Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Clinton says she spoke to staffer who accused top adviser of harassment [View all]karynnj
(59,504 posts)This may be an example of when there was not a "zero tolerance" policy, but a strong policy that took sexual harassment seriously. Here, it seems that they might have thought that what this man brought to the campaign was sufficient to keep him on staff after a suspension and mandatory counseling. Clearly she believed that that action would make him never act inappropriately while working for her again. She might have thought this win/win. She kept a valuable employee, ended his known transgression and even possibly getting him to permanently clean up his act.
Ironically, what he brought to the campaign was that he was a respected person, writing in places like Soujouners magazine (sojo.net), which was associated with people like Jim Wallis. Following 2004, many people, like Wallis, argued that the Democrats could make progress gaining evangelical votes IF they were more open about their own religious values and how they informed the values they brought to governing. The object lesson of Wallis and others was that though Kerry had high moral standards and was a relatively observant Catholic, he never spoke of that in 2004. This was taken seriously by many Democrats at the time.
I was an active member of DU JK and would argue that his incredible speech on faith and governing at Pepperdine University ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/18/AR2006091801046.html ) was influenced by exactly that argument. For my fellow DU JK friends from MA, it astonished them that their somewhat reserved Senator would speak so openly on what he through his career would have considered deeply private beliefs. In addition, supporting NH candidates, he gave a speech that Democratic values were consistent with religious believes - like helping the needy.
Hillary Clinton clearly took that seriously or had independently came to the same solution. She was active in her church's youth group as a girl and she was inspired by hearing MLK speak.(Here's a CNN article - http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/25/politics/clinton-methodist-minister/index.html ) In 2008, all of this was a big part of the narrative her campaign put out. Burns Strider was very likely the point person in her campaign on that issue, which I assume she thought would be more important in the general election, which she was working towards.
Here is a NYT article from May 2008 on what he brought to the campaign. In addition, Burt Strider was likely one of the people behind the many stories about Clinton's strong Methodist religion.http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/03/us/politics/03strider.html
In fact, 2016 tells us that the PERSONAL religion/morals/integrity of the candidate is NOT what motivates the evangelical voters. Even if the Democratic candidate would have never committed a single sin in their life, they still would have voted for Trump. Likewise, I suspect the reaction would have been the same as in 2004 when the only evangelical I personally know told me that her minister told them they were obligated to vote for the more moral and religious candidate. She was completely at a loss of words, when I argued that meant voting for John Kerry.
However, in the context of 2008, where she likely thought that gaining some of the evangelicals, based on healthcare and other issues, she might have seen Strider as a strong voice helping her on this. Also note that it was NOT that her campaign ignored and allowed these things to continue. What they did not do was have a zero tolerance policy that would have dictated that firing him was the only acceptable solution.