SkiAdcock

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/1...ushpmg00000016

I've been getting emails from folk saying they thought FT was legit. I tell them it is[redacted]

Cheers.

IMH

Which they might believe, until they take a look and see the link right at the top of FT's "must read" list: Congressman Used FT Forums to Joke Online About Drinking & Hitting On Women.

FT (and the image of FT) would be improved by introducing a less sensationalist/salacious algorithm for flagging "must read" stories.

InTokyo

Speaks volumes about his character.

Kagehitokiri

apparently someone hand picks, no algorithm
so HuffPo style, to try to generate traffic

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/techn...-homepage.html

Rebelyell

The guy is one of the ugliest elected officials I’ve ever seen, but there is absolutely nothing wrong with his posts, which were written prior to his election to Congress.

He said if he gave his wife his seat in first class he would miss out on free booze for nine hours but if he didn’t he would miss out on nine months of happiness. What exactly is wrong with this? And by the way, I would be that his wife wasn’t even pregnant when he made the post. It’s just a joke.

He commented that about being cut off for an entire flight after four shots of vodka with caviar on a TA flight, pointing out that he weighed 250 pounds. I’ve seen plenty of people complain about similar things. A person of that weight who consumes four drinks in one hour will have a BAC of about .04, or roughly one-half the driving limit. A level of .08 does not mean one is “drunk,” it means one is too impaired to drive a car. A BAC of about .15 has generally been considered the level at one is “drunk.”

All is fair in politics, but I don’t think this guy deserves the opprobrium from fellow Flyertalk members for comments made prior to election to Congress. If anything, the right of members to exchange what I view as mostly jokes and lighthearted comments should be defended.

GUWonder

I wouldn't be surprised if the attempt to use his posts on FT as part of the case/allegations against him is a desperate and largely misled grasping at straws.

About those posts of his which seem to have gotten attentiion with regard to his work troubles, they seem mostly just an attempt at humor.

I can't speak to his conduct at work or with his work colleagues/subordinates -- and you can bet he probably doesn't fancy all my views on his political choices and statements -- but his contributions to FT and participation with the FT community seem pretty much within the standard range for normal on FT. His non-FT activity seems to be the main matter.

Orwaid

I agree with Rebelyell.

People are entitled to their own opinion. They are not entitled to their own facts and then use them the way the Huffington Post does.

84fiero

Despite a good effort from Moderator2 to get a response from IB (who controls that feature), no one ever replied to the above referenced thread.

I do agree that there are better threads to highlight on the home page.

[Removed response to now-deleted material]

Anna Phor

"I get upgraded," Farenthold wrote in a thread about upgrades. "It's my seat. I can give it to my wife if I like, or if I'm traveling alone the hot redhead in 12B in hopes of......"

Just because this is the kind of thing that counts as a joke or an attempt at humor or "within the standard range of normal" on FT doesn't mean that it's not sexist, fwiw.

I see this kind of casual sexism here all the time. It's very off-putting.

Quinlanty

I don't find anything really wrong with what he said, just a bit distasteful. But who is he kidding, I bet the "hot redhead" would much rather sit in a middle seat in the back of economy than next to him. Google his pic if you don't know what he looks like..... His wife should get automatic 1st class just for having to have children with him.

weero

So we get less inexperienced, easily offended, and people who love the word police but don't care about FFPs? I could live with that.
Don't want the crow from "The Huff" over here.

Just because the boars at Huffington Post have zero threshold whatsoever what constitutes 'news', just fine tune FlyerTalk not to follow news from such sources...


Why would anyone on the planet care about these posts to begin with??? He didn't violate TOS, let alone break laws. What's the next grand revelation? How often some politician visits the toilet per month or that he was fat and red-haired when he was 4 years old?
What a pile of empty rubbish.

biggestbopper

Perhaps the bigger issue here is just how stupid does someone have to be to write this dumbness down and post it on line (that's a rhetorical question!).

I see this sort of thing all the time (Sony execs, thinking of you) and it does not reflect well on the people involved.

Miggles

Because he proved himself to be a pig and because these postings reflect his honest thoughts and ultimately his approach to governing. But hey, if by some fluke he ends up being a champion on a wide variety of women's issues, then I will stand corrected. Shame on him, and shame on the people who voted him into office.

joshwex90

People seem to be OK with off-color posts on FT, and it's only when we see that one of said posters is now a US Congressman is it so bad.

In some of those threads, no one seems to argue with him, but many posts of seeming acquiescence to his form of humor

GUWonder

Just about any and every adult who happens to be closely monitored and have their every statement or action recorded is likely to look at least a little "deserving" of contempt or ridicule or both. So what is dumb and what, if anything, is more dumb: the statement/actions or being recorded making the statement/actions? Either way, everyone can be made to look like an oaf or boar or who knows what else if cherry picking and taking things out of a context which may not be apparent to everyone long after a comment/action.

His statements on FT are rather well within the range of normal on FT and in households across all of America; and his verbal attempts at humor seem rather mild compared to the sexist and/or racist prejudices and communications peddling such prejudices that seem widely present in every modern society/state and family no matter how progressive they may publicly seem or proclaim themselves to be.

His posting behavior on FT really is less concerning to me than whether or not the legal allegations against him are found to be validated in a court of law.

I would have more issue with his voting record than his FT posting record. And I have more concern about the allegations and the actions represented in the allegations than about his posting record. Until a court finds him liable or guilty, I'll try to stand by the principle that not every oafish comment deserves a legal penalty of presumed guilt.