Originally Posted by Guest

Political talk provides an opportunity to speak one's mind. I welcome that opportunity, and as most responding, make every effort to respond in a civil, unemotional, factual and objective manner. In turn there will always be those who disagree with you and me and some very disagreeably but that is the trade off and one I accept.

Megyn Kelly disappointed and thus lost me at the first primary when she began with a pointed question that I believe help build this momentum over exaggerated misogynist claims regarding Trump and hence moving the primary from substance to sublime . I believe the question was unfair, irrelevant and a bit salacious. I was looking for her to direct a policy-oriented question to Trump

Clearly, Ailes spoke and acted inappropriately and his forced resignation was justified. Personally I found his relationship with one reporter disgusting but what consenting adults do behind closed doors is none of my business.

However Megyn Kelly has resurrected events better than 10 years ago to help advance both her career and her book. Her claims as a feminist may be true but she has chosen careers both of which are highly competitive, very aggressive, fast moving and subject to bantering by both the boys and the girls. Hence she certainly is not a shrinking violet and heard much worse along her career path than she relates Ailes spoke to her.

Succinctly stated we have a newly made and temporary diva advancing herself as both victim and righteous, hero and conqueror. One who thinks its OK for her to unfairly strike out at a person like Trump but defensive when a person like Trump strikes back solely because she is a journalist.

Personal Best Regards: