Posted on 10/02/2006 6:17:26 AM PDT by libstripper
Dear Your Nightmare,
"The organization may, but that doesn't make it illegal."
Not generally according to the criminal code, but most organizations start off with the assumption that such a relationship is tortious.
"It might be abusive, but, again, that doesn't make it illegal."
Again, not "illegal" as in "go to jail," but it's certainly illegal in that the individual and the organization can certainly be held civilly liable.
As for the relationship between Mr. Clinton and Ms. Lewinsky, I think it's possible to discern some criminal behavior on the part of Mr. Clinton toward Ms. Lewinsky. It isn't difficult to determine that his subornation of her perjury 1) was harmful and abusive toward Ms. Lewinsky and 2) was a direct outcome of the relationship.
sitetest
When it occurs AT WORK and one is a subordinate of the other, it is ALWAYS sexual harassment.Sorry, you need to document that before I believe it. If the two are consenting (and there is no quid pro quo or the like), it's not harassment as I understand it. Regardless of where it takes place or if one is a subordinate of the other.
All the other interns could easily have file a grievance that ML had received preferential treatment, and won a lot of dough.That would be different than your definition of sexual harassment.
As I recall, Jordan went out of his way to help ML find a high paying, do nothing job in New York.Again, if that were related to the sexual relationship, it would be beyond your limited definition.
Actually, what I said was that it wasn't just about Lewinsky and Clinton. By his actions, Clinton created a hostile environment. Lewinsky's job expectations were different than anyone else's in that particular workplace; when you create an environment where anyone has been rewarded for sexual activity, that creates a hostile workplace. Not for Lewinsky, but for her co-workers.
Yes, the gap in power was immense.
What hostile work environment? For whom? Monica? She wasn't little miss terrified, oh, my, what will I do now...I can't lose my internship...so I must let him have his way with me.
She pursued him...
Cover what? When the affair began she was a volunteer because of the government shut down.
Well, of course, 'whitehouse intern' became a joke.
But doesn't the definition of harassment have to have some harassment to it...either lose your job or get a better job but you can save or get the job by sleeping with me.
What Bill Clinton did was wrong... and he should have impeached but was it harassment? I don't think so.
How did Clinton create a hostile environment toward Lewinsky when she was eager, willing, and available. He didn't.
You might make that argument using Kathleen Willey, and you would be spot on.
How did the Clinton/Lewinsky affair create a hostile workplace for the other interns. Most were oblivious to it...
This is one of the worst cases of sexual harassment I've ever heard of.I guess the fact that Bill Clinton was involved might have something to do with your opinion.
First the gap in power is immense.So? That power gap is irrelevant unless the power was used to force someone into an unwanted sexual situation.
Second, a hostile work environment was created.I don't know that that was the case here, but that would still be beyond your limited definition of sexual harassment.
Repubs covered it up as well and just like the dems, we are saying "unprofessional behavior" and "not the crime of the century."
True consistency would have one as outraged over Foley as one is over Clinton... instead of trying to excuse Foley by saying "the dems do it too but worse."
Dear bornacatholic,
It appears that by "Update III," the blogger has backed off considerably from his earlier charges.
I haven't followed the precise statements issued by Speaker Hastert. It's my understanding that he initially denied knowing that Mr. Foley had truly "crossed the line" with an underage page. In that he clarified by saying that he was aware of e-mails and not IMs, and in that even this blogger admits that that is true, it seems that Mr. Hastert 1) really didn't realize the seriousness of the problem, 2) since the page's family had asked to have the matter dropped, Mr. Hastert's hands were, to some degree, tied, and 3) the blogger's original claims of "dishonesty" appear to me to be more of "misunderstanding."
sitetest
It doesn't really matter how many were aware.
Look, I'm not a crusader. That's just the way it works, and it works that way because people like Billy could make political hay from it. There's a whole bunch of irony in Bill's getting hung up with a law he supported.
It is what it is.
"That is an asbsolutely detestable framing of Foley's crimes."
Most of us are completely unaware of any actual "crimes" Foley committed...we were sorta waiting for more information.
And, in your hysteria, you condemn Stein's take on this: it's about Democratic hyprocisy...friend, you couldn't carry Stein's toner cartridge.
According to you...
PS How can you have a hostile work environment if no is aware that it is hostile?
I have never let my children off the hook when they give me the old "everyone else does it" excuse.
Just because someone else does it doesn't justify me doing it. Wrong is wrong!
While we can point out the hypocricy of the dems, there is NO excuse for what it appears Foley did. I want to get to the truth and then make the proper judgement.
I am also left wondering if the page office warned incoming pages about Foley, was he the only one? I want them all cleared out.
A "hostile work environment" has been the subject of enough legal proceedings that legal definitions have been created, refined, and enforced. It's nothing personal; the legal establishment doesn't care whether you agree or not. Acknowledge it or not.
*Yeah. "Hitler-was-worse" ism at work as a poltiical defense.
friend, you couldn't carry Stein's toner cartridge.
*Agreed
So, you really don't answer the questions, you just tell me its a done deal and to accept it. Okay... I can live with that. Have great day and don't work too hard.
I, on the other hand, would carry Benjamin Netanyahu's coffee mug...
Holy Cow! Is everyone in the world a total freak? At least Clintoon like females. May not be the best role model but he's not fishing in kindergarden. This whole "go to rehab only after caught" thing is getting old. Patsy Kennedy did the same flippin' thing. Research must show that people are more willing to forgive if you go to rehab. Toss Foley to the dogs!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.