fight for a cause unless it affects you or someone you know personally. Conservatives are selfish; they don't care about anything if they don't have "actual skin in the game".
Liberals, on the other hand, have empathy and can feel concern for their fellow human beings. They understand that helping others will ultimately help themselves because we're all in this together.
At their best, liberals are humanitarians, while conservatives are still trying to draw dividing lines between "us" and "them". But the world is getting far too small for that. We can't afford such limited thinking anymore.
I don't believe people without kids should be running the country
Edward Heath. Conservative. Never married.
So why was he selected to lead that party by the 1922 Committee: ultimately becoming Prime Minister?
So many in said Committee who were married & had children. Their not caring about your future opinions all those decades ago, thus your fee-fees OP.
Women shouldn't even be politicians
…and who did said Conservative 1922 Committee select to lead their party in 1975 who ultimately became Prime Minister between 1979 - 1990?
And who was so favoured by your precious Ronnie Raygun…:
image
…Cass the Ass ?!
Do you plan to die soon, Cassie?
Do you care for no relatives?
Do you have no friends? (OK, that's believable.)
Because those are the only ways childless people don't have "skin in the game."
I have no kids. But I hope and expect to live for several more decades, so the state of the country is still of great importance to me. I have family and friends who are much younger, who will be here longer, and who will have kids themselves. What kind of country I leave for them is of major concern.
Your comment only points up Republican selfishness and shortsightedness.
All the Georges who just learned tonight that Kid Washington didn't have Dems are replying.
Ok how is I shit -- Women couldn't even be slit in a shop. Women who give up on caving children for their hearers even more so.
@Passerby #202243
Exactly. From what I’ve been reading, these people only consider one thing to be a family, and that’s a married couple with more than one kid that are all biologically theirs. If you’re divorced and remarried? Not a family. If there are two parents but they are the same sex? Not a family.
These are the kind of people who think LGBT people don’t have families and don’t count as family members. Many of them are the same ones who are against women having reproductive rights and they hate no fault divorce.
These people see women as baby machines and think that’s our only purpose, and the only family that counts is the nuclear family.
@Yutolia #202281
And if you’re not specifically the *head* of a nuclear family - usually with added ethnic and religious caveats - you don’t count as people, period. Building on another analogy the Christian Patriarchal head of acceptable breeding is 3/5 of a person and the successfully bred wife and reproduction quota are the remainder bringing them to full with no status of their own.
@Indicible #202314
This really doesn’t mean much, but I find it amusing, at least partly because I’m a big pro wrestling fan…Lauren Bobert’s mom apparently made some claims years ago on social media that the former pro wrestler “Sweet” Stan Lane is Lauren’s father. I’m not finding it in my Google searches now, but I could have swore I read that “Mama Boebert” and “Sweet Stan” were related themselves, or so she claimed? At any rate, Lane did a 2nd DNA test about a year ago, and to slightly paraphrase the words of Maury Povich….he is NOT the father. lol
So you’re crapping on her for not having any biological children. Now imagine if she’d had five children with three different spouses, cheated on all three of them, and had been caught having sex with porn stars? You’d be slut-shaming off the chart, wouldn’t you?
@Yutolia #202281
And they talk about the wonderful visit they had with Tom and his wife, Nadine, who have two kids and two adopted children.
No, bitch, they have four kids.
I do love the meme going around, asking how the GOP would treat Kamala if she ahd five kids by three different men. And then fucked a porn star.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.