Bill O’Reilly and the Right’s Morality Problem

[FollowTheWay]

Allegations prompt investigations.
And investigations prompt the media to imply guilt.
And (some) of the public declare guilt.

I'll wait for the result of the Justice Dept. and FBI investigation until I decide whether Trump is innocent or guilty of treason. That's the American way.

 

[FollowTheWay]

It is my opinion, that the problem is the Democrats engaging in the behavior that the hackers exposed. The problem was the actions that were exposed, and not those who exposed them.

I'd just like to see a real, in-depth investigation rather than opinions.

 

[Happy]

So, you are aligning yourself with the Communists

That is nothing what I said.

like Trump?

According to what evidence?

So be it.

Your unfounded ASSumption.

I consider Russia to be our enemy.

But apparently you do not know why.

[/QUOTE]Putin is licking his chops [/QUOTE]

[/QUOTE]because of people like you.[/QUOTE]

Actually, Russia patiently waits for Liberals "like you" to to educate their children following the protocol of the Communist Manifesto, which centers around the ideology of economic equality through the elimination of private property. The beliefs of communism center on the idea that inequality and suffering result from capitalism, the very same things Liberals believe and attempt to foster.

 

[Happy]

I'll wait for the result of the Justice Dept. and FBI investigation until I decide whether Trump is innocent or guilty of treason. That's the American way.

No. That is not the American way. Investigations and Judgements, never declare a person "innocent".

And you have already proved by your statements, you have made judgements against me, and against Trump.

You act in the Liberal Way, making accusations as if they are true, when they are not.

 

[Reynolds]

I'd just like to see a real, in-depth investigation rather than opinions.

Unfortunately, all I can do is give my opinion based in the available information.
Is the real problem the hackers? No. The real problem is the actions of the Democrats that the hackers revealed.
Throughout history leaks have occurred. Hacking is merely the newest form. The focus has always been the message and not the messenger. If the Democrats can keep attention on the messenger and get the focus off the message, they have won. Focus on the evil, not the exposed of the evil.

 

[HankD]

It has come to my attention that by using Clinton to cover every wrongdoing, it is a tacit admission that the person being defended is no better than Clinton. Its all about Tribalism at this point.

Partially Agree, it's about hypocrisy as well.

HankD

 

[HankD]

What crime do you think Trump was covering up that he fired the acting assistant attorney general?

He just didn't like her. Remember "look at that face"?

HankD

 

[HankD]

I disagree with you. Period.

I disagree with you. Period.Period.

HankD

 

[HankD]

Bill O’Reilly and the Right’s Morality Problem ~

Sexual harassment charges ~ is akin to abuse charges ~

The "charges" carry the weight with the public at large, and the "what exactly" often becomes obscure.

And the "employer" can as well be charged for negligence, IF someone makes a charge, and the employer does not satisfy the one making the charges, per discipline.

"Although most people think that sexual harassment involves conduct of a sexual nature, based on a study of case law, this is not true." Sexual Harassment Law and Legal Definition | USLegal, Inc.

It's a pretty nifty game ~ that has numerous options for charges ~ and can almost always handsomely increase the bank account of the one making the "charges".

"Sexual harassment includes acts that are not overtly sexual but rather are directed at individuals based on their gender. Therefore, profanity or rude behavior that is gender-specific may create a work environment that legally supports claims of sexual harassment." Sexual Harassment Law and Legal Definition | USLegal, Inc.

Depending on circumstance "That dress looks great on you" could be construed as sexual harassment.

It's the "on you" that can cause trouble.

"That's a nice dress" is PC.

HankD

 

[HankD]

Who consorted with an enemy?
How many times did this person "consort" with the enemy?
In person?
Who is the "enemy"?
How did you determine the "enemy", fact or opinion?
How exactly was the result of a Presidential election compromised?
How was an investigation obstructed?
By whom?
Define Treason?
And the sources of your facts are?

 

[Happy]

Depending on circumstance "That dress looks great on you" could be construed as sexual harassment.

Agree. However believe it is totally absurd.

It's the "on you" that can cause trouble.

On you is specific, agree. However, it is ridiculous that a compliment is considered "harassing".

"That's a nice dress" is PC.

Agree. And the dress itself is all that is complimented, and regardless if it is on a hanger or a person, it is complimented as a nice dress.

PC....The way the world at large accepts. I don't.

 

[Reynolds]

I'll wait for the result of the Justice Dept. and FBI investigation until I decide whether Trump is innocent or guilty of treason. That's the American way.

The American way is actually innocent until proven guilty.

 

[HankD]

A practical illustration of "collusion" with Russian officials?

President Obama: "This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility."
President Medvedev: "I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir, and I stand with you."

Obama to Russia: ‘After My Election I Have More Flexibility’

Was this a message to Putin to interfere with the election to do what he could to see to it that Obama won the election?

What did Medvedev mean by "I stand with you"?

Collusion!?

Let the investigation START HERE.


HankD

 

[HankD]

Imagine, just imagine what would have happened if the Donald had said something like this to Putin or one of Putin's high officials prior to the current election!!



HankD

 

[Happy]

The American way is actually innocent until proven guilty.

Correct, "innocent of the charge" until proven guilty. Once at trial and a verdict rendered, it is never "innocent".
It is always rendered, "guilty" or "not guilty".

 

[Happy]

I agree. Trump is acting more like a dictator than a president of a democratic society.

The President is not the "president of a democratic society".

A US President is President of the United States of America, which is a Republic.

 

[Salty]

..."That's a nice dress" is PC. ...

Not necessarily - your statement could be code for "women should not wear pants"

 

[Happy]

Not necessarily - your statement could be code for "women should not wear pants"

Too obscure and has nothing to do with the Law.

If such a code had legal standing, it would have to appear in the Federal Register to which any citizen could read and be privy to such "codes".

Agree that the term "Sexual harassment" has been ridiculously broadened from the "INTENT" that one "gender", (male or female), is "harassed" by another person for the "purpose" of having a "sexual" encounter......

TO; the FEELINGS of the "supposed" "victim....and the "hopeful" reliance of a "jury" who is ignorant of LAW, and gives weight to FEELINGS, over and above the Law.

The "Politically Correct" connotation weighs in beginning with: Government "policies" for Government employees, flowing over into "private" employers 'copying' the "policies" of the Government pertaining to "its" employees.....and then "flows" over to the public at large, setting in place the SAME "policy", (without an employee/ employer relationship), but rather purporting it as "common law", which "requires" no written law.

And precisely why ~ the public at large can either "agree" or "not agree" with the "Politically Correct" format.

And in a nutshell ~ "employers" have every right to SET policies, for their "employees" during performance of their duty's on the job.
And when such a "policy" between "employer / employee" crosses the line into the general public at large....

The result is the "public at large" begins ACCEPTING as common law; that such supposed "common law" supersedes "their RIGHT to FREE SPEECH".

Fact is; outside of an employee / employer relationship where the employee is bound by Specific policies regarding "co-workers"..... the public at large HAS the RIGHT to Speak any way, to any one, whom they desire.

Short of (slander), the one being spoken to may or may not like it, and can put on their adult shoes and handle it by any number of methods.

 

[HankD]

Not necessarily - your statement could be code for "women should not wear pants"

Good point!

How about "Hey that's a great gender neutral article of clothing you are wearing sir/ma'am contingent upon your gender identity (If any)!"?

HankD

 

[Calminian]

Good Red State opinion piece:

Bill O’Reilly and the Right’s Morality Problem

I’ve come to the conclusion that the Right has a morality problem. It is evident in the leaders of the party and some of the pundits we misguidedly idolize.

Bill O’Reilly is the latest example.

Bill O'Reilly and the Right's Morality Problem

I though you considered yourself part of the right.

Regardless, government is not a moral entity per se. They don't have moral standards like pastoral requirements. They really have one purpose, to keep civility, by punishing evil and protecting the innocent. It's not easy, but simple.