DID YOU JUST WATCH NICOLLE WALLACE?

I address this especially to those who keep saying she is a fan of Trump? What part of Trump "slobbering" all over Kim do you not get?

Before falling for bs false equivalency, realize in this country we can still take to the streets...

...without tanks and machine guns mowing us down (Tien An Men Square). We can read the newspaper of our choice, write to the editor, start a paper of our own. We can blog, we can join a discussion board. We can work to persuade others who,do not agree with us. Shall I go on?

We can resist the forces of evil.

After Bush-Cheney we elected Barack Obama, not a mythical savior but a chance to get it right. After Obama, we in fact elected Hillary Clinton -- another chance to get it right.

But Hillary was taken down in an act of war, and the hateful forces of backlash are wearing red hats and thumping their chests.

We are in terrible trouble. But we are not done yet. Tell the truth about our flaws as a nation, by all means, but don't peddle false equivalency. Resist.

On the contrary: Love thy neighbor as thyself supercedes the Old Law

Ever since the RNC when Trump got the nom & the balloons stopped falling, she & Steve Schmidt...

...sat there in the dark and the ashes after Trump's apocalyptic speech talking about the Constitution and democracy and the republic -- Steve literally choked up.

I could tell they felt they were at the deathbed of the Party they had served, and quite possibly that of our republic. As a consequence I have followed their progress as commentators with interest ever since.

Here's how: you change the corporate culture and create a clear set of expectations...

...written up in the Employee Manual, which you give give to every employee now, and then to every new hire.

You create a competent EEO/AA department and have them create an employee training program going forth, starting with face to face groups and continuing with online training.

Once a year everybody in a supervisory position has to retake the onlne training course, pass it, and sign a statement that they understand it. Or you can just extend that to every employee from the ground up, because this business depends utterly on public good will.

We know how to do this. I'm not talking about reinventing the wheel here -- my template is County employment in California. It's not that hard; it just takes determination from the top and a recognition that this is important.

Starbucks has always been known as a good employer: they pay a decent wage and have good benefits. Thus, unlike Walmart, they are a good neighbor-- their employees are not routinely on food stamps or other state and county services.

As a consequence, I believe Starbucks means to make this work, and will make it work.

I think you mean "unpaid position." IIRC, First Lady is entitled to a small staff but no salary.

The small staff used to consist of a social secretary and a secretary to answer mail. She, or rather the potus, also gets a household allowance, out of which they are to see to things like groceries and the upkeep of the house they live in.

She's not "our employee," and never has been. She is expected to be the hostess for her husband's events, and to plan them (which is, contrary to some opinion here, actually a complex job). But she is NOT required to do any of this by statute, law, or the Constitution. It's the usual unpaid women's work in support of the husband as it has always been.

In other words, she can bow out if she wants to, and there is precedent.

If and when we ever elect a female president, a paid position will have to be created, because First Gentleman is certainly not going to do all of these things outside the usual male skillset, and for free.

That's it in a nutshell. "Those words" used against a man *always* imply weakness, unmanliness...

...and by no coincidence are synonymous with terms for homosexuality such as faggot. That last one's not a bundle of sticks, in the US.

Used against a woman they are demeaning and connote worthlessness and an attitude of "only good for one thing" in terms an incel would grasp immediately.

I stayed away from the other thread, where someone was persistantly Britsplaining how C was in common usage where he came from (and was, I gather, so harmless you could practically use it in a medical text regarding the female sex organs).

Over here, it's obscene. As obscene as N--r.