Whiny Democrats Attack Tom Tillis For “Mansplaining”

This is pretty much the extent of the Dems defense of Kay Hagan.  What little record she has is pathetic and shows that she’s a dupe of Obama, rather than a representative of NC

(Politico) Thom Tillis, the Republican running for a North Carolina Senate seat that could well decide the majority in the Senate, has been pilloried since a debate last week against Sen. Kay Hagan by Democrats who see him as a condescending “man-splainer” who played into gender stereotypes.

But in his first comments on the controversy, the Republican state House speaker was unrepentant in a sit-down interview on the campaign trail, chalking up the firestorm to Democrats playing gender politics to boost Sen. Kay Hagan. “It’s just silly,” he said during a lunch stop this weekend with supporters over barbecue, fried oysters and chicken livers. “We’re talking about the future of the greatest nation on the earth, and this is what we’re going to?”

The attacks began after Tillis, in a paid advertisement, jabbed at the incumbent, a former bank vice president, saying “Math is lost on Sen. Hagan.” Then, in last week’s debate, in which the Republican appeared better prepared overall, Tillis referred to her as “Kay,” even though she continued to refer to him as “Speaker Tillis.”

“We saw women on social media in particular who were bothered by his tone and more than anything they were bothered by his record,” said Sadie Weiner, spokeswoman for Hagan.

I love how Democrats portray women as hothouse flowers who get the vapors over every perceived slight and Need To Be Protected. Good for Tillis for not falling in to the trap.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

12 Responses to “Whiny Democrats Attack Tom Tillis For “Mansplaining””

  1. Jeffery says:

    Thom wanted to show disrespect to the female US Senator from NC and he did. Mission Accomplished. His boorish behavior will strengthen the resolve of his white male supporters as well as strengthen the resolve of his opponents. Politics ain’t beanbag.

    Senator Hagan should have referred to Tillis as Tommy Boy.

  2. gitarcarver says:

    So, “politics ain’t beanbag” and yet you and other liberals are complaining that a candidate referred to his opponent by her name?

    That’s rich.

  3. Jeffery says:

    As I said, Tommy Boy recognizes his base and how they respond to his boorish behavior.

    Just because politics ain’t beanbag doesn’t immunize Tommy Boy against criticism.

  4. gitarcarver says:

    As I said, Tommy Boy recognizes his base and how they respond to his boorish behavior.

    There you go again labeling the act of calling someone by their given name “boorish.”

    In what world is that the case?

    Just because politics ain’t beanbag doesn’t immunize Tommy Boy against criticism.

    And just because you open the flap beneath your nose doesn’t mean the criticizism is justified, or doesn’t show that liberals want different standards applied to others than they want applied to themselves.

    Face it, you and others are whining like a 3 year old because someone said a woman’s name.

    Sheez.

  5. Jeffery says:

    Willful Ignorance, gitarcarver is thy name. I hope you’re just playing dumb – I understand it’s de rigueur for conservapundits, but it’s still unbecoming in real life. Knock it off.

    Look up “honorific”, then go and sin no more.

    Rhetorical question (I’d hate to burn my eyes reading anymore of your silliness): The last time you were before the judge for public urination or teabagging in public, did you call the judge “Beauregarde” or did you refer to him as “Your Honor” of “Judge”?

    Tommy Boy’s lack of respect for the office (and paycheck) he hopes to gain is a political tactic, intended to energize his base.

  6. Gotta love Jeff: he’s having a fit over how mean it is to use Kay’s first name, then throwing around tons of slurs.

    No one gets upset over stopping Mr. for Bush, Ckinton, Obama, etc. No one is bothered by calling Michelle Obama just Michelle and Laura Bush Laura. Hey, remember how liberals called her Pickles? No one is bothered by simply saying Hillary.

    Really, this kerfuffle is just a bunch of b itchy liberals who need something to whine abiut.

  7. gitarcarver says:

    Willful Ignorance, gitarcarver is thy name. I hope you’re just playing dumb – I understand it’s de rigueur for conservapundits, but it’s still unbecoming in real life. Knock it off.

    Awwww….. is poor widdle Jeffie’s feelings getting hurt because someone called a person by their real name? And Jeffy thinks that is “ignorance?”

    Get a clue, whiner.

    Look up “honorific”, then go and sin no more.

    I did. Now you go look it up and see when honorific titles are to be used. HINT: it ain’t all the time.

    Rhetorical question (I’d hate to burn my eyes reading anymore of your silliness): The last time you were before the judge for public urination or teabagging in public, did you call the judge “Beauregarde” or did you refer to him as “Your Honor” of “Judge”?

    Changing the parameters of the situation Jeffery?

    So when Hagan’s husband calls her “Kay,” is he being disrespectful as well? Her children? Her neighbors?

    Is a neighbor of Hagen “disrespectful” when they say “hey Kay, wanna come over for a cookout and watch the game?”

    Tommy Boy’s lack of respect for the office (and paycheck) he hopes to gain is a political tactic, intended to energize his base.

    If that is your position, then why are you referring to him as “Tommy Boy?” Doesn’t he deserve the same respect that you would give to Hagen?

    Or more hypocrisy from you?

    I know it won’t matter to you, but I was was involved in a series of debates for offices for the last election. Candidates – including incumbents – took part in debates for the office of judge, commissioner, Senate, and Representative. No one ever worried about making sure the incumbent was addressed by some title. No one got their feelings hurt. People would see such a thing as what it is – a distraction from the issues as well as being childish whiners.

    As you said, politics is not beanbags and yet here you are acting like a little child over a person being addressed by their given name.

    Try these to wipe away your fake tears of “outrage.”

  8. Jeffery says:

    Teach, Teach, Teach…

    Hardly a fit now, is it? If I were debating Mrs. Bush, that is how I’d refer to her. Out of respect. Even though she got away with killing her friend in high school.

    If you were interviewing Obama would you address him as Mr. Obama, Mr. President, President Obama or would you call him Barry? Honorifics are for formal use, like in debates, not for personal use (although most moms and dads insist on not being called by their first names by their children). Do you think Tillis and Hagan are close personal friends who BBQ together and go on family picnics?

    It’s about respect, and Thommy Boy wanted to make certain he showed his base, in a very public forum, that he had none for a US Senator from North Carolina.

    Do you find it disrectful that I refer to Speaker Tillis (as Senator Hagan referred to him) as Thommy Boy? Funny how that works.

    Anyway, you’re just being ultra sensitive about the playful nickname, Thommy Boy.

  9. Jeffery says:

    And of course the key for both campaigns in this too close to call match is to energize their base and get out the vote. The voters have a clear choice.

    It’s a bit surprising that in a conservative state, and with a communistic Dem prez who is unpopular and whose policies are unpopular, that the race would even be close.

    Tillis is a rising star and a conservative darling in NC. What gives?

  10. gitarcarver says:

    Do you find it disrectful that I refer to Speaker Tillis (as Senator Hagan referred to him) as Thommy Boy? Funny how that works.

    Yeah, it is funny how you find something to be wrong so you do it.

    Anyway, you’re just being ultra sensitive about the playful nickname, Thommy Boy.

    Wait, you are tryigng to complain that people that are showing how hypocritical and devoid of morals and ethics you are “ultra sensitive?”

    You own stance condemns you and your actions, but you won’t see it.

  11. Jeffery says:

    You’re playing dumb, right? No one, not even a right-winger, can have zero awareness.

    I mock Tillis as he mocked Senator Hagan. To you, mocking the Senator in a public meeting is OK, but mocking Tillis online is catastrophic. See how that works?

    Buh-bye

  12. gitarcarver says:

    No one, not even a right-winger, can have zero awareness.

    And yet you seem to have zero morals and awareness. You must be the exception that proves your own rule.

    I mock Tillis as he mocked Senator Hagan.

    Really?

    “Thommy Boy” is the same as “Kay?”

    If there was a similarity, can you show me where Tillis referred to Hagan as “Kay Girl?” If that happened, you would have a point. Instead, you are still trying to take offense at a person being addressed by their given name.

    To you, mocking the Senator in a public meeting is OK, but mocking Tillis online is catastrophic.

    Oh. I get it. You want names to be given in context of the situation – like I originally said.

    That’s fine except in any debate, there is no rule that says how one show or must address the other person or side.

    So once again, we see you fabricating outrage where adults know there is none.

    See how that works?

    Yes, I see how it works. You just proved that you are a hypocrite with no morals. It works great.

    Buh-bye

    Buh bye little hypocrite! Buh bye little man with no morals or ethics!

Bad Behavior has blocked 10349 access attempts in the last 7 days.