• vzq
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    116
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    deleted by creator

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    86
    ·
    3 months ago

    On May 19, 1992, during a crucial part of the presidential campaign, Vice President Dan Quayle delivered a speech on family values that came to define him nearly as much as his famous “potato” gaffe. During the speech, he criticized Murphy Brown a fictional 40-something, divorced news anchor on a popular situation comedy   for her choice to have a child outside of marriage. Quayle argued: “Bearing babies irresponsibly is simply wrong.

    Same Shit Different Decade

      • Got_Bent@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        ·
        3 months ago

        So I just went and revisited that whole thing. I remember it vaguely, but not any details.

        The gist was that Murphy was deciding whether to have the baby or abort it and the Republican vice president says she’s terrible for having it because she’s not married.

        Of course, I guess the intent was that she was supposed to marry whoever got her pregnant, but it presents as she should have aborted it. Interesting in today’s forced birth environment.

        • Asafum@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          3 months ago

          Of course, I guess the intent was that she was supposed to marry whoever got her pregnant

          I think it’s worse with some of these nutjobs. They’d say you shouldn’t be sleeping with someone you aren’t married to, it’s the extra level of “irresponsibility” they want to slander you with as well. Unmarried and promiscuous…

          • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            3 months ago

            If Republicans had their way, executing unmarried pregnant women for having sex outside of marriage would be some sort of exception to a fetus’ right to life…

          • Optional@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            Yeah he wasn’t pandering to 1992 republicans, he was pandering to 1960s republicans.

            And he was VP only because Bush the I should have gone to jail for Iran Contra. The more things change amirite

      • adarza@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        3 months ago

        an emmy-nominated episode, at that. (for directing, peter bonerz)

    • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      3 months ago

      Ew.

      Taken out of context, the phrase almost sounds like it could be used to argue for education, contraception, and healthcare access, not whatever grossness he’s actually meaning in context.

      I agree it should only be done responsibly, which is why I’m in favor of people have the information and tools to ensure it only happens when they’re prepared and able to do so.

  • Nougat@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    72
    ·
    3 months ago

    Hear that, mothers and fathers of America? JD Vance says that you were worthless until you had children. JD Vance says that your children who aren’t parents are worthless.

  • Nobody@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    3 months ago

    JD Vance’s 4chan tripcode will be discovered one day, and we’ll find out exactly how far down the rabbit hole goes.

    • barsquid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      You literally cannot be a peasant voting Repub without turning off your brain. The lies are so obvious.

      • Optional@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        It’s worse than that. They’re being told “the liberals” can’t vote Democratic without turning off our brains. Our lies are so obvious.

        It’s a propagandized fear of propaganda baked into the propaganda.

  • fossilesque@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Lmao, I might be a childless cat lady, but at least I’m not a miserable bigot with an insatiable lust for upholstered furniture.

      • Optional@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yeah whats the deal with that? Are republiQans just going all in on the trump aesthetic? Thick makeup, wigs, false teeth, lifts, girdles?

  • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    You could have tried to explain your way out of the 2021 comment. But nope he just goes head long into it.

    I hope we get Mark Kelly as VP now, a fucking astronaut against this clown would be the greatest juxtaposition ever.

    • UpperBroccoli
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Men are allowed to innocently sit on their couch, at home, possibly naked, doing absolutely nothing disgusting with the aforementioned piece of furniture, while they are waiting for women to throw themselves upon them. If they do not, well, why would you blame the men and not the women?! SAD!

  • donnager@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    3 months ago

    Even if you raise taxes on people without kids, it will still be cheaper than having kids. Saying that childless people have no stake in the country and maybe their voice should be worth less is wild. But can’t say I am surprised since shit is always flowing out of their mouths.

    • oyo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      3 months ago

      Taxes are already higher for people without kids. That’s literally the point of the child tax credit.

  • MyEdgyAlt@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    This feels misleading.

    Vance made it clear, said Aaron Fritschner, deputy chief of staff for Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.), “that he meant no disrespect to cats, but he did mean to demean women and still holds the view in 2024 that they should be punished for not having children.”

    So the actual quote here is from a chief of staff of a Democratic representative, not from dolphin-loving couch-loving JD Vance. So it’s an accusation that interprets for us. And the tweet the article cites heavily edits the text it quotes:

    “Obviously it was a sarcastic comment. I’ve got nothing against cats. … People are focusing so much on the sarcasm and not on the substance … and the substance of what I said, Megyn — I’m sorry, it is true.”

    Heres a video of the clip without the editing: https://therecount.com/watch/obviously-it-was-a-sarcastic/2645895762

    Ok, so the edits here at least aren’t misleading…

    Then based on the 9 minute clip of her show in the original article, it seems like he’s claiming the substance is not about the cat lady comment, but some lies about what Democrats believe about families (democrats think kids are for the economy, republicans want to make it easier for women to stay in the workforce (I mean, is there a more blatant lie than that? They’re the ones who fight against extending COVID-era childcare credits!), etc). That’s what says he’s doubling down on. And given the context that does truly seem to be the lies he’s doubling down on.

    Let’s try to stick to sincere, defensible attacks against people for whom there are many valid attacks, and not spread misleading claims that JD is doubling down on “crazy cat ladies”. He’s shit and we can demonstrate that in good faith, or we can lie like he does.

    • peopleproblems@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      Right. Saying JD Vance is a couch lover may be an out right lie. It’s more important that we state what we know; we cannot prove he never had sex with a couch.