"Sexual violence is a national crisis that requires a national solution. We miss that point if we end the discussion at whether I should forgive Mr. Biden." - Hallo friend WELCOME TO AMERICA, In the article you read this time with the title "Sexual violence is a national crisis that requires a national solution. We miss that point if we end the discussion at whether I should forgive Mr. Biden.", we have prepared well for this article you read and download the information therein. hopefully fill posts Article AMERICA, Article CULTURAL, Article ECONOMIC, Article POLITICAL, Article SECURITY, Article SOCCER, Article SOCIAL, we write this you can understand. Well, happy reading.

Title : "Sexual violence is a national crisis that requires a national solution. We miss that point if we end the discussion at whether I should forgive Mr. Biden."
link : "Sexual violence is a national crisis that requires a national solution. We miss that point if we end the discussion at whether I should forgive Mr. Biden."

"Sexual violence is a national crisis that requires a national solution. We miss that point if we end the discussion at whether I should forgive Mr. Biden."

"This crisis calls for all leaders to step up and say: 'The healing from sexual violence must begin now. I will take up that challenge.'"

I'm trying to understand why Anita Hill has another op-ed in the New York Times. Or, I guess it wasn't an op-ed. There was this interview with her, back on April 26th, which begins with the news that Biden apologized to her, and it was more or less clear that she didn't accept the apology:

But I cannot be satisfied by simply saying, “I’m sorry for what happened to you.” I will be satisfied when I know that there is real change and real accountability and real purpose to correct the issues that are still there.

The new op-ed just repeats what was already clear: She doesn't want to be the Accepter of Apologies. To put her in that position is to suggest a ritual of absolution. It doesn't and shouldn't work that way.

But we heard all that 2 weeks ago. Why revive it now? I'm trying to perceive the NYT agenda. I see this political analysis (from Lisa Lerer) in the NYT on May 6th: "Some Look at Joe Biden’s Campaign and See Hillary Clinton’s." Excerpt:

Like her, he touts his decades of government experience, intimate knowledge of world leaders and close relationship with former President Barack Obama. But unlike Mrs. Clinton, who faced attacks from just one opponent, Mr. Biden is running against a historically large and diverse field of candidates, some of whom have already spent months scrutinizing parts of his long political record....

The Clintonian echoes began before Mr. Biden even kicked off his campaign, with his drawn-out apology to Anita Hill for how she was treated during the 1991 Senate Judiciary Committee hearings over the Supreme Court nomination of Justice Clarence Thomas. It’s an issue he’s been publicly expressing regret over since 2017.

After several interviews, Mr. Biden settled on some phrasing: “I take responsibility,” a sentence that echoed the words Mrs. Clinton landed on after months of declining to apologize for her use of a private email system while she was secretary of state....

Why did the NYT go back to Anita Hill? Was it an effort to extract forgiveness or to get her to push him back more for the sake of the candidates he seems to be blocking or did they want this repetition and sameness (which doesn't seem to help any Democrat)?

I see that Maureen Dowd brought up Anita Hill in her column last Sunday:

Now that Joe Biden is running for president in a post-#MeToo era, he says he always believed Anita Hill. But as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, he acted more like a Republican collaborator. He shut down the hearing without calling the three women who worked at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission with Thomas, women who were ready to puncture the phony image of a prim and proper boss.

Biden implied on “The View” recently that one of those women, Angela Wright-Shannon, had been a reluctant witness. But she came to Washington set to testify and then got worn down by all the obstacles thrown up by Biden.

In a Washington Post op-ed published Wednesday, she wrote that she wants an apology from Thomas, not Biden, adding: “I understand why Biden turned into a prattling, ineffectual lump of nothingness.”...

A prattling, ineffectual lump of nothingness. But that's Angela Wright-Shannon, not Hill. And Hill is the one who rejects the apology gambit. But perhaps WaPo's presentation of Angela Wright-Shannon made the NYT want to publish Anita Hill's reiteration of what she'd said 2 weeks earlier.

Again, I'm just trying to understand how the NYT thinks it's using Anita Hill. I'm not criticizing Hill for writing an op-ed with the message and in the style she chose. I assume she was invited to write.

For some added insight into the mind of the NYT, consider the correction on that Maureen Dowd column:

An earlier version of the picture caption with this column, using information supplied by Getty Images, misstated when the photograph of Joe Biden and Clarence Thomas was taken. It was in July 1991, shortly after Mr. Thomas was nominated to be an associate justice of the Supreme Court. It was not during his confirmation hearings, which took place in October 1991.

The photograph shows young Joe and Clarence shoulder to shoulder, beaming happily.

But I cannot be satisfied by simply saying, “I’m sorry for what happened to you.” I will be satisfied when I know that there is real change and real accountability and real purpose to correct the issues that are still there.

Like her, he touts his decades of government experience, intimate knowledge of world leaders and close relationship with former President Barack Obama. But unlike Mrs. Clinton, who faced attacks from just one opponent, Mr. Biden is running against a historically large and diverse field of candidates, some of whom have already spent months scrutinizing parts of his long political record....

The Clintonian echoes began before Mr. Biden even kicked off his campaign, with his drawn-out apology to Anita Hill for how she was treated during the 1991 Senate Judiciary Committee hearings over the Supreme Court nomination of Justice Clarence Thomas. It’s an issue he’s been publicly expressing regret over since 2017.

After several interviews, Mr. Biden settled on some phrasing: “I take responsibility,” a sentence that echoed the words Mrs. Clinton landed on after months of declining to apologize for her use of a private email system while she was secretary of state....

Now that Joe Biden is running for president in a post-#MeToo era, he says he always believed Anita Hill. But as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, he acted more like a Republican collaborator. He shut down the hearing without calling the three women who worked at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission with Thomas, women who were ready to puncture the phony image of a prim and proper boss.

Biden implied on “The View” recently that one of those women, Angela Wright-Shannon, had been a reluctant witness. But she came to Washington set to testify and then got worn down by all the obstacles thrown up by Biden.

In a Washington Post op-ed published Wednesday, she wrote that she wants an apology from Thomas, not Biden, adding: “I understand why Biden turned into a prattling, ineffectual lump of nothingness.”...

An earlier version of the picture caption with this column, using information supplied by Getty Images, misstated when the photograph of Joe Biden and Clarence Thomas was taken. It was in July 1991, shortly after Mr. Thomas was nominated to be an associate justice of the Supreme Court. It was not during his confirmation hearings, which took place in October 1991.

The photograph shows young Joe and Clarence shoulder to shoulder, beaming happily.

Thus articles "Sexual violence is a national crisis that requires a national solution. We miss that point if we end the discussion at whether I should forgive Mr. Biden."

that is all articles "Sexual violence is a national crisis that requires a national solution. We miss that point if we end the discussion at whether I should forgive Mr. Biden." This time, hopefully can provide benefits to all of you. Okay, see you in another article posting.

You now read the article "Sexual violence is a national crisis that requires a national solution. We miss that point if we end the discussion at whether I should forgive Mr. Biden." with the link address https://welcometoamerican.blogspot.com/2019/05/sexual-violence-is-national-crisis-that.html

"Sexual violence is a national crisis that requires a national solution. We miss that point if we end the discussion at whether I should forgive Mr. Biden."

"Sexual violence is a national crisis that requires a national solution. We miss that point if we end the discussion at whether I should forgive Mr. Biden."

Thus articles "Sexual violence is a national crisis that requires a national solution. We miss that point if we end the discussion at whether I should forgive Mr. Biden."

0 Response to ""Sexual violence is a national crisis that requires a national solution. We miss that point if we end the discussion at whether I should forgive Mr. Biden.""

Post a Comment

"Sexual violence is a national crisis that requires a national solution. We miss that point if we end the discussion at whether I should forgive Mr. Biden."

see also

"Sexual violence is a national crisis that requires a national solution. We miss that point if we end the discussion at whether I should forgive Mr. Biden."

Thus articles "Sexual violence is a national crisis that requires a national solution. We miss that point if we end the discussion at whether I should forgive Mr. Biden."

0 Response to ""Sexual violence is a national crisis that requires a national solution. We miss that point if we end the discussion at whether I should forgive Mr. Biden.""

Post a Comment