Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Moral Bankruptcy???? David Brock called honorable Professor Anita Hill "slutty and nutty"
It was reported on September 1, 2015, that a batch of Hillary Clinton's emails that had been made public included one from Brock entitled “Memo on Impeaching Clarence Thomas.
In the memo, Brock discussed possible ways of trying to bring down the Supreme Court justice whose cause he had championed in The Real Anita Hill.[51]
In the memo, Brock discussed possible ways of trying to bring down the Supreme Court justice whose cause he had championed in The Real Anita Hill.[51]
Anita Hill, Professor
Anita Faye Hill is an American attorney and academic.
She is a University Professor of Social Policy, Law, and Women's Studies at Brandeis University and a faculty member of Brandeis' Heller School for Social Policy and Management.
She became a national figure in 1991 when she accused U.S. Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas, her supervisor at the U.S. Department of Education and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, of sexual harassment.
Anita Faye Hill is an American attorney and academic.
She is a University Professor of Social Policy, Law, and Women's Studies at Brandeis University and a faculty member of Brandeis' Heller School for Social Policy and Management.
She became a national figure in 1991 when she accused U.S. Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas, her supervisor at the U.S. Department of Education and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, of sexual harassment.
David Brock, of Hillary's campaign, called Professor Anita Hill, "a bit nutty and a bit slutty." And Hillary hires him????
In March 1992, The American Spectator published a 17,000-word article in which Brock challenged the claims of Anita Hill, who had accused Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment.
Shortly thereafter Brock became a full-time staff member at that publication.
In 1993, Brock expanded his article into a book, The Real Anita Hill. Brock's description of Hill in the book as “a bit nutty and a bit slutty” was widely quoted.[6]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Brock
Shortly thereafter Brock became a full-time staff member at that publication.
In 1993, Brock expanded his article into a book, The Real Anita Hill. Brock's description of Hill in the book as “a bit nutty and a bit slutty” was widely quoted.[6]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Brock
Here's what Brock said about the Clintons, themselves:
So great was their (the troopers') fear of retaliation from what they called "the Clinton machine," that the troopers then had Jackson make inquiries about establishing a defense fund to cover potential legal costs and lost income that could result from coming forward.
snip
Some may well conclude, therefore, that Bill and Hillary Clinton's loose sexual morals and their habitual foul language are irrelevant to their public roles and, in any event, are not uncharacteristic of their generation as a whole.
But there is a larger point in the case of Clinton that goes well beyond any moral or ethical judgment about -- or prurient interest in -- his private life.
When sources come forward of their own volition to describe how Clinton's private activities have caused lies to be told, threats to be made, and cover-ups to be undertaken, an issue of public integrity is raised, and the public's right to know outweighs a public figure's claim to privacy or journalistic discretion.
Thus, even if one is inclined to give the issues of character, judgment, and self-control raised by the troopers' account of Clinton's behavior little weight -- much of the material should strike readers as more farcical than scandalous, a view shared by the troopers, who chuckled through some of the telling -- it became evident in the reporting of this story that Clinton and his surrogates continue to regard his private behavior as a political time bomb.
Their (the Clintons') effort to try to thwart publication of the story is itself newsworthy -- and quite illustrative of how this information was kept from voters during the 1992 campaign.
http://spectator.org/print/49976
23 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
