AND ON TOP OF MAGA HERO AND MAJOR DONOR KENT STERMON TRADING TAYLOR SWIFT TICKETS FOR TOPLESS PHOTOS OF EXTREMELY UNDERAGE PUBESCENT GIRLS- HERE’S MORE MAGA SEX CRIMES AND COVERUPS…



Scotty Campbell, GOP leader who voted to expel Tennessee Three, resigns; found guilty of sexually harassing multiple interns by his GOP colleagues in SECRET on March 29 with absolutely no punishment or public notification from the Tennessee GOP leadership…because for the GOP, sexually harassing interns is fine, hiding sex crime convictions is fine, but speaking while black on the house floor is grounds for expulsion.

When confronted by reporters over the secret convictions for sexual harassment by the workplace discrimination and harassment subcommittee, he first denied it vehemently, then 6 hours later he resigned.

Again the GOP leadership kept more sex crimes secret and protected their own from punishment or exposure.

Death, destruction, and Debauchery…every day I got more. Many more.
EVERY
SINGLE
DAY

easy because MAGA is a sick, pedophilic, fascist death cult that actively protects sex offenders.
😂

No sir. There is a world of difference between slight bias in reports about the nationalistic leader who continues to attack all actual news reporters like a 2 year old and direct his terroristic followers to attack them as enemies of the people and a deeper level of bias against all non right wingers paired with outright campaigning for the same anti free press candidates.

Wait...you still defend Fox as having reporting but claim you don't need someone to bend facts? Bending facts like using proper English to describe a scene? But reporting on the birther movement for years as true, and the ridiculous waste of money named the Benghazi investigation, continued denial of climate science, etc. does bother you? Fox doesn't bend fact, they omit it. They don't get credit for using 5% (yes, that's exaggerated) truth to sell their lies.

I watched Chris Wallace interview Conway just yesterday (for as long as I could stand it, which admittedly was only a few minutes), his questions were ok, but delivered with a slow underhand pitch and with no follow-up or contradiction of her ridiculous rambling factless replies. That's not good reporting, it's being the setup for spreading their agenda/propaganda.

You think CNN goes to far by using words like "accost" to describe 3 policemen tackling a topless woman in tights, and while you claim to have looked up the definition , you still claim the word is somehow loaded and not proper. Please explain.

When the police were going after the fleeing armed supporters of Mr Bundie under Obama I think you likely called them violent thugs who attacked that poor innocent man unnecessarily....Fox did. That man was armed and an anti American terrorist, but right wing so Fox called him a strong patriotic American standing up for American values that the unAmerican Kenyan thug in the Whitehouse wanted to murder.
There is no equivalence. Fox is (disgusting unAmerican) entertainment, not news. There is no right wing news outlet, they are all propaganda outlets and little more today.
The Ministry of Truth doesn't need fact, you will believe any nonsense they tell you to, even when it contradicts what they had you believe yesterday. They have you believing any non Trump biased news is fake news reported with hyper liberal bias, even in other countries, but Fox has good reporting and less bias.
*facepalm

Edit: True, Trump didn't say all Mexicans are rapists like some others have claimed, he said all Mexican/central American immigrants are rapists....like I claimed.

They used "accost" because 3 large men tackled a topless woman in tights (so clearly unarmed unless she had a snuke), hard....it's a proper and correct description using the correct terminology. Your inference that they were implying something improper by the police is likely your bias coloring what they said.

Lol. Censor you!? I think perhaps you might look up that word too, because I don't think it means what you think it does. I certainly don't have either that power or desire. I wish only to dissuade you from being an unwitting dupe of an Orwellian movement against fact and truth.

There is no equivalent stupidity or bias on the left, not by half...not by 1/10.
Again, please name reporters that speak at Democratic rallies....from any non right wing network since limiting you to CNN yielded no answer. If the left is just as bad as the right in this regard, that should be incredibly easy to do.

It seems having it pointed out that there is no equivalence is intolerable and like an attack in your eyes, but it's simply fact.

I know, facts are for liberals. The truth isn't the truth. What you see and hear isn't really what's happening....also known as blackwhite/duckspeak.

There is no other main stream network besides Fox who's viewers are actually less informed than people who watch no news at all, and OAN and Info Wars likely perform the same job for minor networks. CNN isn't perfect, but it's viewers actually gain information and become more informed rather than loose it, becoming more ignorant. They are not equivalent.

You can label it whatever makes you sleep better but choosing to ignore facts that don't fit your agenda is silly at best.
Not sure why you keep bringing up Alex Jones...
Do you share Trumps love for him?
The investigation itself has been investigated and don't tell me it is all fine and dandy how they did it or the people involved with it.
Also Trump never called all the folks in the caravans rapists.
You should know that if you actually read what he said and not the way your treasured media bends it.
Just today a topless woman jumped over a security fence to protest Trump in France and CNN reported she was "accosted" by security officials.
I tried to watch the BBC for a while a couple of days ago and can't recall what upset me other than the way they seemed to frame everything
in this weird way.
Bending the facts of stories to fit something.
I have no idea what they would want to be pushing on people.
Do you?
It simply felt like I was being brainwashed to see everything their way.
Not a good feeling but I can't recall the story or stories now they were covering.
I too hope they get rid of Trump as I'm tired of a draft dodger talking about heroes and for many of the same reasons you don't like him.
I just wish the media was more mature about it.
Don Lemmon
Jim Accosta
Chris Cuomo
None of the above are mature.

Some references:

Drums: https://youtu.be/k59E7T0H-Us?t=9

Topless drummers: https://youtu.be/4tgtyl_5x5Y?t=59

Grandmother plays the drums: https://youtu.be/RWQCgSB_lpE?t=150

Violin: https://youtu.be/M3RpKTehDi0?t=43

Old women baking: https://youtu.be/BgUstrmJzyc?t=13

Man in a hamster wheel: https://youtu.be/slHboKF9PIQ?t=123

Pretending to be in love: https://youtu.be/iq2yLykdjvA?t=134

Burning Piano: https://youtu.be/-f993p0CAV8?t=105

Russian man on skates: https://youtu.be/bawnwSYOCFU?t=119

Creaming butter: https://youtu.be/VJ920cN2HmA?t=138

Lordi: https://youtu.be/gAh9NRGNhUU?

Loreen: https://youtu.be/Pfo-8z86x80?t=53

+ dancers, strange costumes, wind, light, love songs, etc.

First up, "directionless YT rambling".... agree so much. This show really needs an editor. "concise" is not a bad word, guys!

As for the rest of the comment, much as I don't like it personally, employers have a right to set a reasonable standard of dress, especially if your job is public facing. So yeah, if she turned up to present the weather topless or something, I think they could reasonably ask her to cover up.

Personally, I think people in general need to get the fuck over our collective hangup about nudity (and especially the idea that strangers of the same gender can see you naked, but those of a different gender can't, i.e. changing rooms etc).

But that's not the way the world works at the moment.

Do'h! Saw her in Connecticut the night before she was in Boston for the HBO film, but maybe it wasn't a topless show since it was on a college campus.

lies. Lies I tell you. Still bleeped the words and they showed bottomless cameramen. Where are the topless women?!

I'm all for the cause, but I'm a bit skeptical that freeing the nipple will really be striking that big a blow for women's equality. Regular public exposure would probably lead to some degree of normalization but I doubt it would eliminate objectification of women in general.
Many of the men they questioned seemed to grope for answers as to why boobs were so distracting, but I think it's not just about the boobs but the whole package as well. If I saw a topless woman walking down the street that I wasn't really attracted to then I probably wouldn't give her much more attention than if she were a man, whereas if she was attractive to me then I may have a harder time averting my eyes.

Anyone remember TI graphing calculators, which at the time I was using them (90s) I think ran on 8088 processors?

Quite a bit MORE expensive than this. MUCH less powerful, even factoring in Moore's law. AND, they were in no way intended to be an open, hackable design like this is. And even with all those limitations, they became one of the primary "introduction to hardware and software hacking" devices of my generation.

When I was a 16-year-old HS Freshman, I had a TI-81 that I hooked up to a PC with a serial port and "hacked" zShell onto. I learned a bit of assembly code and put on lots of little programs like games etc. onto my calculator. I even got an image display program where you could load up bitmap images that were converted to a specific size and color depth (4-8 grays if I remember right). I got busted in my Geometry class that year looking at a blurry grayscale picture of a topless Pamela Anderson. On my calculator. If that doesn't put me in the running for biggest nerd ever, I don't know what would.

Anyway, I can only see this "Chip" thing (I agree that I'm not too big on the name) as a very cool idea. Sometimes, something as simple as a hackable platform or a blurry 4-bit picture of some boobs can be enough to push someone towards a lifelong interest in IT and other technology. Raspberry Pi and the others are great too, but the price of this one gives it a real leg up in the universal accessibility department!

I think the lady makes a very good point about damage being done to sex relations, and often times it seems the internet-generation feminist is actually not interested whatsoever in equality and is more accurately described a misandrist.

Very recently in my own country we had a number of famous feminists fighting to get rid of "page 3 girls" - semi nude models in tabloid newspapers. It never happened, but even as it was happening there were page 3 models complaining because it meant they'd be out of a job they enjoyed and got paid well for. No woman OR man should feel forced to take their clothes off in public for any reason, and in fact that is the case as these people are not slaves but career models by choice. What was actually happening was a prudish approach to human sexuality had been disguised as an equality thing; and the language was always of course referring to the little girls - because if you disagree with little girls having to grow up to go topless you're a certified monster and pervert.

That kind of shit really detracts from the things that are seriously unfair such as, most obviously, the pay gap. No woman should get paid less for the same job. There's no "rape culture" that i've ever heard of if your sample size includes greater than 1000 people in the west, and terms like that detract from the argument again - if you want to talk rape culture then look to India, where there is (and needs to be more) attention on changing the attitudes of the male community towards females because of horrific acts taking place.. almost commonplace. And to India's credit there was a big campaign tied into their favourite sport, with social media involvement and obviously most men proudly wearing symbols and stuff. There are parts of that society that has issues that could do with feminism.

But this is the profession of being offended. You have to drum up publicity, it has to be viral, or you don't get paid. You don't get a column in the newspaper or the mag, you don't get enough hits on your youtube to make enough money. Not if you talk about the pay gap or the gender inequality in less "civilised?" societies.. no, you do that by talking about the tits on page 3. Or espousing something unfair and incendiary; something someone will want to argue with. Nothing that fits with common sense. These people are self publicists - they will make a spelling error on a tweet to encourage others to call them stupid, correct them, essentially RETWEET AND REPLY AND FOLLOW AND LIKE!

Whether or not Sarkeesian(?) should have commented, there is a point well made in this video. I've been on the receiving end of something disguised as feminism in the past, and all it did was make me wary of anyone under 30 that calls themselves a feminist. Before i can establish whether that means misandrist, i have to establish common ground, because i'm a feminist too. What we need is more decorum and less extremism. You can't change the world without the help of both sexes, why alienate each other?

I'm guessing the topless girl getting her hair cut was what got it flagged initially

http://www.reddit.com/user/uffasan
Bloody topless spoken word performance of Swing Low Sweet Chariot (youtube.com)
submitted 7 months ago by uffasan to /r/videos

...hold mouse over.and...Wed Dec 11 19 : 18 : 58 2013 UTC therefore
Wed Dec 11 2013 11 : 18 : 58AM PST

I think we have to give them artistic license to show as many examples as possible of the worst it can be, but at the same time it paints a pretty bleak picture where every single "man" acts compulsively and exaggeratedly sexist whenever they're within earshot of a "woman".

I don't like the more subtle aspects either - "men" peeing in alleyways? I've seen women peeing in alleyways and i consider it equally disgusting as men peeing in alleyways. Whoever does it is gross or utterly desperate, and by dint of easier access men are probably more inclined to take the risk of it. This embellishes the misogyny.

The clothing comparisons made is another example - they compare loose fitting shirt and shorts with (for example) skin tight, see through, almost naked stuff. Her dialogue at the end makes me think the author was being quite a bit tongue-in-cheek about that and therefore other bits. Topless jogging? How many would want to do that? Doesn't make good mechanical sense to me and i think you'd find a topless woman walking around my neighbourhood would be shopped in by the women who saw her, not the men.

I think if they're going to try to make a point with the rape scene then they needed to be less tongue-in-cheek with the goofy stuff that i think is added for a level of humour.