Karl Denninger wrote:
In article ,
Harry Krause wrote:


That has nothing to do with whether their complaint has merit.


Perhaps you ought to read up some more on the case. O'Reilly isn't
denying it...he just is ****ed at how much money the lady wants.

Denying a conversation took place is not necessary.

For it to be harassment the attention must be unwanted. Further, the
accuser must not have initiated the attention.

There are allegations (from friends of the accuser!) that she not only
wanted the attention, but she explicitly SOLICITED it, and bragged prior
to going back that she was going to use it in exactly this way.

You're really walking the plank now, Karl.



Again, Harry, under exactly WHAT scenario does someone who is being sexually
harassed and ESCAPES TO ANOTHER JOB AT A DIFFERENT COMPANY, VOLUNTARILY
comes back to not only the same position she held WHILE BEING HARASSED
but comes back to the same job with the same boss who was doing the
harassing?


The woman was assured that O'Reilly had learned his lessons and would
behave.



That's going to be a nearly-impossible sales job to make to ANY jury,
and both you and I know it.

--


--
Jesus was the ultimate liberal progressive revolutionary of all history.
The conservative religious and social structure that he defied hated and
crucified him. They examined His life and did not like what they saw. He
aligned himself with the poor and the oppressed. He challenged the
religious orthodoxy of his day. He advocated pacifism and loving our
enemies. He liberated women and minorities from oppression. He healed on
the Sabbath and forgave adulterers and prostitutes. He associated with
drunks and other social outcasts. He rebuked the religious right of his
day because they embraced the letter of the law instead of the Spirit.
He loved sinners and called them to himself. Jesus was the original
Liberal. He was a progressive, and he was judged and hated for it. It
was the self-righteous religionists that he rebuked and he called them
hypocrites.

The primary issues of Christian Liberalism were birthed when Jesus spoke
the profoundly prophetic words found in Matthew 25: 31-46. These
scriptures reveal God's heart for the poor, the sick and other neglected
people through out history. Christians should read this text and judge
for themselves which of the two groups mentioned there more accurately
reflect the political parties of today. His Liberalism lives on today
and the issues have not changed much.

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 21:35:07 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:
The DRUDGE REPORT has obtained O'Reilly accuser Andrea Mackris' financial
records which show a combined debt of nearly $100,000!

Who cares?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Damn. If she's "living way beyond her means", then *I'm* in deep ****.
$100k in debt? That's it? I'm in the hock for about a million-five.

You must be among "the rich" that everyone in politics is always
talking about. :-)

No one else could owe that much - who would lend it?

Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 21:35:07 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:
The DRUDGE REPORT has obtained O'Reilly accuser Andrea Mackris' financial
records which show a combined debt of nearly $100,000!

Who cares?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Damn. If she's "living way beyond her means", then *I'm* in deep ****.
$100k in debt? That's it? I'm in the hock for about a million-five.

You must be among "the rich" that everyone in politics is always
talking about. :-)

No one else could owe that much - who would lend it?


Maybe he had to repeat dental school a few times...


--
Jesus was the ultimate liberal progressive revolutionary of all history.
The conservative religious and social structure that he defied hated and
crucified him. They examined His life and did not like what they saw. He
aligned himself with the poor and the oppressed. He challenged the
religious orthodoxy of his day. He advocated pacifism and loving our
enemies. He liberated women and minorities from oppression. He healed on
the Sabbath and forgave adulterers and prostitutes. He associated with
drunks and other social outcasts. He rebuked the religious right of his
day because they embraced the letter of the law instead of the Spirit.
He loved sinners and called them to himself. Jesus was the original
Liberal. He was a progressive, and he was judged and hated for it. It
was the self-righteous religionists that he rebuked and he called them
hypocrites.

The primary issues of Christian Liberalism were birthed when Jesus spoke
the profoundly prophetic words found in Matthew 25: 31-46. These
scriptures reveal God's heart for the poor, the sick and other neglected
people through out history. Christians should read this text and judge
for themselves which of the two groups mentioned there more accurately
reflect the political parties of today. His Liberalism lives on today
and the issues have not changed much.

Harry Krause wrote:



Maybe he had to repeat dental school a few times...



Gotta admit Harry, that one was good for sprayed keyboard.

LOL

Eisboch

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 20:34:20 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 21:35:07 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:
The DRUDGE REPORT has obtained O'Reilly accuser Andrea Mackris' financial
records which show a combined debt of nearly $100,000!

Who cares?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Damn. If she's "living way beyond her means", then *I'm* in deep ****.
$100k in debt? That's it? I'm in the hock for about a million-five.

You must be among "the rich" that everyone in politics is always
talking about. :-)

No one else could owe that much - who would lend it?

You would be surprised. We sold our house up on Webster Lake this
summer for mumbelmumbletyillion and with less than 5% down, the couple
got a "jumbo" mortgage in about the same time as a regular mortgage.
Neither one of them were great shakes in the wages department - he was
a wage/contract attorney for an insurance company and she was a
paralegal with a local attorney. People are betting that in the long
run, they will win the inflation lottery.

The broker told us that, while not common, they aren't all the
uncommon either.

Later,

Tom
-----------
"Angling may be said to be so
like the mathematics that it
can never be fully learnt..."

Izaak Walton "The Compleat Angler", 1653

Eisboch wrote:
Harry Krause wrote:



Maybe he had to repeat dental school a few times...



Gotta admit Harry, that one was good for sprayed keyboard.

LOL

Eisboch


Well, it's about $10,000 to $40,000 a year or so for a place like Tufts.




--
Jesus was the ultimate liberal progressive revolutionary of all history.
The conservative religious and social structure that he defied hated and
crucified him. They examined His life and did not like what they saw. He
aligned himself with the poor and the oppressed. He challenged the
religious orthodoxy of his day. He advocated pacifism and loving our
enemies. He liberated women and minorities from oppression. He healed on
the Sabbath and forgave adulterers and prostitutes. He associated with
drunks and other social outcasts. He rebuked the religious right of his
day because they embraced the letter of the law instead of the Spirit.
He loved sinners and called them to himself. Jesus was the original
Liberal. He was a progressive, and he was judged and hated for it. It
was the self-righteous religionists that he rebuked and he called them
hypocrites.

The primary issues of Christian Liberalism were birthed when Jesus spoke
the profoundly prophetic words found in Matthew 25: 31-46. These
scriptures reveal God's heart for the poor, the sick and other neglected
people through out history. Christians should read this text and judge
for themselves which of the two groups mentioned there more accurately
reflect the political parties of today. His Liberalism lives on today
and the issues have not changed much.

In article ,
Harry Krause wrote:


Karl Denninger wrote:
In article ,
Harry Krause wrote:


That has nothing to do with whether their complaint has merit.


Perhaps you ought to read up some more on the case. O'Reilly isn't
denying it...he just is ****ed at how much money the lady wants.

Denying a conversation took place is not necessary.

For it to be harassment the attention must be unwanted. Further, the
accuser must not have initiated the attention.

There are allegations (from friends of the accuser!) that she not only
wanted the attention, but she explicitly SOLICITED it, and bragged prior
to going back that she was going to use it in exactly this way.

You're really walking the plank now, Karl.


Again, Harry, under exactly WHAT scenario does someone who is being sexually
harassed and ESCAPES TO ANOTHER JOB AT A DIFFERENT COMPANY, VOLUNTARILY
comes back to not only the same position she held WHILE BEING HARASSED
but comes back to the same job with the same boss who was doing the
harassing?


The woman was assured that O'Reilly had learned his lessons and would
behave.

Yeah, right. So says she.

If he can produce the friend who allegedly claims that she was madly in
lust with him, and subsequent to her stint at CNN claimed that she was
going to go back and destroy him by extorting him with these claims her
case collapses.

Just watch the fireworks - O'Reilly has already asked for a show cause on
discovery of any (if there are any) tapes - if she's got 'em, she better
pray to God that she didn't make any in a two-party consent state, or she
goes to prison for wiretapping statute violations as well (those be
felonies, my friend, one per recording.)

I don't care for O'Reilly, but this one smells like extortion to me.
Kinda like if Lewinsky had sued the President alleging that
the BJs she gave him were "harassment"!

--
--
Karl Denninger ) Internet Consultant & Kids Rights Activist
http://www.denninger.net My home on the net - links to everything I do!
http://scubaforum.org Your UNCENSORED place to talk about DIVING!
http://www.spamcuda.net SPAM FREE mailboxes - FREE FOR A LIMITED TIME!
http://genesis3.blogspot.com Musings Of A Sentient Mind

In article ,
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:


On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 20:34:20 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 21:35:07 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:
The DRUDGE REPORT has obtained O'Reilly accuser Andrea Mackris' financial
records which show a combined debt of nearly $100,000!

Who cares?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Damn. If she's "living way beyond her means", then *I'm* in deep ****.
$100k in debt? That's it? I'm in the hock for about a million-five.

You must be among "the rich" that everyone in politics is always
talking about. :-)

No one else could owe that much - who would lend it?

You would be surprised. We sold our house up on Webster Lake this
summer for mumbelmumbletyillion and with less than 5% down, the couple
got a "jumbo" mortgage in about the same time as a regular mortgage.
Neither one of them were great shakes in the wages department - he was
a wage/contract attorney for an insurance company and she was a
paralegal with a local attorney. People are betting that in the long
run, they will win the inflation lottery.

The broker told us that, while not common, they aren't all the
uncommon either.

Yep.

Real estate is driving it.

If you can collateralize it, you can get the money.

But that's not truly "in hock", because there are assets backing the
note(s). If you don't pay, they take the house.

Credit card debt is unsecured. But I've seen card issuers do absolutely
crazy things, particularly if you shop around to the different issuers
and take out as many cards as you can.

Its not hard to run up $30k in credit card debt on a $100k salary - the
issuers will let you do it, although its suicidal for them since there's
not a snowball's chance in hell they will get it all back.

I know someone who had income of about $25k who was able to run over $35k
in card debt before the issuers caught up with them and it got ugly.

And no, they didn't own a house either - they were renting!

--
--
Karl Denninger ) Internet Consultant & Kids Rights Activist
http://www.denninger.net My home on the net - links to everything I do!
http://scubaforum.org Your UNCENSORED place to talk about DIVING!
http://www.spamcuda.net SPAM FREE mailboxes - FREE FOR A LIMITED TIME!
http://genesis3.blogspot.com Musings Of A Sentient Mind

Karl Denninger wrote:
In article ,
Harry Krause wrote:


Karl Denninger wrote:
In article ,
Harry Krause wrote:


That has nothing to do with whether their complaint has merit.


Perhaps you ought to read up some more on the case. O'Reilly isn't
denying it...he just is ****ed at how much money the lady wants.

Denying a conversation took place is not necessary.

For it to be harassment the attention must be unwanted. Further, the
accuser must not have initiated the attention.

There are allegations (from friends of the accuser!) that she not only
wanted the attention, but she explicitly SOLICITED it, and bragged prior
to going back that she was going to use it in exactly this way.

You're really walking the plank now, Karl.


Again, Harry, under exactly WHAT scenario does someone who is being sexually
harassed and ESCAPES TO ANOTHER JOB AT A DIFFERENT COMPANY, VOLUNTARILY
comes back to not only the same position she held WHILE BEING HARASSED
but comes back to the same job with the same boss who was doing the
harassing?


The woman was assured that O'Reilly had learned his lessons and would
behave.

Yeah, right. So says she.

If he can produce the friend who allegedly claims that she was madly in
lust with him, and subsequent to her stint at CNN claimed that she was
going to go back and destroy him by extorting him with these claims her
case collapses.

Just watch the fireworks - O'Reilly has already asked for a show cause on
discovery of any (if there are any) tapes - if she's got 'em, she better
pray to God that she didn't make any in a two-party consent state, or she
goes to prison for wiretapping statute violations as well (those be
felonies, my friend, one per recording.)

Heheheh. Doubtful. Not with a sexual kink. Which O'Reilly maybe.



I don't care for O'Reilly, but this one smells like extortion to me.
Kinda like if Lewinsky had sued the President alleging that
the BJs she gave him were "harassment"!

Yes, well, you have an interesting attitude towards women.


--
Jesus was the ultimate liberal progressive revolutionary of all history.
The conservative religious and social structure that he defied hated and
crucified him. They examined His life and did not like what they saw. He
aligned himself with the poor and the oppressed. He challenged the
religious orthodoxy of his day. He advocated pacifism and loving our
enemies. He liberated women and minorities from oppression. He healed on
the Sabbath and forgave adulterers and prostitutes. He associated with
drunks and other social outcasts. He rebuked the religious right of his
day because they embraced the letter of the law instead of the Spirit.
He loved sinners and called them to himself. Jesus was the original
Liberal. He was a progressive, and he was judged and hated for it. It
was the self-righteous religionists that he rebuked and he called them
hypocrites.

The primary issues of Christian Liberalism were birthed when Jesus spoke
the profoundly prophetic words found in Matthew 25: 31-46. These
scriptures reveal God's heart for the poor, the sick and other neglected
people through out history. Christians should read this text and judge
for themselves which of the two groups mentioned there more accurately
reflect the political parties of today. His Liberalism lives on today
and the issues have not changed much.

In article ,
Harry Krause wrote:


Karl Denninger wrote:
The woman was assured that O'Reilly had learned his lessons and would
behave.

Yeah, right. So says she.

If he can produce the friend who allegedly claims that she was madly in
lust with him, and subsequent to her stint at CNN claimed that she was
going to go back and destroy him by extorting him with these claims her
case collapses.

Just watch the fireworks - O'Reilly has already asked for a show cause on
discovery of any (if there are any) tapes - if she's got 'em, she better
pray to God that she didn't make any in a two-party consent state, or she
goes to prison for wiretapping statute violations as well (those be
felonies, my friend, one per recording.)

Heheheh. Doubtful. Not with a sexual kink. Which O'Reilly maybe.

If she made the tapes in a two-party consent state she's cooked Harry.

And let's not forget her email to a friend....

"I'm having a wonderful time here. I love the people. I'm home and
I will never leave again." - The accuser in an email to one of her
friends just a few days before she filed her suit.

Now remember Harry, the suit alleges that the harassment not only went on
through her entire first stint at Fox, but re-commeced immediately after she
went back to work there.

Yet "I'm home and will never leave again" is what she tells one of her
friends?

Uh huh. Sounds like someone who was being harassed to me.

My take on it?

Mackris may or may not have been in financial trouble. She may or may not
have plotted going back to Fox specifically for the purpose of extortion.

But if the "harassment" was in fact initiated by her and was consensual,
then her demand for money IS extortion and/or blackmail, and she's got
both a civil and potential criminal problem.

I don't care for O'Reilly, but this one smells like extortion to me.
Kinda like if Lewinsky had sued the President alleging that
the BJs she gave him were "harassment"!

Yes, well, you have an interesting attitude towards women.

I believe that neither man or woman has a right to abuse the other.

That includes either attempting to extort money from the other.

I can't see how she gets past her own comments to her closest friends,
some of whom have apparently turned on her due to her filing this action.

Oh well - back to boats - you do have something boating-related to post
here, right?.

--
--
Karl Denninger ) Internet Consultant & Kids Rights Activist
http://www.denninger.net My home on the net - links to everything I do!
http://scubaforum.org Your UNCENSORED place to talk about DIVING!
http://www.spamcuda.net SPAM FREE mailboxes - FREE FOR A LIMITED TIME!
http://genesis3.blogspot.com Musings Of A Sentient Mind