links for 2010-10-22

Published by Waldo Jaquith

Waldo Jaquith (JAKE-with) is an open government technologist who lives near Char­lottes­­ville, VA, USA. more »

14 replies on “links for 2010-10-22”

  1. I am not fan of Clarence Thomas. He is a shitty justice on SCOTUS and is an intellectual lightweight. However, my friend and mentor of many years ago, the Rev. Dr. Henry Silva, worked in that office with Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill. Dr. Silva was also a bodyguard for Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King and was with him at the end. And he told me a whole lot of stories, including about his time working in that office with Clarence Thomas. Based on what he told me, Anita Hill was full of shit. Henry didn’t think much of Clarence Thomas as a legal mind, but he told me that NONE of the stuff Anita Hill described actually went on in that office. He told me that Thomas was the biggest damned stick in the mud you could imagine.

    I still don’t think much of Clarence Thomas, but from what Henry Silva told me I think that this sexual harassment thing was absolute horseshit. Thomas is innocent of that.

  2. I.Publius

    It may not have mattered if Anita Hill had corraboration that Thomas was a serial sexual harrasser. More’s the pity. If I were hiring for a job in which the candidate would be in a position of influence and found that a candidate had a history of rating colleagues as to their sexual attractiveness and forcing unwanted attentions on them, I’d have serious qualms about hiring that candidate.

    There’s not a woman I know that didn’t (and doesn’t)believe Anita Hill was telling the truth. To many women the phrase “a little nutty and a little slutty” is a warning about how they’ll be perceived if they make an issue of sexual harrassment. To many women, having a sexist on the Supreme Court is as disheartening as having a known racist on the highest court in the country. I consider both as indicators of a mediocre mind. Had Lillian corroborated Hill’s testimony when it mattered, we might have been spared a cipher on the Supreme court.

  3. Interesting perspective. I take it, then, that you felt the same about a sitting President engaging in similar (though much worse) conduct toward female subordinates.

    Right?

  4. Which sitting President sexually harassed a female subordinate? I have a feeling you’re being coy and cutesy about Clinton; if that’s the case, then let me fine-tune the question: which female subordinates is President Clinton supposed to have sexually harassed?

  5. I Publius

    “Interesting perspective” It wouldn’t have matter how I responded, your initial question was intended as a set-up for a Clinton reference.

    For the record, I was also deeply offended by the notion that you can find anything by dragging a trailer park with $500.

    So you’re ok with Thomas being a serial sexual harrasser? What was “interesting” about my perspective, or was that completely a throwaway line?

  6. No, seriously. Do you mean Monica Lewinsky–the consenting adult with whom Clinton had an affair? I’m not aware that his relationship with her was ever alleged, by her or anyone else, to have constituted sexual harassment. And I’m not aware of any other women he is supposed to have sexually harassed while he was president. (You did say “sitting President.”)

    So, make this a teachable moment: either you mean that the relationship b/w Clinton and Lewinsky was not in fact consensual but was sexual harassment (in which case you could explain your extremely capacious definition of sexual harassment), OR that there other legitimate cases of sexual harassment of female subordinates while he was president that I’m just not aware of.

  7. Here’s a couple teachable moments for you: direct your google or wiki thingie to “Kathleen Willey” and do a little reading. When you’re finished, look up “sexual harassment” along with “subordinate” and “quid pro quo.” Willey’s allegations were at least as plausible as McEwen’s; and Lewinsky’s relationship, while it started consensual, necessarily transitioned into harassment. To deny that is to fundamentally misunderstand the nature of sexual harassment between a powerful superior and a subordinate.

    The main point here, which you and Bubberella are conspicuously avoiding, is the double standard you’re applying to Clarence Thomas and Bill Clinton. They’re either BOTH unfit to serve in one of the nation’s highest offices, or neither are. And that’s only if Thomas did the things alleged… (some of which has just now conveniently come to light to sell some books. What, she has a financial incentive? Hey, how ’bout that.)

  8. As usual people on the Internet don’t know the correct legal definition of “sexual harassment”. Neither of these cases are clearly – with all that we know – indicative of legal harassment.

    I.Publius, the difference to me is that Thomas was guilty of being a lech, but used his race to defend himself. “A high tech lynching.” When he ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS says race should not be an issue.

    Clinton was a horndog. So was Thomas. But when push came to shove, Thomas reverted to race. So hypocritical. Poor Clarence, people went after him because he was black (insert laughing emoticon).

    And Jack, that’s a nice anecdotal story. I’m not being snarky. But, men are usually the last to know/be aware of how other men treat women in an office environment. Unless it’s pervasive.

  9. That’s really funny, Transplant. How many workplace sexual harassment cases have you defended? (insert laughing at you emoticon).

  10. It’s not that I totally disbelieve McEwen, but I’d be much more likely to believe her story if she wasn’t trying to sell her book.

    She has written “her memoir” (which… why?), and is actively seeking a publisher. It’s not like someone has made up things or exaggerated the truth in order to sell books before… ;-)

  11. I Publius

    I haven’t avoided anything. I answered your question honestly which is more than you did. I don’t think you actually read or comprehended anything I said — my comments are just springboards to you launch your next statement. I’m not necessary to your wankfest.

Comments are closed.