Las Vegas Review-Journal editor wants to outlaw women voting.

[Archae]

Anyone care to make any bets as to how many times this asshole has been divorced?
:grr:


Bias is not a good thing. Right? We all agree on that, don't we?

People and candidates for public office should be judged on the basis of their ideas, stance on the issues, character, experience and integrity, not on the basis of age, race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, religion or disability.

Therefore, we must repeal the 19th Amendment. Yes, the one granting suffrage to women. Because? Well, women are biased.

http://www.lvrj.com/blogs/mitchell/Time_to_repeal_the_19th_Amendment.html

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. And while we are at it, let's bring back prohibition

no sex and no booze... that will make this a very unhappy boy

:banghead:

The fact that they are voicing these things are telling.

[TransitJohn]

2. I think his ridiculous mustache makes him unhappy.

:hi:

[ShadowLiberal]

3. And this idiot hasn't been fired for writing this why? This got past editors how?

[Archae]

4. The LV Review-Journal is a dumping ground for right-wing crap.

Media Matters did an article about how bad it's got.

http://mediamatters.org/research/201003220062

[Egnever]

5. Amen to that

Its beyond ridiculous. I didn't know media matters had done an article on it. I try not to buy it but every once in a while I'll get the Sunday for the coupons.

Any article bashing Dems is front page news no matter how much they have to contort themselves, and the editorial page....I've seen more coherent writing on free republic.

[Bobbieo]

6. Because he is the editor - the photo caption says so!

[Enrique]

7. he probably would want that, but he's not saying it in this column

he's making some stupid point about that poll, and using that 19th amendment thing as a gimmick.

[Posteritatis]

8. I love that he uses the Standard Claim Of Satire Backpedal, too. (nt)

[enlightenment]

9. Umm - satire. Poorly done, but satirical.

Think about it.

He says: women shouldn't have the right to vote because they are not consistent.

Then he goes forward with examples of the poll results. In the examples, he proves ONE point: that women will consistently favor Democrats.

He disses men "men favored the attractive former beauty queen . . ."

He disses Reid with the comment "Women, on the other hand, chose Reid by 16 points, proving they’d rather vote for a woman than a male Republican."

At no point does he diss women - by his own examples, they are consistent in their support.


Poor satire, obviously, since so many people (and I live in Las Vegas and have been listening to the shrieking all afternoon) have damn near knocked themselves out with their knee-jerk reflex . . . but it is not meant seriously.

[Quantess]

10. I bet he's just an attention whore troll.

It's flamebait and he knows it. This is not worth a reaction.