Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
bearishgurl
Participant[quote=SK in CV][quote=bearishgurl]
Machado isn’t going to get the sympathy of voters. They’re beyond fed up with the whiner/victim mentality that is so prevalent in the “PC culture” of today.**************************************************
I must step out for an appt. Back later to engage this very interesting debate![/quote]
Actually, yes she is going to get the sympathy of particularly women voters. most women don’t approve of fat shaming or slut shaming. Unlike you, they don’t blame victims. The results are already showing in the polls. . . [/quote]SK, between you and your “sidekick” (flu/flu redux/bullishgurl/fat_lazy_union, etc, etc, depending on what day or time it is) who seems to have recently gotten into the habit of following you around here on your coattails, I just want to point out that the words, “slut” and “prostitute” (to describe Machado) were in both of YOUR posts . . . not mine.
The actual word I used to describe Ms. Machado here was “opportunist” and she is not the first opportunist Trump has ever come in contact with throughout his life, nor will she be the last. She was an opportunist in 1997 and she is still one today. She has no proof whatsoever that Trump called her those two names NOR can she produce any. Trump never admitted to calling her those names. What he said to her (and the surrounding media) was in the workout video. None of that stuff could be considered “insults.” And even if they were taken that way by her at the time (she certainly didn’t act like it or show it), what she did was a breach of her contract or at the very least, a breach of the pageant rules and what they were going to do with her was left up to the discretion of the owner/operator. I’ve reviewed pageant “rules” in the past because one of my kids wanted to enter a regional contest at one time (while they were still in middle school) but never did. The rules applied to all ages between 12 to 22 (3 different levels of the pageant). Signing up for a pageant is a little like signing up for the military. If they accept you as a contestant, there are certain rules and if you win the contest in your category (or become the 1st runner up) there are other rules added to that. Winning that 4-yr scholarship, a new vehicle and cash comes with a price! The winner has to actually work for it by adhering to a busy schedule of appearances to represent the organization (esp in National and International Contests, like Machado was involved in). During their one-year reign, the winner’s appearance is not allowed to change appreciably from when they were crowned (adults only – haircut/change of hairstyle excepted). They could not have visible tattoos. They were not allowed to get pregnant. They must get regular dental care. They were not allowed to get married. They could not show up for any official appearances under the influence of drugs or alcohol or visibly hung over. The winner cannot conduct any activities which would reflect negatively on their “moral turpitude” or negatively on the organization (ie, getting drunk in public, sex which became public and scandalous, associating themselves with known gangsters and/or ex-cons, etc. If any of these things occurred with the winner during their reign (even having a long-term illness or injury through no fault of their own), the owners/operators of the organization have the option of placing the 1st runner up into the position for the duration of the reign. That’s why the 4-yr scholarship is held by the organization until the completion of the winner’s one-year reign. The winner must fulfill the duties of their reign first. Essentially, the winner’s life belongs to the organization during the term of their reign . . . just like in the military.
Voluntarily gaining ~65 lbs in 4 months (as Machado did) was NOT fulfilling her duties. She became depressed because she couldn’t fit into her clothes and missed some of her required appearances on behalf of the pageant. This frustrated Trump and the pageant operators because it is assumed that every adult has full control over their weight and is aware of the rules upon entering the pageant.
Machado did not deny on Fox’s Kelly File segment that she had had eating disorders PRIOR to entering the pageant after Kelly cornered her on the subject. She told Kelly that she had to “starve” herself for months to get down to 118 to fit into her pageant gown. She stated, in essence, “a lot of women have trouble with their weight,” as an excuse why she gained 60+ lbs in 4 months almost immediately after she was crowned. It could actually be argued that she entered the contest under false pretenses well-knowing that she had a problem with her weight yo-yo-ing, she had existing eating disorder(s) for which she had not sought treatment for and had little control over her weight from day to day or week to week.
The way I see it, Trump really went over and above his responsibilities to help Machado properly represent the franchise back in the day. After she became a scheduling and public relations nightmare for the franchise, he should have just immediately replaced her with the first runner-up. He would have been well within his rights to do so. I just think he has a soft heart for a lot of women and just does whatever he can to help them through a rough patch in their lives as one of his female (Asian/Guamanian?) longtime employee/speakers testified to at the RNC.
In utter desperation, Clinton was indeed using Machado “for show as a `token Latina'” in attempt to win over the undecided Latino vote. Machado was a willing participant because she is being PAID by the campaign! Hello?? Promises could have also been made to her to give her some kind of a job if Hill gets elected (too bad she likely can’t spell or write English very well, either). She was positively starstruck when she first appeared on CNN with Cooper …. and to a lesser extent, with Fox’s Kelly. She kept flipping her hair and forgetting what she was going to say and repeating herself in her very broken English. She has been trying mightily to put herself out there as a “representative” of the US Latino/Hispanic electorate and that couldn’t be further from the truth. I was told just before I typed this post that Machado is the laughingstock of the “Latinos for Trump” Facebook page (I’m not a member of FB). That is . . . of both women AND men!
Again, Machado was no “victim” . . . that is, unless you want to consider the position HRC placed her in as “victimizing her” solely for her own political purposes. In any case, she was and is an adult who cooperated with everything she was asked to do by both Trump and Clinton.
Participant[quote=SK in CV][quote=bearishgurl]
Machado is far from being a “victim.” She wasn’t a victim in 1997 and she isn’t one now. She is an opportunist. She does whatever she gets paid for . . . including posing nude for (at least) Playboy, allegedly making porn films (I haven’t personally investigated this) and attempting to smear DJT’s character after being paid handsomely by HRC’s campaign. She’s even been working for the campaign![/quote]Fox morning show, the morning after the debate, he said she was “a real problem” and “had gained an enormous amount of weight”. The three stooges hosts all cringed.
I don’t know that she was paid by the Clinton campaign. And neither do you. She has claimed that Trump never paid her what she earned as Miss Universe. There is no porn film. Nor any crime she’s been convicted of in Mexico that I can find. And what do those things have to do with blaming the victim? He called her Miss Piggy. He called her Miss Housekeeping. You think those are ok? Are there really mitigating circumstances that happen 20 years later? You’re really ok with Trump smearing her for being his victim of abuse? I guess you are, you don’t have any problem smearing her for being a victim. Or Hillary Clinton for having a cheating husband. Or probably rape victims.[/quote]zk, I did watch Cooper’s interview again where he fed her those two insults and asked her if DJT called her that. After a long pause, she said, “yes he did, all the time,” but she couldn’t come up with any witnesses who heard DJT say that “all the time” or at any time in the Kelly interview. I seriously doubt DJT and Machado were ever alone together for any significant period of time, lol. I just saw her at the end of the interview admit that her “daughter was born in the US and that’s why I’m here, now,” or something to that effect. That explains everything . . . she got her US citizenship based upon having an “anchor baby.”
She apparently didn’t end up being charged for driving a getaway car for her “boyfriend” who was committing a crime or the fact that she threatened a judge’s life in SA. But she ADMITTED TO ALL OF IT in the video.
Again, Machado was never a “victim.” Trump undoubtedly spent tens of thousands of dollars on her to help her slim down after she ballooned to 165+ lbs shortly after being crowned Miss Universe (and he had just purchased the franchise) and she was grateful to him for helping her at the time. Any other owner of the pageant would likely have just replaced her with the runner-up, as Trump should have. She used her former title to springboard herself into her nude Playboy spread and porn films.
One can’t expect to be a (beauty) pageant winner or model and continue to get jobs/engagements if they haven’t lived up to the job’s expectations . . . that is, the job they took on was based 90% on their “looks,” which they let go to ^&*%. That’s just how it is.
Machado isn’t going to get the sympathy of voters. They’re beyond fed up with the whiner/victim mentality that is so prevalent in the “PC culture” of today.
**************************************************
I must step out for an appt. Back later to engage this very interesting debate!
Participant[quote=SK in CV]…What crimes? I don’t know anything about any crimes….[/quote]SK, it has become quite clear that you haven’t get viewed the Cooper interview with Machado. Get busy!
Participant[quote=SK in CV][quote=bearishgurl]I don’t believe he called her those names. Can you point me to a video where he states he called her those names? Yes, her crimes in another country WERE pertinent when she was seeking US citizenship. It sounds like the INS once again fell down on the job. It wouldn’t be the first time and it won’t be the last.
The subject of “rape” has absolutely nothing to do with anything we have been discussing on this thread. That subject is just an example of a zinger you like to throw out at Piggs who disagree with you.[/quote]
She has made the claim. He hasn’t denied it. He’s made excuses for doing it.
What crimes? I don’t know anything about any crimes.
The rape analogy is pertinent. You’ve shown you have no problem blaming victims, particularly when they’re women.[/quote]Please point the dear pigg readers to a video of Trump “making excuses” for calling Machado names.
Machado is far from being a “victim.” She wasn’t a victim in 1997 and she isn’t one now. She is an opportunist. She does whatever she gets paid for . . . including posing nude for (at least) Playboy, allegedly making porn films (I haven’t personally investigated this) and attempting to smear DJT’s character after being paid handsomely by HRC’s campaign. She’s even been working for the campaign!
Participant[quote=SK in CV][quote=bearishgurl][quote=FlyerInHi] . . . Machado says that Trump was mean and cruel to her. Trump does not not deny he called her miss piggy and miss housekeeping.[/quote]
I’m not sure why he hasn’t emphatically denied it. Last night I watched 2 videos (one lengthy) where Anderson Cooper of CNN asked her point blank if Trump had called her “Miss Piggy” and “Miss Housekeeping.” She deflected the question and insisted that SHE was the spokesperson for ALL Latinos (wrong!). Cooper grilled her on her criminal past in South America and she ADMITTED TO IT, stating, “I haven’t been a saint but that’s not why I’m here. I speak out for all Latinos, blah, blah.” In spite of now finally attaining US citizenship (did the INS ever investigate her criminal record in SA??), her (broken) English isn’t the best. She also VOLUNTEERED the statement, “No one is paying me for this. I’m doing it on my own.” Cooper didn’t even ask her that . . . he could barely get a word in edgewise with her! In the beginning of the interview, she initially complemented him and thanked him for having her on his show … clearly for the purpose of her stumping against Trump and for HRC.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2i63x6Ga2w
I also watched a recent interview of her by Fox News’ Megyn Kelly (a trained lawyer), who asked her point blank if there were any witnesses present when Donald supposedly called her those names. Again, she deflected the question and used the the Fox interview to stump against Trump and for HRC. She initially appeared nervous at the beginning of the Kelly interview and was even shaking a bit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DeGAV5A86w
Both commentators were incredulous and just congratulated her on her recent US citizenship and dismissed her.
I don’t understand why this loser is currently getting so much airtime as it doesn’t seem to be a slow news cycle right now. Her 14.99 minutes of “fame” have been over for at least 48 hrs and she should now go back to posing nude for mag rags and making South American porn films, where she belongs. She could very easily be summarily impeached in a US court of law in very short order by a law-student-in-training, lol.
Can’t HRC’s campaign drag anyone out of Trump’s “archives” more credible than Machado??
Next . . .[/quote]
How does anything she has ever done excuse a US presidential candidate from calling her Miss Piggy or Miss Housekeeping? I asked you before and I don’t think you answered. Do you think that rape is sometimes the fault of the victim? Is something she did in Mexico, unrelated to anything being discussed, the least bit pertinent? There is nothing that needs to be impeached. Trump has essentially admitted that he’s called her everything she claims, he just falls back on the same misogynist excuses you just used.[/quote]I don’t believe he called her those names. Can you point me to a video where he states he called her those names? Yes, her crimes in another country WERE pertinent when she was seeking US citizenship. It sounds like the INS once again fell down on the job. It wouldn’t be the first time and it won’t be the last.
The subject of “rape” has absolutely nothing to do with anything we have been discussing on this thread. That subject is just an example of a zinger you like to throw out at Piggs who disagree with you.
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi] . . . Machado says that Trump was mean and cruel to her. Trump does not not deny he called her miss piggy and miss housekeeping.[/quote]
I’m not sure why he hasn’t emphatically denied it. Last night I watched 2 videos (one lengthy) where Anderson Cooper of CNN asked her point blank if Trump had called her “Miss Piggy” and “Miss Housekeeping.” She deflected the question and insisted that SHE was the spokesperson for ALL Latinos (wrong!). Cooper grilled her on her criminal past in South America and she ADMITTED TO IT, stating, “I haven’t been a saint but that’s not why I’m here. I speak out for all Latinos, blah, blah.” In spite of now finally attaining US citizenship (did the INS ever investigate her criminal record in SA??), her (broken) English isn’t the best. She also VOLUNTEERED the statement, “No one is paying me for this. I’m doing it on my own.” Cooper didn’t even ask her that . . . he could barely get a word in edgewise with her! In the beginning of the interview, she initially complemented him and thanked him for having her on his show … clearly for the purpose of her stumping against Trump and for HRC.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2i63x6Ga2w
I also watched a recent interview of her by Fox News’ Megyn Kelly (a trained lawyer), who asked her point blank if there were any witnesses present when Donald supposedly called her those names. Again, she deflected the question and used the the Fox interview to stump against Trump and for HRC. She initially appeared nervous at the beginning of the Kelly interview and was even shaking a bit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DeGAV5A86w
Both commentators were incredulous and just congratulated her on her recent US citizenship and dismissed her.
I don’t understand why this loser is currently getting so much airtime as it doesn’t seem to be a slow news cycle right now. Her 14.99 minutes of “fame” have been over for at least 48 hrs and she should now go back to posing nude for mag rags and making South American porn films, where she belongs. She could very easily be summarily impeached in a US court of law in very short order by a law-student-in-training, lol.
Can’t HRC’s campaign drag anyone out of Trump’s “archives” more credible than Machado??
Next . . .
September 29, 2016 at 7:58 PM in reply to: OT: Battle Ground Zero: Murrieta: Invasion of America #801635Participant[quote=SK in CV][quote=bearishgurl]The laid-off worker is free to look for another job from day one. If they got any “severance” at all, it must be reported to EDD. The worker is still eligible for 26 weeks of UI from the week after the severance pay ends.
Let’s just say these laid-off Disney IT employees were making an average of $80K annually. That’s $20K gross for 3 months FT work plus a $2K “bonus” (~$22K) IF their cheaper foreign replacement “gets it” after 3 months (MINUS ALL PAYROLL TAXES)! It’s still not worth it . . . that is if FL has a ~$450 cap on their weekly UI paymen
[/quote]
Severance pay doesn’t affect UI benefits in California, irrespective of whether it’s paid in a lump sum or periodically. It does, however, in Florida, where maximum weekly benefits are $275/wk, and are reduced by periodic severance.[/quote]Thanks, SK. That explains why these FL workers ended up cutting off their noses to spite their faces.
Disney deserves to have EEOC investigation(s) dropped in their lap as well as being served with a class action suit for discrimination and skirting the H1b law (at least the “letter of the law”). I sure hope hiring their cheap, transplanted foreign labor was worth it for them.
I think I’ll go back to CAR’s first article and get that court case number so I can put yet another stick-note on the bottom of my computer monitor to follow :=0
September 29, 2016 at 7:35 PM in reply to: OT: Battle Ground Zero: Murrieta: Invasion of America #801632Participant[quote=flu].[/quote]Hey, flu . . . I did manage to capture your deleted quote. Would you like me to post it?
:=D
So were you saying here that you WOULD train your replacement if you didn’t initiate your impending absence and you were asked to by your employer?
I can’t quite make out from your post whether you consider yourself to be a “team player” in an industry where these shenanigans are “common.”
September 29, 2016 at 7:26 PM in reply to: OT: Battle Ground Zero: Murrieta: Invasion of America #801630Participant[quote=no_such_reality]In California, UI benefits are capped at $450/wk.
That’s $2200/month.[/quote]For 2016? I haven’t looked in awhile. Even so, if the worker is eligible for the entire $450 week for a maximum of 26 weeks ($11,700) and the laid-off worker is FREE!
The laid-off worker is free to look for another job from day one. If they got any “severance” at all, it must be reported to EDD. The worker is still eligible for 26 weeks of UI from the week after the severance pay ends.
Let’s just say these laid-off Disney IT employees were making an average of $80K annually. That’s $20K gross for 3 months FT work plus a $2K “bonus” (~$22K) IF their cheaper foreign replacement “gets it” after 3 months (MINUS ALL PAYROLL TAXES)! It’s still not worth it . . . that is if FL has a ~$450 cap on their weekly UI payment.
I would never train my replacement where I didn’t initiate my own absence from work. H@ll no! The employer can kiss my a$$. Never in a million years would I give away the store to a person hired as my replacement . . . unbeknownst to me :=0
Workers should realize that collecting UI usually throws them into a lower tax bracket and they don’t have to have Federal taxes taken from their weekly benefit. Also, in CA, if they take another job and then suspend their UI, they are still able to collect the balance of the claim if they are terminated within that 26-week time period. If not, they can file a new claim after the 26-week time period based upon a newer 18-month wage record and collect it for 26 weeks again. The new weekly benefit may be more or less than the weekly benefit from the old claim.
September 29, 2016 at 6:51 PM in reply to: OT: Battle Ground Zero: Murrieta: Invasion of America #801628ParticipantI just read a link within the article supplied by CAR:
They (the laid off employees) said only a handful of those laid off were moved directly by Disney to other company jobs. The rest were left to compete for positions through Disney job websites. Despite the company’s figures, few people they knew had been hired, they said, and then often at a lower pay level. No one was offered retraining, they said. One former worker, a 57-year-old man with more than 10 years at Disney, displayed a list of 18 jobs in the company he had applied for. He had not had more than an initial conversation on any one, he said.
Disney “made the difficult decision to eliminate certain positions, including yours,” as a result of “the transition of your work to a managed service provider,” said a contract presented to employees on the day the layoffs were announced. It offered a “stay bonus” of 10 percent of severance pay if they remained for 90 days. But the bonus was contingent on “the continued satisfactory performance of your job duties.” For many, that involved training a replacement. Young immigrants from India took the seats at their computer stations.
“The first 30 days was all capturing what I did,” said the American in his 40s, who worked 10 years at Disney. “The next 30 days, they worked side by side with me, and the last 30 days, they took over my job completely.” To receive his severance bonus, he said, “I had to make sure they were doing my job correctly.”
In late November, this former employee received his annual performance review, which he provided to The New York Times. His supervisor, who was not aware the man was scheduled for layoff, wrote that because of his superior skills and “outstanding” work, he had saved the company thousands of dollars. The supervisor added that he was looking forward to another highly productive year of having the employee on the team.
The employee got a raise. His severance pay had to be recalculated to include it.
The former Disney employee who is 57 worked in project management and software development. His résumé lists a top-level skill certification and command of seven operating systems, 15 program languages and more than two dozen other applications and media.
“I was forced into early retirement,” he said. The timing was “horrible,” he said, because his wife recently had a medical emergency with expensive bills. Shut out of Disney, he is looking for a new job elsewhere.
Former employees said many immigrants who arrived were younger technicians with limited data skills who did not speak English fluently and had to be instructed in the basics of the work. . . .
(parenthesized material mine)
This is disgusting to me. In CA, weekly UI benefits are equal to 1/13 of 62.5% of one’s highest quarter’s pay in the past 18 months, IIRC and is not subject to state income tax. With a layoff letter in hand, a CA-based employee would not have to stay behind and train their replacement. They could elect to leave at or before the time their “replacement” arrived and not make it easy for their employer to replace them seamlessly and be unequivocally eligible for UI.
If they stayed behind to train their new (foreign) “charge,” the Disney layoffs were eligible for full pay for three months plus a 10% “bonus” (minus taxes) IF their (H1b) trainee was performing their job competently at the end of the 3-month training period.
That’s nothing to write home about. That’s not even as much as UI and Disney’s “internal job lure” to the laid off employees was a farce. I don’t know about FL but in CA, this would have been a bad deal for the longtime displaced employee and a waste of their time when they could have been actively looking FT for a new job 3 months earlier while still having uncollected UI benefits to fall back on.
I don’t understand how these employees fell for Disney’s dangling mini-carrot. Perhaps FL’s UI benefits aren’t adequate.
September 29, 2016 at 6:09 PM in reply to: OT: Battle Ground Zero: Murrieta: Invasion of America #801626Participant[quote=CA renter][quote=harvey][quote=CA renter]Thank you, BG. It seems that Pri is completely unable to do any research of his own, while expecting others to spoon-feed him every single fact and detail[/quote]
Someone on the internet says they know some people that told them something, and you call that “research?”
No doubt you’ve cited BG posts in all your academic publications – give that girl a PhD!
But let’s get past the personal comments about me, or your gossip about what you want others to think of me. If you’re really on a higher plane then let’s see you set an example:
Tell us again about a demographic been displaced (besides BGs pals, lol.): Not someone making an excuse because they halfheartedly looked for a job and failed…an actual, documented population of people that have been displaced by immigrants in the US.
Still waiting for an actual answer, and the Piggs see clearly when you weasel out with an insult or “do some research” cop out.
While we are at it … What’s your general position on refugee immigrants? Can you make a direct statement, without innuendo, or speculation about what someone else might think in some hypothetical situation?
Can you elevate the conversation about the middle-school level, and say something with substance?
EDIT: I see that flu just posted some credible research. Should his wife also go dictionary shopping?[/quote]
What flu posted has nothing at all to do with the issue being discussed. As already noted by other posters, farm workers are not paid nearly enough as it is, and these immigrant workers (especially the undocumented ones) are willing to live in cramped, decrepit, filthy shacks; or camp out in river valleys and hillsides. They have been working these miserable, back-breaking jobs without overtime, and are often abused and disrespected by their employers. American workers are not willing to do that, and we should not be striving to plumb the deepest depths of what workers are willing to accept.
And I wasn’t referring to BG’s comment as research. All you have to do is look at the demographic shifts in some key industries [I’ll give you a head start: construction, manufacturing, warehousing, trucking, food service (esp. cooks and fast-food workers), hospitality, child care, auto repair, etc.), check out the demographic changes, and then compare that to the jobs where pay hasn’t kept up with inflation.
Here’s a fairly recent story about Disney dumping their local talent in favor of immigrants.
Now, try doing some of your own research. I’ve just given you a head start since you’re clueless about how to do this on your own.[/quote]Interesting article, CAR. I don’t understand how the two longtime Disney employees in the story got cornered into training their own replacements (for weeks at a time?). One worker stated that he “had” to train his (H1B) replacement as a condition of his severance. So, at the time the H1B worker appeared on the job, he must have known that he was a “short-timer!” How humiliating! Couldn’t he have cited his job description which may not have included training another employee at his own level as to why he couldn’t do it? If I was asked to train someone to do everything I do and I hadn’t already given notice or didn’t have an impending medical leave or FMLA coming up, I would likely refuse. If an employee gets fired, they’re usually eligible for UI. The employer will argue in the UI hearing that the employee was “insubordinate” (because they refused to train their “replacement” when they weren’t even told that the H1B was hired to be their replacement)! I would be asking some tough questions of my supervisor/boss if an H1B worker (or anyone for that matter) showed up at my desk to learn everything about my job and there didn’t appear to be any opening in the organization for them!
If the employer wants to do this, let them fire me and have the new, green, H1B and let them bumble thru their first weeks on the job without me. You pay for what you get in this life. All my institutional knowledge would walk right out the door between my ears and straight to the unemployment office without even passing go or collecting $200! Especially if my performance evals were sterling like the gentleman’s were in the story.
I guess I don’t understand why the two protagonists in the story cooperated with their employer.
Participant[quote=SK in CV][quote=bearishgurl]SK, correct me if I’m wrong, but it seems you may be trying to say here that HRC, as a woman, would have had no chance at the 2008 and 2016 Democratic Presidential nomination unless she stayed married to that lying, cheating sack of *&^% aka Bill Clinton.
[/quote]
No, I didn’t say anything the least bit similar to this. This is all your made up garbage.And maybe you haven’t noticed it because you don’t actually read real news, but Hillary is doing quite well with women. And her health is just fine, conspiracy theories notwithstanding.
You really have no f’ing clue why she decided to stay married. Your fantasy of blaming her seems as if it’s rooted in some horrible tragedy in your background. You really should see a counselor about it. Was it your abuse? Maybe your mother was abused by your father and you still blame her for it? There is help available. But clearly you have unresolved issues.
Wait. I have no idea why you have your opinions. That was very unfair of me to speculate. Because unless I know all the facts, i’d be an idiot to speculate. None of us know why Hillary Clinton decided to stay married to Bill. You’re apparently not subject to those same limitations.[/quote]You’re right. None of us know ALL the reasons either of them decided to stay with each other. All the REAL news I’ve read and watched (from major MSM outlets only), including HRC’s authorized biography, essentially stated that she was more ambitious than Bill in college (which impressed him) and they got together to see if they could collectively assist each other to make a difference in the world. BOTH of them wanted to run for public office early on but they couldn’t do it at the same time. They are still trying to accomplish these same goals at this late date. And that is all okay but I have always thought that HRC paid too high a price to stay with Bill after it became clear that he was more of a liability to her than an asset. If she’s okay with her current “arrangement,” so am I. But let’s not pretend this isn’t a campaign issue. Most of the country (um, the electorate) did not and does not approve.
ParticipantIt’s perfectly legal to have an open marriage but (fortunately or unfortunately) the vast majority of US voters don’t see it that way. They didn’t see it that way in the ’80’s or ’90’s and they don’t see it that way today. That’s not what they signed up for when they voted that person into office. Thus, attempting to conduct an open marriage as an elected official (especially occupying the highest office in the land) is a most perilous endeavor. Bill Clinton not only had very bad judgment over the years but was/is likely a sex addict. And, unfortunately, there is no cure for that.
Participant[quote=SK in CV][quote=bearishgurl][quote=SK in CV]Can you imagine what a woman would go through trying to be a Presidential candidate if they had 5 children with 3 different fathers, and began relationships with the 2nd and 3rd husbands before they were even separated from the previous spouse?
But it’s ok when a man does it. Apparently even for some women, it’s nowhere near as bad as being married to a man who has had affairs. Is that like Stockholm syndrome or something? Or just general disrespect for women.[/quote]In reference to DJT, you must be referring to him cheating on Ivana with Marla Maples. When Ivana walked away from that marriage/business partnership (which SHE helped build), she was left a multi-millionaire and set for life.
Maples and DJT were only married for +/- 4 years (from ’93 to ’97, when they legally separated). He did not meet Melania until 1998, did not date her until 1999 and did not marry her until 2005. She became a permanent resident of the US on her own in 2001 and a citizen in 2006 (after she married Donald).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melania_Trump
You must be getting confused due to Bill’s dozens of trysts highly publicized in the MSM during fully half of our lifetimes. I know . . . it happens.[/quote]
So you’re calling Ivana a prostitute? Because she was paid well, his philandering is ok with you? I can’t even fathom why you think a financial settlement excuses his behavior but Clinton not divorcing her philandering husband makes her horrible.
I’m not confused about anything, other than your hypocrisy in being ok with Donald the philanderer but having a problem Hillary Clinton as the wife of a philanderer. You realize how anti-woman that position is, right?[/quote]SK, I don’t excuse Donald of anything. He was philandering whilst Ivana was running his NY Plaza Hotel around the clock. I don’t think he wanted a divorce from Ivana. She deserved every penny she got in her settlement. But that was the end of his “philandering” while married. Melania wouldn’t have much to do with him until his divorce was final (in 1999).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marla_Maples
Hillary Clinton stood by and allowed herself to be repeatedly publicly humiliated for ~10 years in AR and another 8 years in the White House.
Even if they had agreed to an open marriage from Day One (likely the case), HRC literally prostrated herself at Bill’s feet over and over by covering for him and waging “revenge” on the “other women” in the back room whilst being publicly humiliated in the front room over his inability to keep his pants zipped while serving in public office. Honestly, that doesn’t speak much to her self-esteem and pride, especially since she was more than able to support herself well. The whole codependent dance between them has taken its toll on her in more ways than one.
Certainly, you can see the difference in her over the years, SK. You were there, weren’t you?
-
AuthorPosts
