43 comments on “That’s one job lost then

  1. “…she would not defend President Donald Trump should someone try to shoot him.”

    Another self-indulgent liberal halfwit lets inclination override duty. She probably has colleagues who despised Obama but who still saw it as their duty to protect him as the POTUS.

  2. I’m seeing half of facebook defend her. It’s not like she refused to bake a gay wedding cake or something entirely unconscionable like that, so what’s all the fuss about?

  3. Killery’s detail hated her arrogant guts–but they still protected her–tho’ they were never put to the ultimate test.

    Even when “Broomstick One” came under sniper fire–hah,hah.

  4. The link does not *actually* say that she would not defend President Trump, although it does imply that – what it says is that she deliberately broke the US law prior to the election and that only after the election has the Secret Service decided that it ought to take appropriate action.
    So, this is not just about a midddle-aged woman breaking the law, it is *also* about the Obama administration condoning it.

  5. According to a commenter at insty, the presidential guard are not assigned, they are volunteers, so her statement is entirely hypothetical. But still, sack her.

  6. Diogenes: not treason, but a prima facie violation of the Hatch Act (which is toothless).

  7. re: Roué le Jour

    Presidential protection detail is also a highly sought after promotion track. That’s why it’s volunteering position.

  8. @ Gamecock
    At least he had principles and didn’t ask to be paid for work that he refused to do, unlike the female in this case.
    JuliaM said something relevant yesterday.

  9. Matt Wardman,

    She’s quite right, but I doubt that any of these jobs were about women who speak much.

    It’s about people like receptionists. They’re the public face of your business and are supposed to look good. Are you more likely to take that step into the BMW dealership because the girl on reception is tasty? Yes. Yes you are. Hell, your brain is so far into your dick that the guy can sell you a 5 series instead of a 3.

  10. @ Matt Wardman
    So Usain Bolt can’t breathe properly when wearing spikes? For older people who understand the difference between aerobic and non-aerobic running try Seb Coe?
    I have always been under the impression that running in flats gives me a disadvantage compared to the serious runners who wore spikes.
    Maybe the AAA should ban flats for all races longer than 200 metres?

  11. Given that the bimbo can’t apply enough common sense to the use of social media to keep her ass out of hot water with her bosses, I doubt she’d be able to stop much of anyone from doing much of anything.

  12. Richard – “she’ll just be redeployed.”

    Hopefully investigating counterfeit $1 bills in North Dakota.

  13. BiW – Like the completely unqualified newsreaders and weather girls who complain they can’t get work after 35, they forget they only got the job in the first place because of their looks.

    I don’t spend an hour talking to the bimbo who visits me from Brenntag because she doesn’t have a PhD in chemistry, I do it because she does have awesome gams.

  14. RLJ,

    “According to a commenter at insty, the presidential guard are not assigned, they are volunteers, so her statement is entirely hypothetical. But still, sack her.”

    Unless he’s visiting the area where she’s working and she might be on the wider security cordon.

    I was a little bit surprised to see that the Secret Service Oath doesn’t mention POTUS,from wiki:

    I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter. So help me God.

    But on reflection I suppose it couldn’t in case POTUS is carrying out an illegal act.

  15. In contrast here’s the British Army Oath:

    I… swear by Almighty God (do solemnly, and truly declare and affirm) that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will, as in duty bound, honestly and faithfully defend Her Majesty, Her Heirs and Successors, in Person, Crown and Dignity against all enemies, and will observe and obey all orders of Her Majesty, Her Heirs and Successors, and of the generals (admirals / air officers) and officers set over me.

    So it would be possible to include POTUS.

  16. john77: running spikes are across the whole of the sole of the shoe, the foot is still flat relative to the ground. High heels are, well duh, just the heel, forcing the foot permanently into a tippie-toe position, forcing the foot into a position that normally would have the body leaning forwards at 45 degrees, causing the body to be permanantly fighting to remain upright as it is permanatly forced minus 45 degrees from its normal position.

    High heels are purely and simply a method of preventing women from running away from attackers, nothing else. The tragedy is that women have been brainwashed into believing that they are doing this out of their own choice.

  17. jgh – it also affects how they walk and how their legs are presented. Don’t get me wrong, I like the look of a woman in high heels. I’d just never ask the wife to cripple herself wearing them.
    In her job its thick black or navy trousers and steel capped shoes or steel capped boots.

  18. @ jgh
    In spikes you run with your heel off the ground – I run and walk with my heel hitting the ground before the ball of my foot. There are no spikes on the heel – just look!
    High heels are purely and simply a way to make the wearer – be it a Texan cowboy or the editor of “Vogue” look taller.
    I think high heels are stupid* – I just pointed out that the woman in the link was talking nonsense.

    * So I don’t ask my wife who is 6″ shorter to wear them.

  19. Martin – “Don’t get me wrong, I like the look of a woman in high heels. I’d just never ask the wife to cripple herself wearing them. In her job its thick black or navy trousers and steel capped shoes or steel capped boots.”

    When did Western men become so, well, gay? Are you sure you are not looking for CiF and found us by mistake?

    High heels do not cripple. They look good. Men like them. There is no reason why someone with balls should not ask his wife to wear them. Even if it is in the privacy of the bedroom. There is even less reason for a grown man, and I mean this in the nicest possible way, to boast about his emasculation in public to a bunch of strangers he does not know.

  20. john77 – “So Usain Bolt can’t breathe properly when wearing spikes?”

    The only spike Bolt has to worry about is the one in his track team mate’s arm. Oddly enough Bolt has given interviews that seemed to accept that his teammate would be found guilty. That is, he knew.

  21. @jgh. “High heels are purely and simply a method of preventing women from running away from attackers, nothing else.”

    Heh?!!! Maybe you should go and update Wikipedia with your new-found knowledge.

  22. The tragedy is that women have been brainwashed into believing that they are doing this out of their own choice.

    Bollocks. Women know what to wear to emphasize their attractiveness to potential partners. High heels make their legs look longer and slimmer, and emphasize their butt. Women DO wear them out of choice (just like short skirts and push-up bras) – because it improves their odds in the mate-selection game.

  23. When I see a woman in heels, I ask myself whether she’s wearing them because she genuinely likes to (vanishingly rare, above a certain age), or because she wants to present herself for one or other reason to her best advantage. The latter category, far and away the most common, is a ‘tell’, like hair extensions, false eye lashes and padded bras.

  24. If the company makes it a condition of employment that a front of house employee must wear heels of between 2 and 4 inches then it must be enforced whatever the gender of the employee, however If a company wants to make people wear particular clothes to work then they should pay for them, you wouldn’t think it acceptable for a fireman to provide his own fire engine or an Asda cashier to pay for a hideous orange jacket so why should she buy her own company specified footwear ?

    If she had any sense she would have googled ‘3 inch platform brogues’ and looked at the images, Stella McCartney has a range of them.

  25. Funny how men can brainwash women into doing all sorts of things, but not into stopping nagging the fuck out of them, spending all day shopping or allowing them to go to the pub more often.

  26. How freaking stupid do you need to be to join the Secret Service? Her need to show feminist solidarity and virtue signal overrode her knowledge to never to say or put anything in writing you don’t want to see / hear repeated in court.

  27. BobRocket – “If the company makes it a condition of employment that a front of house employee must wear heels of between 2 and 4 inches then it must be enforced whatever the gender of the employee”

    Why?

    Rob – “Funny how men can brainwash women into doing all sorts of things, but not into stopping nagging the fuck out of them, spending all day shopping or allowing them to go to the pub more often.”

    If the patriarchy existed, it would be manifested in men getting a lot more sex, never mind the occasional blow jobs. I am sure my grandmother’s generation heard the occasional woman complain about her husband’s sexual demands, but I doubt any woman in the West has for the past two generations.

  28. Let the businesses put their money where their mouths are. If you want heels, make it part of your bonus calculation. (Kilts for men? Shoulder to waist ratio? YMMV.)

    Reveal dem preferences.

    HR will throw a fit, alas.

  29. Bemused – “Her need to show feminist solidarity and virtue signal overrode her knowledge to never to say or put anything in writing you don’t want to see / hear repeated in court.”

    I would guess her thought process was similar to that of Montgomery Burns when imagining the press response. It likely never crossed her mind anyone would disagree.

    NielsR – “Reveal dem preferences.”

    I wonder. If academics turn up to work in a nice suit, do their colleagues take them aside and say that, no, they have to scuff up those shoes, buy a cardigan with patches on the elbows and by the way here’s the address of a really bad hairdresser?

    HR will throw a fit, alas.

  30. There is no reason why someone with balls should not ask his wife to wear them.

    People have to ask their wives to wear heels? They obviously never married Russians.

  31. Look what they do to the feet though, bunions, it looks like another toe is growing. Awful!

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.