God, I am getting SO sick of the term "Latte Liberal"...

[Bicoastal]

...anyone using it non-sarcastically should feel SO proud they've managed to take a Limbaugh stereotype and mainstream it into a catchphrase for Democrats to bludgeon each other with...:eyes:

[Kool Kitty]

1. Thanks.

That phrase pisses me off, too. I am a liberal and I like latte. So sue me.

[AZ Criminal JD]

41. Not going to sue you. You just can't win elections.

[Kool Kitty]

82. That's okay, because I'm not running.

That's what you meant, right, bama?

[AZ Criminal JD]

85. No, and you know that.

The San Francisco elitist crowd that Obama caters to can't win national elections. Never have, never will.

[Kool Kitty]

88. God, I was kidding.

You need a sense of humor. I'm not an idiot-I know what you meant.

[AZ Criminal JD]

90. Humor goes into a black hole when you enter GD:P

[Kool Kitty]

91. Well, please pardon me.

I wasn't aware of that rule.

[Hissyspit]

2. It's so stupid and embarassing. Lattes can be bought at McDonald's and Dunkin' Donuts

If appreciating a drink with foreign origins and originally appreciated by educated people is such a horrible thing then why can you buy one in almost any small town now?

Malvern freakin' Arkansas, a town in the geographic center of the country, a town built on the brick industry, has a new Starbucks.

[MADem]

19. But once upon a time, they couldn't. That's a newer development.

The term was used to describe people with sufficient disposable income to routinely afford pricy coffee...when Starbucks were slightly less ubiquitous and had a bit more cachet than they do now.

Hey, it's a step up from Limousine liberal...

[Hissyspit]

37. Once upon a time poor people in the U.S. couldn't afford light bulbs.

But light bulb liberal would have been just as ridiculous. The OP is addressing that fact that people are still seriously using 'Latte Liberal' as some kind of legitimate political analysis.

[MADem]

38. The analysis might not be to your liking, but it is out there. And it has been for YEARS.

This isn't a "new" term, not by a long shot. It is a label that the GOP use, but they've been using it for several years now.

I don't understand why people here get all excited and angry about it, like it came to their attention just yesterday or something. Every couple of weeks, I see one of these griping threads about a term that has been in use for quite a while now.

The second link is to an article is by a college student who wrote the column two years ago:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=latte+liberal

http://media.www.studlife.com/media/storage/paper337/news/2006/07/25/Forum/What-You.Can.Learn.From.The.latte.Liberal-2133840.shtml

Comparing a light bulb to a latte, though, is a bit silly. If you couldn't afford a light bulb, you were probably using gaslight or kerosene. You couldn't afford electricity, either.

For some people, a couple of bucks for a cup of coffee is too much to spend, and those lattes are "luxury" items. To pretend that isn't true is to be out of touch with the fact that there are poor people in this country who don't drink morning lattes so they can, say, afford to pay the light bill.

Now, if you challenge the GOP definition (see the first link) of "latte liberal," that's fine. Go right ahead. But good luck getting the term to go away--the number of people who are "upset" by it on this thread tells me that it's a sore point for some--and the GOP love sore points.

I don't drink those oversweetened, fluffy and frothy lattes, (massive things, the equivalent of four or five cappuchinos with a whole load of crap in them you wouldn't get at a bar in Italy) so the term doesn't phase me at all. We make coffee at home, and it's inexpensive, and good, too.

[Warren DeMontague]

45. Right, and the important thing is to have a catchy label, so you know who to hate.

Don't forget about "prius drivers", "birkenstock wearers", or the "San Francisco brie and cheese set", wink wink nudge nudge.:eyes:

[MADem]

50. Well, you're determined to be angry, and blame me. I don't see that as the "important thing"--you

do, apparently, and you're pushing that on me, simply because I point out that there actually are people here in the US who can't routinely afford lattes. For some, they ARE luxury items.

As I said elsewhere in this curious thread, the term has been around for years, yet every few weeks, there's a thread here where someone gets all hot under the collar about it--like it's a brand-spanking-new term.

I think there are more important issues in the world than the silly names that the GOP come up with, like this one, that they came up with YEARS ago. Issues like hunger and poverty. Like educational standards, and health care. Like safety nets for kids and seniors.

I honestly think those things are more important than worrying about what word some fat Republican uses to try to insult you. I don't drink lattes, so I don't worry about it overmuch. I suggest that letting it roll off your back might be a good strategy.

[Warren DeMontague]

53. I'm not worried about the divisive bullshit that comes out of the GOP. I'm used to that.

What bothers me is seeing important constituencies in the Democratic Party trashed by other (ostensible) Democrats, because they're thought to be standing in the way of Queen Hillary's inevitability train.

[MADem]

54. There you go, with the "Queen Hillary" bullshit.

That's why people use the latte term--you insult the people, many of whom are working class, regular folks, who support that "Queen" and don't see her as a "Queen." They think she speaks for them, she will stand up for them, and she will fight for them. And they aren't "stupid" either--they know how to make a connection. She's got a built-in advisor in the family, and two heads are better than one--especially when those people supporting the "Queen" remember that they were kings and queens of their own castles back in the day, before BushCo drove the economy into the ground.

You're the one looking down your nose and dividing the party with that Queen crap.

You shouldn't wear that shoe, because it doesn't fit a Democrat.

[Warren DeMontague]

60. Oh, give me a fucking break. Hillary-supporting pundits have ADMITTED that she made a mistake by

basing her early campaign on pretty much declaring to the rest of the party that she was the "inevitable" nominee, that latte-sucking Democrats such as myself who might be concerned about little, meaningless bullshit (like, say, her IWR vote) ought to just get used to the idea that the nomination was HERS from the word "go".

This is the kind of thinking that calls Bill Richardson a "judas" for supporting Obama but not for participating in the primary process running AGAINST Hillary- because the primary process was supposed to be perfunctory and for show, only.

I particularly like how people like me obviously must not be "regular, working class folks", ourselves .... cough. cough. Want to know how many years I spent working at min. wage or just above it with no health insurance?

Feh.

[MADem]

63. Well, you stay good and mad, then. It seems to "sustain" you in some perverse fashion.

How dare Clinton campaign! How dare she assert!

You wanted her to stay home, stand by her man, and bake cookies, I guess!

Feh, indeed.

[Warren DeMontague]

64. Yeah, that's it.

Um, actually, my opposition to her has nothing to do with me wanting her to "bake cookies". Guess your spidey-sense missed the mark on that one, just as it missed the mark on me not being a "regular working American". :eyes:

If Hillary Clinton circa 1973 or 1992 or even 1999 was running, for me, this would be a VASTLY different story. (You know, the Hillary Clinton who would have told Mellon-Scaife to go fuck himself rather than sit down for a pleasant chat) But her actions since she got to the Senate- PARTICULARLY voting for the Iraq War and refusing to acknowledge said vote was a mistake- compounded with the rock-bottom vile campaign she's run (where her campaign is reduced to chucking tired right-wing bullshit about flag pins and scary unpatriotic pastors and 'latte liberals'... er, witness this thread) ... well, like many others here, I'll vote for her in the unlikely event that she somehow ends up with the nomination, but I won't be terribly enthused about it.

But, of course, it must just be about misogyny. You know, I "want her to bake cookies". Here's a nice thought experiment- how about we put Barbara Boxer on the ticket with Obama? Then we'll see how outraged/upset misogynist cookie-pushers such as myself are at the prospect of a strong woman succeeding in the political arena.

Here's a clue: We're NOT. It has zip diddly shit to do with Hillary's gender, and everything to do with the compromises she seems all too willing to make for "political expediency".

[MADem]

67. Funny. It's OK for Obama to "reach across the aisle" and "Big Tent it" with homophobes and

virulently anti-abortion politicians, going on Hannity's show http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uT-z9q6E_3k to explain himself and try to get his ass out of a jam of his own making, after he said he wouldn't touch Fox with a ten foot pole http://blog.washingtonpost.com/sleuth/2007/01/obama.html .... but Clinton sits down with the editorial board of a big paper IN a primary state, DURING a primary contest, with the express purpose of reaching an audience of newspaper readers who are also potential voters, and all of a sudden, she's UNFORGIVEN.

Please. Give me a break. That's a great big stinking load of double-standard bullshit and you know it. Funny how the fellah can get away with changing HIS pretty little mind without repercussions, but you're up Clinton's ass like a junebug for the exact same behavior--the horrible "crime" of dealing with "the enemy" to achieve a greater goal.

And that's telling. You don't see it in yourself, how you excuse one, but not the other....but step back a few paces, take a good hard UGLY look, and there "it" is.

Iron my shirt?

And he doesn't go on Fox just the ONCE--he's going BACK, doing it AGAIN, this very weekend: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,352513,00.html

Funny how those pesky political considerations--like, oh, say--TROLLING FOR VOTES--can compel one to change their tune, isn't it?

But gee, it's "OK" if Obama changes HIS mind. He's a fellah, after all!

When Clinton does it, though, why...she's a ... a .... traitorous JEZEBEL!


Go ahead and put Barbara Boxer on the ticket with Obama. It's an idiotic idea. Guess how many states he'd win? California--MAYBE. But maybe NOT. Illinois, sure. But not too many others.

You want a third Bush term? That's a SWELL idea there.

You apparently don't understand that Boxer-- while a fine Senator and politician, and one of my personal favorites-- is "too liberal" for a national ticket, and she's also a lightning rod.

You also don't understand that two Senators, both without executive experience AT ALL, on a single ticket is a recipe for abject ticket failure. The only reason JFK and LBJ worked is because LBJ was the most powerful "executive" in Congress, EVER, as the "Master of the Senate" Majority Leader. He didn't just know how the Hill worked, he OWNED it. He was, quite literally, the "exception that proves the rule."

[Warren DeMontague]

72. LBJ was also deeply flawed. His compromises, particularly pertaining to war, were his undoing.

You know that.

Leaving aside my personal preferences, from a political standpoint I don't think Boxer should go on the ticket; if for no other reason than the Gropenhauser would pick her replacement. We like and are very proud of her, here.

(I actually think Bill "Judas" Richardson would be the best bet politically for the Obama ticket- executive experience, regionally and demographically, etc.)

But your argument, if you can call it that, seems to center on this idea that all opposition to HRC must be based on the fact that she's a woman. After all, why ELSE would anyone not want her to be the nominee?

But if it was just about her being a woman, wouldn't ALL women be equally unacceptable?

Look, either I'm a misogynist who hates and is tewwified of women, or I'm a liberal California loony who, given my druthers, would stick the wrong woman on the Presidential ticket. But I think you'll be hard pressed to argue that I'm BOTH.

There seems to be a lot of that coming from the HRC campaign. Wait- Obama is cozying up to anti-choicers? Wasn't it just a couple months ago that the manufactured outrage machine was cranked up to 11 over his "extremist" pro-choice statements? You know, when your people were coming fucking unglued because he allegedly said a teenager having an unplanned pregnancy was being "punished"?

That crafty, evil Obama- too pro-choice AND too anti-choice.. at the SAME TIME!

Whatever. I've said I didn't like the McClurkin thing with Obama. That was an early stumbling block to my support. But weighed against everything Hillary has done- like, again, her IWR vote and her REFUSAL to acknowledge it as a mistake- it pales in comparison.

[MADem]

73. I agree with Bill Maher on that score.

He said Obama-Richardson was "too down with the brown." Consequently, it will be a nonstarter ticket on the national level. And, FWIW, he supports Obama and most of his girlfriends are black. It was an analysis based on reality, not an endorsement of that reality.

I don't believe that "all opposition to HRC must be based on the fact that she is a woman." What I do believe is that sexism plays a role in this childish "hatred" I see on this board, and sexist language and insults permeate the discussions here to the point that any free flow is stymied. And then, when one points it out, there's that whole "wide eyed innocent" routine. "Oh, I meant NOTHING by it." Uh huh.

Today I responded to a juvenile asshole who discussed, with no shame and quite proudly, a "rhetorical gang bang" of Clinton, with one of those little "ha ha" rolling men accompanying his stupid little post. Here--on DU. A clueless, 26 year old 'urban' young man, so he says, with the brainpower of a ten year old, apparently (and probably the genitalia as well, based on the undercurrent of unreasonable anger expressed). Didn't they teach the little shithead any Women's History at all in school? No gender/sexual harassment training, ever? Certainly no MANNERS, I'd wager. Where is that hostility coming from? Why is it "OK" to express it?

I'll be the first to admit, I've been "sensitized" to much of this offensive language, as well as the more subtle, insideous code wording that pops up when talking about both Clinton as a woman and Obama as a black man as a result of this campaign. It's rather sad that this kind of shit language and characterizations continue to be featured on a forum that touts itself as being the place where people with "progressive" ideals come to support Democratic candidates.

These words and phrases of denigration don't just pop up by accident. They aren't innocent double entendres, or errors. They're designed to inflict damage. They have to be taught. And they're coming out of the mouths of people in their late teens and early twenties who cluelessly call themselves Democrats, and THAT is the saddest thing of all.

[Warren DeMontague]

84. Sexism exists, and it exists in some of the shit that is thrown at Hillary Clinton. For sure.

And racism exists, and it exists in some of the stuff that I see thrown at Obama. I've seen some jaw-dropping shit in that regard. Hell, I only changed my avatar to an Obama one a couple months ago, and within a week I had Hillary supporters saying things like "You needs to get edumacated" to me. :wtf:

So, yes, there is an undercurrent of sexism to SOME opposition to Hillary; like the example you cite. I wouldn't use that kind of language about Senator Clinton, and I wouldn't consider that within the bounds of acceptable, civilized discourse. Likewise, some opposition to Obama around here has a clear racist undercurrent. Some of it is just plain fucking mean and nasty. I've never put ANYONE on "ignore" here, but I've come as close as ever in the past few months. I had a Hillary supporter tell me- and I'm someone who is full out in favor of a SPHC system, mind you- that she hoped I 'got very sick and had no health insurance'... because I disagreed with someone else on whether or not Hillary's plan was actually a "single payer" plan. (it's not. Only Kucinich has advocated that, unfortunately) So there are folks on the HRC side who have lowered themselves to the Michael Savage "I hope you die" level. And certainly some Obama people have behaved abysmally, too.

I'm ready for this shit-fest to be over, frankly.

Oh- and as for Bill Richardson; you may be right. Nevertheless, the guy has exec. experience, he's well-placed regionally, etc. And he's smart. But if what we need on the Obama ticket above all else is a white guy, I say Russ Feingold. (I know, I'm a liberal loony that way.)

[MADem]

87. Hopefully, the vitriol will blow over, eventually, and all the racist and sexist trolls will leave.

Russ Feingold is too liberal, and so they say, has a "McGreavey problem." Dunno if it is true, but if I heard Washington whispers about it, you know the GOP would trot THAT shit out in a heartbeat.

I'm no good at picking VPs. I always seem to get it wrong. I NEVER would have thought "Lieberman" actually....

[shraby]

3. I'm a liberal and have never had

a "latte". What is it anyway? Mineral, plant or animal? Do you drink it, wear it, walk on it or eat it? Those who use the term are trying to talk down to most of us bumpkins.

[TahitiNut]

6. Coffee made with hot milk ... a barista thiing.

I'm more of a Mocha Liberal, myself.

[shraby]

29. No wonder! I'm not a coffee drinker.

[DangerousRhythm]

66. Mmm, mocha.

I do love a good latte but I rarely get to drink them, as I'm really not a Starbucks type of person who drinks coffee a whole lot. Once every couple of years anyway. I find the term latte liberal really ridiculous, which is why I made this button.



It cracks me up. I have it on my purse and it tells people hey, you may consider me a "latte liberal" but hell, I have a vote too. It's that whole "coast people don't count" mentality that pisses me off. I'm a New Yorker and sorry, but someone from the "heartland" doesn't have a vote that means more than mine does just because they're more authentically American or whatever the idea is. Y'know?

[JeffR]

4. Please don't let it make you bitter.

;-)

[napoleon_in_rags]

5. AMEN!!! THANK YOU.

Its driving me nuts too. Its not a sign of wealth or privilege to consume a beverage at Starbucks. Its a sign of privilege to drive huge wasteful cars or own many properties or vacation in the EU.

[mcctatas]

7. Really,

if they want to get it right they have to use the proper term "Half-caf soy foam venti latte". Silly baughbots!

[Norrin Radd]

with a whisper of cinnamon

[smalll]

8. It hurts because it's true.

Is there any irony in the fact that someone named "Bicoastal" demurs at the latte liberal label?

Lessons for Obamatrons:
1) The "base" of the Democratic Party is the working class, not Moveon.
2) Don't expect to be able to insult that base and win in November.
3) The Democratic Party used to exist to help the common man, not cause him troubles (viz, raise the cigarette tax, force parents to keep their kids in special (expensive) car seats until 8 years old, institute garbage police to enforce the recycling hair-shirt on American homes, ban plastic bags from the supermarket, etc. etc.)
4) Rich people do not suddenly become "good guys" because they wear Birkenstocks rather than wingtips.

[Kool Kitty]

12. Like I said in my first post, I am a liberal and I like latte.

Why is this considered an insult? And it doesn't hurt, it pisses me off because it sounds like something Hannity or Limbaugh would say about us. I am not an Obamatron, but I support Obama. I am a working class 55 year old woman. I still believe that the Democratic party exists to help the common man and woman. I will vote the staight Democratic ticket in November, whoever gets the nomination. What lesson would you like me to learn?

[Norrin Radd]

24. Speaking of Hannity and his ilk,

I'm curious which expensive, posh restaurants he's dined at in New York that most people couldn't afford? Talk about elitist...

[Kool Kitty]

30. Exactly. Funny how that works, isn't it?

[mcctatas]

13. ...

:rofl:

oh wait, you're serious...
what is this, reverse elitism, you're only a true democrat if you drink black coffee and budweiser? I've got news for you, the democratic party is multi-ethnic, mult-religous, and accepting of all types of people, if you want to belong to a party that shuns people based on petty differences (and really, what is more petty than your beverage choice), go join the pukes.

:puke:

[leftstreet]

15. wtf are you talking about?

The HRC campaign created the meme (and the M$M ran with it) that HRC is the labor friendly candidate. What bullshit. They only said it hoping to make it come true.

HRC's base is older white females who pick and choose their feel-goody candidates the same way they choose their new granite countertops.

Obama is bringing out the working class vote.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[smalll]

27. "I used to live in LA, now I live in Brooklyn" LOL

Brooklyn has been the new home of trustafarians and other alterna-richies ever since this new century began. Where do you live exactly? Williamsburg? "BoCoCa"?

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MattBaggins]

47. I usually try to refrain from this

but i would like to second his big fat fuck you

I came from a small town where I graduated with 35 other people. Don't presume to preach to me about the common man.

[datopbanana]

49. small = hateful little man

[Shakespeare]

62. smalll = small "L" = libertarian

All is clear now.

[Warren DeMontague]

65. Cough. I self-identify as a small l libertarian, & a left-libertarian. So do a lot of people here.

I know some people here like to wave that word around like it's dog doo on a stick, but this chucklefuck doesn't speak for us.

[Shakespeare]

70. yes, I know that

And have no problem with that`at ALL; difference is, you're not an ass. ;-)

[Warren DeMontague]

71. Thanks.

But perhaps you just don't know me well enough. ;)

[Hippo_Tron]

36. Yea and we used to be pro-segregation too, the working class loved us then

Maybe we should run George Wallace's corpse in '08. He'd get 100% of the "Reagan Democrats" I'm sure.

[Warren DeMontague]

42. So... what you're REALLY pissed off about is cigarette taxes, car seats for kids, and recycling?

Well, that certainly explains some shit.

[MattBaggins]

46. I am a liberal

I am working class and moveon
I enjoy a latte now and then. Do not expect to insult me and win.

[Shakespeare]

61. Ah, a libertarian!!!

Explains SO much.

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JI7]

9. yup, it belongs with welfare queen, limousine liberal

and all the other crap started by limpballs and other wingnuts.

[Raine]

10. I like Lattes

so anyone who uses that as a way to insult me can go fuck themself. x(

[stratomagi]

11. Funny thing

When a friend and I were canvassing for Obama he went into a Starbucks to get a coffee. He was a little new to canvassing but he was about to go up to doors with the cup in hand. And I was like way to go reinforcing a stereotype! I had him abandon the cup as he was going to doors just because the caricature would've been too much.

[stratomagi]

14. I like Chai lattes

am I a hopeless case?

[JI7]

16. i like pepsi and dr.pepper

[quantass]

17. but..but..Obama's Wyoming win was attributed to Latte-drinking Liberal Black Cowboys

We thank you all, our Starbuck heehaw brothas!

[crankychatter]

18. In response to "Freedom Fries" Gore Vidal said... (rant inlcluded)

"The French make wonderful cheese. America makes wonderful plastic, to be wrapped around BAD cheese." G.Vidal

I roast my own, fair trade, India Monsooned Malabar and blend it with other fair trade beans from around the globe... I brew up Espresso that blows Starbucks OUT of the water...(the people that want to trademark the name "Ethiopia/and I HOPE you're boycotting them)...

...and I do it for under a dollar per cup.

I'm a construction guy... catfish belly white, red-necked, Southern by heritage, gun toting, trailer trash, "never had no money, never will"... Disabled Veteran, Conscientious Objector, Saul Alinsky Democrat, unrepentant 60's radical with an African American - Native American -ALL AMERICAN FAMILY.

Anally retentive, demographic scriveners, slaving for the "divide and conquer" bullshit artists of the corporate elite... can kiss my red white and blue, hard working Ass.

[MattBaggins]

48. F'in eh brother

They can take their "latte liberal" moniker and shove it up their "I'm blue collar therefor better than you" elitist asses.

[2rth2pwr]

20. Limosine Liberal better?

[Kool Kitty]

21. Not really. How about just plain ole' liberal?

We should be proud to be liberal. All these phrases remind me of Rush.

[mcctatas]

26. Come on...

regardless of who you support, shouldn't we all reject these rush approved stereotypes of each other? Attack Obama's positions all you want, hell, you can even go ahead and insult his supporters, but when you get your ad hominem attack talking points from rush and deploy them against other democrats, you are really kind of an embarrasment...
:eyes:

[Warren DeMontague]

44. Certainly better than a "can't even spell the crap I spew correctly" liberal. nt

[2rth2pwr]

57. You hav sumthin agin unedumacated white folk?

[Warren DeMontague]

58. Yes.

It's all part of my latte-sucking, prius-driving, birkenstock wearing agenda.

[Scooter24]

23. I have no problem with someone refering to me as a "latte liberal"

I admit I come from an affluent family and have substantial income, however when I support a candidate it's not just for what I think they will do for me but what I feel that they can do for the country as a whole.

Today, my boyfriend and I each donated the maximum allowed by law, $2300, to Obama. In doing so we are hopeful that his policies will greatly affect those who are most desperately in need. This includes lowering taxes, making medical care affordable for everyone, fixing our education system, reviving our struggling economy, etc. I would also like to see some relief for my business in helping me keep my insurance costs down for my employees which are increasing at an astronomical rate.

So I gladly wear that label not as a means to self-congratulate myself, but because I know that my money will be used to put a candidate in office who I feel will not only give back to me, but also those who are most in need.

[Avalon6]

25. I hate latte and I'm one!

[cliffordu]

28. Quad shots of espresso, black and hot as the asphalt in Austin.....

A little sugar. Slam it down.

MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

[SunsetDreams]

31. What's the big idea???? Did you have to trigger my sensitivities like that??

:beer: yummyyyy

:hi:

[Zambero]

32. How about "Cappucino Conservative"?

All that extra foam in the cup is a perfect match for the vacuous brain of the imbiber!

[pansypoo53219]

34. am i latte liberal, if

i make my own 8:00 coffee and put 1/2 & 1/2 in it?

and i hate starbucks?

[anonymous171]

35. It's just a clintonian triangulation attempt to split the party apart.

[Kitty Herder]

39. I'm a Maxwell House liberal. I like lattes, but I can't afford them very damned often.

[ccharles000]

40. I hate the term.

I also hate coffee.

[JackintheGreen]

43. Rush is probably getting tired of

fat-ass dipshit drug-addled republican motherfucker

But I never tire of saying it.

[Sapphocrat]

51. Yeah, that's pretty nasty shit.

Almost as bad as "white trash," wouldn't ya say?

[Spazito]

75. Both "white trash" or "trailer trash" and "latte liberal" are equally

disgusting, imo. Expressions like these are being used to stereotype and denigrate people so as to influence others to think negatively about them.

It reflects more poorly on those who use those expressions than it does on those being denigrated, imo.

[NMMNG]

76. Right

"Latte Liberals", so to speak, are so downtrodden and oppressed unlike their "white/trailer trash" counterparts. Tell me another one. There's simply no comparison and to claim they're equally denigrating in any way is preposterous.

[Spazito]

77. I see you have no problem stereotyping some but not others....

that's unfortunate. The term "latte liberal" has been used on this site to stereotype those who support Obama while "white trash" has been used to stereotype Clinton supporters. Gosh, how could I be so wrong to believe both phrases are denigrating and demeaning and do nothing but create hostility on both sides.

[NMMNG]

78. I'm not denigrating anybody

I love lattes, though I normally make them at home. I'm just scoffing at the notion that so-called "latte liberals" (no matter who they're voting for) are in any way oppressed or marginalized as are "white/trailer trash", which is what you seemed to be implying in your former post.

And if you're so worried about people creating hostility, maybe you should call off the attack dogs. I've certainly never used "latte liberal" or anything like it to describe Obama voters. Go talk to Rhandi Rhodes and every Obama supporter here who insists on claiming that Hillary voters are old, uneducated white trailer-trash women who don't know jack shit.

[Spazito]

80. My point was stereotyping using phrases as noted above is

denigrating and demeaning, period. I don't recall taking one side over the other in the stereotyping battle so I can only say I criticized all the "attack dogs" who choose to stereotype.

I can only assume you took great umbrage when Carville referred to Paula Jones as "white/trailer trash" as well?

I can only assume you had no problem with Limbaugh/Hannity et al referred to Democrats as "limousine Liberals" which was the former terminology to denigrate before the newest terminology "latte Liberals"?

Both of the examples I gave disgusted me at the time and still do.

[NMMNG]

81. I don't like either of the terms

And yes, I was as disgusted when Paula Jones was called "White/trailer trash" and when the RW asshats referred constantly to "limousine/latte liberals" (latte liberals has been around for a while). Despite what some think we LGBT people don't all run around making up things to express "faux outrage" over for effect.

[Spazito]

83. Thank you for your response, I don't like either of the terms as well...

and that really was the intent behind my first response. There are very legitimate issues to be raised on all sides without the use of denigrating terminology, imo.

I have to ask, though, where your last sentence fits into the discussion we have been having? I certainly have made no assertion about the LGBT community at all, in this discussion OR in any other.

[Jamastiene]

52. Only rich liberals can afford latte.

The rest of us just drink Maxwell House when it goes on sale. I hear rich people even put chocolate in coffee sometimes and call it mocha. I hear it costs a bunch more too. Idiots. Don't you know you can buy a whole bottle of chocolate syrup at the grocery store and squirt a little into regular coffee. Oh, wait, y'all got money to burn and love doing it publicly for show. I forgot. :rofl:

[MadBadger]

55. I think Jon Stewart agrees...did you watch last night's show?

I think he was arguing this same point to Howard Fineman. What makes the heartland voters more "real" or normal than the rest of us? I think he was asking why so many of us are demeaned as Northeast Liberals, or Latte Liberals, but heartland voters are sacred.

[dana_b]

89. I love him.

I saw that and cheered when he said that.

[merh]

56. Sorry, coming latte to this thread ...

:hide:












but why all the foaming, too much caffine? :hangover:

[WinkyDink]

59. I'm a Diet Coke Liberal.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

69. Is that a rung down from "Limousine Liberal"?

An old term that you don't hear so much anymore.

:hi:

[formernaderite]

74. do you prefer limousine liberal?

at least latte...describes an affluent but not super rich liberal. I guess I'd describe myself as a typical long hair hippy liberal :]
But come on...I've met latte liberals...they lecture me on the benefits of almost everything lol they're worse than limousine liberals cause I see them everywhere...and I'm not rich enough to hang with the limos.

[PatGund]

79. I hate it too....

....because I HATE coffee.....

[Tribetime]

86. latay, lauty....I can't spell it , let alone drink it

[McCamy Taylor]

92. It is a very stupid divide and conquer term.

[tigervalentine]

93. I've never had a latte.

Don't even know what a latte is. Does that make me an non-elitist?