Discussion: Gillibrand Intros Bipartisan Bill To Alter How Congress Handles Harassment

“It also helps Democrats that by ousting Sen. Al Franken and Rep. John
Conyers, and by (mostly) cheering as the litany of offenders in
Hollywood and the press have gone down, they can authentically claim the
moral high ground on what may have become the most salient social issue
of our time.”

Gillibrand knows what she is doing and she’s known all along.

3 Likes

Except that there is no such place as “the moral high ground.”

She’s on a crusade—a much needed one—but she has to be careful not to come across as hectoring and judgmental, which can damage what she’s trying to do. So far, she’s only slipped a couple of times, and I hope she’s figured out the right balance.

1 Like

She was a strong voice for sexual harrasment change in the Military but was shut down by the democratic Senator from Missouri.

1 Like

Yes she was and this is not lost on a lot of women. Despite the fact that apparently white women voted for Roy Moore, I saw an analysis of the numbers that showed that mothers walked away from the GOP In that election.

1 Like

Unless, of course, he never did it. Which he apparently didn’t.

I don’t think it’s misogynistic to criticize Gillibrand for a knee-jerk reaction, before any kind of review or inquiry had even begun. It has nothing to do with her gender – the same has already been said about Schumer, too, when it comes to the treatment of Franken. She just happens to be taking the lead on this, so naturally, she would be facing most of the criticism. If Schumer were out front, it would be him taking the brunt of it.

I don’t think it’s inconsistent or misogynistic for someone to be firmly against harassment while wanting to make sure the accused is actually guilty of harassment. Personally, I find the timing, nature, and connections among Franken’s accusers to be highly suspect – that has nothing to do with Gillibrand or her gender. It’s the rush to judgment in an atmosphere of such hysteria among the public that I find incredibly troubling.

Sorry but I do. There were a lot of misogynist things said out of anger over Al.

I quit getting on those threads because “purge” and “lynch mob” were terms I feel were misogynistic. She knew what she was doing. Women do once in awhile but nobody wanted to give Kirsten the slightest benefit of a doubt. Ok, I know people were mad but it really didn’t feel good to me at all the way she was attacked.

And that’s all I’m saying about it - I’ve said it already and everybody else had their say too.

Being able to claim the moral high ground is not an excuse for any rush to judgment – it reeks of political expediency rather than moral concern.

Sometimes you have to take one for the team. Franken will have an opportunity to run for Governor shortly if he comes out clean enough when the dust settles.

3 Likes

Oh, I don’t disagree, but I think it’s still fair to criticize the opportunism on display from Schumer and Gillibrand in so willingly helping the right-wing “scandal” machine toss one of our best under the bus out of political expediency.

Maybe so, but it was not just Gillibrand. Mazie Hirono was even tougher on him and showed no signs of letting up. Have there been any more accusations since he announced his resignation?

Fair enough, but let’s just say, for the sake of argument, that it turns out that Tweeden’s claims turn out to be nonsense – that, as has been suggested, the circumstances of the photo were very different from what she claims, that she was in on the photo and had no problem with the skit, which had been performed many times before and after, and that she continued to participate in events with Franken (including events honoring him) for years. And let’s say it turns out, as has been suggested, that the metadata on the photo indicates that it was altered in some way at or about the time Franken won his seat to the Senate. And let’s say it further turns out, as has also been suggested, that the other claims about supposed grabbing during photos, which are not supported by the photographic evidence, turn out to be part of a scheme cooked up by and with Roger Stone. In other words, if it turns out Franken was railroaded, would your view of Gillabrand, Schumer, et al., change? I know mine would. I put nothing past the GOP smear machine – and it ticks me off that the Dems keep doing their dirty work for them.

Except that apparently they found the accusations credible and since they worked with the man I had to respect how Gillibrand, Kamala Harris and Patty Murray felt about it and by god I still do.

And about 2 more seconds, I’m off this thread too.

1 Like

When have Dems ever NOT all piled on in knee-jerk fashion? How many times have they been quick to be outraged, only to have it turn out that they were hoodwinked by right-wing malfeasance, including doctored videos? As my freshman-year math teacher used to say, “Wrong is wrong even if everyone is wrong, and right is right even if no one is right.”

Well, I guess that’s where we disagree – there has been no credible evidence suggested to support any of the accusations, as far as I’ve seen. Anyway, thanks for engaging in the debate, though. Really. It’s a messy topic, and I appreciate your thoughtfulness on the subject and willingness to discuss it.

1 Like

OK, she knew what she was doing. That actually makes her lynching of Al Franken much much worse. Because she knee-caped him not due to the ridiculously trivial level of the offense, but rather to show that Dems had zero tolerance. He was just a human sacrifice to allow more posturing about Roy Moore. And that is disgustingly squalid.

If human sacrifice is needed to gain “the moral high-ground”, that high ground needs to be re-thought.

Drama much? Human sacrifice? Good lord.

If you could quote the message to which you were responding, your response would be clearer. I know you were responding to me, but others may not know that.

If you are correct, Al Franken was just a demonstration of the effect of zero tolerance. As Gillibrand herself indicated, there is no proportionality in her thinking. And, that being said, no man with testosterone is safe. Just yesterday, I put my hands on a subordinate as she was backing up and almost stepping on me. Zero tolerance would consider my contact with her scapula to be possibly sexualized, but in reality i was just ensuring that her heels did not gouge my feet. But zero tolerance means that if she wants to bring me up on charges to HR, I’m toast. Luckily for me, I’m retiring at the end of the summer, so I don’t give a shit. But others might not be so lucky.

And as to your thought that these criticisms “may be misogynistic”, that’s an appalling comment. I am of the opinion that men AND women need to be responsible for their actions. You seem to be of the opinion that men are responsible, but women can say whatever they want without criticism. That’s extremely infantilizing. You appear to believe that women can be allowed to say or do whatever they want, and no one can hold them to account. Amazing.

She’s moved left now that she represents a whole state with a lot of liberals.

I get that, ‘representing her constituents’. Lived just south of her district.

But what does ‘moved left’ mean? From the 30 yard line to the 50 yard line? Until we get to Michael Moore’s camp we’ll be forever stuck in mainstream America. And no, that’s not a ‘good thing’ IMO.

'And now you are giving out commenting lessons? Thanks for the mansplain.

Yeah.

1 Like
Comments are now Members-Only
Join the discussion Free options available