• 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!

Is Kellyanne Conway a voice for women in the White House?

Celebrity

Celebrity

DP Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2016
Messages
5,257
Reaction score
761
Location
VT, USA
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Earlier this year, Kellyanne Conway was appointed Counselor to the President of the United States. Does that mean she is an attorney? Who knows?

Her comments about feminism were praised by some women (and likely also rebuked by others).
I don’t consider myself a feminist. I think my generation isn’t a big fan of labels. My favorite label is mommy. I feel like the feminist movement has been hijacked by the pro-abortion movement or the anti-male sentiments that you read in some of their propaganda and writings. I’m not anti-male. One does not need to be pro-female and call yourself a feminist, when with it comes that whole anti-male culture where we want young boys to sit down and shut up in the classroom. And we have all of these commercials that show what a feckless boob the man in the house is. That’s not the way I see the men in my life, most especially my 12-year-old son. I consider myself a postfeminist. I consider myself one of those women who is a product of her choices, not a victim of her circumstances.
Click to expand...

First of all, I applaud Mrs. Conway for her clarity on the matter of where she stands (or kneels) among women: she is not talking down to other women, and she is not condemning womanhood. But what is she saying about American women?

Mrs. Conway's comments about men show that she is aware that women's issues are intrinsically relevant to human issues vis-a-vis men. The comment is first and foremost about how men and women are treated in society, with the issue of abortion as a secondary question for women. I think she wants to provide a safe environment for her son, while uplifting the women around her.

One final note on this quotation: I am not sure if Mrs. Conway is for or against abortion. I should like to hope that she is not against it.


170228-conway-cr-0428_2ea53586655edddc8c4715529a11aa70.nbcnews-ux-2880-1000.jpg

More recently, Kellyanne Conway shared a moment with Chelsea Clinton on Twitter of mutual assurance. Regarding the photo of the ravishing, yet tasteful Mrs. Conway delicately kneeling on a couch in the oval office, Mrs. Clinton expressed her support for Conway by berating a male US Representative for his commentary. Apparently the comment was considered rude or distasteful. I don't really understand what the problem is, but at least these two women have shown that they are capable of cooperation.
 
Celebrity said:
Earlier this year, Kellyanne Conway was appointed Counselor to the President of the United States. Does that mean she is an attorney? Who knows?
Click to expand...

Sorry, that is a silly opening.... "who knows?" is a fact that is pretty easy to know.

She is an attorney with a JD from GWU.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kellyanne_Conway

She seemed to be a political star a month ago, but it seems pretty clear her wings have been clipped. She had (has) an impossible job. IMHO, she will not be attending the White House Christmas party this year, as she will no longer be on staff by then.
 
upsideguy said:
Sorry, that is a silly opening.... "who knows?" is a fact that is pretty easy to know.

She is an attorney with a JD from GWU.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kellyanne_Conway

She seemed to be a political star a month ago, but it seems pretty clear her wings have been clipped. She had (has) an impossible job. IMHO, she will not be attending the White House Christmas party this year, as she will no longer be on staff by then.
Click to expand...

Well, I was under the impression that she is an attorney by her education. Due to the ethics violation allegations, I assume that whoever knows that she is indeed an attorney is either zealously fighting to maintain that quality, or zealously seeking to remove that quality. I read that she is not even a member of a bar association, so I wasn't sure if she could practice law in any state. Was the opening phrased lazily? Yes, but I think you catch my drift.
 
Nice comment from her on the subject. It should however be noted that it was largely feminists that are responsible for the anti-male mindset currently all over the western world. Just go any feminist march and you will meet many women that are anti-male and probably a few boys carrying around signs that are shaming them for being boys.

There was one just like that at the last march where a boy was carrying around a sign that said boys will be boys with the second use of the word boys crossed out and replaced with good human. You know, because being a boy is bad.
 
Celebrity said:
Earlier this year, Kellyanne Conway was appointed Counselor to the President of the United States. Does that mean she is an attorney? Who knows?

Her comments about feminism were praised by some women (and likely also rebuked by others).


First of all, I applaud Mrs. Conway for her clarity on the matter of where she stands (or kneels) among women: she is not talking down to other women, and she is not condemning womanhood. But what is she saying about American women?

Mrs. Conway's comments about men show that she is aware that women's issues are intrinsically relevant to human issues vis-a-vis men. The comment is first and foremost about how men and women are treated in society, with the issue of abortion as a secondary question for women. I think she wants to provide a safe environment for her son, while uplifting the women around her.

One final note on this quotation: I am not sure if Mrs. Conway is for or against abortion. I should like to hope that she is not against it.


170228-conway-cr-0428_2ea53586655edddc8c4715529a11aa70.nbcnews-ux-2880-1000.jpg

More recently, Kellyanne Conway shared a moment with Chelsea Clinton on Twitter of mutual assurance. Regarding the photo of the ravishing, yet tasteful Mrs. Conway delicately kneeling on a couch in the oval office, Mrs. Clinton expressed her support for Conway by berating a male US Representative for his commentary. Apparently the comment was considered rude or distasteful. I don't really understand what the problem is, but at least these two women have shown that they are capable of cooperation.
Click to expand...

I would hope that Kellyanne is my kind of feminist who appreciates being a wife, mother, woman and strong woman who resents being treated as some kind of helpless underclass. In our world, if we dish out the insults, we can't expect to be protected from them just because we are women. In our world, we can't expect to be as much value to our employer if we expect special accommodations or policies to be established for us because we are women.

As for her credentials, yes, she is a lawyer among other things. This is one smart cookie:

She is a magna cum laude graduate of Trinity College, Washington, D.C., where she earned a B.A. in Political Science. She studied at Oxford University and was elected to Phi Beta Kappa.
Holds a law degree, with honors, from George Washington University Law Center. For four years, she was an adjunct professor at George Washington University Law Center.

Founded the polling company, inc. (sometimes referred to as The Polling Center), a full-service public opinion and market research firm, in 1995. She is the President and CEO.

Editor and publisher of WomenTrends Online.

And the first woman to head up a successful Presidential campaign, once the President, through trial and error, finally figured out he needed to hire her. :)​
 
AlbqOwl said:
I would hope that Kellyanne is my kind of feminist who appreciates being a wife, mother, woman and strong woman who resents being treated as some kind of helpless underclass. In our world, if we dish out the insults, we can't expect to be protected from them just because we are women. In our world, we can't expect to be as much value to our employer if we expect special accommodations or policies to be established for us because we are women.

As for her credentials, yes, she is a lawyer among other things. This is one smart cookie:

She is a magna cum laude graduate of Trinity College, Washington, D.C., where she earned a B.A. in Political Science. She studied at Oxford University and was elected to Phi Beta Kappa.
Holds a law degree, with honors, from George Washington University Law Center. For four years, she was an adjunct professor at George Washington University Law Center.

Founded the polling company, inc. (sometimes referred to as The Polling Center), a full-service public opinion and market research firm, in 1995. She is the President and CEO.

Editor and publisher of WomenTrends Online.

And the first woman to head up a successful Presidential campaign, once the President, through trial and error, finally figured out he needed to hire her. :)​
Click to expand...


Smart cookie? She's a fox.
​
 
Celebrity said:
Smart cookie? She's a fox.
Click to expand...


Yep. That's when Kellyanne the politician comes shining through. She is a master at deflecting tactics to sidestep leading and 'gotcha' questions or questions she knows will be spun out of all resemblance to what she actually says if she answers them. Most smart politicians won't answer questions that can only end badly. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama wrote the book on that.
 
Um, sure?

I mean, a lying sack of crap of a voice coming from a woman with no idea what's really going on most of the time. But it's technically a voice.
 
Conway isn't the first woman who has been on her knees in the Oval Office.
 
I doubt I could care less, but I can try.
 
Well, there's no doubt Conway crafted an excellent commentary in the OP.

But while I'll praise her writing and speaking skills (I admire those that can write and speak well), I don't believe a freaking thing she says.

So, that's about that!
 
AlbqOwl said:
Yep. That's when Kellyanne the politician comes shining through. She is a master at deflecting tactics to sidestep leading and 'gotcha' questions or questions she knows will be spun out of all resemblance to what she actually says if she answers them. Most smart politicians won't answer questions that can only end badly. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama wrote the book on that.
Click to expand...

Obama was/is good at that. Clinton, not so much (Bill was excellent).

Conway may be good, but it's hard to tell. Defending the indefensible or making 2 contradictory statements Trump made not contradict each other is just not possible. So she tries to spin off the topic. It's boring. She and Spicer are well paid, but what a horrible daily life...
 
Porkuloss said:
Obama was/is good at that. Clinton, not so much (Bill was excellent).

Conway may be good, but it's hard to tell. Defending the indefensible or making 2 contradictory statements Trump made not contradict each other is just not possible. So she tries to spin off the topic. It's boring. She and Spicer are well paid, but what a horrible daily life...
Click to expand...

She has never defended the indefensible that I have observed. She's just smart enough not to bite on the 'gotcha' questions that the media intends to use to spin any way they choose and that won't be good for her or for the President. That couch shot deliberately made to go viral to discredit her is a good example of what they do. She had just been up on the couch, at the President's instruction, to take a photo of the group in the room from a particular viewpoint and had just sat back down when the photo of her was taken and then distributed to the press without any effort to provide an honest explanation.

But again, the President's critics, including most of the MSM, are without conscience, ethics, or honor. Every quarter was given to President Obama, Hillary Clinton, et al who, as Trey Gowdy recently said, had at least one misspeak every day as every human on Earth does. If people are damned for every gaffe, mental fart, misspeak, failure to understand what has been asked, etc. there is no human on Earth who won't be damned. But the President's critics, including most of the MSM, give no allowance whatsoever for that even when they said it was just mean spiritedness or hatefulness when their people are criticized for doing it.
 
Conway looks like a "double amputee survivor...." lol

C5zhNSIWAAAIl-0.jpg:medium
 
AlbqOwl said:
She has never defended the indefensible that I have observed. She's just smart enough not to bite on the 'gotcha' questions that the media intends to use to spin any way they choose and that won't be good for her or for the President. That couch shot deliberately made to go viral to discredit her is a good example of what they do. She had just been up on the couch, at the President's instruction, to take a photo of the group in the room from a particular viewpoint and had just sat back down when the photo of her was taken and then distributed to the press without any effort to provide an honest explanation.

But again, the President's critics, including most of the MSM, are without conscience, ethics, or honor. Every quarter was given to President Obama, Hillary Clinton, et al who, as Trey Gowdy recently said, had at least one misspeak every day as every human on Earth does. If people are damned for every gaffe, mental fart, misspeak, failure to understand what has been asked, etc. there is no human on Earth who won't be damned. But the President's critics, including most of the MSM, give no allowance whatsoever for that even when they said it was just mean spiritedness or hatefulness when their people are criticized for doing it.
Click to expand...

"Gotcha" questions like "Donald Trump said a thing is true, but the thing isn't true."

Such lowlifes in the media!

Making things up isn't a gaffe, dude.
 
AlbqOwl said:
She has never defended the indefensible that I have observed. She's just smart enough not to bite on the 'gotcha' questions that the media intends to use to spin any way they choose and that won't be good for her or for the President. That couch shot deliberately made to go viral to discredit her is a good example of what they do. She had just been up on the couch, at the President's instruction, to take a photo of the group in the room from a particular viewpoint and had just sat back down when the photo of her was taken and then distributed to the press without any effort to provide an honest explanation.

But again, the President's critics, including most of the MSM, are without conscience, ethics, or honor. Every quarter was given to President Obama, Hillary Clinton, et al who, as Trey Gowdy recently said, had at least one misspeak every day as every human on Earth does. If people are damned for every gaffe, mental fart, misspeak, failure to understand what has been asked, etc. there is no human on Earth who won't be damned. But the President's critics, including most of the MSM, give no allowance whatsoever for that even when they said it was just mean spiritedness or hatefulness when their people are criticized for doing it.
Click to expand...

You see conscience, ethics and honor when you look at Trump?

Repeating in different interviews the story of a "massacre" that never happened is a "misspeak" or "gaff"? People are still repeating that "57 states" thing 8 years later.

Trump just says crap - bombast, hyperbole, whatever you want to call it. Now that he's POTUS, adults like Pence, Tillerson and Mattis have to go overseas and tell foreign officials that the POTUS didn't really mean that.

What a ridiculous state of affairs.
 
Porkuloss said:
You see conscience, ethics and honor when you look at Trump?

Repeating in different interviews the story of a "massacre" that never happened is a "misspeak" or "gaff"? People are still repeating that "57 states" thing 8 years later.

Trump just says crap - bombast, hyperbole, whatever you want to call it. Now that he's POTUS, adults like Pence, Tillerson and Mattis have to go overseas and tell foreign officials that the POTUS didn't really mean that.

What a ridiculous state of affairs.
Click to expand...

I use the 57 states thing as an illustration of innocent gaffes that should amuse us, but are no big deal. To use them to accuse President Obama is just as wrong as to use inconsequential things to hate the current President.

And yes, I do believe President Trump has a conscience and a sense of ethics and honor that we haven't seen for some time in Washington. Is he a perfect man? Absolutely not. He is politically incorrect, perhaps not fully thought out in his comments at times, and unlikable at times. But he was elected in part because he was unafraid to say what he thinks, in part because he is a person to actually wants to fix what is wrong and get things done, and in part because he has a vision that was sorely lacking in our most recent Presidents.

And I am ashamed, frustrated, and angry at those who would destroy him because they hate him, because it isn't one of THEM, because he might succeed when their champions failed. There is nothing constructive or useful in that. It is as if they don't care if they rip the country apart to keep him from achieving the vision that he and his supporters share.
 
AlbqOwl said:
I use the 57 states thing as an illustration of innocent gaffes that should amuse us, but are no big deal. To use them to accuse President Obama is just as wrong as to use inconsequential things to hate the current President.

And yes, I do believe President Trump has a conscience and a sense of ethics and honor that we haven't seen for some time in Washington. Is he a perfect man? Absolutely not. He is politically incorrect, perhaps not fully thought out in his comments at times, and unlikable at times. But he was elected in part because he was unafraid to say what he thinks, in part because he is a person to actually wants to fix what is wrong and get things done, and in part because he has a vision that was sorely lacking in our most recent Presidents.

And I am ashamed, frustrated, and angry at those who would destroy him because they hate him, because it isn't one of THEM, because he might succeed when their champions failed. There is nothing constructive or useful in that. It is as if they don't care if they rip the country apart to keep him from achieving the vision that he and his supporters share.
Click to expand...

Good morning over there in NM...:2wave:

Your perspective is interesting. I respect it, but I see things much differently. We will just have to agree to disagree. I don't hate Trump and I'm not trying to destroy anyone. I will oppose the Trump admin. when I think it's appropriate a I'll support it when it does things I think are good for the country. I would do the same if Clinton or someone else was president.

If the level of opposition directed at Trump seems higher than it has been for past administrations, I think that's due to the type of campaign Trump ran, the things he's said and the people he's surrounding himself with. He's the opposite of 'moderate', and so is the opposition he provokes. I'm seeing people get involved in politics that I've never known to care much. Something is definitely different.
 
Porkuloss said:
Good morning over there in NM...:2wave:

Your perspective is interesting. I respect it, but I see things much differently. We will just have to agree to disagree. I don't hate Trump and I'm not trying to destroy anyone. I will oppose the Trump admin. when I think it's appropriate a I'll support it when it does things I think are good for the country. I would do the same if Clinton or someone else was president.

If the level of opposition directed at Trump seems higher than it has been for past administrations, I think that's due to the type of campaign Trump ran, the things he's said and the people he's surrounding himself with. He's the opposite of 'moderate', and so is the opposition he provokes. I'm seeing people get involved in politics that I've never known to care much. Something is definitely different.
Click to expand...

I too support the President, whomever he is, when I can and will object when I think he is wrong. But I will NEVER condone rioting, looting, threatening, committing assault and battery, vandalizing, and destroying as 'free speech' or see it as anything other than pure hatred and evil. And I cannot accept that anybody who loves this country and the values it was founded on would condone that.
 
AlbqOwl said:
Yep. That's when Kellyanne the politician comes shining through. She is a master at deflecting tactics to sidestep leading and 'gotcha' questions or questions she knows will be spun out of all resemblance to what she actually says if she answers them. Most smart politicians won't answer questions that can only end badly. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama wrote the book on that.
Click to expand...

This is unbelievable spin on Trump officials never answering basic, basic questions.

I'll give you guys some credit, your commitment to Trump is beyond reproach, you buy all the bull****, in bulk like its cost co.
 
AlbqOwl said:
I too support the President, whomever he is, when I can and will object when I think he is wrong. But I will NEVER condone rioting, looting, threatening, committing assault and battery, vandalizing, and destroying as 'free speech' or see it as anything other than pure hatred and evil. And I cannot accept that anybody who loves this country and the values it was founded on would condone that.
Click to expand...

I don't condone any of that or know anyone who does. Protesting is free speech, violence is not speech. Vandalism is not speech. Vandalism directed at Jews, blacks or other minorities has another name.
 
Porkuloss said:
I don't condone any of that or know anyone who does. Protesting is free speech, violence is not speech. Vandalism is not speech. Vandalism directed at Jews, blacks or other minorities has another name.
Click to expand...

Protesting and demonstrating is indeed free speech, but blocking and/or terrorizing traffic and businesses and innocent people is not. Shouting down and prohibiting a guest at your campus or community from speaking or to prevent others from hearing the speaker is not. Attacking people who are rallying in support of the President is not. All that along with the physical violence is just plain old fashioned intolerance, meanness, hatefulness, and evil.
 
AlbqOwl said:
Protesting and demonstrating is indeed free speech, but blocking and/or terrorizing traffic and businesses and innocent people is not. Shouting down and prohibiting a guest at your campus or community from speaking or to prevent others from hearing the speaker is not. Attacking people who are rallying in support of the President is not. All that along with the physical violence is just plain old fashioned intolerance, meanness, hatefulness, and evil.
Click to expand...

Was this "evil"?

Trump Tells Crowd to ?Knock the Crap Out? of Protesters, Offers to Pay Legal Fees | Mediaite
I'd say so, and it fits your definition. I know Trump later claimed he didn't say it. He's denied saying numerous things he's tweeted or been taped saying, so no surprise there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom