Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
bluebell

A Republican o.k. with Mormon Genocide

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Calm said:

A blog on why telling a woman or anyone else "why don't you just slap him" is poor advice, including the fact that even women trained in self defense freeze up:

https://adainitiative.org/2013/08/27/why-dont-you-just-hit-him-the-worst-possible-anti-harassment-advice/

We are biologically wired not to be a threat to a larger, stronger individual.  It can take hours of emotional buildup to break that programming even if we have intentionally prepared ourselves to do so.

Then put in those hours and preparation.

Notice how even a trained fighter got out as soon as she could. Smart girl.

 

Edited by Darren10

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Darren10 said:

"From my perspective, slapping a man who has no respect for me as a woman is likely to get me punched in the face or worse.  It's generally really stupid to slap people who 1)-have already shown they don't mind assaulting you and 2)-are bigger and stronger than you are.  

Do you really not know that women have been seriously physically harmed for doing less than slapping a man for touching her without her permission?  Why would any woman in her right mind take that risk if she had other options?"

Then raise up to the occasion and protect yourself. Learn to effectively slap a man who gets out of line and then get out of the situation or do some more effective slapping. Stop viewing yourself as so fragile and volatile.

 

Carry a gun and/or a knife and/or pepper spray. Learn to break a man's neck but stop pouting about how useless women are in protecting themselves. Criminetly feminism is destroying women .

I do a lot of self-defense and sparring stuff and it takes a lot of time and effort to learn to fight effectively and especially to fight someone bigger and stronger then you. Expecting every woman to learn to fight in order to function in society is unfair and kind of sad. I could probably destroy you in a fight. Does that mean you should need to learn to fight in order to be around me? And that if I attack you and beat you it just means that you are a wimp who should have been prepared?

Is your argument that before feminism women all carried guns, were trained in jujitsu, and could break men's necks with ease and that feminism ruined that world?

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, bsjkki said:

It's been dropped and was fabricated. It's amazing this wasn't discussed more in the press at the time (sarcasm).http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3914012/Troubled-woman-history-drug-use-claimed-assaulted-Donald-Trump-Jeffrey-Epstein-sex-party-age-13-FABRICATED-story.html

From the article I don't see that she recanted the story, she didn't know who it was until she saw Trump on the Apprentice and realized that was who had raped her. I know she seems very unstable, but she never admitted to making the story up yet, in my estimation.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

Back in the early years of the HIV virus it may have, they would have been scared of catching it. I think the grabbing women by their private parts does merit being charged. And someone kissing me, would also. Sorry, but you aren't a woman. Women have been abused by men so much with little inuendos etc. it's time to stop it, because little inuendos lead to even bigger problems. When men feel they have the okay for a kiss that will lead to more, and it has. Do you have daughters, would you want a stranger or even an aquaintance to kiss them forcefully? Make them feel like just because they're a woman it's okay to be a subordinate to this behaviour? 

"Do you have daughters, would you want a stranger or even an aquaintance to kiss them forcefully? Make them feel like just because they're a woman it's okay to be a subordinate to this behaviour? "

Gee, I don't know. Ask Cal since I told her that I am going to have my daughter trained to instantly kill a man who decides to get stupid with her. This daughter just turned 18 and she may leave the nest soon. She can already shoot really well but I would like her to use her hands and feet better.

So, what do you think?

 

Edited by Darren10

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Calm said:

It is highly unlikely that a man or woman who is willing to force himself/herself on another person sexually in any way is the type of person who would 'never slap a woman'.  Encouraging a woman to slap another for unwanted sexual advances is putting her in harm's way.  You have no idea if that slap will set off a more physical attack that could leave the woman injured or dead.  Possible escalation is a very, very real possibility.

Oh, please. Men are wired, to use your phrase, to get sexual quicker than women. Of course they'll kiss a woman when she did not ask for it. Slap him and if he does anything to retaliate do not be with that man in the first place. The vast majority of times you'll know this type of person way ahead of it. Unfortunately that's not guaranteed but by and large that seems to be the case.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Darren10 said:

"From everything that I've read, over the last several decades, numerous officials--both Republican and Democrat--used private email servers, including classified documents, deleted hundreds of thousands of emails (both before AND AFTER court subpoenas), etc. (I've read that Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice, George W. Bush, Bush Senior, VPs, etc.... ALL did the SAME thing Hillary is being derided for).  " - I've heard that before from Hillary. What do you and I guess her base that on?

They aren't hard to find.  Google turns up numerous references.

Here's a few stories/sources:

 
Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin
Palin kept a separate personal email account, on top of her official government account and regular personal account, to conduct official business for most of her tenure in office.
 
Palin, the GOP vice presidential candidate in 2008, allegedly used the third account to communicate with a group of her closest staffers, according to the Washington Post
 
She was eventually forced to release more than 24,000 pages of emails from her official and private email accounts, including more than 400 emails from a second Yahoo account.
 
Former presidential nominee Mitt Romney and some of his top aides also used their private email accounts for official business, according to the AP.
 
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney
Mitt Romney, the GOP's 2012 presidential nominee, and some of his top aides used private email accounts to conduct state business at times when Romney was governor of Massachusetts, The Associated Press reported this week, citing documents obtained by the news agency.
 
The communications, however, were legal under Massachusetts state law, even though Romney's own administration warned state agencies against the practice due to cybersecurity concerns.
 
The private email accounts used, nevertheless, raise questions about why Romney and his aides sometimes bypassed Massachusetts' official communications system — and how many of those emails remain and whether they could be disclosed to the public.
 
Karl Rove reportedly used an RNC email account, instead of his official White House email account, to send and receive official emails.
 
Former George W. Bush adviser Karl Rove
Karl Rove, a one-time top adviser to former President George W. Bush, allegedly used his Republican National Committee email improperly, resulting in the disappearance of at least four years' worth of correspondence sent and received from the account.
 
Up to 22 other aides to Bush may have also used their RNC, or other email, accounts to send and receive official emails. According to CNN, some of the non-official accounts were used by aides to discuss the controversial firings of several federal prosecutors.
 
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo reportedly has directed staffers to delete emails that are more than three months old.
 
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo
Last month, Capital New York reported that the administration of Democratic New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo had begun "automatically deleting emails of rank-and-file state works that are more than three months old," a policy that has resulted in the elimination of thousands of pages of official correspondence.
 
While the practice hasn't been deemed illegal, it has generated serious questions regarding transparency in the governor's office and may violate certain public information laws.
 
Some of the emails that implicated New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie's former deputy chief of staff Bridget Anne Kelly in the ‘bridgegate’ scandal were sent and received from personal email accounts.
 
Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie aide Bridget Anne Kelly
The "bridgegate" scandal that rocked Christie's administration in recent years all began with the unearthing of emails and texts — many sent and received from personal accounts — among a small group of Christie advisers, including Bridget Anne Kelly, who was eventually fired from her job.
 
Many of the emails that implicated Kelly and other top aides — as well as David Wildstein, a Christie appointee to the Port Authority board of commissioners — were sent and received from unofficial personal accounts.

From Wikipedia:

Bush White House email controversy
 
During the 2007Congressional investigation of the dismissal of eight U.S. attorneys, it was discovered that administration officials had been using a private Internet domain, called gwb43.com, owned by and hosted on an email server run by the Republican National Committee,[1]for various official communications. The domain name is an abbreviation for "George W. Bush, 43rd" President of the United States. The use of this email domain became public when it was discovered that J. Scott Jennings, the White House's deputy director of political affairs, was using a gwb43.com email address to discuss the firing of the U.S. attorney for Arkansas.[2] Communications by federal employees were also found on georgewbush.com (registered to "Bush-Cheney '04, Inc."[3]) and rnchq.org (registered to "Republican National Committee"[4]). Congressional requests for administration documents while investigating the dismissals of the U.S. attorneys required the Bush administration to reveal that not all internal White House
emails were available. Conducting governmental business in this manner is a possible violation of the Presidential Records Actof 1978.[5]Over 5 million emails may have been lost.[6][7] Greg Palast claims to have come up with 500 of the Karl Rove emails, leading to damaging allegations.[8] In 2009, it was announced that as many as 22 million emails may have been lost.[citation needed]
 
The "gwb43.com"[9] domain name was publicized by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington
(CREW), who sent a letter to Oversight and Government Reform Committee committee chairman Henry A. Waxman
requesting an investigation.[10] Waxman sent a formal warning to the RNC, advising them to retain copies of all emails sent by White House employees. According to Waxman, "in some instances, White House officials were using nongovernmental accounts specifically to avoid creating a record of the communications."[11] The Republican National Committee claims to have erased the emails, supposedly making them unavailable for Congressional investigators.[12]
 
On April 12, 2007, White House spokesman Scott Stanzel stated that White House staffers were told to use RNC accounts to "err on the side of avoiding violations of the Hatch Act, but they should also retain that information so it can be reviewed for thePresidential Records Act," and that "some employees ... have communicated about official business on those political email accounts."[13] Stanzel also said that even though RNC policy since 2004 has been to retain all emails of White House staff with RNC accounts, the staffers had the ability to delete the email, themselves.
 
On December 14, 2009, CNN reported [14]that all 22 million missing emails had been found on backup tapes, and that the Obama Administration reached a settlement with two watchdog groups who had sued to obtain the emails.

And from MSNBC:

Quote

The Republicans who did ‘exactly what Hillary did

03/13/15 08:03 AMUpdated 03/13/15 08:20 AM
 
 
One of the under-appreciated angles to the story about Hillary Clinton’s email problem is that Hillary Clinton isn’t the only one with an email problem. In fact, in an ironic twist, some of the former Secretary of State’s leading Republican critics have also relied on personal email accounts and shielded selected messages from public scrutiny.
 
Aliyah Frumin explained this week, for example, that “several potential 2016 Republican presidential candidates are facing email and transparency issues of their own” and they “also leaned heavily on private emails during their time in office – and have been criticized in the past for not releasing other documents – just as they skewer Clinton for not being forthright with her personal emails.”
 
The Wall Street Journal today, for example, takes a look at former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush’s (R) record.
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, a likely Republican presidential candidate, primarily used a personal email account on his own computer server when he was in office from 1999 to 2007. In December, he posted online hundreds of thousands of emails from both the private and government accounts. Mr. Bush’s spokeswoman said that emails from the private account unrelated to government business weren’t turned over to the state or preserved. […]
 
But much like with Mrs. Clinton, the decision over which emails should be considered official and which remain private was made by Mr. Bush. It is unclear how many emails Mr. Bush withheld because he deemed them unrelated to state business.
Barbara Petersen, president of the First Amendment Foundation, told the WSJ that Jeb Bush “did exactly what Hillary did.” The former governor and his aides “went through those emails and decided what were public-record emails and what wasn’t.”
 
By some accounts, the messages Team Bush chose not to share related to “politics” and “campaign donors asking for favors” – topics that may be relevant in a presidential campaign.
 
Bush is hardly the only one among the likely GOP presidential candidates with this email problem. Indeed, most of the Republican field should probably hope this issue goes away quickly:
 
* Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R): Though he called Clinton’s use of a private email address an “outrage,” Walker is at the center of a Wisconsin controversy surrounding his use of a private email address.
 
* Florida Sen. Marco Rubio (R): The Republican lawmaker deleted emails from his private account during his tenure in state government, despite using his personal account to conduct business related to his official duties.
 
* New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R): The Bergen Record reported this week, “Nearly a year before revelations that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton used her personal email account for official business, the Christie administration was chastised because members of its own staff communicated through private emails. And that criticism came not from Governor Christie’s political foes, but from lawyers hired by his team to investigate the burgeoning George Washington Bridge lane-closing scandal.”
 
* Former Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R): Both Republican governors conducted official business from their private email accounts and have not released the emails for public scrutiny.
 
Just to be clear about this, I’m not suggesting the Clinton story is irrelevant. On the contrary, legitimate questions have been raised that deserve answers. What’s more, there are some differences between the Clinton story and the circumstances surrounding her Republican critics, most notably the fact that they seemed to operate two email accounts – one governmental, one private – while the former Secretary of State used one.
 
But the hypocrisy matters, too. Some of the same Clinton critics reaching for the fainting couch because the public won’t see messages she deemed private also conducted official business from their private accounts in emails that will receive no public scrutiny at all.
 
For that matter, the Clinton “scandal” seems oddly detached from the fact that (a) the Bush/Cheney White House lost millions of important emails, and the Beltway media largely ignored the story; (b) Mitt Romney went to hilarious lengths to hide his public emails from scrutiny in the last presidential campaign, and the Beltway media largely ignored the story; and (c) previous Secretaries of State sent and received emails that the public has never seen, and will never see, and no one seems to find that particularly controversial.
 
Edited by Daniel2

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I do a lot of self-defense and sparring stuff and it takes a lot of time and effort to learn to fight effectively and especially to fight someone bigger and stronger then you. Expecting every woman to learn to fight in order to function in society is unfair and kind of sad. I could probably destroy you in a fight. Does that mean you should need to learn to fight in order to be around me? And that if I attack you and beat you it just means that you are a wimp who should have been prepared?

Is your argument that before feminism women all carried guns, were trained in jujitsu, and could break men's necks with ease and that feminism ruined that world?

"I do a lot of self-defense and sparring stuff and it takes a lot of time and effort to learn to fight effectively and especially to fight someone bigger and stronger then you."

Good for you and you're absolutely correct. is your self defense and sparing based on the idea that you are completely helpless? That you must call the police if someone kisses you without asking? It teaches you not to slap a man if he gets out of line? That seems like a self defense system not to effective. But, to each her own.

 "Expecting every woman to learn to fight in order to function in society is unfair and kind of sad."

Sad? Strange from a feminist point of view if that's what you are queuing from. It's not that hard to hurt a man and get out of the situation.

"Does that mean you should need to learn to fight in order to be around me?"

Huh? If that was the requisite then I would not be around you. Learning to fight is good though *in case* a man acts inappropriately with you. I think your hubby would agree.

"And that if I attack you and beat you it just means that you are a wimp who should have been prepared?"

Well, if you ever find yourself in a fair fight then your fighting techniques suck. :)

"Is your argument that before feminism women all carried guns, were trained in jujitsu, and could break men's necks with ease and that feminism ruined that world?"

No, that feminism makes women weaker and more of a victim. I hear it loud and clear from you, Tacenda, and BlueBell.

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

Not Utah.

I try to see the good in people, I maybe read your post wrong when asking what planet you live on. I realized afterward that you were quoting Bluebell. 

Just feeling bad if I hurt your feelings. But really can't comprehend your not understanding how a woman feels attacked even with a kiss. I think men have been conditioned to believe that it's the manly thing to do, or they are the pursuer or that women like that way of being pursued.  

Share this post


Link to post
38 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

"Why can't we just slap people for breaking the law?"

Sounds good to me.

 "The next time some man comes up to you and kisses you forcefully without your permission you go ahead and slap him."

Sounds good to me. you do the same.

 

Did you not read the rest of my post Darren?  Are you really telling someone that doing something that is likely to get them hurt 'sounds good to you'?  

Share this post


Link to post

Daniel2;

 

I gleaned your post and which ones had national security information and which were destroyed after being subpoenaed?

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Daniel2 said:

They aren't hard to find.  Google turns up numerous references.

Here's a few stories/sources:

 

 
 

 

 
Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin
 
 

 

 
 

 

Palin kept a separate personal email account, on top of her official government account and regular personal account, to conduct official business for most of her tenure in office.
 

 

Palin, the GOP vice presidential candidate in 2008, allegedly used the third account to communicate with a group of her closest staffers,
.
 

 

She was eventually
more than 24,000 pages of emails from her official and private email accounts, including more than 400 emails from a second Yahoo account.
 
 

 

Former presidential nominee Mitt Romney and some of his top aides also used their private email accounts for official business, according to the AP.
 
(Gregory Bull/AP)
 
 

 

 
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney
 
 

 

Mitt Romney, the GOP's 2012 presidential nominee, and some of his top aides used private email accounts to conduct state business at times when Romney was governor of Massachusetts, The Associated Press reported this week, citing documents obtained by the news agency.
 

 

The communications, however, were legal under Massachusetts state law, even though Romney's own administration warned state agencies against the practice due to cybersecurity concerns.
 

 

The private email accounts used, nevertheless, raise questions about why Romney and his aides sometimes bypassed Massachusetts' official communications system — and how many of those emails remain and whether they could be disclosed to the public.
 
 

 

Karl Rove reportedly used an RNC email account, instead of his official White House email account, to send and receive official emails.
 
(Rich Pedroncelli/AP)
 
 

 

 
Former George W. Bush adviser Karl Rove
 
 

 

Karl Rove, a one-time top adviser to former President George W. Bush, allegedly used his Republican National Committee email
, resulting in the disappearance of at least four years' worth of correspondence sent and received from the account.
 

 

Up to 22 other aides to Bush may have also used their RNC, or other email, accounts to send and receive official emails. According to
CNN
, some of the non-official accounts were used by aides to discuss the controversial firings of several federal prosecutors.
 
 

 

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo reportedly has directed staffers to delete emails that are more than three months old.
 
(Mike Groll/AP)
 
 

 

 
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo
 
 

 

Last month,
that the administration of Democratic New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo had begun "automatically deleting emails of rank-and-file state works that are more than three months old," a policy that has resulted in the elimination of thousands of pages of official correspondence.
 

 

While the practice hasn't been deemed illegal, it has generated serious questions regarding transparency in the governor's office and may violate certain public information laws.
 
 

 

Some of the emails that implicated New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie's former deputy chief of staff Bridget Anne Kelly in the ‘bridgegate’ scandal were sent and received from personal email accounts.
 
(MIKE SEGAR/REUTERS)
 
 

 

 
Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie aide Bridget Anne Kelly
 
 

 

The "bridgegate" scandal that rocked Christie's administration in recent years all began with the unearthing of emails and texts — many sent and received from personal accounts — among a small group of Christie advisers, including Bridget Anne Kelly, who was eventually fired from her job.
 

 

Many of the emails that implicated Kelly and other top aides — as well as David Wildstein, a Christie appointee to the Port Authority board of commissioners — were sent and received from unofficial personal accounts.

From Wikipedia:

 

Bush White House email controversy
 
 
During the 2007
, it was discovered that administration officials had been using a private Internet domain, called gwb43.com, owned by and hosted on an email server run by the
,
[1]
for various official communications. The domain name is an abbreviation for "
, 43rd"
. The use of this email domain became public when it was discovered that
, the White House's deputy director of political affairs, was using a gwb43.com email address to discuss the firing of the U.S. attorney for Arkansas.
[2]
Communications by federal employees were also found on georgewbush.com (registered to "Bush-Cheney '04, Inc."
[3]
) and rnchq.org (registered to "Republican National Committee"
[4]
). Congressional requests for administration documents while investigating the dismissals of the U.S. attorneys required the Bush administration to reveal that not all internal
emails were available. Conducting governmental business in this manner is a possible violation of the
of 1978.
[5]
Over 5 million emails may have been lost.
[6]
[7]
claims to have come up with 500 of the
emails, leading to damaging allegations.
[8]
In 2009, it was announced that as many as 22 million emails may have been lost.
[
]
 
 

 

The "gwb43.com"
[9]
domain name was publicized by
(CREW), who sent a letter to
committee chairman
requesting an investigation.
Waxman sent a formal warning to the RNC, advising them to retain copies of all emails sent by White House employees. According to Waxman, "in some instances, White House officials were using nongovernmental accounts specifically to avoid creating a record of the communications."
The Republican National Committee claims to have erased the emails, supposedly making them unavailable for Congressional investigators.
 

 

On April 12, 2007, White House spokesman
stated that White House staffers were told to use RNC accounts to "err on the side of avoiding violations of the
, but they should also retain that information so it can be reviewed for the
," and that "some employees ... have communicated about official business on those political email accounts."
Stanzel also said that even though RNC policy since 2004 has been to retain all emails of White House staff with RNC accounts, the staffers had the ability to delete the email, themselves.
 

 

On December 14, 2009, CNN reported
that all 22 million missing emails had been found on backup tapes, and that the Obama Administration reached a settlement with two watchdog groups who had sued to obtain the emails.

And from MSNBC:

 

I appreciate all the effort put into this post!!! I've wanted to put it in words or documentation for a long time. My mental capability or patience isn't quite there though. So thanks again! :)

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

Oh, please. Men are wired, to use your phrase, to get sexual quicker than women. Of course they'll kiss a woman when she did not ask for it. Slap him and if he does anything to retaliate do not be with that man in the first place. The vast majority of times you'll know this type of person way ahead of it. Unfortunately that's not guaranteed but by and large that seems to be the case.

Men are wired to assault women?  That's the stupidest thing i've ever read on here, and that's saying a lot.  

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I try to see the good in people, I maybe read your post wrong when asking what planet you live on. I realized afterward that you were quoting Bluebell. 

Just feeling bad if I hurt your feelings. But really can't comprehend your not understanding how a woman feels attacked even with a kiss. I think men have been conditioned to believe that it's the manly thing to do, or they are the pursuer or that women like that way of being pursued.  

It's bad Tacenda. That's not the question. But going to jail because a man kissed a woman? Really?

I appreciate your empathy. Perhaps I should show more myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, bluebell said:

Men are wired to assault women?  That's the stupidest thing i've ever read on here, and that's saying a lot.  

Men are wired to get sexual quicker and for different reason then women, yes. Not stupid, reality. you just want to define an unwanted kiss as sexual "assault' and worthy of going to jail for. That's what I find stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Did you not read the rest of my post Darren?  Are you really telling someone that doing something that is likely to get them hurt 'sounds good to you'?  

I got your post and if I'm not mistaken, responded to it.

Of course I don't want to get people hurt or to encourage women to get punched in the face. I cannot see how you've read my posts and come to that conclusion.

Share this post


Link to post
32 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

How's your grandkids?

Stuck in premortality with their parents wondering if grandpa and grandma are ever going to meet. Why?

If this is some petty macho attempt to make me feel inferior for not having children you are wasting my time. I volunteer to help with child abuse and neglect and have learned repeatedly that any pair of idiots can create a child. Do I want children on my own? Sure. Will I get that opportunity in this life? Maybe and maybe not. Such is life.

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Did you not read the rest of my post Darren?  Are you really telling someone that doing something that is likely to get them hurt 'sounds good to you'?  

You, I responded to it. And, yup, I am all about wanting women to get hurt my men. By careful analysis which you possess BlueBell, one can totally conclude that I want women to set themselves up to get their a** kicked by a man...after an unwanted kiss of course.

/Feminism is destroying men too.

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Darren10 said:

Men are wired to get sexual quicker and for different reason then women, yes. Not stupid, reality. you just want to define an unwanted kiss as sexual "assault' and worthy of going to jail for. That's what I find stupid.

Maybe not jail time, but some kind of punishment, whether it be a fine, I don't know. But women shouldn't have to feel that they need to be ready for this to happen non stop in their lives. Daily women are cat called on their way to work, or other far worse things. Put yourself in their shoes once. Ask your daughter if she's been harassed at work or school sexually. First have her read the definition of it to make her aware, she may not even be aware of it. Or maybe she's well aware. Ask her, I know my dad never asked me about it. I wish he had, and somehow equipped me or prepared me with what to do. I worked downtown in Salt Lake for several years and felt nervous every time I walked down the street from where I parked. I've been cat called, I've been asked to go for a photo shoot to become a model, not because I look like one, but this is a ploy to get young women to go with them. I rode the bus and had someone try something on me. Good ole' Utah even. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, The Nehor said:

Stuck in premortality with their parents wondering if grandpa and grandma are ever going to meet. Why?

If this is some petty macho attempt to make me feel inferior for not having children you are wasting my time. I volunteer to help with child abuse and neglect and have learned repeatedly that any pair of idiots can create a child. Do I want children on my own? Sure. Will I get that opportunity in this life? Maybe and maybe not. Such is life.

I love that you volunteer to help with child abuse and neglect, in Utah especially. I heard that we are three times the national average on child abuse just the other day on Good Things Utah.

Share this post


Link to post

"Daily women are cat called on their way to work, or other far worse things. "

Oh, I agree and that's very inappropriate. Should cat whistlers be fined? Go to jail? That's where I disagree.

Now, is there any impression I've left you where I am NOT engaged with my daughter and her safety? If so I would like something specific.

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

Daniel2;

I gleaned your post and which ones had national security information and which were destroyed after being subpoenaed?

I'm not convinced that Clinton's emails contained "national security information," as per your insinuation above. 

Here's what Fact-checking Site had to say in their: PolitiFact Sheet: Hillary Clinton’s email controversy entry:

Of the tens of thousands of emails investigators reviewed, 113 contained classified information, and three of those had classification markers. FBI Director James Comey has said Clinton should have known that some of the 113 were classified, but others she might have understandably missed.

Comey said the Justice Department shouldn’t prosecute Clinton because there isn’t enough evidence that she intentionally mishandled classified information. FBI investigators didn’t find vast quantities of exposed classified material, and they also did not turn up evidence that Clinton intended to be disloyal to the United States or that she intended to obstruct justice.

However, he called Clinton’s email setup "extremely careless."

Clinton frequently dealt with sensitive and classified information as secretary of state, and the amount that the FBI found in her email server is miniscule in comparison. It appears that she generally dealt with classified information in an appropriate way.

To electronically transmit classified information, State Department employees must use a specific closed system, not their usual @state.gov email addresses. Clinton has said she viewed classified information in hard copy in her office, and she used other secure channels when traveling. Some emails now made public actually show Clinton’s team discussing how they couldn’t email each other classified information over the private server and instead had to move the conversation to a more appropriate venue.

There are legitimate problems with the government classification process. For example, transparency experts say the government regularly over-classifies, such as classifying information that wouldn’t actually damage national security if released. And the State Department and the intelligence community regularly disagree over whether information should be classified, including about some Clinton emails.

The FBI also determined that about 2,000 of Clinton’s emails contained information that was retroactively classified, meaning the information is classified now but not when the emails were first sent — so no one mishandled these emails.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Darren10 said:

"I do a lot of self-defense and sparring stuff and it takes a lot of time and effort to learn to fight effectively and especially to fight someone bigger and stronger then you."

Good for you and you're absolutely correct. is your self defense and sparing based on the idea that you are completely helpless? That you must call the police if someone kisses you without asking? It teaches you not to slap a man if he gets out of line? That seems like a self defense system not to effective. But, to each her own.

 "Expecting every woman to learn to fight in order to function in society is unfair and kind of sad."

Sad? Strange from a feminist point of view if that's what you are queuing from. It's not that hard to hurt a man and get out of the situation.

"Does that mean you should need to learn to fight in order to be around me?"

Huh? If that was the requisite then I would not be around you. Learning to fight is good though *in case* a man acts inappropriately with you. I think your hubby would agree.

"And that if I attack you and beat you it just means that you are a wimp who should have been prepared?"

Well, if you ever find yourself in a fair fight then your fighting techniques suck. :)

"Is your argument that before feminism women all carried guns, were trained in jujitsu, and could break men's necks with ease and that feminism ruined that world?"

No, that feminism makes women weaker and more of a victim. I hear it loud and clear from you, Tacenda, and BlueBell.

The irony about you posting these self defence videos is your profile pic is of you at a shooting range...hmmm.............hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm..............hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm:wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

"Daily women are cat called on their way to work, or other far worse things. "

Oh, I agree and that's very inappropriate. Should cat whistlers be fined? Go to jail? That's where I disagree.

Now, is there any impression I've left you where I am NOT engaged with my daughter and her safety? If so I would like something specific.

No not at all, I was just wondering if she knew about these things, I never even attempted to talk to my girls about it. Now they are all out of the house, but I could have done a better job. I guess it didn't even occur I should be talking to my daughters about this years ago while they were younger. So I was just curious. I really dropped the ball on so much with my children. 

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Stuck in premortality with their parents wondering if grandpa and grandma are ever going to meet. Why?

If this is some petty macho attempt to make me feel inferior for not having children you are wasting my time. I volunteer to help with child abuse and neglect and have learned repeatedly that any pair of idiots can create a child. Do I want children on my own? Sure. Will I get that opportunity in this life? Maybe and maybe not. Such is life.

I had no idea you did not have children.

Here's what I'm getting at. Loretta Lynch met with Bill Clinton secretly days before the FBI was to announce their conclusion regarding Hillary Clinton. You brush this off as anything coincidental and presented me as some kook stretching to find some conspiracy theory. The meeting between Lynch and Bill was supposed to be secret but a reported just happened to be stationed right in the viewing range of the two planes Lynch and Bill flew in to meet. The reporter recognized the planes and filmed Lynch boarding Bill's plane. When asked about it Lynch said they talked about grandkids and that their meeting was coincidental. . Yeah, like talking grandkids is so important to arrange a secret meeting and it is about near impossible for the US Attorney General to coincidentally meet with a former President of the United States. absolutely no way that was unplanned.

So, that's my grandkid's reference. Absolutely nothing to d with you personally.

Child dude and get a perspective on what I'm saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...