Liberal hypocrisy: Clinton fails to shatter 'glass ceiling,' hires all-male staff

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
V

Viligant_Warrior

Guest
#21
#21
kennethcadwell said:
I don't know where you are getting your info from ...
Click to expand...
Actual news sources, which apparently you are ignorant of.

McConnell offers exit strategy for DHS funding impasse, bill’s fate uncertain

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell on Tuesday offered a new plan to potentially break the impasse over legislation to fund the Department of Homeland Security -- but it remained unclear whether the plan could clear Congress before a looming funding deadline.

Funding for DHS expires at midnight Friday, and McConnell's change in tactics comes after Democrats repeatedly blocked a Republican-authored bill to both fund DHS and reverse President Obama's controversial immigration actions.
Click to expand...
McConnell has offered to split the two issues today, vote a so-called "clean" DHS funding bill and then address Obama's illegal immigration order, but Democrats are still stalling. It's going to be their fault if DHS employees have to work past midnight Friday without knowing when they'll be paid for the work.
 
A

AgeofKnowledge

Guest
#22
#22
Hillary's hypocrisy is legendary as is her husband's and Obama's. Of course, she hired an almost all-male staff and paid the few women an average of 72 cents on the dollar of what she paid the men while traveling around telling everyone else to do the opposite.

These people are disgusting and have no business in politics or the running of any nation. Unfortunately; however, morons put them into office in what amounts to a real world exercise of the blind leading the blind. Make no mistake, it's a slow motion train wreck. Just because it happens slowly over many decades doesn't mean it isn't happening. It is happening.


Viligant_Warrior said:
Ya know how Hillary Clinton is always going around promoting "equal rights/equal pay" for women? How she's always encouraging other women to "help one another out" and promote the hiring of women into key corporate positions? Well, turns out she don't practice what she preaches. But what else is new?

FNC added another perspective on this today on F&F. They reported women on both her Senate and State staffs said they averaged 72 cents in salary for every dollar her male staff members earned.

Can you spell "W-A-R O-N W-O-M-E-N", Hill?
Click to expand...
 
3

3Scoreand10

Guest
#23
#23
Ok , Back to Clinton.
Just what positive thing has she done for this country other than just being Hilary.
If the Dems just have to have a woman, surely they can find someone that has accomplished something positive in her life.
 
G

GodIsSalvation

Banned
#24
Dec 18, 2013
6,733
45
0
#24
Just more reason to think Hillary is running if she is now taking on staffers.

Me thinks you ought not be quick to rush into a War on Women. Don't walk into the ambush!

If it is the so-called glass ceiling you worry about, know that the presidency is a job and there seems to be a formidable woman running for it. The average voter won't look at the campaign apparatus as much as they'll look at the candidates.
 
3

3Scoreand10

Guest
#25
#25
Hey Ken
Sheila Jackson Lee just admited the the Dems had held up the funding bill FIVE times.
Just thought you might like to here the REAL news
 
David_1

David_1

Banned
#26
Mar 21, 2011
1,515
16
0
#26
I think the next president will be a Republican, which is sad, because that means a lot of war, corruption and death. The US middle class lost half it's net worth because of the Bush years, I don't think there is much more wealth left to transfer to the 1%. But that won't stop them trying.

I wonder if the next Republican president will finally bring the USA to it's economic knees, unable to recover again?

or maybe things will be okay, because that Republican president won't belong to a criminal family like the Bush family who like to perform false flag attacks?

I just don't have much faith in that.

I'm just not inspired by a Hillary win. She's just more of the same old stuff the Repubs give us. Death and torture.
 
K

kennethcadwell

Guest
#27
#27
3Scoreand10 said:
According to CNN, Politico, and fox, the Dems have been filibustering the bill.
Late yesterday McConnell offered two seperate bills for vote on Friday and Dems rejected his offer.
Click to expand...

That is funny because I watched CNN this morning and they were the ones who said that the Republicans were the ones blocking it because it had immigration reform in the bill. They did not want to pass the bill because of that and want to draft up a new bill without it. And CNN even had other Republicans on the program they were talking to saying that their fellow party members need to go ahead and pass it and then they can work on passing other bills to change what they don't like later. Just to make sure homeland security gets their funding.
 
K

kennethcadwell

Guest
#28
#28
3Scoreand10 said:
Hey Ken
Sheila Jackson Lee just admited the the Dems had held up the funding bill FIVE times.
Just thought you might like to here the REAL news
Click to expand...

So you got the Democrats blaming the Republicans, and the Republicans blaming the Democrats, and then party members blaming other party members.

So once again my initial stance still stands firm that both parties are corrupt and sitting on their butts, not just the Democratic or Liberal parties that seems to be only ones that Viligant Warrior wants to keep making threads to demean and belittle others of.

The behavior of belittling or demeaning others just because you don't like them is not Christian morals or principals, as like the bible says we are to pray, show love, and do good toward others even if we don't like them.
 
K

keepitsimple

Guest
#29
#29
"The greatest argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter."

Winston Churchill


I think I would have liked Winston :)
 
H

Human

Banned
#30
Oct 30, 2014
1,150
7
0
#30
Viligant_Warrior said:
Ya know how Hillary Clinton is always going around promoting "equal rights/equal pay" for women? How she's always encouraging other women to "help one another out" and promote the hiring of women into key corporate positions? Well, turns out she don't practice what she preaches. But what else is new?

FNC added another perspective on this today on F&F. They reported women on both her Senate and State staffs said they averaged 72 cents in salary for every dollar her male staff members earned.

Can you spell "W-A-R O-N W-O-M-E-N", Hill?
Click to expand...
Really, I don't see what your point is. If it's that Hillary's a hypocrite, well maybe she is, but you'd have to prove she deliberately set out to hire more men than women and didn't just decide the people involved (whether male or female) were better for the job she wanted done.

Hiring candidates for the sake of a 50:50 male:female split is silly. You hire the best candidate for the job.
 
Last edited:
H

Human

Banned
#31
Oct 30, 2014
1,150
7
0
#31
Equal rights isn't the same as deliberately 50:50 male:female employment policy. Regardless of whether a person is a man or woman (and remember, more men get into politics than women; more males than females are politicians; and generally, more men than women actually decide to work full-time), they should be evaluated on their ability, not their gender.
 
Last edited:
A

AgeofKnowledge

Guest
#32
#32
It's fun watching liberals make excuses, every single one of which I can decimate into a smoking pile of ash. I think I'll pop some popcorn and keep reading for the entertainment value.
 
H

Human

Banned
#33
Oct 30, 2014
1,150
7
0
#33
AgeofKnowledge said:
It's fun watching liberals make excuses, every single one of which I can decimate into a smoking pile of ash. I think I'll pop some popcorn and keep reading for the entertainment value.
Click to expand...
Well it's not an excuse for anyone, it's my genuine view on employment policy regardless of the situation. I believe that -- as one of those liberals you hate -- people should be evaluated on their ability, not their gender. If I work as an employment officer in an oil rig and am interviewing for a job that requires the lifting of heavy metal objects and a woman comes in and can't handle the physical loads, I won't hire her. Now I'm sure you have a thousand instances at hand -- as pathetic as you sometimes are -- to say ''well liberals can't handle that, look at these lawsuits''. I don't care. I'm not ''those liberals''. We are all different, there are different degrees of liberalism.

If I own a barbershop and hairdressers and a man and woman both come in and the guy can cut hair better than she can, I'd hire him.

I believe in equal rights in employment. That means that I think that people should be evaluated not on their gender, but on their ability. It means that I also believe in socially accommodating workplace environments that are compatible with a mixed sex workforce -- that means fair harassment policy, fair process when dealing with complaints and equal opportunity based on the evaluation of ability rather than gender.

I'm sure again, you have multiple instances of liberals being hypocrites or whatever. Again, I don't care. I'm not them.
 
Last edited:
1

1still_waters

Guest
#34
#34
Does this speak well for Hillary in this specific instance?
The article states...

But just eight years ago, Mrs. Clinton touted eight of 14 senior staffers as women, and 12 of 20 highest-paid staffers as women, the Huffington Post found.The conclusion?
“The woman who would be the first of her gender to reach the presidency has decided that it takes a whole lot of testosterone to win the White House,” Mr. Milbank wrote.
Click to expand...
In other words eight years ago she had women running the show. That didn't work. So instead of doing what didn't work again, all in the name of "girl power", she adapted and is going for what may work. Which indicates she doesn't view "girl power" as a suicide pact of sorts. Which indicates she wants to put what works ahead of quotas and girl power and yada yada yada.

If she doesn't view the "girl power" thing as a suicide pact, and thinks it's better to hire the best qualified, then that may bode well for her in this specific instance.
 
K

kennethcadwell

Guest
#35
#35
1still_waters said:
Does this speak well for Hillary in this specific instance?
The article states...



In other words eight years ago she had women running the show. That didn't work. So instead of doing what didn't work again, all in the name of "girl power", she adapted and is going for what may work. Which indicates she doesn't view "girl power" as a suicide pact of sorts. Which indicates she wants to put what works ahead of quotas and girl power and yada yada yada.

If she doesn't view the "girl power" thing as a suicide pact, and thinks it's better to hire the best qualified, then that may bode well for her in this specific instance.
Click to expand...

Yes as people need to look at the whole story and back ground before coming to a conclusion on somebody.
Good post as there is always to sides to a story and not just one, and anybody who looks for and wants the truth will accept all outlooks and opinions behind an issue. For in looking around we can always even with books and media sources only read and listen to those that fit a one sided agenda to base a bias opinion on.
However to find the actual truth one must use multiple sources to get the full truth, rather you like the other source or not.
Back when the immigration started up with all those kids crossing the border I seen one news media giving mostly the story of the persecution, gangs, and death they were escaping. And another focused mainly on the drugs, gang violence that comes with some of them, and making them out to be a burden on society.
Both gave partial truths, but left out the other half and only by using both would you get the full story.
Plus like I said in a thread about the issue, what happened to the Christian love to help these people go ???
 
A

AgeofKnowledge

Guest
#36
#36
Yes, that was a good post by 1still_waters.
 
RyBread

RyBread

Member
#37
Feb 15, 2015
98
2
0
#37
Viligant_Warrior said:
Ya know how Hillary Clinton is always going around promoting "equal rights/equal pay" for women? How she's always encouraging other women to "help one another out" and promote the hiring of women into key corporate positions? Well, turns out she don't practice what she preaches. But what else is new?

FNC added another perspective on this today on F&F. They reported women on both her Senate and State staffs said they averaged 72 cents in salary for every dollar her male staff members earned.

Can you spell "W-A-R O-N W-O-M-E-N", Hill?
Click to expand...
hmmm.. first of all.. she, just like every other main candidate in the past 60 years; is just a puppet for the corporate America and banking systems. second.. how is this at all relevant or appropriate for CC? third.. who cares??
 
S

Sirk

Guest
#38
#38
RyBread said:
hmmm.. first of all.. she, just like every other main candidate in the past 60 years; is just a puppet for the corporate America and banking systems. second.. how is this at all relevant or appropriate for CC? third.. who cares??
Click to expand...
Well....this is the News section.
 
G

GodIsSalvation

Banned
#40
Dec 18, 2013
6,733
45
0
#40
1still_waters said:
Does this speak well for Hillary in this specific instance?
The article states...



In other words eight years ago she had women running the show. That didn't work. So instead of doing what didn't work again, all in the name of "girl power", she adapted and is going for what may work. Which indicates she doesn't view "girl power" as a suicide pact of sorts. Which indicates she wants to put what works ahead of quotas and girl power and yada yada yada.

If she doesn't view the "girl power" thing as a suicide pact, and thinks it's better to hire the best qualified, then that may bode well for her in this specific instance.
Click to expand...
I think you're close to the grit of it. I don't think it has anything to do with girl power, for Hillary by herself has enough of that. Rather it seems to me she is assimilating some of Obama's old campaign apparatus.

Funny enough though, while this would normally go as an unnoticed bit of news, because Hillary's own opponents invoke that girl power though, they have pretty much reminded everyone that Hillary is the lady best poised to be first woman president.

This is going to be a fun campaign season if this is how it is going before it has even officially begun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.