Posted on 04/24/2017 6:29:34 AM PDT by rktman
Back in 1998-99, many Democrats and liberals defended President Clinton. My favorite defense was that President Clinton's private behavior did not affect his job, i.e. “look at your 401-K!” and the unemployment rate was something I heard about on TV back then!
I find this interesting because Bill O'Reilly’s alleged personal conduct did not affect his job either. After all, his ratings never dropped.
This is why I've grown so skeptical of any public figure accused of sexual harassment, specially when we hear about them on The New York Times.
Back in the summer of 1998, when many of us were caught up in the McGwire-Sosa home run chase, this is how some women of the left reacted to the allegations against President Clinton.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Nope. There was never such a time.
It's only when conservatives try it that it's a surprise.
I'm sure that word went around the personal injury bar that O'Reilly and Fox were easy to shake down for that very reason,particularly after the first couple of payouts.
It matters.
Because people choose to ignore or explain the behavior away, it doesn’t make the behavior right. I can hide my head in the sand, but that does not make bad behavior acceptable.
It is still bad behavior. And whether or not it matters to me is irrelevant.
I was talking to my adult daughter the other day. I pointed out that most of the Liberal policies were about making hard things easier, and allowing things that felt good to be done without consequence.
They go out of their ways to make sexual intercourse accessible without consequence. Don’t worry...the government should pay for an abortion, or birth control pills, because a woman should be able to be as promiscuous as any man.
You should be able to go to college for free...because it makes you feel better than going to get a job.
Buying more of a mortgage than you can afford is not your fault, because there is so much small print and anyway, buying a house is their right.
There are simply fundamental differences between making your own way, and having the government pave the way for you.
A very interesting comment considering that “Pleasure Island” is what the DNC now subsist in and where they think civil rights should be.
And like the fictional Pleasure Island the real world version can all too easily produce emotive, irrational brutes who confuse kindness with goodness and tolerance with virtue.
As far as I can recall the last time progressives cared about a Democrat cheating was when Gary Hart was caught. After his presidential campaign tanked as a consequence it seems that the idea arose that if only they hadn’t run the story, protected Hart instead, he might have won.
When Clinton came along a few influential media types decided to carry his water and do what they could to prevent another Republican administration. Problem is that with Clinton his cheating heart was only the tip of the coke-snorting, influence peddling pay-for-play, drug-running, Arkancide nightmare that is the Clintons.
The media got him elected twice, with the help of Ross Perot (you cannot tell me he wasn’t in it as a spoiler, especially when he got out of the race once because the Democrats (Clinton) had pulled their act together BUT jumped back in when they were in trouble), but in for a penny is in for a pound and they soon had to circle the wagons for much more than infidelity.
It’s a process that scars the conscience, such as they were, and soon enough Democrats winning at any cost was all the only remaining “value”.
At the same time there is not nothing left of the old extreme left that is considered extreme by the left anymore, not to mention that they’ve shifted the idea of center substantially to the left as well so that unrepentant Alinskyites / McGovernites may be viewed by them as right of center!
So Democrats aren’t being hypocrites because their values have nothing to do with anything but victory or silencing opposition. DNC land has become Communazis ... they even have their own version of taqiyya, and their militants like those in the Antifa even wear similar costumes to many Islamists (though at the moment they are swinging bike locks or using small knives rather than big knives or guns ... give the Proper Little Eichmanns time though and that’ll change).
They are not to be lived with or tolerated: but defeated.
In the private sector, just stating your opinion can get you in hot water.
Happened to me in 2001.
HR now only exists to protect the company from lawsuits.
Liberals do not advocate for any moral absolutes so cannot be held accountable for their moral failings. Conservatives on the other hand . . . .
Yes.
One of the few respectable features of Republicans is that they will still eat their own in matters of wrongdoing, that Republicans wagons don’t circle at the first sight of braying jackasses come over the hill.
This is very distinct from Democrats whose wagons not only auto-circle, but who rank-and-file have an astonishing capacity to get over wrongdoing (if it’s their guys) and indeed have lost any ability to care about any accumulation of wrongdoings (see note below). Either something must b so horrifically bad so as to disabuse them all at once or they will get over it. Having gotten over something that bad it becomes easier to get over something that bad, or a bit worse, latter on. If you bring up something they’ve gotten over before then you’re just bringing up what numerable libs I’ve posted to have called old news, and you’re just petty to bring it up again.
The thing about people is that we aren’t frogs: frogs cannot rationalize away the frying pan but people can. The end is that they become seared in heir consciences, even conscience-less and only irrational.
A comment about “accumulation of wrongdoing” that I mentioned earlier, or what the Framers termed “a long train of abuses” in their own time. It is important to realize that in every measure the modern left is for far more Arbitrary government, for a surpassing abundance of dispatched officials to lord it over the people and consume/waste the nation’s means (as least for everything that isn’t sex, sex is just about the ONLY thing the left doesn’t want to regulate). Many on the left like to style themselves as bring with the Patriots, with the Founders, but the truth is that those who had a tolerance for abuses from their masters, who agreed with them, were the Loyalists and NOT the Patriots. Indeed if the American colonist had been as far to the left as the Democrats now are the Crown might have had reason to protest THEM! I have pointed this out and boy does it make the current lot mad. But it must be said: the left is not only against what this country was founded to be BUT they are also against the very sort of causes why it came to be in the first place, for they love Arbitrary government, big government, high taxes to pay for it all and even reckless eternal deficit spending to pay for more of it all still.
When a woman is told “You look good today” becomes grounds for a sexual harassment problem, this country is in deep trouble.
When they have driven the males in the workplace to NEVER speak to them, their next battle cry will be “He’s IGNORING me on the job”.
I have worked a fair number of places in my life & being told “I looked good today in a new outfit or with a new haircut or whatever” was NEVER a sexual harassment item. I was raised to believe that was a COMPLIMENT.
These wussies need to write a new playbook for themselves. Glad I am no longer in any position to hire someone to work for me.
I believe you are correct. That is next in the playbook. Once men have been driven underground in the workplace and forced to avoid even casual contact with female employees out of concern anything they say or do may be misinterpreted (or worse, just plain fabricated out of thin air), then they will holler that they are being shut out. That closed door meetings between just men are going on without them. That men go out for a drink after work and never invite them. That men go on golf outings without them, thus shutting them out and keeping them out of that inner circle. To a degree, I see some of that creeping into the workplace culture now. When a few men want to grab a beer after work, it becomes a prudent and safe choice to not invite any of the lady co-workers.
Which is a shame because most women in the workplace just want to be part of the team and would never want to cause any trouble. But enough of their counterparts feel differently and so that men must be on guard, always. And it's getting worse, not better. Just looking at the wrong woman the wrong way is enough to destroy a career these days.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.