Katie Britt Response

[Anonymous]

The only good thing about Britt’s speech is that Republicans and Democrats agree that it was absolutely horrible. The memes and tweets from both sides of the aisle are hilarious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:so much skin paired with a cross

Such a weird comment. What skin?

Not PP but that was more cleavage than politicians usually show when they’re at work. Also, I love the color of her blouse - Ann Taylor is full of that color right now.

Please post a picture of the cleavage. I watched it and saw zero cleavage.


cleav·age
noun
1.
the hollow between a woman's breasts when supported, especially as exposed by a low-cut garment.

So provocative.

I didn’t say it was provocative, I said it was more cleavage than politicians usually show at work. Just admit you’re wrong.

DP. You are beyond ridiculous. We’ll wait while *you* admit you’re wrong (and frighteningly misogynistic).



https://cdn.media.rollcall.com/author/2019/01/gillibrand043_052418.jpg?fit=1536,864" border="0" class="embeddedImage" />

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only good thing about Britt’s speech is that Republicans and Democrats agree that it was absolutely horrible. The memes and tweets from both sides of the aisle are hilarious.

Republican here and I agree, her speech was horrible. However, the totally bizarre discussion of her shirt is worse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares about the cleavage. The point isn't that she was showing cleavage. It's that she was intentionally doing so as part of the whole strange caricature she was presenting. It's just one small obviously contrived aspect of an obviously contrived presentation that screamed inauthenticity.

I’m truly embarrassed for you that you consider a normal neckline to be showing “cleavage” of any kind. You don’t get out much, do you?

don't try and change the subject. I don't care whether or not she shows cleavage.

I do find it hilarious that she thought she needed to show cleavage, and a perfectly positioned cross, to portray the weird soap opera character she was playing.

Please alert the Democrat at the center of this picture that her “cleavage” and perfectly positioned cross necklace are entirely too risqué and inappropriate. Also, the Democrat right above her is flashing WAY too much skin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hated by DCUM. Loved in the flyover and swing states.

No.. it’s actually being pretty widely panned. Whether it’s people criticizing what she said, or people who agreed with the substance but didn’t like the delivery.

I say this as someone who firmly believes DCUM is mostly in a liberal UMC bubble that is out of touch with anyone who doesn’t live in a major metro— this is one of the few cases where DCUM is actually not being out of touch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares about the cleavage. The point isn't that she was showing cleavage. It's that she was intentionally doing so as part of the whole strange caricature she was presenting. It's just one small obviously contrived aspect of an obviously contrived presentation that screamed inauthenticity.

I’m truly embarrassed for you that you consider a normal neckline to be showing “cleavage” of any kind. You don’t get out much, do you?

don't try and change the subject. I don't care whether or not she shows cleavage.

I do find it hilarious that she thought she needed to show cleavage, and a perfectly positioned cross, to portray the weird soap opera character she was playing.

Please alert the Democrat at the center of this picture that her “cleavage” and perfectly positioned cross necklace are entirely too risqué and inappropriate. Also, the Democrat right above her is flashing WAY too much skin.

lol, that cross isn't perfectly positioned.

Are you the genius that came up with this charicature?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only good thing about Britt’s speech is that Republicans and Democrats agree that it was absolutely horrible. The memes and tweets from both sides of the aisle are hilarious.

It is refreshing to see both sides agree on something.

[Anonymous]

this is worse than the water bottle incident

[Anonymous]

Even Begun Kelly hated her speech.

[Anonymous]

A Megyn

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares about the cleavage. The point isn't that she was showing cleavage. It's that she was intentionally doing so as part of the whole strange caricature she was presenting. It's just one small obviously contrived aspect of an obviously contrived presentation that screamed inauthenticity.

I’m truly embarrassed for you that you consider a normal neckline to be showing “cleavage” of any kind. You don’t get out much, do you?

don't try and change the subject. I don't care whether or not she shows cleavage.

I do find it hilarious that she thought she needed to show cleavage, and a perfectly positioned cross, to portray the weird soap opera character she was playing.

Please alert the Democrat at the center of this picture that her “cleavage” and perfectly positioned cross necklace are entirely too risqué and inappropriate. Also, the Democrat right above her is flashing WAY too much skin.

Honestly, that woman you reference is not dressed appropriately for making a major speech, televised in a close up.
The second woman you mention - her blouse/neckline is fine.

I just looked at Katie Britt's blouse again to see what the fuss was about. The neckline plunges a critical inch below where it should stop. Her lapel microphone may be weighing it down a bit more than expected. It's a little more revealing than expected in her profession, especially when being filmed very close-up. That's all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares about the cleavage. The point isn't that she was showing cleavage. It's that she was intentionally doing so as part of the whole strange caricature she was presenting. It's just one small obviously contrived aspect of an obviously contrived presentation that screamed inauthenticity.

+1 The cleavage isn’t too weird, alone. The kitchen isn’t either. The panting line delivery is weird, but it’s the altogether that is bizarre.

But there was no cleavage. Literally. None. Just a woman and her neck and upper chest. You cannot see the line between her breasts, which is what cleavage is.

I suspect the people saying this don't speak English as a first language. Cleavage specifically refers to the space between breasts. It isn't the larger area-- neck, chest, shoulders-- that a word like décolletage refers to. The English word cleavage refers to something that you cannot see on Sen Britt in this video.

[Anonymous]

We know politics is acting for less attractive and talented people who could not make the cut in Hollywood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who cares about the cleavage. The point isn't that she was showing cleavage. It's that she was intentionally doing so as part of the whole strange caricature she was presenting. It's just one small obviously contrived aspect of an obviously contrived presentation that screamed inauthenticity.

+1 The cleavage isn’t too weird, alone. The kitchen isn’t either. The panting line delivery is weird, but it’s the altogether that is bizarre.

But there was no cleavage. Literally. None. Just a woman and her neck and upper chest. You cannot see the line between her breasts, which is what cleavage is.

I suspect the people saying this don't speak English as a first language. Cleavage specifically refers to the space between breasts. It isn't the larger area-- neck, chest, shoulders-- that a word like décolletage refers to. The English word cleavage refers to something that you cannot see on Sen Britt in this video.

You’re probably right. I get the sense there are a lot of foreign posters playing both sides lately.

[Anonymous]

The cleavage discussion is distracting from the plagarism and lying