Robert Foster, GOP governor candidate, denies woman reporter access because of her gender

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You people are ridiculous.

One observation I have that may be a bit inconvenient for those of you decrying this decision as "sexist" or "misogynistic"......

I don't recall any woman accusing Mike Pence of inappropriate conduct. Why might that be?

Because, unlike misogynists believe, women aren’t lying sloot bitc#es out for blood.

Misogyny is the weirdest jacket some of you put on in childhood. You don’t even know you’re wearing it and when anyone mentions your weird jacket, you get all huffy and weird.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe if people on the right had more confidence that reporters were not "secret democratic party political advocates", they might be more open to closed door meetings of people of the opposite sex.

Change the perception that they're not cheerleading for the DNC, but that is going to be hard to change if they only consume GOP positive media.

This guy is a fundamentalist, misogynist loon. He just hates women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe if people on the right had more confidence that reporters were not "secret democratic party political advocates", they might be more open to closed door meetings of people of the opposite sex.

Change the perception that they're not cheerleading for the DNC, but that is going to be hard to change if they only consume GOP positive media.

wait - now the reporter needs a male chaperone because she's going to shill for the dnc otherwise? what if her male chaperone is also a shill?! do they now need a republican chaperone, and then a republican to write the story, and then a republican editor and publisher?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe if people on the right had more confidence that reporters were not "secret democratic party political advocates", they might be more open to closed door meetings of people of the opposite sex.

Change the perception that they're not cheerleading for the DNC, but that is going to be hard to change if they only consume GOP positive media.

In other words, he would be just fine if it was Laura Ingraham who wanted to meet alone to interview him? Is that what you're saying? As long as it was a conservative who had a positive view of him he could do it. Gotcha.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You people are ridiculous.

One observation I have that may be a bit inconvenient for those of you decrying this decision as "sexist" or "misogynistic"......

I don't recall any woman accusing Mike Pence of inappropriate conduct. Why might that be?

Because he's closeted? Or at least because he hasn't done anything untoward in his personal life.

So, let me get this straight: Because Mike Pence has not been accused of rape, that means that no man should ever be interviewed by a female reporter unless that reporter has a male chaperone? I mean it just seems easier to get rid of the men frankly. They seem like a lot of trouble.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe if people on the right had more confidence that reporters were not "secret democratic party political advocates", they might be more open to closed door meetings of people of the opposite sex.

Change the perception that they're not cheerleading for the DNC, but that is going to be hard to change if they only consume GOP positive media.

Hmmm... we have ample examples of the media acting as DNC advocates........especially in the past two years.

I remember reading about cozy relationships that were revealed as a result of the Podesta emails leaked, for example.

And, there is this.....

There is a pretty substantial symbiotic relationship between the political left in Washington and the media. While a few people went from the media to the Bush Administration, it was never like it was with Obama.

Jay Carney went from Time to the White House press secretary's office. Shailagh Murray went from the Washington Post to the Veep's office while married to Neil King at the Wall Street Journal. Neil King has left the Wall Street Journal to work for Fusion GPS. Linda Douglass went from ABC News to the White House and then the Atlantic. Jill Zuckman went from the Chicago Tribune to the Obama Administration's Transportation Department. Douglas Frantz went from the Washington Post to the State Department and Stephen Barr went from the Post to the Labor Department.

Ruth Marcus, who heads the Washington Post Editorial Board, is married to the Obama Administration's former Federal Trade Commission Chairman. Jonathan Allen had been at the Politico before going to work for Debbie Wasserman Schultz, then back to Politico before going to the left leaning Vox. Now he is at NBC News. Andy Barr worked for the Politico before leaving for Democrat politics. Michael Scherer was at both Salon and Mother Jones before going to Time. Laura Rozen was at Mother Jones and the American Prospect before Foreign Policy magazine. Even Nate Silver had started out at Daily Kos. Then, of course, there is Matthew Dowd, who worked for scores of Democrats before working for George Bush. That, though he later washed his hands of Bush, bought him street credibility with ABC News to become its senior politically analyst alongside George Stephanopoulos, formerly of the Clinton Administration.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2017/12/15/the_medias_democratic_ties_135794.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe if people on the right had more confidence that reporters were not "secret democratic party political advocates", they might be more open to closed door meetings of people of the opposite sex.

Change the perception that they're not cheerleading for the DNC, but that is going to be hard to change if they only consume GOP positive media.

wait - now the reporter needs a male chaperone because she's going to shill for the dnc otherwise? what if her male chaperone is also a shill?! do they now need a republican chaperone, and then a republican to write the story, and then a republican editor and publisher?

I mean, would he have to okay the male chaperone? What if the male chaperone and female reporter conspire to make the false accusation? Then it would be worse because you'd have 2 against one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe if people on the right had more confidence that reporters were not "secret democratic party political advocates", they might be more open to closed door meetings of people of the opposite sex.

Change the perception that they're not cheerleading for the DNC, but that is going to be hard to change if they only consume GOP positive media.

In other words, he would be just fine if it was Laura Ingraham who wanted to meet alone to interview him? Is that what you're saying? As long as it was a conservative who had a positive view of him he could do it. Gotcha.

No. However, I have no doubt that Laura Ingraham would honor his request.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe if people on the right had more confidence that reporters were not "secret democratic party political advocates", they might be more open to closed door meetings of people of the opposite sex.

Change the perception that they're not cheerleading for the DNC, but that is going to be hard to change if they only consume GOP positive media.

wait - now the reporter needs a male chaperone because she's going to shill for the dnc otherwise? what if her male chaperone is also a shill?! do they now need a republican chaperone, and then a republican to write the story, and then a republican editor and publisher?

I mean, would he have to okay the male chaperone? What if the male chaperone and female reporter conspire to make the false accusation? Then it would be worse because you'd have 2 against one.

Oh my lord this is getting so complicated, it's turning into an LSAT game! I guess you need to get rid of all the women, and all the Democrats, and then you just have Republican men - and then no one will be accused of rape? Is that it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe if people on the right had more confidence that reporters were not "secret democratic party political advocates", they might be more open to closed door meetings of people of the opposite sex.

Change the perception that they're not cheerleading for the DNC, but that is going to be hard to change if they only consume GOP positive media.

In other words, he would be just fine if it was Laura Ingraham who wanted to meet alone to interview him? Is that what you're saying? As long as it was a conservative who had a positive view of him he could do it. Gotcha.

No. However, I have no doubt that Laura Ingraham would honor his request.

She is known for her false and fictitious statements so I'll grant it's probably a good idea in this case to have a chaperone

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe if people on the right had more confidence that reporters were not "secret democratic party political advocates", they might be more open to closed door meetings of people of the opposite sex.

Change the perception that they're not cheerleading for the DNC, but that is going to be hard to change if they only consume GOP positive media.

In other words, he would be just fine if it was Laura Ingraham who wanted to meet alone to interview him? Is that what you're saying? As long as it was a conservative who had a positive view of him he could do it. Gotcha.

No. However, I have no doubt that Laura Ingraham would honor his request.

So he doesn't even trust someone on his side? He thinks ALL women are capable of falsely accusing him? Or he is afraid he will be tempted to do something? Or that he is so irresistible that any woman would make a move on him, even a conservative like Laura Ingraham? Which is it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe if people on the right had more confidence that reporters were not "secret democratic party political advocates", they might be more open to closed door meetings of people of the opposite sex.

Change the perception that they're not cheerleading for the DNC, but that is going to be hard to change if they only consume GOP positive media.

wait - now the reporter needs a male chaperone because she's going to shill for the dnc otherwise? what if her male chaperone is also a shill?! do they now need a republican chaperone, and then a republican to write the story, and then a republican editor and publisher?

I mean, would he have to okay the male chaperone? What if the male chaperone and female reporter conspire to make the false accusation? Then it would be worse because you'd have 2 against one.

Oh my lord this is getting so complicated, it's turning into an LSAT game! I guess you need to get rid of all the women, and all the Democrats, and then you just have Republican men - and then no one will be accused of rape? Is that it?

Apparently so!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe if people on the right had more confidence that reporters were not "secret democratic party political advocates", they might be more open to closed door meetings of people of the opposite sex.

Change the perception that they're not cheerleading for the DNC, but that is going to be hard to change if they only consume GOP positive media.

In other words, he would be just fine if it was Laura Ingraham who wanted to meet alone to interview him? Is that what you're saying? As long as it was a conservative who had a positive view of him he could do it. Gotcha.

No. However, I have no doubt that Laura Ingraham would honor his request.

What if it were his sister, would he still need a chaperone? Or his cousin? Or his daughter? Yikes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe if people on the right had more confidence that reporters were not "secret democratic party political advocates", they might be more open to closed door meetings of people of the opposite sex.

Change the perception that they're not cheerleading for the DNC, but that is going to be hard to change if they only consume GOP positive media.

In other words, he would be just fine if it was Laura Ingraham who wanted to meet alone to interview him? Is that what you're saying? As long as it was a conservative who had a positive view of him he could do it. Gotcha.

No. However, I have no doubt that Laura Ingraham would honor his request.

What if it were his sister, would he still need a chaperone? Or his cousin? Or his daughter? Yikes.

Ask him. I'm sure he would answer you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe if people on the right had more confidence that reporters were not "secret democratic party political advocates", they might be more open to closed door meetings of people of the opposite sex.

Change the perception that they're not cheerleading for the DNC, but that is going to be hard to change if they only consume GOP positive media.

In other words, he would be just fine if it was Laura Ingraham who wanted to meet alone to interview him? Is that what you're saying? As long as it was a conservative who had a positive view of him he could do it. Gotcha.

No. However, I have no doubt that Laura Ingraham would honor his request.

What if it were his sister, would he still need a chaperone? Or his cousin? Or his daughter? Yikes.

Ask him. I'm sure he would answer you.

Okay!