No. of Recommendations: 14
Shady Vance to Tucker Carlson back in 2021:
We're effectively run in this country ... by a bunch of childless cat ladies.
It's just a basic fact. Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg, AOC, the entire future of the Democrats is controlled by people without children.
Will Chamberlain on Xhitter:
Really simple, underdiscussed reason why Kamala Harris shouldn't be President
No children
And no, becoming a step-parent to older teenagers doesn't count
Just a couple of fact checks:
Pete Buttigieg and his husband Chastain adopted their twins in August 2021. JD Vance's interview was in July 2021, so Buttigieg was indeed childless at that moment.
AOC is not married. She became engaged in 2022, but is still unmarried.
Vice-President Harris became a step-parent when the children were 15 and 13.
And now the opinion section.
A bit of homophobia mixed in with Shady's misogyny there. And I'm quite certain the howls over AOC being an unwed mother would have been just as loud if not louder amongst those good, God-fearin' Republicans. So Shady is creating a no win situation. Worthless if you have no children, and worthless if you have children out of wedlock. Apparently the only place for wimmin' is barefoot and pregnant at home, doing what their man tells them to do. Apparently that includes making sure the girls grow up subservient and the boys are properly stocked with ammo.
Kerstin Emhoff, Doug's ex-wife, has come out praising Kamala's role as a co-parent. Unlike the typical MAGAite, who believes everyone says whatever is convenient to say at any moment, Kerstin has been saying this quite consistently throughout Harris' public career. Sure doesn't sound like a statement of convenience to me.
As the parent of a child who went through the teen years, I can attest that anyone getting through that time while maintaining a good relationship between parent and child is doing a good job.
No one is more afraid of strong, competent women than a white, MAGA male.
--Peter <== a white, non-MAGA male, for the record
No. of Recommendations: 6
“‘Look, if you’re a miserable cat lady, you should not force your misery on the rest of the country,’
The context: ""These children are the future of this country and yet the parents who have them actually have no advantage in our democratic process," Vance said. "They have a smaller voice in some ways — in very many cases — than the people who don't have any children at all. The children who come from these families have no real representative in our democracy. Why don't we change that?"
In that case, the list of those who should have less representation would include all the celibate religionists, gay/lesbian people who don't procreate, husbands and wives who could not conceive, parents whose children were killed in school shootings, people who simply choose not to have kids, ... and undoubtedly many more.
Why no simply deny them all rights and be done with them.
No. of Recommendations: 7
sano: Why not simply deny them all rights and be done with them.
The childless should have fewer rights.
The disabled should be left to die.
Stand back and stand by.
Migrants are poisoning the blood of our country.
Driven by the creation of a unified Reich.
Huh.
Why does this all sound so vaguely familiar?
