Discussion[ Home/Contents | Search/Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ] |
From: The Big Cashew
Date: 05 Apr 1998
Time: 19:57:23
Remote Name: 148.202.33.113
Is anybody smoking about the (lady) judge throwing Paula Jones' case against Big Bill into the trash bin? Several loyal ladies of my fairly close acquaintance are breathing fire. They want to crucify the judge, and they try to get me to agree with them. God knows I am not a Dimmycrat, but neither am I a damn fool. Sexual harrassment, like beauty, is in the (crotch) of the harrasser. Until we can nail down "intent," I see no way for us to pin a label on it. There is a line to be drawn between "just trying to get laid - or whatever", and "sexual harrassment", but I am having a hellaciously hard time time deciding where to put it, based on all of this "he said - she said" stuff.
It would be much easier if there were a legal definition. Like "rape" in Idaho. In Idaho, if the guy got it into any bodily orifice without consent, it's rape. If he didn't get it in, it's not rape. It might be physical abuse, assault and battery, --- whatever -- but it isn't rape unless he got it in somewhere. That makes all kinds of sense to me. We need a dividing line between "putting a move on a lady," and "harrassing" her without either threats or force. My female employees (and female friends) used to tell me if it wasn't for the pinches and passes there wouldn't be any reason for them to come to work in the morning.
So what do we do about this? Did you see that Allen (Bill Gates' partner in the founding of Microsoft) is about to be sued for a zillion dollars for putting a muscular move on one of his female executives. If a guy can't get it on with a member of his own Board of Directors, who can he get it on with, anyway? Many years ago there was a rash of "heart-balm" cases, wherein women sued the beejezus out of a bunch of (well-heeled) guys, for allegedly breaking off engagements. This was almost at the point of becoming a national sport for a while. I was seeing the sexual harrassment thing going down the same trail, earlier. But no more.
Tossing out Paula Jones' case is going to spoil the game for a whole bunch of other predatory women, who were ready to jump in line, had P-p-paula-Baby p-p-prevailed. But not now. I am told that a trash-press publisher is readying a quick-print-paperback, on the busy life and steamy times of P-p-paula, Baby. The quick take is that, if she - indeed - turned down the Governor of Arkansas, then it must have been because she didn't like his haircut, because she is soon to be extensively reported to have joyfully joined in the "ultimate intimacy" with a long and grateful list of lesser officials, school chums and friendly neighbors, in and around the greater Metropolitan Little Rock area.
I realize that the paperback may be gratuitous bullshit, and (in due course) the author and publisher might be sued for a ton of money - respectively. But in the meantime the book will (unless restrained by prior court order) sell millions of copies, making said author and publisher incredibly rich - and P-p-paula incredibly famous. Which is not what I think she had in mind when this foolishness began.
Anybody old enough to remember Linda Lovelace, she of "Deep Throat" acquired fame and fortune by DOING oral sex on-camera. Paula Jones is getting fame and NO fortune, for refusing to do oral sex in a Little Rock hotel room.
There has to be a moral in here somewhere, if we can just find it.
As for me, I can hardly wait for the end of the silly season, and the beginning of the NFL football schedule.
From:
Date: 05 Sep 2005
Time: 11:00:44
Remote Name: 85.204.7.73
http://www.technorati.com/search/caringmom.com
From: Paul Holloway
Date: 02 Nov 1999
Time: 15:12:07
Remote Name: 148.202.33.135
Hello Lorenzo, I read your warning about buying land in Honduras. I am a little confused.
Are you saying that by applying your rules while purchasing land and maintaining it, that you can prevent a judge from taking it away from you. I mean, if I go to Honduras and buy 100 acres like I am looking at doing, and if I do everything you say to do, then do I have a 90% chance of keeping my land.
If I give someone 100K for the land...the government can actually come along and say I dont own it? That is so scary. I don't think it is even worth considering buying the land there now. Please give me some feedback