I replied that fellow as an adjective was not male in this case. She just simply disagreed.

I learned never to talk to that woman unless it was required.

Why?

Because I’ve been employed non-stop since 1986 and everywhere I’ve worked I’ve worked in a “fun” atmosphere where we all feel free to have fun in the workplace.

Of course nobody is ‘groping’ one another…

But I have had females rub against me innocently and say to me suggestive comments. Have I ever felt that I need 5 figures to get me by? No. To me it makes the work environment funner. We are all adults and can figure out how to TELL SOMEBODY – “hey that’s enough now”. Speak up! Say “no” if you don’t like something.

eventually all speech will be banned because advertisers insist on using English or some native language…

untiltheonesplayingoldmaidequalizeandfightfirewithfire,orputthefireoutbyholdingpeopletoRESULTSnotintents…

thecommonmoremoralwilllosetotheuncommonandamoral..

foramoralityistheantithesistomorality…

[ANDspamminatorSTINKS!!!!]
itwontpostunlessifindorbreakupwhateveritisthatscausingit

this is even grea ter for the par as iti cal power hungry sex ual sad ist pol itico…

ESPECIALLY if the popu lation doesnt get the actual game…

[AND spamminator STINKS!!!!]

all with the unde rsta nding that those who follo w the old ru les dont want to be rude and call them what they ARE…

and that their contem pora ries will defend the indefensible when appr oached impol itely. and part of that

imp ropriety is to try not to think the worst of someones wants, goals and desires, but to give them a out…

[AND spamminator STINKS!!!!]

so when you read, you read that in order to be socialisrt and not on the right and fascist.. one has to be desirous of a matriarchy… effeminate… that homosexuality and the other taboos are there because of the repression of the fascism that reaches its culmination in nazism..

and so the only way to avoid that is to do the antithetical thing… and sexu alize, sexu alize and purposefully do the unthi nkable… and so, decons truct the society that will cu lmin ate in n azism/fascis m..

and so insure its culmin atino in what they refer to as a (progressive communist) DIONYSIAN utopia…

the SADDEST part is that as crazy as all this thinking sounds to normal people who still have common sense and think cognitive dissonance is bad, not a mosquito…

is that htey dont realize that the peioole they vote for, and suppport blindly DO beleive all tis and belive that it gives them the greater moral right to violate all morals to achieve this wackaloon end.. including experimenting on kids in schools through pedagogy, indoctrination instead of education, the destruction of morality (Which is seen to culminate in religious nazism, over atheist Dionysian)

it was not the common man who lived post modern.. (he just liked some of the art)… it was not the common man who decided that platos retreat or the trapeze club was a way to live (but sociopaths dont mind sharing what they dont care about or have empathy for)…

the common man believes in the morals that they dont… which is why the common man (or woman) is despised..

its why cain is hated… he is seen as a nazi front as he represents the cultural things that they, through these lines of thought, have concluded lead to the oppresison.

now remember in their world view, the soviets and maoists didnt do anything. ie. the horrors are made up… but they are smarter than to declare the holocaust didnt happen and gain the hate for it.

morals would say be honest in showing who you are… amorals, the new way, would be to portray yourself as something else if what you are is not to be liked by the people your gaming.

so all that social theory, and study? its all about how to game the machine called human.

how to trick the machines into doing what you want them to do, and negate their individual will… (like femi nism does…)

everything from the big lie
revisioned history
shoot first to be first in the worst
accuse others of what you do to equalize
(And leave no clean high ground)

which is why their strategy is to hit first regardless of validity… to remove the idea you have to reinforce it by thinking about it… so the first ideas are the hardest to remove… ergo. fire first, fire hard, and let em ride… this is power acquisition, not a high school debate with rules!!!

all you ahve to do is read george kennans long telegram to get the mentality… (or make something else up to explain it)

its tactics and strategy with the idea that what used to be invalid to do for moral reasons, is no longer invalid and that anything that works is ok…

the population is still playing by the old rules and think that despite their declarations that they are not playing by them, they are assumed to be playing by them.

so the battle between a lie and the truth is seen as the battle between two truths… not a one is valid the other isnt and why are we paying attention to invalid… its the nicer truth that wins.. .

so if you say sexual liberation will lead to more and better literature, respect for women and such…

you sound great as your offering naughty candy and the permission to be dirty as now its ok…

and the opposition who is playing by the old rules of respecting the individual? they HAVE to claim that it will lead to what it has led to… which is none of the things that the liars said.

guess who won the battle

and by doing that, and letting them win that way… they redefined what was permissible, and what was ok to do!!!!

[spamminator again]

“He has contradicted himself even more risibly on his memory of the harassment charges than he has on his abortion position.”

followed by

“At first, he said he wasn’t aware of the five-figure settlement to one woman; then, suddenly, he was aware. Instead of the meaning of “is,” Cain tried to parse the meaning of “settlement” versus “agreement.” He still claims he doesn’t remember the other five-figure settlement to another woman.”

Here’s a question to Dowd: Is it a contradiction to say, “I don’t remember” then later to say, “Now, I remember?” Whose memory isn’t jogged by recalling related events, looking at notes, reviewing the history, and being told other facts. But this defense is too complex for most people too busy to pay this the proper attention it needs. This is how the media manipulates and slanders good and decent people. The real rakes, like Kerry and Edwards, get all the defense that left thinking can provide.

There are, among others, two points that make the accusations against Cain suspicious. First, why was he not named as a Defendant. Probably because as a Defendant he would not have settled. Second, why didn’t the Association remove or punish Cain.

Dowd mentions a $35,000 settlement. I wonder if that included attorney fees, which would indicate this already small settlement was only token and the Plaintiff’s counsel thought it was loser and would not fight for it.

I hope both sides agree to full disclosure and we can see all the documents. I’d like to know the truth because I think it would exonerate Cain. I don’t think Cain is, in Dowd’s words, “another powerful man who crossed the line and then, when caught, tried to blame the women.”