2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWhy was Hillary fashionably tardy after the break?
Gastric distress?
Tactical move?
Either ain't pretty.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Post removed
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Response to bettyellen (Reply #7)
zigby This message was self-deleted by its author.
Cha
(297,800 posts)a hide. Apparently doesn't learn it's not acceptable.
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)You might want to take a look at your password security.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)You're being childish, petty, and mean.
Hepburn
(21,054 posts)JTFrog
(14,274 posts)Codeine
(25,586 posts)larded over with ageist nonsense.
Fail.
Hal Bent
(59 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)I suppose we all make them now and then, but damn man.
Cha
(297,800 posts)pnwmom
(109,009 posts)FYI, I just posted this update.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251931800#post2
madamesilverspurs
(15,811 posts)the moderators didn't take into account that there's NEVER a line for the men's room, but it's a different story for the ladies.
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)The 5 minute bathroom breaks ABC built into its schedule are adequate for the average man but not the average woman.
And there are academic studies showing this, conducted by researchers with stopwatches. Even if there is no line women need more time.
They can't just whip something out over a urinal. It takes significantly longer.
Quackers
(2,256 posts)Ignorantly saying that men can just whip it out and go. Did you forget about the 74yo man up there?
Urinary hesitancy affects people of all ages and occurs in both sexes. However, it is most common in older men with an enlarged prostate gland.
https://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/003143.htm
Also, we don't know what really held her up. You're assuming it was bathroom issues. I assume that she was checking the data on how viewers were responding to her. With that being said, this whole thing is silly. I think you're making something out of nothing.
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)(I assumed she was gone on a bathroom break because that's what I read somewhere -- that the schedule called for a 5 minute potty break.)
There were only 3 candidates in this debate, each of them important. ABC should have waited till each of them was at a podium before they began.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Why did they even need a bathroom break? Most people can go before and last 45 minutes or longer.
George II
(67,782 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)I couldn't watch it because the TV somehow only plays one channel lol. Thanks.
I could last 2 hours by going right before, but a break is a break.
George II
(67,782 posts)...in fact, when we go up to Boston for a game, we have to plan around rest stops.
Also, I think someone also correctly pointed out that she has a lot more security overseeing her movements (no, not THOSE movements! ) than the other candidates.
I just don't see why people are now dwelling on her bathroom habits, just as I can't see why many of them have been dwelling on her faint southern accent. To me those are signs of desperation.
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)trying to drink enough water to keep their throats from drying out and worrying about if they'll make it to the next bathroom break.
Update here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251931800#post2
treestar
(82,383 posts)they should have waited for her. It's hard to believe the excuses in other threads to attempt to make it her fault.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)madaboutharry
(40,234 posts)and out of the bathroom.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)pnwmom
(109,009 posts)and way too many men don't.
840high
(17,196 posts)pnwmom
(109,009 posts)If you don't want me to reply, then block me. Otherwise, I'll reply when I want to.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)...do NOT wash their hands. I recall years ago being in a men's room with my "classy" boss during a seminar break. He pointedly said, as I was washing my hands, "I don't have to wash, I didn't pee on my hands"! Suffice it to say, I never shook his hand again.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Women. Washing one's is good.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Your inferences seem irrational. One might even say it drips with a foul bias...
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)Are you serious? Why did they start without her, is a better fucking question.
freeplessinseattle
(3,508 posts)after the way they seemed to let the debate kind of go it's own way
If it wasn't for having to wrestle with pantyhose! Heck, she may have gotten a run and had to change them, for all we know
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)Not my favorite debate, although the discussion is going well, it's kind of in spite of the debate moderators.
George II
(67,782 posts)pnwmom
(109,009 posts)pnwmom
(109,009 posts)MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)Same thing happened in the last debate. Sorry it's no big deal.
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)They've done time and motion studies on this and women require significantly more time -- not that we needed a study to show us this, but architects and building departments did.
All ABC was allotting was 5 minutes, including transit time.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)I don't see anything wrong with it.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Old building--not enough ladies' bathrooms!!
It's usually true at old venues that the lines for the women's restroom go out the door; and the men's room never has a line.
I'm only joking...but just. It's an equality issue, really, at public venues.
In any event, it WORKED for her--she's sitting pretty in this debate, thus far--she's commanding the stage.
nc4bo
(17,651 posts)Viagra commercial?
Hekate
(90,865 posts)nc4bo
(17,651 posts)DURHAM D
(32,611 posts)Dem2
(8,168 posts)But I was being a smart ass here at home, I don't expect this sort of silliness here.
Response to Dem2 (Reply #17)
JTFrog This message was self-deleted by its author.
This thread made me do it, I swear!
Response to Dem2 (Reply #131)
JTFrog This message was self-deleted by its author.
Dem2
(8,168 posts)this is what I get? You're in a serious mood today!
Response to Dem2 (Reply #134)
JTFrog This message was self-deleted by its author.
Dem2
(8,168 posts)Carry on. Hate me now based on a misunderstanding - it's your choice.
Response to Dem2 (Reply #136)
JTFrog This message was self-deleted by its author.
Dem2
(8,168 posts)OMG, DU can have the most frustrating interactions - I still will like your posts even if you're angry and have made a snap choice based on a misreading of my intent.
Response to Dem2 (Reply #138)
JTFrog This message was self-deleted by its author.
Dem2
(8,168 posts)I can make a joke at home (and even mention it as an ice breaker) and still object to the ridiculousness and misogynous intent that was clear in the O/P. I'm sorry you found it so offensive.
LexVegas
(6,114 posts)senz
(11,945 posts)Response to LexVegas (Reply #18)
JTFrog This message was self-deleted by its author.
mwrguy
(3,245 posts)Hekate
(90,865 posts)Men: stand up against the wall urinal. Unzip. Do business. Zip up. Job done.
Women: squeeze into undersized stall. Take off one half of garments. Put paper on seat. Hope paper doesn't fall off while turning around. Put paper on seat again. Sit. Do business. Clean up. Get dressed again. Wash hands. Job done.
And you wonder why the lines for women's restrooms are so loooong. And that's without all of us who have to bring in small children.
Cha
(297,800 posts)wait until all 3 were on stage?
They have to show what big powerful mediassholes they are.
BlueMTexpat
(15,374 posts)women, situations like this would not arise: http://time.com/3653871/womens-bathroom-lines-sexist-potty-parity/
From the link, following a description about several physical activities/events that concern women only:
Legislation to address the design and provision of public restrooms in new construction often requires more space for womens rooms. But that has hardly made a dent in many of our oldest and most used public spaces. This is especially true in powerful institutions, such as schools and government complexes, where old buildings, and their gendered legacies, dominate. In the United States, for example, women in the House of Representatives didnt get a bathroom near the Speakers Lobby until 2011. Prior to that, the nearest womens room was so far away that the time it took women to get to the bathroom and back exceeded session break times. The nearby mens room, meanwhile, had a fireplace, a shoeshine stand, and televised floor proceedings.
Additionally, old building codes required more space for men, as womens roles were restricted almost entirely to the private sphere. That reality has often confused the is with the ought. As scholar Judith Plaskow noted in a paper on toilets and social justice, Not only does the absence of womens bathrooms signify the exclusion of women from certain professions and halls of power, but it also has functioned as an explicit argument against hiring women or admitting them into previously all-male organizations. She cites examples, including Yale Medical School and Harvard Law School, both of which claimed that a lack of public facilities made it impossible for women to be admitted as students. Schools like the Virginia Military Institute used this excuse as recently as 1996.
In 2001, I was on a work-required visit to Saudi Arabia. No government buildings - at least at the time - contained bathroom facilities for women. We coped because one (1) room was set aside for us with a guard posted outside. It is a crying shame that the US - supposedly #1 in so many areas - is still not that far ahead of Saudi Arabia in this respect.
The OP is simply stupid and ABC's moderators were discourteous, to say the least. But for anyone to deflect by referring to Hillary's using this to make a "grand entrance" is outrageous.
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)and you can bet that if something had been a problem in the men's room and caused delay they'd have waited for Martin or Bernie.
BlueMTexpat
(15,374 posts)Response to Hekate (Reply #19)
Name removed Message auto-removed
southerncrone
(5,506 posts)Distracted audience from Sanders answer, too. Very obvious. Not attractive.
Response to southerncrone (Reply #27)
Post removed
southerncrone
(5,506 posts)senz
(11,945 posts)This is how people normally handle late entries and it is far more respectful of others. I honestly believe that in her mind, it's all about her. There's just nobody else.
(And I'm sorry a devoted fan insulted you like that.)
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)of her by aiming the camera at the empty podium and announcing that they were going on without her -- as if she weren't as important as the other two.
You've heard of "potty parity"? They've done academic studies with stopwatches proving women need significantly more time in the bathroom just to use the basic facilities. These 5 minute breaks ABC had built in -- including transit time -- were enough for the men but not most women.
This is an example of unconscious but institutionalized sexism -- where the function is built around men's needs without taking into account women's. It might seem trivial but it's not.
You can see right in this thread that it made her the object of some mockery, all because she can't just whip something out and hang it over a urinal.
P.S. Why should she slink in like she's an INTRUDER who had to be careful not to DISTURB the men? ABC was wrong to start the 3 way debate without her.
senz
(11,945 posts)Haven't you been in similar situations where some group activity is ongoing and those who are late enter quietly and take their posts without drawing attention to themselves? It's the right thing to do; it shows respect for what is occurring.
It happens all the time, pnwmom. When a person tries to be cutsie about it, it comes off for what it is: attention seeking. She seems to think she's the center of the universe.
I'm beginning to wonder if she surrounds herself with sycophants. If so, it could account for this attitude.
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)around men's needs, not men's and women's.
She was on the STAGE. To act as if she's supposed to slip in quietly is just ludicrous. They made a point of noting her absence. Saying sorry as she slipped in was perfectly fine.
The fault was ABC's entirely, not hers. This wasn't some group activity where she was a minor player. She was one of only three major players and they had no business beginning without her.
senz
(11,945 posts)She should have respected the gravitas of the event. She, Bernie, and Martin were expected to show themselves to the American people with the moderators facilitating. The most important element in the entire exercise were the audience and television viewers. The moderators were representing us. The candidates are asking for our votes.
We rule. She should have sensed that and humbled herself enough to take her place quietly until it was her turn to speak.
She seems lacking in the humility department.
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)Studies have shown women need twice as much time in the bathroom as men. They had no business starting without her, simply because the men were able to make it to the stage within the 5 minutes.
senz
(11,945 posts)It didn't hurt her one bit that they started without her, since the question that was being answered would be asked of her, as well.
Yes, Hillary should be humble enough to appreciate that the American people -- those peons living in apartments and little houses, trying to make ends meet -- are her superiors, by dent of her having chosen public service as a profession.
Surely you can see that? Again, in a political debate among candidates for office, the voters -- not the candidates -- rule.
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)Last edited Sun Dec 20, 2015, 03:45 AM - Edit history (1)
In the normal give and take, the candidates are supposed to be LISTENING and RESPONDING to each other. By starting without her, they denied her the opportunity to listen to and formulate responses to what the other candidates said.
It was a blatant act of disrespect to start the proceedings without her, as if her presence wasn't as important as that of the men.
senz
(11,945 posts)Thanks!
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)I've always felt you were a reasonable person, and I was getting frustrated about not being able to explain this well enough. Thanks for letting me know I'd finally found a way.
senz
(11,945 posts)especially in a medium like this. I admire your persistence/patience and sorry about the frustration!
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)"She seems lacking in the humility department..."
That's a very creative allegation lacking any objective evidence; i.e., a bumper sticker with all the concomitant wisdom they provide.
But no doubt, you'll certainly point towards the posts indicating you yourself are a humble person, else we're to presume you hold yourself to a lower standard than you hold others to...
MADem
(135,425 posts)pnwmom
(109,009 posts)women need just to go to the bathroom compared to men. Even if there is no line.
I don't go into the details, but they need more time. And the schedule with ABC only allowed 5 minute bathroom breaks.
CNN's Anderson Cooper didn't make a big deal about it; he just began the proceedings a minute or two late. This was a bad call on ABC's part.
Cha
(297,800 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)pnwmom
(109,009 posts)Researchers have proven women simply need more time to go through all the necessary motions. (And younger women even need more time during some parts of the month.)
The 5 minute bathroom breaks, including transit time, that ABC scheduled were set up based on men's needs, not women's.
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
Post removed
renate
(13,776 posts)No big explanation or joke, just a genial "Sorry." Most of us (not all!) in our household prefer Bernie, but we all liked the way she owned it.
demmiblue
(36,903 posts)I do believe it was staged for effect (potty issues were a part of the first debate, as well).
senz
(11,945 posts)pnwmom
(109,009 posts)to determine how many stalls need to be in public buildings.
And they discovered women need significantly more time than men, just to use the basic facilities.
ABC only gave them 5 minute bathroom breaks, and part of that time was just spent walking to wherever the bathroom was. It was rude and sexist for them to make a show of starting without her.
Institutionalized sexism at work here: making men's needs the norm.
artislife
(9,497 posts)I am beginning to think it is a lie.
We get it. My question is why wouldn't you go before the debates started? When I think of the drive home, I visit the ladies before I leave. They really aren't that long.
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)need to go more often than men, if they want to avoid bladder infections, due to their short urethra. Also they take longer.
Do you think she should have to wear a diaper, like an astronaut? Why couldn't they just let their commentator blab on for another minute or two? Their schedule wasn't sacrosanct.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/13/sports/baseball/13potty.html
Studies show that women take about twice as long as men in the restroom.
artislife
(9,497 posts)The debates weren't half the day. Go before they start. If she has to go again, I think she may already have some issues.
I take a woman in her mid seventies out to the store and to get her hair done. She goes before we leave and we never stop for the 3 hours we are together. Most people can plan their "evacuation".
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)So what if your friend doesn't need to go. She's probably not advertising the pair of Depends she has on just in case.
And even if she doesn't, it doesn't matter. ABC planned for a bathroom break and it should have waited till all three participants got back. Period.
artislife
(9,497 posts)but if Hillary needs to go, she needs to go!
Really, she needs to go.
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)for some inexplicable reason.
artislife
(9,497 posts)This seems like a reach.
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)of the female, then the norm is sexist.
When you criticize a woman for having a female body that requires more time for hygienic elimination, that is sexist.
Researchers with stopwatches have measured the amount of time needed for men and women to physically accomplish the various tasks involved in urination, and there are many more steps for women, who can't just use a urinal. (They have to enter a stall, close the door, remove clothing, etc., etc.) Women also are more likely to wash their hands and to use soap, both adding crucial seconds to the procedure. Overall, women take about twice as long as men to do their business.
The ABC break time was only 5 minutes, including transit time. This was probably the length of time ABC has always had for debates and it never occurred to them to adjust the schedule because a woman would be one of the debaters.
This is unconscious, institutionalized sexism -- where facilities and schedules are designed around the needs of one gender over the other. It's so pervasive that most of us don't even notice it, unless we're in a line of twenty women outside of a ladies' room while men are whipping in and out of the men's room.
Building codes in the past called for more men's rooms than women's, on the theory that women weren't out in public as much. It was only when researchers started doing studies in the latter part of the past century that they realized that women needed more bathrooms than men, not fewer. But many of these old buildings are still around today, and still putting women at a disadvantage. If the ABC building was like many old buildings, Hillary might have had to go to the other end of the floor -- or even to another floor -- simply to find a bathroom.
ABC could have easily waited the one or two minutes for Hillary to return. Instead, they made the demeaning decision to start the debate without her -- as if the presence of one of their three debaters wasn't important-- so she wasn't there to hear what the other candidates were saying. She had to join in mid-question, not knowing what she had missed.
Poor form for ABC. And I'm really shocked to see how many progressives seem to be clueless about this.
Bathrooms are a feminist issue. Without adequate bathrooms, women are at a disadvantage participating in public life. This is true in the US Senate (where women often have trouble with distant and rare ladies' rooms) and it is true worldwide, where inadequate sanitary facilities affect women (who are elevated risk of bladder infections) much more than men.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/07/womens-restrooms-sexist_n_6431184.html
A winding line of women waiting for the restroom may seem like a simple inconvenience, but feminist critic and activist Soraya Chemaly calls it a prime example of "male-centeredness."
Chemaly joined HuffPost Live on Wednesday to discuss her piece for Time, which argues that long lines at the ladies' room constitutes "everyday sexism" that favors the bodies of men. Chemaly explained to host Nancy Redd:
Whose bodies are worthy of prioritization? Whose bodies need to be recognized as legitimate? Those are really fundamental issues in society, and they come together in super interesting ways in public space and in public toilets. So when you see a line, as I did last week, of 50 women standing waiting patiently and quietly while men breeze in and out of the restroom, it's really not just this minor irritation. It's reflective of much deeper issues about bodies, embodiment, ... elimination and social justice. I also think it's just one aspect on a very broad spectrum of how important bodily needs and sanitation are to people's equal rights.
http://time.com/3653871/womens-bathroom-lines-sexist-potty-parity/
artislife
(9,497 posts)7 minutes..that's a long time. But whatever.
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)because they don't have sanitary supplies, or just drop out at the age of menstruation.
But this is a related issue.
P.S. The 7 minutes includes transit time and no one has any idea where the bathroom Hillary was assigned to was located.
artislife
(9,497 posts)Hillary = African girls
You win.
And it isn't what you hoped it would be.
Response to artislife (Reply #74)
JTFrog This message was self-deleted by its author.
artislife
(9,497 posts)Pfft
Your shaming has no effect. It is a pathetic tactic in itself.
Response to artislife (Reply #142)
JTFrog This message was self-deleted by its author.
artislife
(9,497 posts)Response to artislife (Reply #145)
JTFrog This message was self-deleted by its author.
artislife
(9,497 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)at all. That IS a real issue, though-- and it is something that really needs addressing, even today. Architects do incorporate bathroom equality into new construction, if they're good, and smart. But not everything is "new construction."
Clinton's level of security ensures that she's got a room cleared just for her--it might be a little ways away, though, down a corridor that has been secured for her use alone, but she's not sharing with anyone.
As a complete aside, the ONLY reason that the Pentagon has sufficient bathroom facilities for both genders is because they used to have segregated bathrooms back in the Bad Old Days. After the desegregation of the Armed Services, when more women started joining the forces, they were able to convert a lot of the segregated bathrooms for use by women.
Each candidate probably has a dressing room backstage.
NobodyHere
(2,810 posts)pnwmom
(109,009 posts)and women need more time in the bathroom than men. This was established by researchers with stopwatches decades ago.
ABC only gave them 5 minutes, including transit time. Not enough. Focusing on the empty podium and going on without her was inexcusably rude.
NobodyHere
(2,810 posts)I hope she isn't in the bathroom when she gets that 3am phone call she touted last election.
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)clothing, and the facilities themselves.
Your sexism and or ignorance is noted.
NobodyHere
(2,810 posts)pnwmom
(109,009 posts)NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)I don't even have the words for this.
Cha
(297,800 posts)pnwmom
(109,009 posts)Those who think she should have just quietly slipped in and not said "sorry"?
Those who think she was grandstanding?
Those, like me, who think ABC was remiss not to delay the start for a minute or two since one or their 3 participants was still in the bathroom?
Women need more time in the bathroom to get their basic business done. This is not disgusting; it's just a simple fact backed up by time and motion studies conducted with stopwatches.
ABC's 5 minute breaks were not enough. They should have just let their commentators blab on for a little longer -- it's what they love to do -- instead of making a point of starting without her.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)I just can't properly articulate what I just read for fear of my brain shutting off and dying.
People actually sinking so low as to turn a slightly longer bathroom break into a fucking Clinton campaign dirty trick.
Absolutely no shame at all.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)Agschmid
(28,749 posts)Codeine
(25,586 posts)We see what the bros are reduced to in the face of a strong woman; puerile children.
Yupster
(14,308 posts)Until this year I never noticed candidates going offstage during breaks. It's probably always happened but I've never noticed it.
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)Yupster
(14,308 posts)are the candidates met by their aides who walk with them to the bathroom telling them what's going right and wrong and remember to say this about him, or are they supposed to be isolated during these breaks.
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)What would an aide know more about than she does? No one knows what questions will be asked in the second part of the debate.
Yupster
(14,308 posts)I'm talking about all of them.
During debates, I'm sure the campaigns are constantly saying that something someone said wasn't true or could be easily countered. I'm sure each campaign would love to grab their candidate during the debate and say, "he said he was against this, but on Oct 23 at the Davenport Foreign Legion he said he was for it."
I was just wondering if that was allowed during the commercial breaks.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)Ripped right out of FreeRepublic.
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)This is terrible. I am with Hillary supporters on this. I invite them to do a thread on bathroom parity I will visit and rec.
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)I found your posts to be good on the subject.
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)PatrickforO
(14,594 posts)assholes for starting before she got back.
But ABC really sucks anyway. You guys remember their hatchet job on Obama back in 08? I mean, that was pathetic, in a ridiculous and light weight way. I don't watch ABC much.
pnwmom
(109,009 posts)the ladies was farther away?
akbacchus_BC
(5,704 posts)Response to hootinholler (Original post)
JTFrog This message was self-deleted by its author.
akbacchus_BC
(5,704 posts)I feel very sorry for you.
The moderator repeated the question for Mrs. Clinton to respond. Who are you on this fecking totem pole? Are you making a difference in the debates?
Get lost!
akbacchus_BC
(5,704 posts)The Mods need to delete it. Whether you like Mrs. Clinton or not, this post is fecking disgusting. Delete it please Mods and you will be doing yourselves a favour. More people will be willing to pay to be on here if DU is fair!
NanceGreggs
(27,820 posts)... I thought he did very well in tonight's debate.
I find it curious that his supporters are more interested in HRC's hairdo, outfit, and bathroom breaks than their own candidate's performance.
TDale313
(7,820 posts)and find it classless and yes, sexist. Rather see us stay on the issues.
Purveyor
(29,876 posts)TDale313
(7,820 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,716 posts)The irony is there are those that argue misogyny and sexism are not part of the opposition to Secretary Clinton.
Thank you for reading.
Happy Holidays
DSB
JustABozoOnThisBus
(23,374 posts)It seems to have gotten everyone's attention. So it's a successful ploy.
Vinca
(50,318 posts)Sometimes things just take longer. Get a grip.
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr][font color="blue"][center]All things in moderation, including moderation.[/center][/font][hr]
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)but I don't think it was planned. She might have had a wardrobe malfunction, might have been a restroom issue, either way I thought she handled it well and I can't stand the woman.
No biggie.
mythology
(9,527 posts)Why did you think this post was a good idea? All it does is make you look really small and petty.
MineralMan
(146,338 posts)It provided a bit of comic relief. That's all.
Response to hootinholler (Original post)
JTFrog This message was self-deleted by its author.
wyldwolf
(43,870 posts)ronnykmarshall
(35,356 posts)for GD-B
Arkana
(24,347 posts)Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)And I am not big fan of the Clinton's. But nasty, petty remarks like this serve no meaningful purpose and I am sure Bernie would be personally embarrassed. Shame on you and everyone who supports such nasty and personal sniping.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)Have you never had gastric distress? And if so, so the fuck what? We need the unrec feature back
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)The grade-school petulance with which a post like this is created more often than not illustrates that character of poster much more than anything they may be righteously railing against. Which itself isn't pretty, either... but I'm sure you'll rationalize holding yourself to a much lower standard one way or another, regardless of how pretty, or distressful or even tactical.