Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ratbasit
Listen, forget the homosexual and pedophile aspects of this thing for just a second.
This is sexual harassment. If this were any workplace other than the Congress of the United States and a prominent employee was found to be flirting or even just joking inappropriately with his subordinates, and if that employee's boss was even suspected of covering it up, heads would roll all up and down the corporate ladder, and the company would be subject to massive legal liability.
|
Yes, this is true, IMO. But then, you'd have to dredge up the whole history of the late '70's early '80's "harrassment" of the pages who faced the same, even more. And you'd have to examine the response of the various parties of that harrassment, in which the Democrat received three standing ovations from his own party on the floor of the house after his folly was revealed.
And how well would that reflect upon the Democratic party today? If Clarence Thomas was so reviled for Anita Hill's allegations (not judging upon the veracity of the claim, mind you), why shouldn't the democratic party receive censure for their response when one of their own was found out to be in an admitted relationship with a 17 year old girl?
Villification is a two-way street, my friends. If one party is reviled for what they do, then both parties should be.