Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DMaA who wrote (15419)	11/20/1998 4:28:00 PM
From: one_less	Respond to of 67261

Offense, what offense? His empirical highness is not above the law, he is the law; as the now common reference indicates, "...and should change our laws regarding same." Remember the old days when it was "of the people, by the people, and for the people." I wax reminiscent.

To: DMaA who wrote (15419)	11/20/1998 4:32:00 PM
From: sea_biscuit	Respond to of 67261

The conclusion you have to come to is the public doesn't take the sexual harassment laws seriously or at least thinks they've gone way overboard. I think it is the latter. Whether or not you stole a case of beer from the neighborhood store last month has nothing to do with whether or not you bought and drank some beer last night. Sexual harassment is a serious issue and I don't think the public takes it any lightly now. Dipy.

To: DMaA who wrote (15419)	11/20/1998 4:36:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Rape of tobacco companies? They did a little bit of lying too, you know, for a long time. Then, they succeeding for a long time with the argument that the Surgeon General's warning, which they fought tooth and nail, made them immune to all liability. Nicotine is among the most addictive substances known. The tobacco companies understood that well enough to meter the dosage very precisely in cigarette manufacturing. I guess that somehow that doesn't count for much with the moral crusaders when the drug you're pushing is legal.

To: DMaA who wrote (15419)	11/20/1998 7:57:00 PM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 67261

Playing devil's advocate, why do we need laws to punish people for being jerks? My wife worked in the management of a hi tech company. She was "sexually harassed" (pawed and propositioned) by her boss at work and again on a business trip. She mentioned it to me and I paid the gentleman a visit and assured him that if I ever heard of such conduct again or if she suffered in her job as a result of our conversation, he'd be eating through a straw for an extended period of time. End of "harassment". The jerks don't get punished under the laws we have set up, its the company which gets punished if it doesn't act as proper nanny. Doesn't make sense to me. JLA