Many men can’t resist that animal urge to plant their genes in as many women as possible. Politicians just like to show that they answer to no one. Women just to find the best male that can provide for her children.

It amazes me that these lib journalists are women when if they paid attention they would know that the liberals are the real sexists. Why can’t more women be strong conservatives who realize that the conservatives are the ones who are not sexist, unlike the liberals who call Palin a “whore” and did not vote for Hillary clinton but 0-bow-ma because they are racists also thank you.

Nikki Haley?

Women throw themselves at powerful men. That’s why there are groupies.
Even in Weiner’s emails the women were telling Anthony they loved him, had a crush on him, and considered him they’re “boyfriend”.

Male politicians and celebrities become kids in a candy store and a lot of them cant handle the temptation.

SuburbanPatriot said:
It amazes me that these lib journalists are women when if they paid attention they would know that the liberals are the real sexists. Why can’t more women be strong conservatives who realize that the conservatives are the ones who are not sexist, unlike the liberals who call Palin a “whore” and did not vote for Hillary clinton but 0-bow-ma because they are racists also thank you.

Probably a parenting issue.

ImJustThatDamnGood said:
Nikki Haley?

She got away with it.

Maybe not directly, but there was a lady running for President who had a cheating hubby. And another one running for President whose teenage daughter had a baby put in her by a boy named after some dungarees. Them’s scandalous where I’m from.

I don’t think it’s sexist or sensational to suggest that women just have more self control in this department.

SuburbanPatriot said:
It amazes me that these lib journalists are women when if they paid attention they would know that the liberals are the real sexists. Why can’t more women be strong conservatives who realize that the conservatives are the ones who are not sexist, unlike the liberals who call Palin a “whore” and did not vote for Hillary clinton but 0-bow-ma because they are racists also thank you.

Liberals are progressive, of course, and hence have always fought harder for women’s rights. This has always been true.

Wait, Christiane Amanpour is a woman??

I can’t help but wonder if it’s not the women who have the self control… but that men don’t aren’t as attracted to powerful women, as women are attracted to powerful men.

Prom Night Dumpster Baby said:
Liberals are progressive, of course, and hence have always fought harder for women’s rights. This has always been true.

Unless it’s for the rights and respect of conservative women… in which case those principles go out the window.

SuburbanPatriot said:
It amazes me that these lib journalists are women when if they paid attention they would know that the liberals are the real sexists. Why can’t more women be strong conservatives who realize that the conservatives are the ones who are not sexist, unlike the liberals who call Palin a “whore” and did not vote for Hillary clinton but 0-bow-ma because they are racists also thank you.

There is so many things I wanna say regarding that statement that my brain is not processing.

so I’m just gonna go with thanks for that pile of s$%t comment.
It gave me a good laugh.

Bennybombom said:
so I’m just gonna go with thanks for that pile of s$%t comment.
It gave me a good laugh.

Your comments and face give everyone a good laugh.

ImJustThatDamnGood said:
Nikki Haley?

Hillary and Vince Foster!

Rivermont said:
Hillary and Vince Foster!

Vince Foster was not female.

BFD said:
She got away with it.

Perhaps she got away with it because it was a figment of the guys imagination. I don’t think any Republican woman gets away with anything, therefore there was nothing there. Just you guys who keep spreading the rumors and innuendoes.

catfishjuggling said:
Vince Foster was not female.

Neither is Hillary!

Prom Night Dumpster Baby said:
Liberals are progressive, of course, and hence have always fought harder for women’s rights. This has always been true.

Nonsense. Liberals are far from progressive. They did not fight harder for women’s rights. Absolute nonsense.
NOW is a joke – and they’ve pretty much done themselves in with their “selective” support of women. I wonder why Republicans are so much better behaved towards their fellow man?

Rivermont said:
Neither is Hillary!

Yeah. Who’s the sexist now?

Rivermont said:
Hillary and Vince Foster!

Parenting issue? This is what I’m talking about.

catfishjuggling said:
Yeah. Who’s the sexist now?

Bawaaaaaawawaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

catfishjuggling said:
Yeah. Who’s the sexist now?

I do truly appreciate Hill’s s”corkscrewing into Bosnia, under sniper fire.

Rivermont said:
Bawaaaaaawawaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

You said that she is not a woman. She clearly is.

Yeah. Liberals are the problem.

I am starting to think that liberal people don’t like conservative women. It also seems that conservatives don’t seem to like liberal women. Amazing.

I also notice that liberals do not like conservative men. And conservatives do not like liberal men.

Any chance this has more to do with the team that the disliking crew is on and not so much whether the target sits or stands to pee?

Rivermont said:
I do truly appreciate Hill’s s”corkscrewing into Bosnia, under sniper fire.

Does that have anything to do with her gender?

catfishjuggling said:
Does that have anything to do with her gender?

No- political ideology- She lied about it!

“Hillary Clinton has finally admitted that she “misspoke” when claiming that she came “under sniper fire” in Bosnia during a March 1996 visit to U.S. troops enforcing the 1995 Dayton Peace Agreement. At first, the Clinton campaign maintained that the “misstatement” was limited to one occasion on March 17 when she talked about running across the tarmac “with our heads down.” In an interview yesterday with the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, the senator from New York attributed the mistake to her “sleep-deprived” condition. “

Rivermont said:
No- political ideology- She lied about it!

“Hillary Clinton has finally admitted that she “misspoke” when claiming that she came “under sniper fire” in Bosnia during a March 1996 visit to U.S. troops enforcing the 1995 Dayton Peace Agreement. At first, the Clinton campaign maintained that the “misstatement” was limited to one occasion on March 17 when she talked about running across the tarmac “with our heads down.” In an interview yesterday with the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, the senator from New York attributed the mistake to her “sleep-deprived” condition. ”

What’s that have to do with sex scandals?

catfishjuggling said:
What’s that have to do with sex scandals?

They are about lies, lies, and more lying!

Well, we’re primates. With chimps and apes the alpha male gets first dibs on all the females in the tribe. We’re not that far removed DNAwise from chimps.

Powerful men have too much testosterone surging through their veins, the same stuff that makes them crave high status and to lord it over others.
.

Rivermont said:
They are about lies, lies, and more lying!

This is story about women and sex scandals. When there is a round table about ladies who lie, please stop on by and re-paste that thing about Hilary.

Thanks.

catfishjuggling said:
This is story about women and sex scandals

I guess you didn’t know about Hill and Vince Foster, eh?

Rivermont said:
I guess you didn’t know about Hill and Vince Foster, eh?

Vince Foster was not a lady.

Catherine the Great of Russia had quite a reputation. Remember the horse story?

catfishjuggling said:
Vince Foster was not a lady.

The topic was not women having sex scandals with women! It’s “Women Politicians Don’t Have Sex Scandals” when we all knew about Hill and Vince!

This headline is a joke, right? I am a working woman, and I do not see any difference between the two sexes. In fact, it takes both sexes!

Rivermont said:
The topic was not women having sex scandals with women! It’s “Women Politicians Don’t Have Sex Scandals” when we all knew about Hill and Vince!

Did it happen in Bosnia?

catfishjuggling said:
Did it happen in Bosnia?

LMAO

You don’t even know who Foster was!

Rivermont said:
LMAO

You don’t even know who Foster was!

Wait. Was this a gay thing? You said Hilary isn’t female. Vince sounds like a dude’s name.

catfishjuggling said:
Wait. Was this a gay thing? You said Hilary isn’t female. Vince sounds like a dude’s name.

LOL

Rivermont said:
LMAO

You don’t even know who Foster was!

Of course I know who Vince Foster was. That was one of America’s favorite conspiracy theories in the 1990s.

There are also a bunch of left wing bloggers who think that Sarah Palin cheated on Todd and that Track isn’t his. Others who think that Trig isn’t her kid at all.

I don’t put weight in either side’s crazy people.

seek said:
Nonsense. Liberals are far from progressive. They did not fight harder for women’s rights. Absolute nonsense.
NOW is a joke – and they’ve pretty much done themselves in with their “selective” support of women. I wonder why Republicans are so much better behaved towards their fellow man?

NOW lost all credibility during the Clinton scandal. They dismissed all the women accusers and defended the proven male liar.

They’re just another wing of the Dem Party. You might say the misogyny you see surfacing in so many lefty blogs, comedians, and posters is due to the lack of credibility of orgs like NOW. (You never even see NOW representatives as guests on the political talk shows anymore. They’ve become irrelevant except to raise money for pro-choice politicos.

slickerwick said:
Well, we’re primates. With chimps and apes the alpha male gets first dibs on all the females in the tribe. We’re not that far removed DNAwise from chimps. Powerful men have too much testosterone surging through their veins, the same stuff that makes them crave high status and to lord it over others..

You may lose your Radical Right Reactionary Republican card for that remark. The only reason for science is to deny it.

catfishjuggling said:
Rivermont said:
LMAO
You don’t even know who Foster was!
Of course I know who Vince Foster was. That was one of America’s favorite conspiracy theories in the 1990s.
There are also a bunch of left wing bloggers who think that Sarah Palin cheated on Todd and that Track isn’t his. Others who think that Trig isn’t her kid at all.
I don’t put weight in either side’s crazy people.

Well put.

And, how could anyone live through the ’90s and not know who Vince Foster was? He was today’s Jeremiah Wright.

I agree with the “focus” argument, but not as some sort of genetic gender trait.

I think the higher women ascend the MORE engaged that they get, whereas the opposite is true with men.

When it comes to the skills of delegating and macro-managing, women haven’t yet caught up to men. We tend to nursemaid the human assets and to micromanage everything else.

As women gain more access to power, they’ll gain the confidence it takes to manage from above.

With that sense of distance and authority, they’ll have the time and the ego that it takes to think they own the world and all it’s spoils.

laceyunderalls said:
Wait, Christiane Amanpour is a woman??

I hope your are proud of displaying your wit. In ten years, if you work at it, you’ll be up to sophomoric.

catfishjuggling said:
That was one of America’s favorite conspiracy theories in the 1990s.

It was the ’90s version of the 911 Truthers.

Glackin said:
I hope your are proud of displaying your wit. In ten years, if you work at it, you’ll be up to sophomoric.

This from mr profanity himself!

seek said:
Perhaps she got away with it because it was a figment of the guys imagination. I don’t think any Republican woman gets away with anything, therefore there was nothing there. Just you guys who keep spreading the rumors and innuendoes.

Please see below.

Rivermont said:
Neither is Hillary!

He’s yours, we don’t want him.
One is known by the company they keep.

Glackin said:
He’s yours, we don’t want him.

Yeah, and you are lubed up for Weiner!

Cecelia said:
I agree with the “focus” argument, but not as some sort of genetic gender trait.

I think the higher women ascend the MORE engaged that they get, whereas the opposite is true with men.

When it comes to the skills of delegating and macro-managing, women haven’t yet caught up to men. We tend to nursemaid the human assets and to micromanage everything else.

As women gain more access to power, they’ll gain the confidence it takes to manage from above.

With that sense of distance and authority, they’ll have the time and the ego that it takes to think they own the world and all it’s spoils.

Let’s face it, a woman knows she would ruin her career if a scandal emerged.
The day when women take the chance anyway, you will know that true equality has arrived.

Glackin said:
Let’s face it, a woman knows she would ruin her career if a scandal emerged.
The day when women take the chance anyway, you will know that true equality has arrived.

Just who do you think men are having sex with? The copy machines?

Cecelia said:
Just who do you think men are having sex with? The copy machines?

LOL

Cecelia said:
Just who do you think men are having sex with? The copy machines?

Those do lead to reproduction!

Cecelia said:
Just who do you think men are having sex with? The copy machines?

I agree, it takes two. Sometimes there are two different sexes involved. I was referring to the “Headliner”.
Huey Long once said he could get away with any sex scandal as long as it did not involve, “A dead girl, or a live boy.”
I personally think women are smarter, and less seduced by the “side benefits” of power (the “groupie effect”).

Cecelia said:
Just who do you think men are having sex with? The copy machines?

I have read sometimes men have sex with other men.

Glackin said:
I personally think women are smarter, and less seduced by the “side benefits” of power (the “groupie effect”).

That may be a “pedestal” thing.

As a woman I KNOW that we aren’t any smarter or any less likely to be seduced by the perks of power.

Cecelia said:
That may be a “pedestal” thing.

Yes, Glackin follows the philosophy of Archie Bunker.

Mediaite needs to keep up. NY Daily News reporting that a source close to Weenie says he his considering resigning.

slickerwick said:
Mediaite needs to keep up. NY Daily News reporting that a source close to Weenie says he his considering resigning.

Not really a shock.
About damn time if you ask me.

Cecelia said:
Just who do you think men are having sex with? The copy machines?

Weenie is having sex with himself and sometimes with the mirror in the congressional gym.

Rivermont said:
Yes, Glackin follows the philosophy of Archie Bunker.

That noted Progressive.
Second stalker alert!

Men will be men. Our job is nail as many females as possible and the female’s job is to like it. Based on Weiner’s tweets the girls REALLY liked it. Barbara Walter’s sure had nice things to say about Weiner’s package. The females on this panel won’t admit this but everyone knows that they would love to get plowed by Weiner’s tummy tickler.

Cecelia said:
That may be a “pedestal” thing.

As a woman I KNOW that we aren’t any smarter or any less likely to be seduced by the perks of power.

I hope you are wrong. It’s not the pedestal effect, it’s just that there are centuries of history of us men “thinking with our smaller heads.”
It would be good if women weren’t as damned dumb.

It may be that women in power have less chances to cheat than men. Women are attracted to men with power and authority a lot more than the other way around.

Raygun said:
It may be that women in power have less chances to cheat than men. Women are attracted to men with power and authority a lot more than the other way around.

Duh! It may be that there are far fewer women, and they are more heavily scrutinized.
And, they’ll never be “one of the boys.”

Raygun said:
It may be that women in power have less chances to cheat than men. Women are attracted to men with power and authority a lot more than the other way around.

Now, tell me you would turn down Julia Roberts if she pursued you–with a straight face.

Is that a Congressional bill in your pocket or are you just glad to see me?

I love myself, I think I’m keen.
I pose in the gym with hand on pene,
Then take a pic and send it out
And claim, “a hack!” I’m such a lout.

Glackin said:
I hope you are wrong. It’s not the pedestal effect, it’s just that there are centuries of history of us men “thinking with our smaller heads.”
It would be good if women weren’t as damned dumb.

Well, we’re not. Female libido may be wrapped in window treatments and doilies…. but it’s no less compelling.

Cecelia said:
Well, we’re not. Female libido may be wrapped in window treatments and doilies…. but it’s no less compelling.

Thanks, (I think) for the insight. If we just get over pretending, we’d probably be better off.

I don’t think there is much of a difference at all. I think women don’t get caught as often. And men don’t throw themselves at women with power as much as women do with men who are in power. Remember it use to be in the past that it was always male teachers who were in trouble for getting caught with the student. Now there have been many reported cases of women getting caught with male students. Society looks at this in a different way even though its the same thing. Its typical in any work place if an attractive female who is your boss flirts with you, most men don’t say a thing. Or hell even if its an unattractive female most men don’t say anything. But if its an unattractive male who the female finds disgusting you can guarantee an EEOC complaint. I have to watch what I say or do a lot. Most females can get away with saying racy things without reprisal. Not all the times but most of the time.

slickerwick said:
You never even see NOW representatives as guests on the political talk shows anymore.

I had not thought about it, but you’re right. I cannot remember the last time I saw a NOW spokesperson on television, or even seen the organization mentioned in a news article.

We may be making too much of this.

If power is seductive and at the heart of these dalliances, that power generally comes with a certain age and status. Mr. Weiner is, perhaps, one of the youngest men involved in a sex-tinged scandal. We are generally speaking of 40+ years and most often older men. One of the last remaining gender-based inequities we have in America (Western Europe is well ahead of reducing these inequities) is age. As a society, we still regard 40+ women as non-alluring, virtually non-sexual beings. For them, the star has dimmed in Hollywood, and women on Boards of Directors and in Congress are stereotyped as post-menopausal shrews. Their scandals by definition lack the sex-angle.

It’s all rather disturbing and destructive for these women and for those of us much drawn to women of substance.

THE REAL ROYAL KING said:
For them, the star has dimmed in Hollywood, and women on Boards of Directors and in Congress are stereotyped as post-menopausal shrews. Their scandals by definition lack the sex-angle.

It’s all rather disturbing and destructive for these women and for those of us much drawn to women of substance.

Frankly, that may be something that men ascribe to on surreys, the silver screen, and perhaps in hiring practices (for both genders), but in daily living there’s not an attractive woman from 18 to 80 who can sit alone at a bar and not have men, young, old, and in between, offer conservation and a drink.

Men just aren’t that complex.

Your example is rather extreme, isn’t it? I doubt seriously a woman has ever gone into a bar alone for a refreshing beverage and a handful of salty snacks. I doubt a man has ever done it either. Conversation and a drink are both rather expected, aren’t they?

But, I agree that men aren’t that complex and, as a consequence, are seldom all that interesting. Once one accepts the notion that men have a strong impulse to create, craft or construct something, to make, manufacture, mold something, you’re 90% there.

Fact: Do these women except Pay Pal?

Just4thefax said:
Fact: Do these women except Pay Pal?

Except for what?

Cecelia said:
I think the higher women ascend the MORE engaged that they get, whereas the opposite is true with men.

When it comes to the skills of delegating and macro-managing, women haven’t yet caught up to men. We tend to nursemaid the human assets and to micromanage everything else.

As women gain more access to power, they’ll gain the confidence it takes to manage from above.

With that sense of distance and authority, they’ll have the time and the ego that it takes to think they own the world and all it’s spoils.

I agree with you. Women perhaps are more *control freaks* and don’t let go – I hate delegating because I always think I can do it better than anyone else. The higher up I went in my career, the harder I worked, the busier I was, even with an office of employees I could delegate to. Although, with me, it wasn’t a confidence issue, it was a control issue.

I also think it is a power position issue, wrt men and sex scandals. There are far less women in politics. But if you move to the teaching arena, women and student sex scandals, there certainly isn’t a shortage there.

And, in most of these political sex scandals, women are involved, they just aren’t the *power players* in the scandal.

(gawd, those weiner pics in the gym are creepy)

What about the rumors concerning Hillary and Mrs. Weiner?

In summary form, it’s because men keep score in conquests, women keep score in shoes.

Actually, most female politicians are wretched beasts and no one will sleep with them! Just remember — you didn’t hear that from me!

Cecelia said:
Frankly, that may be something that men ascribe to on surreys, the silver screen, and perhaps in hiring practices (for both genders), but in daily living there’s not an attractive woman from 18 to 80 who can sit alone at a bar and not have men, young, old, and in between, offer conservation and a drink.

Men just aren’t that complex.

And yet for creatures as simplistic, as men, women still seem baffled every time a man acts inappropriately.