Did they update this story? There's no note that they updated it, but it mentions that Conyers announced he's stepping down from the Judiciary Committee, which seems at odds with the point "He’s the top Democrat on the committee that will be responsible for possible sexual harassment legislation coming soon" which is still in the article.
I'm not sure what that has to do with Nancy Pelosi, a party leader (if not the defacto leader herself) saying shitty things.
nothing, she still defended him in a shitty enabling way either way, I was just wondering if they wrote the article before he announced he was stepping down from the committee and then edited that in or not
David Cameron fucked a dead pig in the mouth and I never even got the impression that people were terribly shocked by it, I got a real sense of "But of course he did" from the UK
Pelosi has, in the past, worked to push out members involved in inappropriate behavior. But in public, on a popular Sunday show, she ran through a list of excuses for Conyers that are the very reasons women are afraid to come forward and report sexual harassment in the first place:
Conyers is the credible one. He is an “icon,” she told Todd. The woman? “I do not know who they are. Do you?” she asked the host. “They have not really come forward.” (The woman came forward three years ago, dogging her case through an opaque process in Congress that bars her from speaking about it. She spoke to BuzzFeed anonymously.)
Conyers is the real victim. Pelosi is withholding judgment until Conyers gets “due process,” she said. But Conyers got something better than due process. Congress wrote the rules for how sexual harassment claims are handled, exempting members from requirements that most other employers must follow. The woman, meanwhile, got less. She didn’t have a right to free lawyer. She couldn’t speak about her case. And it took months. Then she couldn’t find a job on the Hill. “I was basically blackballed,” she told BuzzFeed. “There was nowhere I could go.”
Conyers is a good man. “He understands what is at stake here and he’ll do the right thing,” Pelosi said, explaining how he’s going to think about what he’s done. He’s the top Democrat on the committee that will be responsible for possible sexual harassment legislation coming soon. “A good deal of that would be done by the Judiciary Committee. And I know that John would take that into consideration.” The woman, meanwhile, first raised her complaints three years ago. Will she get to explain what’s at stake for herself?
Conyers cares about women. “He’s done a great deal to protect women,” Pelosi said, pointing out he worked on the Violence Against Women Act. How, she implied, could he have hurt a woman who works for him?
Conyers’ behavior isn’t so bad. “Was it one accusation? Was it two?” Pelosi said when talking through how she is considering Conyers’s case. In an age of serial predators, maybe one woman’s story shouldn’t count.
Did they update this story? There's no note that they updated it, but it mentions that Conyers announced he's stepping down from the Judiciary Committee, which seems at odds with the point "He’s the top Democrat on the committee that will be responsible for possible sexual harassment legislation coming soon" which is still in the article.
How the fuck is that what the most prominent female leader of the Democrats is saying.
Not to mention that multiple times she tries to assert that the reason all the provisions in place to force victims to stay silent was because they didn't want to be exposed to harassment by the public and media.
Pelosi also tried to wave aside everything with Clinton, that they were looking forward. Everything with Franken was deflected as saying it shouldn't be compared to Roy Moore, nothing about the matter itself.
On Conyers she was asked about whether she believed the victims' stories: "I don’t know who they are," she said. "Do you? They have not really come forward."
Jesus Christ. She's not even good at being a slimy, shiftless dirtbag. Why does she even exist?
It's people like her that have bottomed out and despoiled the Democratic Party. Gormless idiots with no beliefs that can't even explain the most basic things in the world. Franken is a dirtbag, but he's not a child molester. HOW IS THIS A HARD TICKET TO SELL? I'm unemploye and drunk and eminently unlikable in a lot of ways and I could get up on that show and make a harder, better sell than whatever the fuck it is that she's trying to do.
There are a number of evangelical types (especially in the rural areas, where I ran into these people a lot growing up) who interpret the unforgivable sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit as cussing, because their theology is very bad. It's the same type of people who believe that gay sex is worst than murder because murder only hurts a person while two guys banging hurts God somehow. When the beginning and end of all morality is "obey the top without question" any and all the rules are just arbitrary meaningless nonsense.
Huh! Thank you for the explanation. That’s, uh, something...
Pelosi has, in the past, worked to push out members involved in inappropriate behavior. But in public, on a popular Sunday show, she ran through a list of excuses for Conyers that are the very reasons women are afraid to come forward and report sexual harassment in the first place:
Conyers is the credible one. He is an “icon,” she told Todd. The woman? “I do not know who they are. Do you?” she asked the host. “They have not really come forward.” (The woman came forward three years ago, dogging her case through an opaque process in Congress that bars her from speaking about it. She spoke to BuzzFeed anonymously.)
Conyers is the real victim. Pelosi is withholding judgment until Conyers gets “due process,” she said. But Conyers got something better than due process. Congress wrote the rules for how sexual harassment claims are handled, exempting members from requirements that most other employers must follow. The woman, meanwhile, got less. She didn’t have a right to free lawyer. She couldn’t speak about her case. And it took months. Then she couldn’t find a job on the Hill. “I was basically blackballed,” she told BuzzFeed. “There was nowhere I could go.”
Conyers is a good man. “He understands what is at stake here and he’ll do the right thing,” Pelosi said, explaining how he’s going to think about what he’s done. He’s the top Democrat on the committee that will be responsible for possible sexual harassment legislation coming soon. “A good deal of that would be done by the Judiciary Committee. And I know that John would take that into consideration.” The woman, meanwhile, first raised her complaints three years ago. Will she get to explain what’s at stake for herself?
Conyers cares about women. “He’s done a great deal to protect women,” Pelosi said, pointing out he worked on the Violence Against Women Act. How, she implied, could he have hurt a woman who works for him?
Conyers’ behavior isn’t so bad. “Was it one accusation? Was it two?” Pelosi said when talking through how she is considering Conyers’s case. In an age of serial predators, maybe one woman’s story shouldn’t count.
Did they update this story? There's no note that they updated it, but it mentions that Conyers announced he's stepping down from the Judiciary Committee, which seems at odds with the point "He’s the top Democrat on the committee that will be responsible for possible sexual harassment legislation coming soon" which is still in the article.
How the fuck is that what the most prominent female leader of the Democrats is saying.
Not to mention that multiple times she tries to assert that the reason all the provisions in place to force victims to stay silent was because they didn't want to be exposed to harassment by the public and media.
Pelosi also tried to wave aside everything with Clinton, that they were looking forward. Everything with Franken was deflected as saying it shouldn't be compared to Roy Moore, nothing about the matter itself.
On Conyers she was asked about whether she believed the victims' stories: "I don’t know who they are," she said. "Do you? They have not really come forward."
Just fucking wow.
can't wait for the centrist dem types to line up behind her
the fishhook is real
+6
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
You should've seen the way centrists leapt to Pelosi's defense over her not listening to Mexican people about immigration issues. There was a whole lot of "not grateful" and "they don't know how good they've got it," etc. I was really shocked.
Lord Ashcroft wrote a book in which he said that a Tory MP told him David Cameron put his dick in a pig to get into a society at university. Did he name the MP? No. Was Cameron ever a member of that society? No, he went to dinner there a couple of times.
Why did he do this? Because Lord Ashcroft is a loathsome right-wing smear of shit who was very critical of the Coaliation government and Cameron for being all wishy-washy and centrist on pretty much everything, and he'd given loads and loads of money to the party, was a leading businessman, and therefore deserved a cabinet position. Cameron, to his credit (pains me to say that but there it is) said "no" and then they released that book, excerpts of which were printed in that fucking rag the Daily Mail, leading to piggate. Which wasn't even really a thing, because the PM's office just said "not even dignifying this with a response" and ignored the book.
Ashcroft didn't and won't get a government position, and nothing ever came of the story, because it isn't true, it's just the surfacing of Tory internal conflicts as happen all the time, and a pathetic attempt for a staggeringly wealthy individual to get revenge after he found out you can't but a Cabinet Minister's role in the British government (or he couldn't, at least).
Lord Ashcroft wrote a book in which he said that a Tory MP told him David Cameron put his dick in a pig to get into a society at university. Did he name the MP? No. Was Cameron ever a member of that society? No, he went to dinner there a couple of times.
Why did he do this? Because Lord Ashcroft is a loathsome right-wing smear of shit who was very critical of the Coaliation government and Cameron for being all wishy-washy and centrist on pretty much everything, and he'd given loads and loads of money to the party, was a leading businessman, and therefore deserved a cabinet position. Cameron, to his credit (pains me to say that but there it is) said "no" and then they released that book, excerpts of which were printed in that fucking rag the Daily Mail, leading to piggate. Which wasn't even really a thing, because the PM's office just said "not even dignifying this with a response" and ignored the book.
Ashcroft didn't and won't get a government position, and nothing ever came of the story, because it isn't true, it's just the surfacing of Tory internal conflicts as happen all the time, and a pathetic attempt for a staggeringly wealthy individual to get revenge after he found out you can't but a Cabinet Minister's role in the British government (or he couldn't, at least).
So it was probably a goat is what you're saying.
I have a podcast now. It's about video games and anime!Find it here.
It is impressive that the man cultivated a personality where he can get acvused of fucking a pig, and most people's reaction will be "christ, of course he fucking did"
Same time, mind, it's kind of sad that he refused Ashcroft a position in government out of a sense of integrity, you know, he thought "I don't want him in my Cabinet and I don't think he gets to come in just because he's offering us loads of money and has given us loads in the past," like he took a vaguely admirable position (for a Tory PM) and the response was this laughably half-baked, stupid story with no backing, and it took off.
Cameron wasn't frosty about it, he cracked jokes about it the same week. Didn't sue either. But it says something that Jeremy Corbyn's (you know, the lefty leader of the opposition) response to the accusation was not "hah! Cameron fucked a pig!" but rather "the way that certain elements of the media have run with this baseless story as if it's in any way corroborated or relevant is very unpleasant and symptomatic of a problem in personality politics."
Solar on
+2
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
David Cameron fucking a pig is when all my Facebook friends started paying at least a little attention to the British politics I'd bring up. Because that's what Americans are dying for. Pig fuckers.
David Cameron fucking a pig is when all my Facebook friends started paying at least a little attention to the British politics I'd bring up. Because that's what Americans are dying for. Pig fuckers.
Our politicians molest real humans, get on our level.
David Cameron fucked a dead pig in the mouth and I never even got the impression that people were terribly shocked by it, I got a real sense of "But of course he did" from the UK
Though it was most likely a smear from a Tory who wanted a peerage, it's not completely ridiculous because those posh tory dinner societies have fucking odd initiations.
He very pointedly failed to directly deny it, in case anyone turned out to have pictures
"I refuse to dignify that allegation with a response" is a very different answer to "Obviously I did not do that, no, I'm not a monster. That's disgusting, who would even think of such a thing?"
He very pointedly failed to directly deny it, in case anyone turned out to have pictures
"I refuse to dignify that allegation with a response" is a very different answer to "Obviously I did not do that, no, I'm not a monster. That's disgusting, who would even think of such a thing?"
Man, this weekend was a harsh reminder that even liberals can have blind spots towards sexual abuse. Had conversations with a couple liberal minded women and was struck by their comments.
The first, when talking about Louis C.K and Weinstein first said that it was Hollywood, and so "should anyone be surprised?". Then handwaived the C.K thing by saying that it was just him reading the room wrong..that at least he didn't assault the women, that he was just doing it for himself, not against them.
Then later that weekend, some mentioned that that "Its just getting too much, too many" when it comes to women coming out. That it was hard to believe it was happening so much, and who knew which were true and which were lies.
She then tried to justify herself by saying that she just likes to play devil advocate and that there's always two sides to a story!
Well on that immigration and daca issue she was right and those people were being foolish and unhelpful.
But this interview is just unbelievable. I am disgusted by this.
This is how you repay women after they just helped give you a landslide election night?
For fucks sake, a 26 year old openly gay woman flipped a state legislature seat in a part of Oklahoma that went for Trump by 40 goddamn points.
Franken and Conyers should have resigned. Now I guess we’re just going to drag ourselves through the mud and throw away all the encouragement everyone felt after those election wins.
I'm fairly certain most evangelicals are lawful evil. I'm glad they found something that keeps them from just murdering people. I just wish they actually took Jesus' message to hear and tried helping people.
If that's all there is my friends, then let's keep dancing
+13
MayabirdPecking at the keyboardRegistered Userregular
I'm fairly certain most evangelicals are lawful evil. I'm glad they found something that keeps them from just murdering people. I just wish they actually took Jesus' message to hear and tried helping people.
Of course, the moment they think they're ordered to murder, or think it's now condoned, they'll gleefully do it. Plenty of times you see in the news where some nutbars thought God was giving them special instructions so they tortured and starved their kids to death. "Abraham, go slit your kid's throat." "Sure thing, boss!"
It ties in with their desire for power. Their entire understanding of the nature of power is that it's to be wielded for arbitrary self-aggrandizement, so they want it to be able to use it against others as it was used against them. It's probably the real reason white evangelicals as a group love Trump, because he's their apotheosis: stupid, petty, corrupt, selfish, and given theoretically unlimited power and the ability to get away with anything.
Posts
Like okay, that maybe makes it the teensiest iota better because at least you weren't torturing a live animal
but you still put your dick in a pig
nothing, she still defended him in a shitty enabling way either way, I was just wondering if they wrote the article before he announced he was stepping down from the committee and then edited that in or not
well i mean we've all stuck our dicks in jello and that's made of dead horses
Honey. Oh, honey. Let's talk.
Have we
Here is the full Pelosi interview.
Starts at 5:38.
How the fuck is that what the most prominent female leader of the Democrats is saying.
Not to mention that multiple times she tries to assert that the reason all the provisions in place to force victims to stay silent was because they didn't want to be exposed to harassment by the public and media.
Pelosi also tried to wave aside everything with Clinton, that they were looking forward. Everything with Franken was deflected as saying it shouldn't be compared to Roy Moore, nothing about the matter itself.
On Conyers she was asked about whether she believed the victims' stories: "I don’t know who they are," she said. "Do you? They have not really come forward."
Just fucking wow.
It's people like her that have bottomed out and despoiled the Democratic Party. Gormless idiots with no beliefs that can't even explain the most basic things in the world. Franken is a dirtbag, but he's not a child molester. HOW IS THIS A HARD TICKET TO SELL? I'm unemploye and drunk and eminently unlikable in a lot of ways and I could get up on that show and make a harder, better sell than whatever the fuck it is that she's trying to do.
Fucking fuck.
Huh! Thank you for the explanation. That’s, uh, something...
let he who is without pig fucking cast the first stone
Twitch (I stream most days of the week)
Twitter (mean leftist discourse)
yes
Gonna skip this one at least 10 meters out, just see if I don’t.
can't wait for the centrist dem types to line up behind her
the fishhook is real
if you put it in a live one you might lose it
He actually didn't, let's be honest
It was a smear campaign by some non-dom doner who wanted to buy a Cabinet seat, I forget his name
Lord Ashcroft wrote a book in which he said that a Tory MP told him David Cameron put his dick in a pig to get into a society at university. Did he name the MP? No. Was Cameron ever a member of that society? No, he went to dinner there a couple of times.
Why did he do this? Because Lord Ashcroft is a loathsome right-wing smear of shit who was very critical of the Coaliation government and Cameron for being all wishy-washy and centrist on pretty much everything, and he'd given loads and loads of money to the party, was a leading businessman, and therefore deserved a cabinet position. Cameron, to his credit (pains me to say that but there it is) said "no" and then they released that book, excerpts of which were printed in that fucking rag the Daily Mail, leading to piggate. Which wasn't even really a thing, because the PM's office just said "not even dignifying this with a response" and ignored the book.
Ashcroft didn't and won't get a government position, and nothing ever came of the story, because it isn't true, it's just the surfacing of Tory internal conflicts as happen all the time, and a pathetic attempt for a staggeringly wealthy individual to get revenge after he found out you can't but a Cabinet Minister's role in the British government (or he couldn't, at least).
So it was probably a goat is what you're saying.
At the same time, david cameron also absolutely definitely fucked a pig
Steam // Secret Satan
Steam // Secret Satan
Cameron wasn't frosty about it, he cracked jokes about it the same week. Didn't sue either. But it says something that Jeremy Corbyn's (you know, the lefty leader of the opposition) response to the accusation was not "hah! Cameron fucked a pig!" but rather "the way that certain elements of the media have run with this baseless story as if it's in any way corroborated or relevant is very unpleasant and symptomatic of a problem in personality politics."
Our politicians molest real humans, get on our level.
Basically a Frat initiation ritual.
ah got onto the next page now
D3 Steam #TeamTangent STO
"I refuse to dignify that allegation with a response" is a very different answer to "Obviously I did not do that, no, I'm not a monster. That's disgusting, who would even think of such a thing?"
For a Bullingdon member the answer is likely to be "very drunk"
honestly it sounds pretty similar to me
note: i am not a british tho
The first, when talking about Louis C.K and Weinstein first said that it was Hollywood, and so "should anyone be surprised?". Then handwaived the C.K thing by saying that it was just him reading the room wrong..that at least he didn't assault the women, that he was just doing it for himself, not against them.
Then later that weekend, some mentioned that that "Its just getting too much, too many" when it comes to women coming out. That it was hard to believe it was happening so much, and who knew which were true and which were lies.
She then tried to justify herself by saying that she just likes to play devil advocate and that there's always two sides to a story!
what the ever lovin' f?
But this interview is just unbelievable. I am disgusted by this.
This is how you repay women after they just helped give you a landslide election night?
For fucks sake, a 26 year old openly gay woman flipped a state legislature seat in a part of Oklahoma that went for Trump by 40 goddamn points.
Franken and Conyers should have resigned. Now I guess we’re just going to drag ourselves through the mud and throw away all the encouragement everyone felt after those election wins.
Of course, the moment they think they're ordered to murder, or think it's now condoned, they'll gleefully do it. Plenty of times you see in the news where some nutbars thought God was giving them special instructions so they tortured and starved their kids to death. "Abraham, go slit your kid's throat." "Sure thing, boss!"
It ties in with their desire for power. Their entire understanding of the nature of power is that it's to be wielded for arbitrary self-aggrandizement, so they want it to be able to use it against others as it was used against them. It's probably the real reason white evangelicals as a group love Trump, because he's their apotheosis: stupid, petty, corrupt, selfish, and given theoretically unlimited power and the ability to get away with anything.