I just want to focus on the subject of a U.S. Senator asking low-level staff to do cleaning and the journalism of calling it "a possible violation of Senate ethics rules, according to veterans of the chamber."
Why can't we have better reporting? Who are these unnamed people who make vague statements about ethics rules? Is this good journalistic ethics? What makes someone a "veteran of the chamber"? Could you be more specific?! Did you find out how little cleaning tasks like collecting coffee cups and rinsing them out are handled by other Senators?
It strikes me as unfair to waft "a possible violation of Senate ethics rule" without telling us what the rule is or committing to exposing and casting aspersions on all the Senators who ask staff to clean things.
If low-level staff think this kind of work is demeaning, let's talk about that. If there's no specific rule against assigning them cleaning tasks and there should be, then make a rule. Don't mobilize a fake rule for the purpose of taking down a candidate that you want out of the way.
For a while, I've had a tag "NYT pushes Kamala," where I've been collecting evidence of my hypothesis, and this post gets the tag. Does Kamala Harris have staff who are asked to do things like clear away coffee cups? Please check that for me and apply the same standard of newsworthiness and sneering at her if she does, because I think you're trying to clear away Amy to help Kamala.
And by the way, that's not going to help Kamala. Quit acting like she needs help, and quit pre-destroying her competition. Kamala could fail, and Kamala fans might need Amy.
And, NYT, you'd better make sure none of this coverage is sexist. Why am I hearing about the woman who expects her staff to clean up after her? Is it because the male Senators never do such things or is it because — on some level of consciousness — you expect a woman to do the cleaning?
ADDED: Full disclosure: I said last December, "I'm just going to be for Amy Klobuchar." That was based on my desire for someone competent and normal. I see the NYT article as a deliberate attempt to make her seem abnormal — that is, to destroy what I see as the best thing about her.
AND: From Tim Nicolai on Twitter:
Some great journalists wrote the Amy Klobuchar pieces. People are attacking the pieces because they say these stories "never get written about other politicians" (particularly men). I checked to see if that was true. A thread....Go to the link for the examples. Nicolai identifies himself as a "Democratic activist and fact-checker." At the top of his Twitter page is this "pinned" tweet from January 19th (that is, he's choosing to flaunt this tweet):
ALSO: I read one of the articles Nicolai linked to, "Congressman Pushes Staff Hard, or Out the Door." That's from 2008. Wouldn't it be funny if the Congressman who "pushes staff hard" was Anthony Weiner? It was!
It started as a routine conference call. But at some point during the call, Representative Anthony D. Weiner became furious....
Two weeks later, Mr. Graff, a Navy veteran, became the latest of a sizable number of staff members who have resigned after an abbreviated stint with Mr. Weiner, a Democrat who represents parts of Brooklyn and Queens.
“I push people pretty hard,” said Mr. Weiner, who acknowledged getting upset at Mr. Graff. “And there are, from time to time, staffers who don’t take to it or just don’t like being pushed that hard. But I really regretted him leaving. He was a marine. I’m like, ‘How bad is this?’ It’s even worse than boot camp.”
पोस्ट्स
१४१ टिप्पण्या:
Women do the cleaning because they have a lower tolerance for clutter than men.
Dogs never clean up after themselves. A peanut butter jar licked clean will be there for months.
The NYT is always pushing an agenda. They are a tool used to push Carlos Slim’s wants.
Are you saying Kamala is on Slim’s couch?
It's a shame no men are running so that people have a choice.
"Women do the cleaning because they have a lower tolerance for clutter than men."
Yeah, watch out, because at some level of feminist consciousness the man IS the clutter.
The question is, does he spark joy?
The bias, once seen, cannot be unseen.
Althouse is clearly losing patience with the “new journalism” rules the NYT adopted re Trump.
While the story about Bad Boss Amy is getting stale, the turnover numbers in her office are high and she’s been a senator for more than 12 years.
Maybe the staff of the other long serving Senators — male and female — just take it. Maybe Klobuchar staff is more sensitive. Maybe they think she is going to be nicer and are more disappointed to find out that she’s a jagoff.
But we’re at the point that The NY Times needs to get people to go on the record or move on. Klobuchar has been in the Senate 12 years and has no record of accomplishment. That’s the story. She votes Present.
Does this behavior not remind people of Hillary (aka the NYT's all-time favorite female candidate)?
Klobuchar has long had a reputation for being nasty to her subordinates.
Hillary was nasty to her subordinates too.
Is it less important to women that you treat people under you well? It seems that Ann thinks normal is abusing people who work for you.
I find this trait a complete deal breaker when looking at a leader.
Is the Times running out of anti-Klobchar ammunition already? Surely someone has to load the dishwasher? It can’t always be the Senator, can it?
To all:
NYT does not want Amy to be POTUS. She is expected to be the AG in the:
Warren/Sanders (POTUS) - Harris (VPOTUS) admin.
Cheers!
The female anti-clutter thing is probably from women being social animals, always thinking they might want to invite friends over to show them what a good deal they made. It's a competitive worth thing.
So the house has to be cleanish.
Men don't give a shit.
Ann has articulated how the Fake News smears people with innuendo. Let’s have a Bill of Particulars. Nebraska used to be a code pleading state and pleadings had to be detailed with facts and citations to law.
You can’t charge someone with a crime and say it may have violated some unnamed statute.
Another reason why the Press is the Enemy of the People. Do your job!
Klobuchar sounds like the capital of Afghanistan or something anway.
So does the President have to wash his own coffee cups?
No?
What's the cutoff? Somewhere between Senator and President.
the Hack-D press IS judge and JURY.
It's ten o'clock, time to start looking for a Scott Adams thing. He takes the media as profit-seeking audience panderers, which is always the right take. Information hasn't been the point since the news became a profit center instead of a loss leader in the 70s.
On the other hand he's a nerd so no good on ethics.
Althouse is correct about the NYT being for Harris and trashing Klobuchar.
They count on their over-credentialed and ignorant and credulous audience to continue to be stupid and credulous for at least one more election cycle.
"Enemies of the people," indeed. Had the Bolsheviks not ruined that phrase I could endorse Trump using it.
Aha, there he is. Talking about eating salad with a comb, according to the blurb.
The low level staff members should just give Angry Amy styrofoam cups.
I don't think the Minnesota boys at Powerline are buying your, competent and normal, argument.
I don't understand. The "low-level employees" think the Senator should wash the dishes? What do they think "low-level" means?
You’ll know they’re going whole hog for Harris when the “daughters of drunk fathers have problems” article comes out
Low-level journalists at the New York Times were asked to perform duties they described as demeaning, like finding the actual text of a Senate rule and getting sources to go on the record — a possible violation of the laws governing elite, coastal journalism.
When Sanders or that Gabbard woman get trashed, you can at least explain it as centrist/moderate Dems trying to gatekeep against people they see as too far left. But what explains the difference in how Klobuchar and Kamala are treated? Is it because Kamala is from somewhere that matters (California) while Klobuchar is from flyover country? Has the NYT decided there's only room for one white woman in the field (Warren)?
Mike
I want to see Nancy's Tax returns.
If you want real reporting you should hire reporters, not journalists.
The seeds of doubt regarding Amy the Hun's candidacy have been firmly planted. A little watering and in a few months she will ripe for plucking. She's a goner.
Does this behavior not remind people of Hillary (aka the NYT's all-time favorite female candidate)?
That's what I was thinking. Berating underlings--and Secret Service agents--was kind of her thing.
I think her part in kavananaugh fraud and belief in the skydragon scam would be no brainers, but the left has no problem with either
Dr. Julia Kelly: coffee?
Lt. Col. Thomas Devoe: I'd love some.
Julia: 0ver there.
The problem for Klobuchar is two fold.
One she is a nasty person.
Two Carlos Slim is pushing Kamala.
The combination will doom her.
We need to know if she orders the women staff to iron her shirt.
Remember when Trump was mocked for picking his own clothes off the floor?
"I see the NYT article as a deliberate attempt to make her seem abnormal — that is, to destroy what I see as the best thing about her"
You got your journalistic ethics right there.
Anyway, what you "see" is not what you get. Time for a little political cataract surgery.
But it is useful to be reminded that, for nice women, the "best thing" about a candidate has nothing to do with what they plan to do.
Neither Klobuchar nor Harris is a wise choice. Neither California nor Minnesota are going Republican anytime soon.
I see the NYT article as a deliberate attempt to make her seem abnormal...
and, in turn, anyone who does or ever did support her.
Leslie Graves observes: Low-level journalists at the New York Times were asked to perform duties they described as demeaning, like finding the actual text of a Senate rule and getting sources to go on the record — a possible violation of the laws governing elite, coastal journalism.
Yep. And not only the NYT. Reporting has gotten lazy and sloppy across the board.
Bill Clinton: “A few years ago, this guy (Obama) would have been getting us coffee.”
Low-level employees were asked to perform duties they described as demeaning
I thought that was the working definition of "low level employee".
AA sez: "I see the NYT article as a deliberate attempt to make her seem abnormal — that is, to destroy what I see as the best thing about her."
Althouse sees clearly.
Her sainted NYT wants to be a political player, wants to adopt Leftist policies, has identified an ally/vehicle (Harris) to do this, has identified a potential obstacle to said ally (Klobuchar) and, thereby, assigns a low-level, clueless functionary to write a silly, but effective hit piece about combs, salads and cleaning supplies to hurt Klobuchar's political chances.
It's comically blatant.
Waiting for the NYT's expose on how young female attorneys in SF can blow powerful Mayors to get great government jobs.
Still waiting.
Still waiting.
"Althouse is clearly losing patience..."
Yeah, and I'm hungry and f**kless.
G.Cochran is picking on the NYT merely because they publish nonsense about more serious subjects than who washes whose dishes.
Just another lefty drone, who was involved in the Cavanaugh ambush through her staff.
"...I think you're trying to clear away Amy to help Kamala."
They're putting all their eggs in the wrong basket. I'd say Bernie has the better chance. And, while it's OK for a newspaper to endorse a candidate, they should do it as opinion, not by disparaging the other candidates and calling it 'news'. The line between editorial comment and news has become so blurred they don't see the distinction.
So we have a junior megalomaniac running; one of those women who gives it up to the boss to get ahead of all of the other women; an old biddy affirmative action fraudster who wants to be national schoolmarm and general all purpose scold; an old white guy come back from his Dacha on North Hero Island; a gigolo, who got his name ‘Beto’ because his family Hispanic maid thought he was so cute, and who married into one of the nation’s richest families; a wrinkly old bankwalker who insists on swimming naked in front of female secret service agents who is otherwise a legendary creep.
Does that about cover it?
I’m out of NYT views, but I’ve read in other articles Amy was asking staff to clean up after her, not only in the office, but at home or on the road:
“Hang up clothes she leaves laying on the floor & her chair
Pick up dirty clothes & place in a basket (in the hallway between room & bathroom)
Organize clothing in the closet so she can find items easily (separate into shirts, suits, etc)
Throw away any garbage in the dressing area
Make sure nylons/socks/etc are in drawers are arranged for easy retrieval”
Source: https://pressfrom.info/us/news/politics/-243331-harry-reid-rebuked-amy-klobuchar-for-mistreatment-of-staff.html
This is what happens when you throw your reputation for accuracy and fairness over the side. What they do to Republicans they now do to each other. Good going, Times.
It may be safe to say that, because they couldn't find any facts to back up their assertations, that it's because there isn't any.
It's certainly the safest way to read the national news nowadays.
Has anyone bothered to check Klobuchar's high school and college yearbooks? Have they checked the immigration status of Harris' maids, landscapers, handymen and mechanics, along with her former boyfriends' maids, landscapers, handymen and mechanics? Sure would save a lot of time and effort if they'd check all that stuff now rather than next October.
My idea has always been that if I make coffee and clean the counter, etc., when necessary, so can the secretary/receptionist.
But these days, most of them seem to think it is sexist to ask them to do it and resolutely refuse to do so, even when they are the one who drank the last cup.
Journalists should write the Democrat candidates' differences on policy issues.
Ask Senator Klobuchar agree with Senator Harris and Senator Booker that the Federal Government needs an anti-lynching law?
A more interesting candidate, even if her views are bonkers
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/02/dave-begley-live-from-council-bluffs-3.php
Like Ann I have been frustrated by 'news' stories that make claims and and have quotes, but no sources for anything. I deem the story to be 100 fabrication. "Fake but accurate" was the term the media has invented to justify their actions. Un-named sources, are fabricated sources.
On to media motivation. Stop tying to shame the media, they don't care. Because, their consumers don't care. The media is providing their customers with the confirmation bias they seek.
This is not new. Newspapers were started by wealthy people to influence public opinion. It has always been so. There is nothing wrong in doing so. In the good old days those papers separated their news from the advocacy. They worked hard to do news straight, which led to their advocacy having more weight. Today the media shapes the news to advance their advocacy. Think about any story about a politician. If it is favorable or derogatory, the Party designation leads or is buried, depending on the medias biases.
Stop believing the media presents any news that is not raw advocacy. You'll sleep better.
Normal and competent. So you don't care about their platform and policies. BS. You are a progressive liberal and cleverly telling us that liberals are normal and competent while Trump isn't. As shouting thomas said "she is a clever politician"
The eating salad with a fork seems more weird than scandalous. If this is the hidden thing in her closet, it's not much. If that's the worst thing those people on her staff, who actively disliked her, can tattle about, she's remarkably upright. Still, it's best to get this out now. Next State of the Union, Trump will be inviting her disgruntled ex staff members to sit in the audience........Perhaps if she had an illegal immigrant as her personal maid, this whole problem could have been avoided. Same deal with Kraft.
Why can't we have better reporting?
@Althouse, your serious question deserves a serious answer, but it strikes me that that the best answer is another question. Althouse, how frequently in the past have you demanded better reporting from the Times versus how many times in the past did you gullibly fall for one of their memes or tropes or steaming piles of bullshit? Now (just to mix metaphors) it’s your own ox being gored, so now you care about the quality of their reporting. A bit late to think about that.
Anonymous sources = bull shit, aka: fake, story.
Have to credit our host for identifying the Times's mission against Klobuchar, and in favor of Harris, early, possibly first.
She makes staff play Hungry, Hungry, Hippos and the implications of that don't have to be detailed.
1 I agree with Ann on all points here
2 Now you know how Republicans feel
Maybe team Klobuchar is leaking this bad boss stuff to the media. She knows the stories and rumors are out there and she wants to dispense with them early, when it doesn't matter so much, and get past it.
Poor Amy Klobuchar. She wants to be president, and some people don't want her to be.
Poor Robert Kraft. People are making fun of him for his involvement in an investigation of human trafficking.
Poor Donald Trump. Some people think he is abnormal and incompetent.
We treat our billionaires and U.S. senators so unfairly.
And the photo accompanying the NYT piece has Klobucher standing next to a glass table top. The effect is to make her hips appear twice the size of her waist.
She looks like a damn Weeble.
.
Amy was first in her high school class. Yale undergrad. Chicago Law.
"Low-level employees were asked to perform duties they described as demeaning, like washing her dishes or other cleaning — a possible violation of Senate ethics rules, according to veterans of the chamber..."
Isn't the Times being demeaning by referring to them as "low-level employees"?
Like, maybe they see themselves as 'Associate Support Personnel' or some such.
Tsk Tsk.
I am Laslo.
As suggested above, Powerline has been saying for awhile that the Minnesota Nice shtick is a façade, she's simply an abusive person. But Scott Johnson does arch an eybrow here: The Amy Klobuchar Experience
The Amy Klobucahr Experience is not pleasant. Klobucahr’s Minnesota nice thing is a facade. You probably wouldn’t want to work as a direct report for Klobuchar.
The story does not come as a great shock. It has been out there for a while. The Times adds depth and specificity to previous reports.
I think the story raises a few questions. Does Klobuchar’s mistreatment of her staff matter? It undercuts the image she is trying to project. In that sense, it has same bearing on the campaign.
Is Klobuchar’s treatment of her staff different in kind from that of the other current or prospective candidates? It’s hard to believe that the Amy Klobuchar Experience is much different than the experience of working for the other current or prospective candidates who have jumped into the race. In any event, Klobuchar is a distinctly secondary candidate in the Democratic field. Why is the Times doing its thing on her now?
Klobuchar’s treatment of her staff may differ in kind from the other candidates and reflect a poor character, but it is probably less relevant than Bernie Sanders’s love of the former Soviet Union or Cory Booker’s fabulations or Kamala Harris’s means of ascent, to take three prominent examples of cases that warrant a close look. Will the Times get around to them some time soon?
Has anyone bothered to check Klobuchar's high school and college yearbooks? Have they checked the immigration status of Harris' maids, landscapers, handymen and mechanics, along with her former boyfriends' maids, landscapers, handymen and mechanics? Sure would save a lot of time and effort if they'd check all that stuff now rather than next October.
Good question. I want to see her finger-paintings from kindergarten. I suspect they are a Rorschachian minefield
I wasn't giving Amy a second thought. Now you have my attention.
Go Amy!
not a very gracious vibe
"Klobber" + "Butcher" => Klobuchar
What did she do in the Senate, except being a rubber stamp?
When I was hired for a coveted, low-paying job as apprentice editor for a documentary producer after film school, my female boss — the editor— asked if I knew how to cook Cuban food, because the crew loves Cuban food! Another part of my job description was to change the kitty litter twice a week for her gigantic Persian cat. As folks have pointed out here, it was an entry level job. I was thrilled that my cooking skills is what tipped the balance for me. In the editing room, there was a wall phone, with a long cord. (It was the 80s,) The phone would ring, I would answer, and hand it to her at the editing console. When she was finished talking to “amore”, she would throw the receiver onto the floor, my signal to return the receiver to the cradle. The producer, a male, on the other hand, was a complete gentleman and treated me like the lady that I am.
Sadly, this experience is of a piece with my employment history. With just two exceptions, working for women has been hellishly humiliating. I’ve told my son never, ever to do it. Men are Mensches.
The US taxpayer is paying for Senate upkeep. We are paying for the cleaning service. Where is it?
Unless your job is in jeopardy or it was part of your duties, helping once in a while is one thing. But AK has funds for more service. Is she cheap? Is she like Fauxahontas, not paying her fair share? Didn’t Warren use her Harvard office to run a business out of?
Good questions Althouse I mean picking up after someone is unethical who says? This seems petty sniping because her record in office is sound.
Let us comb out the crumbs of these petty stories so we can get at The meaty issues later in the campaign—this maybe a good thing?
Who clears the table after NYT staff meetings? Enquiring minds want to know.
Don’t low level people do low level things?
This has relevance to my problems in talking to Trump haters, including some of my closest relatives. People fasten on to political leaders, and start making assumptions--the hero is always kindly, almost saintly, patient, etc., able to speak understandingly to people from all walks of life. The leader one hates is cruel, vindictive, selfish, you name it--a nightmare to work for. I have actually worked for some politicians. I don't tell many tales out of school--I think it is part of accepting these jobs to keep your mouth shut--but the idea that Trump is some kind of impossible new low is ridiculous. On serving coffee, I'll refer to a politician I didn't work for; he wanted to meet with me because I worked for a Minister, and he wanted to ask a favour. He had once been a minister, and everyone could expect to be reminded of that. When I went to his office, he had a small staff. It was not the female receptionist he asked to make coffee, it was a young male, let us say research assistant/dogsbody. There was no doubt a specific way to make the coffee, and it took some time. At one point the politician yelled out: are you growing the beans? What's taking so long? I repeated this to my wife and she said "they are all such assholes." I'm sure this is an exaggeration. Then there was the morning the Minister couldn't remember where his car was. He worked in one high-rise, and lived in another not far away. Yes, he often drove himself, but that is another story. Several staff were told to go immediately and find the car--level by level in a parking ramp .... salary dollars being deployed ....
anonymous sniping from the hack press.
A reminder to the other candidates: "Let he (or she) who is without sin, cast the first comb." Your time is coming, especially with Trump as the final opponent.
It would be interesting to know the sex of the staffer on the receiving end of Klobuchar's wrath. Is it sexism if the targets are young women? Is it something else if it is young men? All these "sexism" angles are written from Klobuchar's point of view. Why are we asking if talking about Klobuchar's aberrant behavior is sexist, but not whether Kolbuchar's aberrant behavior is sexist?
Caroline Walker is correct -- plenty of stories of powerful women treating less powerful women very poorly and less powerful men professionally. Powerful men who treat less powerful women poorly end up on a #metoo list.
Why can't we have better reporting? Who are these unnamed people who make vague statements about ethics rules? Is this good journalistic ethics?
A little late in the day -- in the millennium -- to be noticing this conduct now.
roesch/voltaire said...
"This seems petty sniping because her record in office is sound."
Define "sound". If it means showing up, then I agree. But as a Minnesota resident my observation is that Klobuchar is a mystery woman. She seems to have a low profile and a quiet back bench mentality. She's a comfortable party line voter who emerges for a few months every six year election cycle to appear engaged.
Some times "quiet" means boring. Other times "quiet" means nothing to offer. My observation is that Klobuchar is the latter.
Here's
Justice Kagan on the special low tasks given to the junior Supreme Court Justice:
The junior justice has three unique responsibilities, she said... [T]he newest justice is assigned to cafeteria duty and keeps it until the next justice is confirmed.
“I think this is a way to kind of humble people,” she said during the “fireside chat” at the elegant Broadmoor resort in Colorado Springs. “You think you’re kind of hot stuff. You’re an important person. You’ve just been confirmed to the United States Supreme Court.
“And now you are going to monthly cafeteria committee meetings where literally the agenda is what happened to the good recipe for the chocolate chip cookies.”
The justices eat lunch together on the days when they hear oral arguments, Kagan explained.
“Somebody will say, ‘Who’s our representative to the cafeteria committee again?’ Like they don’t know, right? And then they’ll say, ‘This soup is very salty.’ And I’m like supposed to go fix it myself?”
Kagan said there are no exceptions to the rule of who answers the door.
“Literally, if I’m like in the middle of a sentence--let’s say it’s my turn to speak or something--and there’s a knock on the door, everybody will just stare at me, waiting for me to open the door,” Kagan said. “It’s like a form of hazing. So, that’s what I do, I open the door. Pronto.”
Kagan said all this good-naturedly; she is always one to appreciate the great gig she’s landed rather than expound on the weight of the job.
Enlighten-NewJersey said...
I’m out of NYT views, but I’ve read in other articles Amy was asking staff to clean up after her, not only in the office, but at home or on the road:
“Hang up clothes she leaves laying on the floor & her chair
Pick up dirty clothes & place in a basket (in the hallway between room & bathroom)
Organize clothing in the closet so she can find items easily (separate into shirts, suits, etc)
Throw away any garbage in the dressing area
Make sure nylons/socks/etc are in drawers are arranged for easy retrieval”
See, this is what happens when you can no longer hire an illegal as a housekeeper. Good times when you could.
I live in Minnesota. These stories have been going around about Klobuchar for years. Yes, the NYT clearly has an agenda, but I'm not sure it's any more noxious than the dozen years of hagiography Klobuchar has received from the Star Tribune.
Isn't that what low-level employees are for?
If she’s asking employees to help her around the house, that’s an IRS problem. Or it would be if Trump were doing it. Lots of people have gotten in trouble with the IRS for having their company or whatever do work for them on the side without paying for it themselves.
Long experience tells me that in general male leaders - executives - have a smoother style than women. On matters of "personal maintenance" they are vastly more relaxed and are unlikely to put these embarassing burdens on staff. On other matters, specific to the professional aspects of the job at hand, their expectations can be very high.
Weiner never struck me as someone accustomed to getting things done. God knows what silliness he had his people worrying about.
The Democrat contenders just appear so tiny compared to Trump
The question is, does he spark joy?
And how many times a night can he spark it?
So was it “Member pushes his staff”
or “Staff pushes its member?”
Someone might think that Althouse has dropped her cruel neutrality and is raging at the MSM's attempts to destroy her candidate of choice.
As for dealing with staff - it helps a lot to have grown up with professional servants. It takes away a great deal of the anxiety of leadership, if one is used to it almost from birth. There are proper ways to express ones wishes, there are proper times and places for requesting specific duties, and of course the matter of self control and temperament.
“Women do the cleaning because they have a lower tolerance for clutter than men.”
Oof. Not this man. And in my own experience, not men generally. Althouse’s imputation of sexism is in itself sexist. Shame!
"Kagan said all this good-naturedly; she is always one to appreciate the great gig she’s landed rather than expound on the weight of the job."
Yeah, this. Some bosses are tough. Tough bosses can be the most loyal. Her office is said to be productive. It's a problem if she can't manage or hire good staff. President is a executive management position, after all. She's got a year to prove she can manage a campaign or not.
Did anyone else notice that in the NYT piece by David Chen, John J. Graff is described as a Navy veteran, but the quote from Weiner,
"...He was a marine. I’m like, ‘How bad is this?’ It’s even worse than boot camp.”
Goes without any comment from Chen, also why does Chen capitalize Navy but not Marine in the Weiner quote? Was that his way of gently pointing out the mistake, without doing it directly?
I could find no information on John J. Graff, so it is a mystery to me whether he was in the Navy or Marines or neither. One thing I strongly suspect, given that he was a scheduler for a Congressman--he was likely an officer and so would not normally have gone to boot camp. Which brings up something I've seen in my life-experience: People like Weiner, who never served in the military, seem far more prone than vets to think that if you served you will put up with a lot of bullshit.
"Low-level employees were asked to perform duties they described as demeaning, like washing her dishes or other cleaning — a possible violation of Senate ethics rules, according to veterans of the chamber."
After all, that's part of the Green New Deal: you get paid even when you're "unwilling" to work.
Yeah, and I'm hungry and f**kless.
@Althouse, don’t tell us. Tell Meade.
Yeah, watch out, because at some level of feminist consciousness the man IS the clutter.
Close, but you misspelled "every" as "some".
Well..... the sammiches ain't gonna make themselves!
It is easier for Kamala to get the ayes of spineless noodles than for a rich man to enter the potentate of POTUS.
I'm pretty sure that using a public employee as a private servant does violate ethical rules. I would be interested in seeing the text of the rule, though.
The junior justice has three unique responsibilities, she said... [T]he newest justice is assigned to cafeteria duty and keeps it until the next justice is confirmed.
“I think this is a way to kind of humble people,” she said during the “fireside chat” at the elegant Broadmoor resort in Colorado Springs. “You think you’re kind of hot stuff. You’re an important person. You’ve just been confirmed to the United States Supreme Court.
“And now you are going to monthly cafeteria committee meetings where literally the agenda is what happened to the good recipe for the chocolate chip cookies.”
Not comparable. The Supreme Court cafeteria committee is an official job relating to the functioning of the institution. Somebody has to sit on it. Making the junior member do it might be a form of light hazing, but it's still work that has to be done.
Hypothetically, Kagan could send a clerk to chair the committee if she were out of town, and that wouldn't be abusive. It might lower her in the eyes of the other justices, though, if they all did their time on the cafeteria committee without whining.
Klobuchar is having staffers go around and pick up her clothes, do her dishes, clean her combs, etc. Not public duties, not serving the functioning of the Senate. The only person who benefits is Klobuchar, who isn't forced to live in her own filth.
@Althouse, have you missed the fact that Kagan is no longer the junior justice?
Poor Brett Kavanaugh.......doing the beer runs he thought he had left in his long forgotten past.
The media did the same thing in 2007-2008, but maybe Althouse didn't notice it then.
My (few) leftist friends gloss over this innuendo WaPo and NYT try to pass off as journalism.
It's mother's milk to them. They've been habituated to this slop. Prof's word surgery is one reason I remain glued to the monitor. These "journalists" are clearly third rate, with just enough lefty snark to keep their readers feeling superior. These clowns are who Kelsey Grammerly skewered as being "the brats". "Don't question me, I read the NYT".
The Harris angle is interesting. I guess Harris wants to run as a ... moderate? The progressive lane is full up, so I guess that leaves moderate by default. In theory, you're supposed to drive the other candidates out of your lane, to improve your chances in the early primaries.
But Klobuchar isn't really running in the moderate lane. She's running in the "low profile Senator who thinks she ought to be more famous" lane.
The two candidates who could make some noise in the moderate lane are Biden and O'Rourke.
I can't shake the idea that Harris is out of touch with the Democratic electorate. Appealingly multiethnic former prosecutor from a big state would have been a strong candidate in the 1990s, but is that what the leftists are clamoring for these days?
"Dumbass!!" snapped Klobutcher as the staffer set the table for the fund-raising dinner--
"the combs go on the Left!!"
So he [Jesus] got up from the table, took off his robe, wrapped a towel around his waist, and poured water into a basin. Then he began to wash the disciples’ feet, drying them with the towel he had around him. After washing their feet, he put on his robe again and sat down and asked, “Do you understand what I was doing? You call me ‘Teacher’ and ‘Lord,’ and you are right, because that’s what I am. And since I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you ought to wash each other’s feet. I have given you an example to follow. Do as I have done to you. I tell you the truth, slaves are not greater than their master. Nor is the messenger more important than the one who sends the message. Now that you know these things, God will bless you for doing them.
John 13:4-5,12-17 NLT
She eats with a dirty comb. DISQUALIFIED.
and of course the matter of self control and temperament.
Yep. Give this woman the most powerful job in the world.
It was once the custom for European monarchs, especially Catholic ones, to wash poor mens feet, annually. Maundy Thursday I think.
I'd feel a lot better about these Klobuchar stories if the sources were willing to be identified. I'd give a lot more credibility to someone who is now managing a small non-profit than someone who is currently a receptionist for one.
Cringed the whole time I watched it.
As always it's the truth that sets you free. She should have told them people can't predict interest rates much less climate. And that your teachers have been lying to it if they say otherwise. and they are scaring you unnecessarily. Further, Malthusians have been wrong forever and likely will continue to be so.
Has the added benefit of being true. . . . . .but I guess she can't say that.
Take a poke at Comb-Salad Amy.
I love this story about a former Trump event planner who now works for HUD.
https://nypost.com/2019/02/19/one-way-to-make-nycha-clean-up/
I'd guess she didn't mind cleaning up coffee cups.
Yes, Caroline Walker is correct. My ex, a California ER nurse, told me lots of women would much rather work for a man.
On a different tack, which candidate would have the guts to kick fake women out of women's sports and women's safe spaces? This is rapidly becoming a front-burner feminist issue.
"The question is, does he spark joy?"
Althouse goes red pill. Whoa...
Nipicking how female candidates treat their staff is simply the female version of nitpicking how male candidates treat their female staff. I am on board with sniffing out "mean girl" behavior - I think we need to go all the way back to Amy's high school years to see if this pattern played out on the yearbook committe or drama club. Hell, since girls supposedly mature faster than boys we need to examine Amy's middle school years as well. What's good for the gander is good for the goose. We demand nothing less that pure of heart/soul candidates!
"And, NYT, you'd better make sure none of this coverage is sexist."
Hah! What are you gonna do, cancel your subscription? Then what would you blog about? Face it, you need them more than they need you. They've got you right where they want you ,and they can be as sexist as they like.
and one step from 10 downing street
http://www.thetower.org/7233-video-from-2009-emerges-showing-corbyn-expressing-sympathy-for-suicide-bombers/
Personal services are 100% a violation of most ethics rules. I find it very hard to believe that a staffer doing your dishes or something ISN'T a personal service.
If this is all they could conjure up to smear Amy Klobuchar, then they are pretty desperate. Who knows who is doing the smearing? It doesn’t mean is coming from Democrats. Republicans don’t want Klobuchar as the Democratic nominee, as she will win and win big.
If Republicans had the ammunition, they'd be holding it to use in the general. This is inside baseball fighting.
I find it interesting(?)/ironic(?) that Klobuchar is being raked over the coals for being a bit weak in the empathy department while Harris, who initiated her time in politics by trying to sleep her way to the top, seems to get a free pass for what a high percentage of successful actresses have been condemned for recently.
@Matthew Sablan You are correct and Inga is way off base - again. This is all Dem politics and the R's are more than happy to stand aside and let the D's attack each other with hatchets.
Also: Republicans just don't have the resources to make attacks like this without people knowing it is Republicans doing it most of the time. It isn't like there are any Republicans with the reach of Hillary Clinton who can get help from major media players to clear a path for Donald Trump in the hopes of pitting herself against the "weakest" of the Republican candidates.
“Also: Republicans just don't have the resources to make attacks like this without people knowing it is Republicans doing it most of the time.”
Naive.
Winners have mid-level staffers to tell low-level staffers to do dishes.
Inga...Allie Oop said...If this is all they could conjure up to smear Amy Klobuchar, then they are pretty desperate. Who knows who is doing the smearing? It doesn’t mean is coming from Democrats. Republicans don’t want Klobuchar as the Democratic nominee, as she will win and win big.
Naive, considering that Dems are doing the smearing here, unless the NYT has changed sides.
My guess is that Kamala is BHO's personal favorite because WOC. He defended her "honor" a few years back.
Harris could also be Valerie Jarrett's personal favorite. ValJar is powerful enough to get people fired.
I am sure that if she has them doing housework, she has properly reported it to the IRS .
Naive?
Unfortunately reality is:
True Republicans only smear other Republicans.
They don’t smear Democrats, or even point out negatives.
They lose with dignity! Such as Romney, Dole, and McCain.
Trumps is not a true Republican. That is why the GOP establishment hates his guts.
Last time, they were fine with Hillary. This time, they're so scrupulous that all Senators must do their own dishes. How times change!
Inga: "It doesn’t mean is coming from Democrats. Republicans don’t want Klobuchar as the Democratic nominee, as she will win and win big."
What evidence exists that the NYT has run a single negative story on any democrat at the behest of any republican or conservatives?
Say, over the last 60 years.
LOL
NONE. ZIP. NADA. ZILCH.
But Inga jumped on that obviously hoax dossier like a pit bull on a poodle.
Next time she should have a cheeseburger. No need for the comb.
Cleaning up at the office has to be done by someone, likely a low-level staffer. However, Democrats probably believe cleaning up should be done by immigrants or someone else, not special, Ivy-educated liberals.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा