On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 16:02:05 -0400, JohnH wrote:


Forced to have phone sex... Must be too stupid to hang up the phone.

You might want to do a little reading on sexual harassment. It might
improve your understanding of the charge.

Sexual harassment is:
Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or
physical conduct of a sexual nature constitutes sexual harassment when
submission to or rejection of this conduct explicitly or implicitly
affects an individual's employment, unreasonably interferes with an
individual's work performance or creates an intimidating, hostile or
offensive work environment.

So, do you think hanging up on your boss might effect your work
environment?

http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/fs-sex.html

So he is guilty without a trial? Not a liberal thing to do....eh Krause?

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 04:58:15 +0000, WaIIy wrote:

On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 19:39:08 -0400, "JimH" wrote:

So he is guilty without a trial? Not a liberal thing to do....eh Krause?


Lemme see.....

She worked at Fox for four years or so.

She worked at CNN for four months.

She taped the first conversation about getting her old job back.

She didn't file anything with Fox regarding her situation.

Doesn't pass the sniff test.

That's what courts are for, to see if it passes the sniff test.

The democrats will do anything to gain power...anything.

What Democrat would that be? Mackris? I'm not sure of her political
affiliation, but would suspect she is a Republican. She *did* work as an
intern in George Bush's White House after all.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive...3mackris1.html

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 04:58:15 +0000, WaIIy wrote:

On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 19:39:08 -0400, "JimH" wrote:

So he is guilty without a trial? Not a liberal thing to do....eh Krause?


Lemme see.....

She worked at Fox for four years or so.

She worked at CNN for four months.

She taped the first conversation about getting her old job back.

She didn't file anything with Fox regarding her situation.

Doesn't pass the sniff test.

That's what courts are for, to see if it passes the sniff test.

The democrats will do anything to gain power...anything.

What Democrat would that be? Mackris? I'm not sure of her political
affiliation, but would suspect she is a Republican. She *did* work as an
intern in George Bush's White House after all.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive...3mackris1.html

What Democrat? More like what *Democrats*. Sort of like this:

http://www.democrats.org/news/200410140008.html

2. If no signs of intimidation techniques have emerged yet, launch a
"pre-emptive strike" (particularly well-suited to states in which there
techniques have been tried in the past).

.. Issue a press release

i. Reviewing Republican tactic used in the past in your area or state

ii. Quoting party/minority/civil rights leadership as denouncing tactics
that discourage people from voting

.. Prime minority leadership to discuss the issue in the media; provide
talking points

.. Place stories in which minority leadership expresses concern about the
threat of intimidation tactics

.. Warn local newspapers not to accept advertising that is not properly
disclaimed or that contains false warnings about voting requirements and/or
about what will happen at the polls

-------

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
WaIIy wrote:
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 19:39:08 -0400, "JimH" wrote:

So he is guilty without a trial? Not a liberal thing to do....eh Krause?


Lemme see.....

She worked at Fox for four years or so.

She worked at CNN for four months.

She taped the first conversation about getting her old job back.

She didn't file anything with Fox regarding her situation.

Doesn't pass the sniff test.

The democrats will do anything to gain power...anything.


Didn't she work for the Bush mis-adminstration?

O'Reilly, btw, ain't denying the sex calls...he's just ****ed at the
amount for which he is being sued. He'll settle a few million on her.

For a million bucks, I'll accept O'Reilly's telephone hot chat phone
calls...


Guilty before offered a chance to defend himself....is that the way of the
Democrats...eh Krause?

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 08:40:21 -0400, JimH wrote:


What Democrat? More like what *Democrats*. Sort of like this:

http://www.democrats.org/news/200410140008.html

LOL, thanks for the link. I can tell you didn't read it.

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 08:40:21 -0400, JimH wrote:


What Democrat? More like what *Democrats*. Sort of like this:

http://www.democrats.org/news/200410140008.html

LOL, thanks for the link. I can tell you didn't read it.

Sure I did. And I loved the part about pre-emptive strikes. Do you agree
with such dirty tactics?

He is your classic ambulance chaser, what was your point?


"WaIIy" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 07:07:24 -0400, thunder
wrote:

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 04:58:15 +0000, WaIIy wrote:

On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 19:39:08 -0400, "JimH" wrote:

So he is guilty without a trial? Not a liberal thing to do....eh Krause?


Lemme see.....

She worked at Fox for four years or so.

She worked at CNN for four months.

She taped the first conversation about getting her old job back.

She didn't file anything with Fox regarding her situation.

Doesn't pass the sniff test.

That's what courts are for, to see if it passes the sniff test.

The democrats will do anything to gain power...anything.

What Democrat would that be? Mackris? I'm not sure of her political
affiliation, but would suspect she is a Republican. She *did* work as an
intern in George Bush's White House after all.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive...3mackris1.html

Check out her law firm.

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 09:26:01 -0400, JimH wrote:

http://www.democrats.org/news/200410140008.html

Sure I did. And I loved the part about pre-emptive strikes. Do you
agree with such dirty tactics?

No, I was more interested in the reports of the RNC paying $500,000 to a
company ripping up democratic voter registration forms, or the former
Republican Party official who stated "I am looking to take Democrats of
the voter rolls", or, the Republican who stated "I we do not suppress the
Detroit vote, we are going to have a tough time in this election cycle."

And what dirty tactic were you referring to? Oh yeah, a preemptive press
release. What dirty SOBs those dems are.

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 09:26:01 -0400, JimH wrote:

http://www.democrats.org/news/200410140008.html

Sure I did. And I loved the part about pre-emptive strikes. Do you
agree with such dirty tactics?

No, I was more interested in the reports of the RNC paying $500,000 to a
company ripping up democratic voter registration forms, or the former
Republican Party official who stated "I am looking to take Democrats of
the voter rolls", or, the Republican who stated "I we do not suppress the
Detroit vote, we are going to have a tough time in this election cycle."

And what dirty tactic were you referring to? Oh yeah, a preemptive press
release. What dirty SOBs those dems are.



That's it....change the discussion. I posted a report by the DNC showing
the tactics it is taking on alleging voter fraud. You accused me of not
reading it. I posted the section of the report that I found a problem with.
You post your interpretation of a separate 2 sentence statement about the
RNC that is under investigation and unconfirmed.

Nice spin.

Nice try.