2006-09-27 05:41:21 · 13 answers · asked by Super Shiraz 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
It's not OK for anyone to harass women or any other subordinates.
2006-09-27 05:42:25 · answer #1 · answered by Chris J 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
It isn't ok for anyone.
Clinton settled a case with Paula Jones on sexual harassment where he was fined $850,000 in 1998. Then in 1999 Judge Wright found Clinton in civil contempt of court for misleading testimony and fined ordered him to pay Jones $91,000. Judge Wright referred the case to the bar where Clinton agreed to loose his law license for five years. Remember the 'bimbo eruption team' he had during both campaigns. Then there was Juanita Broderick, and the others.
Clarence Thomas was only charged with it in a politically charged confirmation hearing.The committee could not find sufficient evidence to substantiate Anita Hill's claim. Anita Hill never filed a complaint in court.
I think it's a faulty comparison.
2006-09-27 05:59:23 · answer #2 · answered by JB 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Don't forget Bob Packwood.
Yes, the double standard is alive and well.
Also, we got told for decades that rape is about violence, not sex. Yet discussion regarding Clinton's probable rape was dismissed as "just about sex."
Is there ANY principle that feminists won't jettison to save this man?
And yes, in response to this we will probably get posts about how Republicans are sex-obsessed and mean. Again, I thought (and still think) it's not about sex.
PS Read the posts here FROM WOMEN about how "lots of women would like to be harassed by Clinton." Really? I just blasted a guy on another thread for asking whether women who "dress sexy" deserve rape. I NEVER REALIZED SEXUAL ASSAULT WAS SUCH A JOKEFEST!!! Yes, I'm mad. Shame on you folks.
PPS I remember something from the Anita Hill testimony that I never heard about again. Someone asked her if she knew with, and disagreed with, Thomas' abortion views. she said yes each time, and then the questioning was cut off due to the "ground rules." That, plus the plagiarized "pubic hair on Coke" comment and the fact that she went with him to the new job, killed her credibility.
2006-09-27 05:58:16 · answer #3 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Clinton had a history of harassing females. a minimum of three females got here forward approximately his taking part in around in the back of Hillary's decrease back. Clarence Thomas replace into in easy terms one, yet that would not make it greater desirable. Clinton lied to the common public on television whilst he denyed having a dating with Monica. i would not be stunned that Clinton has STD's or something with each and every of the girls he has slept with. Edna
2016-12-12 16:09:27 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is NOT OK for anyone to harass women under any circumstances or position. period.
Clinton got lucky and didn't face any penalties Clarence Thomas is not.
2006-09-27 05:44:10 · answer #5 · answered by GoodGuy 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Apparently so. And NOW will back any dem any time. I wonder how libs find a way to excuse him if Clinton-boy was a pedophile instead of a rapist. Maybe say "kid was asking for it"?
adding: cvq3842--I agree,. these Dem women who would love to be 'harassed' by Clinton--his "sexual prowess" and other comments praising this man. He's a friggin P-I-G! These women must be deranged!
2006-09-27 05:45:20 · answer #6 · answered by Cherie 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Apparently not because Clinton was impeached while Thomas's appointment to the Supreme Court was confirmed. So sexual harassment is ok if done by a black Republican, but not by a white Democrat. Is that what you meant?
2006-09-27 05:44:15 · answer #7 · answered by TxSup 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
did I miss something? I thought Clarence Thomas was sitting on the supreme court DESPITE his BLATANT harrassment?
2006-09-27 05:45:41 · answer #8 · answered by hichefheidi 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Clinton can do whatever he likes in my view. I think a lot of women would quite like to be harrassed by him :)
2006-09-27 05:45:17 · answer #9 · answered by emma s 1 · 0⤊ 3⤋
I think race is a bigger factor, but politics certainly played a factor. And no its not OK for either of them.
2006-09-27 05:44:00 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋