• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Hillary commenting on abuse of women???

Stinger

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,424
Reaction score
619
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
April 20, 2007, 9:07 PM EDT

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J. -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton finally dropped by Rutgers to meet with the school's women's basketball coach -- but the players themselves skipped the half-hour meeting, citing their studies and Imus fatigue.

Clinton had been scheduled to meet with Scarlet Knight coach C. Vivian Stringer and an assistant, and possibly some of the players, Monday to talk with them about Don Imus's "nappy-headed ho" comments.

But that sit-down was postponed due to weather and because the story seemed far less significant after the Virginia Tech killings.

"Many of the players were in study hall from eight to noon and some had finals," explained a Rutgers source who said the players were "tired" of all the attention. "These young women need to do their classes, and wrap their spring semester."

After meeting with Stringer Friday morning, Clinton addressed about 700 students and faculty on campus later in the day, praising the players and naming them one-by-one while criticizing "bigotry" against women. She never named Imus directly and made a point of saying her criticism wasn't intended to curtail free speech.

She urged the crowd to take a "Rutgers pledge," to say, "Enough is enough, when women or minorities or the powerless are marginalized or degraded."'

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationw...1,0,3464673,print.story?coll=ny-top-headlines

Let me get this straight, this is a woman who allowed a man to totally abuse her as a woman, and as a wife their marriage. This is the woman who to this day who defends and supports a man who sexually abused women, used his power to coax women into having sex with him, set up his young illicit "girlfriend" to go to a federal prison in order to save his own rear end when he got sued for his actions as a sexually harassing boss, and by the preponderance of the evidence raped a woman.

And she thinks she has any standing to speak on the issue. She believe sshe has the authority to rail against the abuse of women, when she is an enabler?
 
Hmmmm, would've thought Mrs. Clinton and the Rutger's women would have caught some interest here.

So where does Mrs. Clinton get the moral authority to lecture the public on abuse when she enabled her husband to do the things he did and she just sat there and took the abuse he laid on her?
 
Let me get this straight, this is a woman who allowed a man to totally abuse her as a woman, and as a wife their marriage. This is the woman who to this day who defends and supports a man who sexually abused women, used his power to coax women into having sex with him, set up his young illicit "girlfriend" to go to a federal prison in order to save his own rear end when he got sued for his actions as a sexually harassing boss, and by the preponderance of the evidence raped a woman.

And she thinks she has any standing to speak on the issue. She believe sshe has the authority to rail against the abuse of women, when she is an enabler?
Click to expand...

These preposterous, unsubstantiated claims of yours are slander; worse, they are libel, which is a crime. And if you weren't an insignificant nobody, I'm sure the victim of this libel would take action against you.
But since you are, I doubt she much cares what you say, or what you think, for that matter.
Apparently, judging from the lack of response to your thread, the feeling is unanimous.
 
Stinger said:
Let me get this straight, this is a woman who allowed a man to totally abuse her as a woman, and as a wife their marriage. This is the woman who to this day who defends and supports a man who sexually abused women, used his power to coax women into having sex with him, set up his young illicit "girlfriend" to go to a federal prison in order to save his own rear end when he got sued for his actions as a sexually harassing boss, and by the preponderance of the evidence raped a woman.
Click to expand...

He also caused the Holocaust and killed Christ.
 
1069 said:
These preposterous, unsubstantiated claims of yours are slander; worse, they are libel, which is a crime.
Click to expand...

Oh that's a joke. They went on 60 minutes and admitted it, we have him on tape with his mistresses, we have sworn testimony, and we have the affidavit.

You claim that it is unsubstantiated is a blatant lie.

And if you weren't.............
Click to expand...

There you go trying to make it about the messenger.

Apparently, judging from the lack of response to your thread, the feeling is unanimous.
Click to expand...

The lack of response is because it is indefensible. For her to chastize anyone for abusing women, to rail about how women are marginalized by men, is absurd, she has no moral standing on that issue, she is an enabler, her abuse is a serial abuser of women including herself.
 
Kandahar said:
He also caused the Holocaust and killed Christ.
Click to expand...

If you say so, I'll stay with the facts. Are you denying he submitted into a federal court Monica Lewinsky's false affidavit in an attempt to obstruct justice, and that by doing so made her a party to a felony subject a term in a federal penitentiary? You deny that?

Nice guy isn't he, and Hillary stays with him and defends what he did. Where does SHE get off telling others that abusing and marginalizing women is wrong when she enables it?
 
Who the hell hasn't had to deal with infidelity in a marriage, in this day and age (or in any day and age, probably)? :roll:

Hillary handled the situation with grace and panache; in doing so, she became beloved by America.

If Bill hadn't screwed around and gotten caught at it, I'd venture, she probably wouldn't be on her way to being President right now.
Because he did, and because we all witnessed her strength, loyalty, composure, maturity, dignity, and optimism in the face of an unimaginably sordid public spectacle, she won the support of America.
This is someone who can set grave personal crises aside and focus on the task at hand.
See, we already know that about her, and it's something we rarely know about candidates until they're already ensconced in the oval office.
 
Stinger said:
If you say so, I'll stay with the facts. Are you denying he submitted into a federal court Monica Lewinsky's false affidavit in an attempt to obstruct justice, and that by doing so made her a party to a felony subject a term in a federal penitentiary? You deny that?

Nice guy isn't he, and Hillary stays with him and defends what he did. Where does SHE get off telling others that abusing and marginalizing women is wrong when she enables it?
Click to expand...

He also collaborated with Barack Obama to bring down the Roman Empire.
 
1069 said:
Who the hell hasn't had to deal with infidelity in a marriage, in this day and age (or in any day and age, probably)? :roll:
Click to expand...

OH that's an excuse isn't it.
Hillary handled the situation with grace and panache; in doing so, she became beloved by America.
Click to expand...

No she didn't, she handled it like a weak woman who enables an abuser. She went on 60 minutes with him and blamed everyone else, when he fact he was stil violating his marriage vows. She allowed him to make a fool of her and then stood by him while he set up a young woman for a prison term.

If Bill hadn't screwed around and gotten caught at it, I'd venture, she probably wouldn't be on her way to being President right now.
Click to expand...

So that makes it a good reason?

Because he did, and because we all witnessed her strength,
Click to expand...

If she had any strength she would have left him after he used his political position to have an affair with Flowers. If she had any scrupples she would have walked out after what he did to Lewinsky.
loyalty, composure, maturity, dignity, and optimism in the face of an unimaginably sordid public spectacle, she won the support of America.
Click to expand...

You mean in the face of someone making a fool our of you and your marriage?

This is someone who can set grave personal crises aside
Click to expand...

And stay with a man who set up his very young mistress to go to jail to cover his own arse and was willing to make her out to be a crazy to make himself look better. Yeah what a guy to defend.
See, we already know that about her, and it's something we rarely know about candidates until they're already ensconced in the oval office.
Click to expand...

Yes we know she is a very weak woman who has no standing to discuss abuse of women and especially sexual harassment in the workplace.
 
Stinger said:
No she didn't, she handled it like a weak woman who enables an abuser. She went on 60 minutes with him and blamed everyone else, when he fact he was stil violating his marriage vows. She allowed him to make a fool of her and then stood by him while he set up a young woman for a prison term.
Click to expand...

...and they broke up the Beatles.

Stinger said:
If she had any strength she would have left him after he used his political position to have an affair with Flowers. If she had any scrupples she would have walked out after what he did to Lewinsky.
Click to expand...

...and they had JFK killed.

Stinger said:
And stay with a man who set up his very young mistress to go to jail to cover his own arse and was willing to make her out to be a crazy to make himself look better. Yeah what a guy to defend.
Click to expand...

I think we get it...you don't like the Clintons. Maybe you're just jealous that Bill gets laid more than you do.
 
Last edited:
If she had any scrupples she would have walked out after what he did to Lewinsky.
Click to expand...

"Scrupples"...?
Heaven forbid. :lamo
 
Kandahar said:
...and they broke up the Beatles.



...and they had JFK killed.



I think we get it...you don't like the Clintons. Maybe you're just jealous that Bill gets laid more than you do.
Click to expand...

So you can't refute on thing I said, so you engage in high school taunting. How childish.
 
Stinger said:
So you can't refute on thing I said, so you engage in high school taunting. How childish.
Click to expand...

There's nothing to refute. You post the same turds in every thread you read. Come up with something new or insightful if you want an actual discussion.
 
faminedynasty said:
I doubt that you believe that for an instant.
Click to expand...

That she is a weak woman, of course she is. Any woman with any strength would have told the jerk to get out a long time ago, not only for how he treated her but how he treated the women he used to cheat on her. Please don't tell me you actually respect this man.

I understand you're committed to posturing and partisanship,
Click to expand...

No let's keep to the facts. He enticed Lewinsky to write a false affidavit, which is a felony in and of itself, he then walked into a federal court, where another employee was suing him over his sexual assault on her, and entered that affidavit into evidence. He set his illicit girlfriend, a not very mature, fantasized young lady, up for a prison sentence, and he didn't care a twit. He then plotted with one of his advisors, that if she did tell the truth they would mount a campaign to smear her as delusional and a crazy that they had tried to get rid of.

Nice guy eh? Now Hillary knows all of this, yet she is powerless to leave him. How can you respect a woman who would stand by such a man? Where does she get the moral standing to preach to others especially young women when she is an enabler of such abuse. If Hillary, when the Lewinsky scandal broke, had walked in and told that was it 'I stood by you on 60 minutes when you. we said, that was all over, and I dared anyone to bring it up again and blamed it on a great right wing conspiricy. And now you have made the fool of me. Bye you jerk", she could probably have been elected President the next election. She would have been showing character and strength.

So tell me where I'm wrong?
 
Stinger said:
That she is a weak woman, of course she is. Any woman with any strength would have told the jerk to get out a long time ago, not only for how he treated her but how he treated the women he used to cheat on her. Please don't tell me you actually respect this man.

So tell me where I'm wrong?
Click to expand...

Stinger, forgiveness takes much more strength than you can imagine. To call any woman "weak" because she made a decision to forgive is just really odd to me.

I can't figure out why you are on such a rant about something that happened in a marriage that wasn't yours.
 
missypea said:
Stinger, forgiveness takes much more strength than you can imagine.
Click to expand...

Excuse me, I know all about forgiveness, this is beyond forgiveness. He made a total fool out of her after asking her forgiveness before the election on national TV. Then he lied and lied and lied and lied and lied and lied and lied and lied and lied to her. It's one thing if a person hurts another, particularly when that person is the one they vowed to honor and respect in a marriage, but when that person does it over and over and over, and then does the other things this man did in the process, as I stated in my previous post, it's time to show character and strength and kick the bum out.

To call any woman "weak" because she made a decision to forgive is just really odd to me.
Click to expand...

It's not just that, she still stands by him after it came to light how reprehensibly he treated all these women, even willing to let one go to federal prison.

I can't figure out why you are on such a rant about something that happened in a marriage that wasn't yours.
Click to expand...

If it was just about his marriage I still wouldn't respect either one of them, but she is asking to be the leader of the country now, and he is still the standard bearer for the left.

Tell me what you think about his willingness to see Lewinsky off to a prison term just to save his political hide? Do you respect a man who would do that. Or be willing to mount a campaign to smear her if she told the truth, your idea of the ideal man?
 
1069 said:
These preposterous, unsubstantiated claims of yours are slander; worse, they are libel, which is a crime. And if you weren't an insignificant nobody, I'm sure the victim of this libel would take action against you.
But since you are, I doubt she much cares what you say, or what you think, for that matter.
Apparently, judging from the lack of response to your thread, the feeling is unanimous.
Click to expand...

Actually slander and libel are basically the same thing, the only difference is slander is spoken and libel is written down. But you're right it is a crime.
 
Actually slander and libel are basically the same thing, the only difference is slander is spoken and libel is written down.
Click to expand...

Duh, what did I just say? :boxer
I said, "Hey, that's slander!" (which it is).
Then I added, "No, actually it's libel, which is worse." (which it is).
 
1069 said:
Duh, what did I just say? :boxer
I said, "Hey, that's slander!" (which it is).
Then I added, "No, actually it's libel, which is worse." (which it is).
Click to expand...

Oops, misread your post:3oops: . But libel isn't really worse, it's basically the same thing.
 
RightOfCenter said:
Actually slander and libel are basically the same thing, the only difference is slander is spoken and libel is written down. But you're right it is a crime.
Click to expand...

Not for public officials and only if the statements aren't true, she is and they are.
 
1069 said:
Duh, what did I just say? :boxer
I said, "Hey, that's slander!" (which it is).
Then I added, "No, actually it's libel, which is worse." (which it is).
Click to expand...

It's not slander if it is the truth, sorry you lose on that argument. So do you respect Bill Clinton after the way he treats women? After the way he set up Lewinsky to go to prison?
 
Stinger said:
Not for public officials and only if the statements aren't true, she is and they are.
Click to expand...

It is a crime against public officials if they aren't true, but since they are your opinions they are debatable and are not libel.
 
NOBODY knows what type of relationship Bill and Hillary have. Only THEY know. It's very likely that Hillary was fully aware of Bill's infidelities and just didn't give a crap. Not only do some people have open marriages, many politicians have political marriages in that they are only married because they have to be married in order to be elected. (at least that's the social state now.. hopefully that will change)

NO ONE has any right or place to judge Hillary. You simply do not know their relationship and what compromises or agreements they may or may not have had. You just don't know.

I have no sympathy for Monica L. None whatsoever. She knew what she was getting into by having "sexual relations" with the president of the fricken United States. She was all about "the power" he had. You think he used HER? Pfffft. I disagree. I think SHE used HIM. He fought back, as any sensible man would.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom