Not true!

I hope Bush gets himself a Lewinski! I also hope no one cares about it. I hope everyone on the planet gets a Lewinski. If bush got a Lewinski, I would be like "Hell Yea"

I have never been the kinda guy to get all uptight about some dude getting himself a Lewinski.

is a lewinski anything like a blumpkin?

i thought a Lewinsky was a fizzy lifting drink.

What does sexual harassment have to do with consenting adults getting it on. How is that hypocracy? You took a leap that wasn't connected.

Bosses and underlings hook up in corporate america all the time. It's not sexual harassment until the underling doesn't get the job they want and claims it as sexual harassment to get a fat payday.



Michael

If bush got more Lewinski's, we wouldn't be in Iraq.

Thanks Laura... for nothing. :(

BUSH needs something more wild, like a "dirty sanchez"

well, actually it is sexual harassment, at least as far as the law (and most corporate policy) is concerned. I just went through sexual harassment training (had to as a supervisor). So I'm now good at it :p

The issue is that with a boss/employee dynamic, a "consenting" relationship is not truly possible (although it is arguable). Same thing with an adult/minor incident, although in that case it is much more clear cut: a minor is not capable of making an informed decision to provide true "consent."

i think todd is right. i went to training too, and paid attention.

As a supervisor, I had similar "training", over the web from an outfit called "workplace answers"... probably the same as yours? Anyway, I found most of it to be the kind of thought control that would make Stalin proud. Everyone was supposed to knuckle under to the sensitivities of the most hyper-sensitive employee -- no matter how prudish, while at the same time agreeing to rat-out co-workers who might be listening to Rush Limbaugh on their lunch break. The only way anyone could fully comply with the policies outlined in that manifesto would be to become an android.

the takehome lesson was: don't eat where you poop.

there was no mention of Rush in my training. Sure you're not projecting? ;)

Money cannot buy love. But, I'm sure that in certain parts of Omaha, money will buy a reasonable facsimile.

Are you sure this wasn't patriot training?

I'm certainly not part of the PC crowd, but any man in a position of authority (not many are higher than POTUS) getting his knob polished by a subordinate IN THE WORKPLACE probably qualifies as sexual harrassment. It DEFINITELY qualifies as piss poor judgment. For any high ranking gubmint official to do that, thereby leaving himself wide open to blackmail (especially since Clinton admitted he thought the Chinese embassy had the WH phones bugged) is just outrageous. I don't care about Clinton cheating on his butch/wife. I'd cheat too if I were married to that. But I wouldn't expect to retain any credibility with anyone when it became public. I would never have the chutzpah to claim I was defending the Constitution (as Clinton claimed) by fighting the impeachment tooth and nail, especially when Clinton later admitted to just about everything anyway.

As a supervisor, I've taken it upon myself to institute a policy of MANDATORY Rush Limbaugh "training" every workday between 9-10AM, just to get the day started off on the RIGHT foot...:D

Well, somebody missed the point of the original post. The point was that perjury was not mentioned. The rampage about sexual acts does not address the perjury issue, but is a diversion tactic that does not work.

Now, I haven't seen the textbook version, but if perjury was not mentioned, what are they saying he was impeached for? No pages need to be dedicated to the sex act itself, just the fact that he lied to a grand jury and was impeached.

If you agree or disagree with the whole issue does not matter; the historical fact that it happened is what is relevant. Children will use this text to learn about impeachment and the fact that it does not always mean the President will be removed from office. As far as a learning tool, the Clinton impeachment is a very interesting case to show how the impeachment process works. Too bad it took reality to show how the system works. :(

Now I just need to go out and find some money.

Scooter, Scott? Of course, school textbooks are written to reflect the leftward leaning viewpoints of the educationalist establishment. For example, my daughter's "global studies" text (she left high screwall in '88) flatly stated that the 2nd amendment did NOT give the individual the right to keep and bear arms.

I'm all for guns. Everyone should be able to have whatever they want, given a small wait period (less than 1 week) for a background check.

The Second Amendment though is not explicit for individuals outside of a militia.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,
the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

You can read this a million times and consistently come to 2 conclusions:

1. A militia has the right to bear arms

2. the people has the right to bear arms

It's this kind of interpretation that keeps this Country vibrant and free, and allows a strict constructionist like bush to find all kinds of powers in the Constitution for ex post facto justification for illegal actions. :)

WHat good is a waiting period, if someone already has lots of guns and a concealed carry permit AND we have the nat. instant check system online in every state?

No, but a fizzy lifting drink could be used in the Lewinsky Process