LaxPower Back-Up Stick

kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:58 pm JHU and others are twisting in the wind to defend Hill, like so many around here defend Trump

Let's talk facts.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... rn/601198/

By her own account, Hill engaged in a profound breach of responsibility by engaging in a sexual relationship with someone who was working for her—and by doing so while running for public office. “The mistakes I made that brought me to this moment will haunt me for the rest of my life,” she said this afternoon in her final speech on the House floor. Members of Congress are no stranger to bad behavior. But in a time when Americans are remapping the difficult landscape of sex and power in the workplace, it would be willfully naive to shove aside the uncomfortable dynamics of Hill’s relationship with a staffer who was almost a decade her junior, and a recent college graduate.

It’s comical to watch the ‘Party of Women’ twist themselves to excuse grossly unethical power dynamic violations. This defense of Party at all cost is what I thought some said Republicans are guilty of.

I mean, would a little consistency hurt?

foreverlax wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:13 pm

kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:58 pm JHU and others are twisting in the wind to defend Hill, like so many around here defend Trump

Let's talk facts.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... rn/601198/

By her own account, Hill engaged in a profound breach of responsibility by engaging in a sexual relationship with someone who was working for her—and by doing so while running for public office. “The mistakes I made that brought me to this moment will haunt me for the rest of my life,” she said this afternoon in her final speech on the House floor. Members of Congress are no stranger to bad behavior. But in a time when Americans are remapping the difficult landscape of sex and power in the workplace, it would be willfully naive to shove aside the uncomfortable dynamics of Hill’s relationship with a staffer who was almost a decade her junior, and a recent college graduate.

Maybe it would have been better if she had just paid off a porn star.

If the “porn star” was an employee of Trump’s, you’d have a point.

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:27 pm

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:15 pm You have a very benevolent and not-unexpected view of the young Democrat's (lack of) ego, and a further not-unexpected waving of the hand at grossly unethical power dynamics in sexual relationships, provided the offender is a Democrat. If you think Katie resigned from her life's goal of being a congresswoman because 'she didn't want to be a distraction', you must be her mom. Most congresspeople who resign resign only when and because the s is about to hit the fan; they actually love being 'distractions', anything for cameras.

But, I suspect you are smarter than this and are merely playing your expected partisan part. A hunch says had this been Jim Jordan with two female staffers, you'd be in a frenzied mob rush to execute him.

Oh, no. You got it all wrong. What jhu72 is doing is applying your "Trump standards" to this lady.

You see, none of us believe what the Congresswoman says. Not even her admitted affair. After all, gee whiz, it's like totally impossible to tell what really happened, you know? You just can't believe what the Congresswoman admitted on live TV, right?

So we're going to not believe the affair happened in the first place.

So we're all set, right?

Uhhh, did you miss the dozens of photos and hundreds of texts (one of which the employee says she is ‘afraid’ of Katie)? Isn’t that actual evidence? Not enough for you, a fan? Do you require witnessing a live act where you sit bedside and watch the ‘alleged’ behavior? Tell us your standard so we can skip to the end.

In other news, aren’t you excusing grossly unethical behavior because Orange Man Bad?

These Hill/Trump defenders are strikingly similar.
Willing to rewrite their personal compass on NAME TOPIC HERE to defend the little letter next to the name.

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:18 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:27 pm

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:15 pm You have a very benevolent and not-unexpected view of the young Democrat's (lack of) ego, and a further not-unexpected waving of the hand at grossly unethical power dynamics in sexual relationships, provided the offender is a Democrat. If you think Katie resigned from her life's goal of being a congresswoman because 'she didn't want to be a distraction', you must be her mom. Most congresspeople who resign resign only when and because the s is about to hit the fan; they actually love being 'distractions', anything for cameras.

But, I suspect you are smarter than this and are merely playing your expected partisan part. A hunch says had this been Jim Jordan with two female staffers, you'd be in a frenzied mob rush to execute him.

Oh, no. You got it all wrong. What jhu72 is doing is applying your "Trump standards" to this lady.

You see, none of us believe what the Congresswoman says. Not even her admitted affair. After all, gee whiz, it's like totally impossible to tell what really happened, you know? You just can't believe what the Congresswoman admitted on live TV, right?

So we're going to not believe the affair happened in the first place.

So we're all set, right?

Uhhh, did you miss the dozens of photos and hundreds of texts (one of which the employee says she is ‘afraid’ of Katie)? Isn’t that actual evidence? Not enough for you, a fan? Do you require witnessing a live act where you sit bedside and watch the ‘alleged’ behavior? Tell us your standard so we can skip to the end.

In other news, aren’t you excusing grossly unethical behavior because Orange Man Bad?

I did...please link or post.

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:13 pm

kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:58 pm JHU and others are twisting in the wind to defend Hill, like so many around here defend Trump

Let's talk facts.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... rn/601198/

By her own account, Hill engaged in a profound breach of responsibility by engaging in a sexual relationship with someone who was working for her—and by doing so while running for public office. “The mistakes I made that brought me to this moment will haunt me for the rest of my life,” she said this afternoon in her final speech on the House floor. Members of Congress are no stranger to bad behavior. But in a time when Americans are remapping the difficult landscape of sex and power in the workplace, it would be willfully naive to shove aside the uncomfortable dynamics of Hill’s relationship with a staffer who was almost a decade her junior, and a recent college graduate.

It’s comical to watch the ‘Party of Women’ twist themselves to excuse grossly unethical power dynamic violations. This defense of Party at all cost is what I thought some said Republicans are guilty of.

I mean, would a little consistency hurt?

It's comical to watch a guy with split personality disorder.

kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:19 pm These Hill/Trump defenders are strikingly similar.
Willing to rewrite their personal compass on NAME TOPIC HERE to defend the little letter next to the name.

So my sarcasm that's set on 11 isn't apparent to you?

I'm making fun of P Brown and his childish insistence that even though Trump admitted on live TV that he asked the Ukrainian President to investigate Biden.....some form of magic makes it so "that doesn't count", and gee whiz, we just can't be sure what Trump meant when he admitted that.

No one here is defending Hill. All anyone has said is: no one here knows WHY she resigned. Which is factually true.

She resigned. Problem solved. Move on.

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:18 pm Uhhh, did you miss the dozens of photos and hundreds of texts (one of which the employee says she is ‘afraid’ of Katie)? Isn’t that actual evidence?

No, of course not. That's not evidence. No, sir. You see, this "alleged evidence" of yours can be interpreted in just so many ways.....

Have you ever had a situation happen where you said something to someone but felt the person misinterpreted what you said? That happens to me constantly.

This common sense observation on life is sure to anger you and other anti-Hills, because you will reflexively think I am excusing his high crimes here, but what I am really doing is trying to be nuanced about life.


(catching on yet? Or do I have to keep quoting your silly, petty excuses for Trump's behavior?)

I got it, but was referring to others without the sarcasm font on.

Hill did resign. But no need to move on. This thread is about progressive ideology. And Katie was one of the "young risers" shaping democratic, progressive ideology.

I guess she showed that creepy sexually abusive relationships outside of marriages aren't just for men like Clinton anymore. How very woke and progressive of her!

kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:38 pm Hill did resign. But no need to move on. This thread is about progressive ideology. And Katie was one of the "young risers" shaping democratic, progressive ideology.

And because she resigned, she showed that that behavior isn't acceptable in the Lib wing of the Dem party.

Is that not a point in the win column for the libs?

Glad you caught the sarcasm. I thought I was really pouring it on......

kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:38 pm I got it, but was referring to others without the sarcasm font on.

Hill did resign. But no need to move on. This thread is about progressive ideology. And Katie was one of the "young risers" shaping democratic, progressive ideology.

I guess she showed that creepy sexually abusive relationships outside of marriages aren't just for men like Clinton anymore. How very woke and progressive of her!

"Shaping democratic progressive ideology" -- hardly. More like she was doing her job well as a freshman congresswomen, regardless of her sexual proclivities.

foreverlax wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:13 pm

kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 12:58 pm JHU and others are twisting in the wind to defend Hill, like so many around here defend Trump

Let's talk facts.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... rn/601198/

By her own account, Hill engaged in a profound breach of responsibility by engaging in a sexual relationship with someone who was working for her—and by doing so while running for public office. “The mistakes I made that brought me to this moment will haunt me for the rest of my life,” she said this afternoon in her final speech on the House floor. Members of Congress are no stranger to bad behavior. But in a time when Americans are remapping the difficult landscape of sex and power in the workplace, it would be willfully naive to shove aside the uncomfortable dynamics of Hill’s relationship with a staffer who was almost a decade her junior, and a recent college graduate.

Maybe it would have been better if she had just paid off a porn star.

And have them sign a Non Disclosure Agreement.

kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:38 pm I got it, but was referring to others without the sarcasm font on.

Hill did resign. But no need to move on. This thread is about progressive ideology. And Katie was one of the "young risers" shaping democratic, progressive ideology.

I guess she showed that creepy sexually abusive relationships outside of marriages aren't just for men like Clinton anymore. How very woke and progressive of her!

"she showed that creepy sexually abusive relationships outside of marriages aren't just for men like Clinton anymore"

Trump managed to do that all on his own...3 wives, all cheated on, over and over.

How much did his session(s) with a porn star(s) cost?

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:28 pm No one here is defending Hill.

You're not serious, right?

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:34 pm
No, of course not. That's not evidence. No, sir. You see, this "alleged evidence" of yours can be interpreted in just so many ways.....

Or do I have to keep quoting your silly, petty excuses for Trump's behavior?

Couple notes. Photos and texts are not evidence? I am uncertain that will fly in a courtroom. Your point however is that when I say Trump's garbled language isn't enough to convict, your retort is that photos and texts aren't then either, is silly. If we all can not agree that Trump bungles almost every sentence he utters, or that saying something is far different than doing something, we are indeed in a world of stupidity and perhaps I am to blame.

Next. I don't excuse Trump for many things (cheating on his wife numero uno for me; saying what he said about women to Billy Bush ranks extraordinarily high on my list too), but unlike you, I don't see the high crimes and misdemeanors that you and others do when Trump so much as breaks wind. I never saw the Russia 'thing' and I guess I don't see the Ukraine thing either; but believe me you, if someone proves he committed a crime (a real crime), I am more than happy to toss him overboard.

Between him and Haley, Nikki would get my vote 1000x and Trump none. And if you put him back to back with Joe Biden, I am picking Joe every single time (as I think I have previously mentioned on this board). You are misreading many posters' feelings about Trump because your Orange Man Bad routine is an obsession.

Oh, you're right. My bad. Someone DID defend Hill.

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 10:33 am Look, I don't care that she did what she did; I don't even care that she has an Iron Cross tattoo.

Maybe pay attention to what you are writing? Or try harder?

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 2:22 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:28 pm No one here is defending Hill.

You're not serious, right?

Still waiting for those texts....

foreverlax wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 2:35 pm

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 2:22 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:28 pm No one here is defending Hill.

You're not serious, right?

Still waiting for those texts....

https://www.redstate.com/jenvanlaar/201 ... ict-claims

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 2:32 pm Oh, you're right. My bad. Someone DID defend Hill.

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 10:33 am Look, I don't care that she did what she did; I don't even care that she has an Iron Cross tattoo.

Maybe pay attention to what you are writing? Or try harder?

Actually I do defend her in some respects (she seems very intelligent and it's tough to get stuck on deals like this so I am sympathetic), but in other respects, if we are consistent, her power dynamic relationships here can't be condoned.

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 2:44 pm

foreverlax wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 2:35 pm

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 2:22 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:28 pm No one here is defending Hill.

You're not serious, right?

Still waiting for those texts....

https://www.redstate.com/jenvanlaar/201 ... ict-claims

Thanks. Figure that was your source.