General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAnother right-wing Deplorable bites the dust on Twitter.
Besides Donald Trump, I don't know if there was an account on all of Twitter that epitomized pure right-wing ugliness more than Juanita Broaddrick.
For those unfamiliar, Broaddrick's main claim to fame is that during the height of the Clinton-Lewinsky impeachment saga around 1998, she claimed that Bill Clinton sexually assaulted her back in the 1970s. And while any woman claiming sexual assault deserves the right to have their claims heard by the public (and she most definitely did that), it soon became clear that Broaddrick's story had some serious issues concerning its credibility. Beyond the lack of any contemporaneous evidence, her story read like a bad Lifetime Movie more than a believable claim of rape. It left more questions than answers, like the fact that Broaddrick actually hosted a fundraiser for Clinton just a couple of weeks after the day she would later claim the assault took place. But most problematic was the fact that she actually executed a sworn affidavit denying that she was ever sexually assaulted by Clinton, which she has never bothered to retract in any subsequent testimony.
Broaddrick's story was ultimately so useless and full of holes, Ken Starr had no use for her during his investigation of Clinton. Ken Starr--a man so determined to bring Clinton down over the slightest foible. Think about that for a moment.
Anyways, Twitter came, and Broaddrick's feed wasn't just a screed against the Clintons, but against any and all Democrats and left leaning political figures in general.
But raw partisanship is one thing; gross hypocrisy is quite another. And that's where Broaddrick was the absolute worst.
Broaddrick--who made her bread and butter her claims that she was sexually assaulted by a powerful political figure--was very quick to jump to the defense of other powerful political figures accused of sexual misconduct...so long as they were conservative Republicans. So when Roy Moore was accused of inappropriate behavior regarding underaged teenagers, Broaddrick was quick to his defense without a second question.
And when the "Access Hollywood" tapes emerged during the 2016 campaign where Donald Trump was bragging about his desire for women to "grab them by the pussy," Broaddrick within days appeared at a pre-debate event literally sitting next to Trump and defending him vehemently. And she always supported Trump vocally, through every single accusation of sexual impropriety on his part.
But the worst would have to be her spirited support of then-Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, and her below-the-belt attacks against Kavanaugh's accuser Christine Blasey Ford. Broaddrick immediately branded Ford a liar, denied she could have even possibly been telling the truth, and even mocked Ford's physical appearance and testimony mannerisms during the Senate hearings. Mind you, Ford did what Broaddrick never could do--testify under oath that she was sexually assaulted. A genuine and credible Broaddrick might have painted Ford as a kindred spirit regardless of politics.
But Broaddrick was neither genuine nor credible. She was a hypocritical and hateful hack, and she does not deserve anyone's support or lent credibility.
She made crude comments about Michelle Obama and other figures who never caused her the slightest bit of harm. She reposted White Supremacists, spread lies about COVID and vaccines, and engaged in Q-Anon conspiracy theories (even appearing at Q-Anon conferences).
Apparently in the end, it was a homophobic remark--referring to gays as "the rainbow people" and how she was "sick and tired of having their lifestyle crammed down our throats on a daily basis"--that did her in.
Good riddance to human rubbish. Truly an awful person on all levels.
Enjoy Truth Social, you bitch.
FM123
(10,053 posts)brewens
(13,538 posts)immediately, the big three, Trump, McConnel and Ryan all said Moore should drop out, then if I remember right, Bannon jumped right in the middle of things and got them to circle the wagons and try and save Moore.
What went on there right at first was it just took a few calls to confirm it was probably true. It had to be common knowledge among his peers in the Alabama judiciary. People working with guys like that always know.
CurtEastPoint
(18,620 posts)[link:?]
Meadowoak
(5,535 posts)erronis
(15,181 posts)Warpy
(111,141 posts)Father Time is one mean son of a bitch and you might as well start accepting that you, too, will look like that someday., should you live that long.
She's just a raving asshole on top of it.
Besides, Rudy was prettier.
Cha
(296,840 posts)spooky3
(34,405 posts)a sexist slur.
Tommy Carcetti
(43,153 posts)If you ever saw her Twitter feed, she called countless people that very word, for no justifiable reason. No justifiable reason at all. Time after time after time.
She reaps what she sows.
And if she were a man, she'd be a dick.
As it stands, there are even worse words than that one which some might be tempted to call her. But I'll leave it at that.
https://polititweet.org/tweet?account=22677397&tweet=1311149272998576128
shrike3
(3,485 posts)Scrivener7
(50,911 posts)You are smarter than to use her own vile statement as justification for your using the same gendered slur. You yourself pointed out at great length why she should not be your example.
It's sexist to use a gendered slur.
Response to Scrivener7 (Reply #11)
Meadowoak This message was self-deleted by its author.
Scrivener7
(50,911 posts)be OK for you to post about him using the N word. Is that what you want to be saying?
Bernardo de La Paz
(48,955 posts)... so I'd advise not going there.
Plus, appearance shaming is a cheap shot when a person's actions and statements are sufficient to attack them.
oldsoftie
(12,489 posts)Has nothing to do with any OTHER woman. Its aimed at THIS woman. Sorry.
Scrivener7
(50,911 posts)efhmc
(14,723 posts)use that term but your comment gave me a chuckle. So apropos.
Scrivener7
(50,911 posts)going on right now - and forever until now?
That would sure be nice.
But, ya know. He's sorry. So that clinches the truth of his statement.
oldsoftie
(12,489 posts)EVERYTHING is offensive or triggering or demeaning or whatever to someone. The OP didnt do anything wrong slamming ONE individual that is "slamable"
Scrivener7
(50,911 posts)I presume you feel that if a person refers to ONE black person that you dislike with the N word, it's perfectly OK. Is that what you mean to be telling us about yourself?
Also, we are all very sorry our objection to demeaning gendered language is so triggering to you.
oldsoftie
(12,489 posts)No, I'm finding the constant "offense" taken every day over the smallest of things sad not triggering. its just a symptom of the current society always looking for the offense. I wonder when we're going to be told to stop insulting Trump with any manner of fat joke; of which I've seen dozens here, because its insulting to fat people? And boy, do the people here come up with some good ones! But hey, thats what makes the world go around; difference of opinion.
Scrivener7
(50,911 posts)Which you failed to address, so I will assume that means that you DO think it's OK to use the N word when talking about ONE black guy that you really don't like.
And yes, I will agree that it is a difference of opinion.
In this case that amounts to the white guy defending the use of a slur and telling others that they have no right to tell him not to use the slur because being told not to makes him feel uncomfortable . And thus, that means that we are "always looking for the offense" when we are being slurred.
And to be honest, you do seem a little triggered.
obamanut2012
(26,046 posts)JFC what the fuck is wrong with this place now.
oldsoftie
(12,489 posts)since I was accused of "mansplaining" I guess I didn't do it very well
Response to Tommy Carcetti (Reply #6)
Hugh_Lebowski This message was self-deleted by its author.
Scrivener7
(50,911 posts)you are revealing with this post.
Response to Scrivener7 (Reply #14)
Hugh_Lebowski This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to Hugh_Lebowski (Reply #18)
Scrivener7 This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to Scrivener7 (Reply #22)
spooky3 This message was self-deleted by its author.
obamanut2012
(26,046 posts)I like to know who to avoid.
Scrivener7
(50,911 posts)a moment and not necessarily about the subject being discussed. I think this was that.
As evidenced by the self-delete.
obamanut2012
(26,046 posts)It is sexist and misogynistic as fuck, and no, Tommy, no woman "earns" being called a bitch, unless you think it's fine for Ben Carson to be called a n****r. Is that okay? Can we call Tarrio a hispanic slur? I guess it's okay Hillary is called a bitch by the GOP, because she earned IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You call one woman that, you call every woman that. You normalize it.
Congratulations for acting like a Republican.
I am so disappointed in you. You ruined everything you wrote by celebrating and doubling down on bigotry.
EmmaLee E
(169 posts)"Bitch" is normalized, and shouldn't be
True Blue American
(17,981 posts)efhmc
(14,723 posts)see what its basic meaning is and that is a deeply layered hate word with women at its core.
tenderfoot
(8,425 posts)They back off immediately.
deurbano
(2,894 posts)Butterflylady
(3,537 posts)I will let it at that.
UTUSN
(70,645 posts)Scrivener7
(50,911 posts)shrike3
(3,485 posts)Over the last few years. "I believe you," from Michelle Goldberg. A sympathetic article from the Post. (By a writer who seemed to know absolutely nothing about the context for Broaddrick's accusations.)
I myself might have been more inclined to believe her if she did not act like an operative from the very beginning.
Caliman73
(11,725 posts)What "lifestyle" is being "crammed" down anyone's throat? LGBTQ people are simply trying to live their lives just like those of us who happen to be heterosexual and cisgender are living ours. Knowing, working with, and living near LGBTQ people, I see absolutely NOTHING that would scream DIFFERENT and BAD. They grocery shop, garden, take their kids to school, and all the same things that I do with my wife and kids. They happen to be two women, or two men, or people transitioning to their authentic identity. That does not affect me in the slightest. It doesn't threaten my marriage, it doesn't threaten my identity. My children are not suddenly questioning their sexual orientation or gender identity. They don't drive down the street in "LGBTQ Pride" floats. They are not trying to paint the sidewalks and streets with Rainbow colors.
I do not understand the mindset that feels so threatened by LGBTQ people merely existing and trying to live their lives like the rest of us.
efhmc
(14,723 posts)Edited to add: interesting account signin: atensnut. Especially the nut part.
oldsoftie
(12,489 posts)Or if you're young & hot.
Not to mention there are so many fake accounts too
BradAllison
(1,879 posts)Mr. Evil
(2,825 posts)that republicans would accept and gladly live in any type of dystopian society if they didn't have any LGBTQ, black, brown or Asian people in it. They'd spend all day working turning big rocks into little rocks for $5 so long as they were surrounded by white christian republicans. Their hatred and bigotry of any humans different from them glows like a Kilauean lava flow. These monsters could care less about the horrific crimes white people have committed and continue to commit. It is sickening and it must be dealt with somehow.
Maybe we can offer them an all-expense paid move to Russia since they think it's so great. I'd bet if that happened most of them would be crying and whining to come back within a month. Fuck them!
Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)She is a liar. Starr did not buy her (ever changing) testimony.
She has demeaned any one who has leveled an allegation against the right. She was horrifically anti-LGBT and a white supremacist (in line with Nazis).
Catherine Vincent
(34,486 posts)She's definitely a deplorable. When I search certain topics, one of her tweets are shown and it's disgusting.
This woman is forever looking for attention. You would think she'd move on with her life like Paula Whatshername.
LittleGirl
(8,279 posts)Thats what 30 years of Fox spews and Rush Limbaugh have brought forth on our country. Im all for free speech until liberals are now the enemy to the right. Ive lost a classmate friend recently that spewed hatred at me for suggesting that he get vaccinated. Hes a truck driver and was rooting the Canada truckers protest so theres that. He called me a f*cking liberal that is ruining the country. Me? I want truckers to get unions and be paid a fair wage even when they are waiting at docks. He lost his job during covid so hes had two solid years of Fox spews to further warp his view of his fellow Americans. God damn shame.
ificandream
(9,335 posts)That was so appalling, and it never seemed to provoke the outrage it deserved. That an idiot with his sexual problems would bring those women to a debate like that. Hillary should have countered, but then she would have been as bad as he was. And she wasn't.
ificandream
(9,335 posts)She can get back on if she does what Twitter requests. I hope she plays tough and doesn't.
obamanut2012
(26,046 posts)Trump would be proud AF of you, Tommy.
Nice job!
efhmc
(14,723 posts)Really makes me very sad.
11 Bravo
(23,926 posts)calimary
(81,110 posts)ICK!
TheDemsshouldhireme
(172 posts)I would like to know her lifetime income off this....I imagine it's been a nice tidy sum over 30 years.
Cha
(296,840 posts)https://democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=16583986
💙💛
niyad
(113,055 posts)True Blue American
(17,981 posts)Who were still trying to make points from a one night stand, or 10 minutes with Bill Clinton. It was pitiful on their part and hateful on Trump ,considering his sordid past with prostitutes.
It was to embarrass Hillary, which made Trump a sickening piece of human flotsam!
Darkstar53142
(71 posts)... as the Mother from the Wall?