- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
A perfectly relevant question for Rand to ask Hillary ...
Posted on 2/14/14 at 1:30 pm
Posted on 2/14/14 at 1:30 pm
"Mrs. Clinton, given your husband had sex with a college-aged girl on the clock and in the office, facts that would likely constitute a strong presumption of sexual harassment in any corporate environment in America, if President, what policies would you put into place to prevent sexual harassment in the workplace? Would you require, for instance, that all interns be male or females of a certain age?"
Agree or disagree?
In my view, these questions would be relevant at any major company in America, why not in this instance?
Agree or disagree?
In my view, these questions would be relevant at any major company in America, why not in this instance?
Posted on 2/14/14 at 1:34 pm to RedStickBR
She's gonna knock him out of the park if he doesn't tread lightly on this
Posted on 2/14/14 at 1:38 pm to Decatur
quote:
She's gonna knock him out of the park if he doesn't tread lightly on this
yeah. I think this is a good question but probably not for a guy who is on the record being skeptical about sexual harrassment.
Hillary could easily turn it around, and say since you believe sexual harassment is an issue, what would you do? To which he would reply. Nothing. BOOM.
Posted on 2/14/14 at 1:38 pm to Decatur
quote:
She's gonna knock him out of the park if he doesn't tread lightly on this
Rand looks like he's spry enough to dodge the errant ashtray or lamp like the one Hillary threw at the ex-philanderer-in-chief.
Posted on 2/14/14 at 1:39 pm to Hawkeye95
Why would he need to do anything? He doesn't have an "at risk" husband.
Posted on 2/14/14 at 1:40 pm to RedStickBR
her reply:
"What difference at this point does it make?"
"What difference at this point does it make?"
Posted on 2/14/14 at 1:42 pm to navy
Can you imagine the CEO of Goldman Sachs having to defend some of the fifty plus year old bankers having sex with college interns on the job? Why is this any different? Bill Clinton is a risk.
Posted on 2/14/14 at 1:43 pm to Decatur
quote:
Posted by Decatur She's gonna knock him out of the park if he doesn't tread lightly on this
As if Hillary is capable
Posted on 2/14/14 at 1:45 pm to RedStickBR
Actually, the better question/statement would be:
So, can we assume you would support legislation to abolish sexual harassment laws/regulations in the workplace?
So, can we assume you would support legislation to abolish sexual harassment laws/regulations in the workplace?
Posted on 2/14/14 at 1:47 pm to RedStickBR
If Paul is smart, he will leave Hillary out of his attacks on Bill as far as Lewinsky is concerned. This sort of loaded questioning might appeal to some FOX News viewers, but I suspect it would turn off a lot of women. I can see Ted Cruz doing something like this, but so far Paul has been more careful with his attacks. I also suspect Paul will avoid birthers leg the bubonic plague, lest all his efforts to reach out to Black folks would be for naught.
This post was edited on 2/14/14 at 1:48 pm
Posted on 2/14/14 at 1:48 pm to RedStickBR
I sure hope Rand doesn't have peabrains running his campaign like the people on this board, though it appears he does based on his attacking Bill's misdeed.
Going up against Hillary with this issue is just going to push votes, particularly female votes, away. Attacking the woman who stood by her man and had to deal with a cheater in a very public way by bringing up the incident isn't going to get you into the White House. No matter how much you peabrains think this is a gotcha. Maybe if he was debating Bill this would matter, but in a debate with the actual candidate, Hillary, Rand is going to come out looking like a petty a-hole.
Going up against Hillary with this issue is just going to push votes, particularly female votes, away. Attacking the woman who stood by her man and had to deal with a cheater in a very public way by bringing up the incident isn't going to get you into the White House. No matter how much you peabrains think this is a gotcha. Maybe if he was debating Bill this would matter, but in a debate with the actual candidate, Hillary, Rand is going to come out looking like a petty a-hole.
Posted on 2/14/14 at 1:49 pm to udtiger
quote:
Actually, the better question/statement would be:
How often would you have to disinfect the carpet in the Oval Office?
Posted on 2/14/14 at 1:53 pm to RedStickBR
quote:
Would you require, for instance, that all interns be male or females of a certain age?"
I can't image any workplace intern situation that would require a minimum age of 23, which would be the relevant age since Lewinsky was 22 at the time of their first encounter.
Posted on 2/14/14 at 1:56 pm to Archie Bengal Bunker
So it's okay to ask about Ann Romney having a horse, but it's not okay to ask about Hillary having a husband who is an actual sexual harrassment risk
Got it. Impeccable logic.
Got it. Impeccable logic.
Posted on 2/14/14 at 1:59 pm to NHTIGER
Right, but assuming you've worked in the past couple of decades, I imagine you also couldn't imagine a workplace allowing someone like Bill "back in the office." Do you have any idea what modern corporate sexual harrassment policies are like?
This post was edited on 2/14/14 at 2:02 pm
Posted on 2/14/14 at 2:05 pm to Archie Bengal Bunker
quote:
Attacking the woman who stood by her man
Stand by Your Man was always the wrong theme song for Hilly. Here's the Tammy Wynette song that's more appropriate.
Til I can make it on my own.
Posted on 2/14/14 at 2:05 pm to Archie Bengal Bunker
quote:
Attacking the woman who stood by her man and had to deal with a cheater in a very public way by bringing up the incident isn't going to get you into the White House.
You really think this is why she stood by her man? Anybody with a lick of sense knows she did it for her political future and four administrations later, here we are.
If she would had divorced Slick she'd be a community organizer raising children in her villages nowadays.
Posted on 2/14/14 at 2:08 pm to RedStickBR
quote:
Right, but assuming you've worked in the past couple of decades, I imagine you also couldn't imagine a workplace allowing someone like Bill "back in the office." Do you have any idea what modern corporate sexual harrassment policies are like?
What does the above have to do with establishing a minimum age for interns, which is the specific part of the OP's proposed "question" that I addressed in my post?
The answer is nothing - nothing at all.
Posted on 2/14/14 at 2:09 pm to Archie Bengal Bunker
quote:
No matter how much you peabrains think this is a gotcha. Maybe if he was debating Bill this would matter, but in a debate with the actual candidate, Hillary, Rand is going to come out looking like a petty a-hole.
Hillary and Bill cannot be separated politically, as much as Hillary wants to be able to use Bill in her campaign when it is an advantage, and distance herself when its not, Rand is going to make Bill her running mate just like Lee Atwater did with Wille Horton and Dukakis.
Posted on 2/14/14 at 2:09 pm to RedStickBR
quote:
So it's okay to ask about Ann Romney having a horse,
Yep, that's exactly what I said, RedStickPeabrain. If the plan of attack is to go after the wife for the husband's cheating, better prepare for four more.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News