Posted on 07/27/2018 10:08:36 AM PDT by Red Badger
Edited on 07/27/2018 11:08:01 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Moonves is Jewish, too!...............8^)
“The New Yorker is scheduled to publish an article by Ronan Farrow on Friday that accuses the 68-year-old of unwanted kissing and touching more than 20 years ago...”
I snapped a bra in 1957.
Could not happen to a better choice. Also glad I don’t have $300 million as I am sure I would have a big target on my bill fold.
Couldn’t happen to a more deserving schmuck.
#himtoo. Just sayin’. This has been rampant for decades. But, hear any of the “liberated” crowd standing up for truly oppressed Muslim women? Crickets
“These stories are comical.”
How much money does she want?
Les has been a top dog for a long time.
Maybe somebody wants his spot.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjuTio-bE8E
(starring Les Moonves)
“Im just going to say it out loud: The only human male to ever exist that has not, at some time in his life, been guilty of sexual misconduct was hung on a cross and raised from the dead three days later.
These stories are comical.”
Wait right there!
There has long been a group of biblical revisionists who claim that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus and that He fathered children by her.
There is another group that claims she was His mistress and fathered children.
Yet another group says she was a groupy that hung with the disciples for the occasional chance to lay with the Big Guy.
Some of the people making these accusations are priests or pastors. Mostly teaching at some college that USED to be faith based.
Rumors seem to point out long term sexual conduct by some of CBS top producers!
I dont like what you said. No. Not all men abuse their power at work to have sex with their subordinates. Thanks for letting us know that you do.
Some of the people making these accusations are priests or pastors. Mostly teaching at some college that USED to be faith based.
There is zero scripture to support their claims, BTW. It’s more of a sort of “he HAD to have had relations because we would have” sort of thing. Except he also “had to have sinned because we all do too”.
It’s a non starter for me.
And yeah, I assume you were being sarcastic. ;)
You are hurting Free Republic. Take 1-3 breaths before always taking the side of the man who abused his power for his sexual jollies. We all know some women are evil when they falsely accuse a man of such behavior. But very prevalent is the evil in the powerful man who exerts pressure on his female employees to engage in sex.
Women have the right to be employed without having to put out sexually for their boss. Free Republic is not only for horny men. Its so offensive that this type of comment, expected and always heartily agreed with, keeps me from donating sometimes. I feel more welcome here as a Jew than as a woman sometimes.
I dont like what you said. No. Not all men abuse their power at work to have sex with their subordinates. Thanks for letting us know that you do.
I referred to sexual misconduct, and put it in quotes for a reason. It is a subjective term. Fact is, it has varying degrees. At some point it crosses a line, but that line seems to be different to different people. And the line fades with time, again, at different speeds with different people.
It’s why Ted Kennedy could still hold public office after Chappaquiddick.
But the bottom line is that my post stands, hopefully clarified by the above. To be clear, I fondled a lot of girls breasts when I was in and just out of high school. It was virtually always with permission, and ALWAYS with permission, eventually because I grasped the true nuance of when no meant yes.
I’m 64 now and there are only two specific ones I’m now interested in. and “sexual misconduct” is never involved.
Ever wonder why Paula Jones' lawyers were able to ask President Clinton about his sexual relations with other women? According to a new book, Clinton himself is to blame.In 1994 Clinton signed into law the Molinari amendments to the federal rules of evidence. Named after Rep. Susan Molinari (R-N.Y.), the amendments permit the plaintiff in a sexual harassment suit to examine the defendant's personal life in search of examples of similar behavior.
Under the prior, centuries-old common law, the defendant's past behavior would have been deemed irrelevant.
Maybe the FBI can raid his attorney’s house... and ALL the MSM can hunt down his women and trash him everyday.
I don't have any subordinates, but if I did, I'd be hitting it 15 times a day and on coffee breaks.
There are some @ssholes, but not nearly as bad as it once was.
The most comical posters were men with multiple divorces who blamed everything thing on the women.
Not one single thing was their fault.
They were perfect, but the exes were bad, evil, hateful rubbish.
Hey, 64 with two girlfriends, go for it! ;)
Confession: I didnt read the article and I assumed Moonves was caught abusing people in his employ or wanting to be. I was really referring to a power imbalance where the woman is truly taken advantage of.
A lot of guys here immediately suspect the woman as being the wrong party.
I don’t have any subordinates, but if I did, I’d be hitting it 15 times a day and on coffee breaks.
Me, I wonder why she stayed 7 weeks. ;)
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.