November 29, 2017

"But David Letterman remains the man with the best timing on earth. I think they actually just did a tribute to him the other night!!"

Writes MayBee in the comments to the first post of the day, "Sexual harassment claim filed Monday night, and Wednesday morning, Matt Lauer is fired from his longtime job as co-anchor of the 'Today' show."

She's right about the tribute. Here's the announcement from the (aptly named!) Kennedy Center:
On Sunday, October 22, 2017, an outstanding lineup of entertainers gathered in the Kennedy Center Concert Hall to salute David Letterman, recipient of the 20th annual Mark Twain Prize for American Humor. The Prize, which is named to honor one of the world's greatest humorists, was given at a gala performance featuring some of the biggest names in comedy, and taped for broadcast nationwide.
Here, you can watch the whole effusive extravaganza. It was on PBS. I haven't watched it, so I don't know if there were any allusions or outright smirking about the outrageous sexual harassment story Letterman weathered in 2009, but it's all about timing in comedy, so it was very funny to see "Al Franken cut from PBS broadcast of David Letterman tribute."

Here's a Vanity Fair article from 2009, "Letterman and Me/One of the few women ever to write for Late Night with David Letterman, the author (a longtime V.F. contributor) remembers a hostile, sexually charged atmosphere. What’s to be done? Start by breaking late night’s all-male gag order," by Nell Scovell:
... Late Night was my dream job.... Without naming names or digging up decades-old dirt, let’s address the pertinent questions. Did Dave hit on me? No. Did he pay me enough extra attention that it was noted by another writer? Yes. Was I aware of rumors that Dave was having sexual relationships with female staffers? Yes. Was I aware that other high-level male employees were having sexual relationships with female staffers? Yes. Did these female staffers have access to information and wield power disproportionate to their job titles? Yes. Did that create a hostile work environment? Yes. Did I believe these female staffers were benefiting professionally from their personal relationships? Yes. Did that make me feel demeaned? Completely. Did I say anything at the time? Sadly, no.

Here’s what I did: I walked away from my dream job.... On my last day at Late Night, Dave summoned me to his office and pressed me on why I was quitting the show. I considered telling him the truth, but with Dave’s rumored mistress within earshot, I balked. Instead, I told him I missed L.A. Dave said, “You’re welcome back anytime.”
ADDED: Here's how I handled the story at the time, in 2009, "Is it really so terrible that David Letterman has a bachelor pad in the building where he tapes his show?"

Why should we mind if the TV star has an apartment in the building to retreat to before and after the show? He has to commute into town. He has to be fresh and energetic to do the show, which depends largely on his performance. He should be able to easily get away from the workplace to nap, watch TV, eat, and, yes, have sex.
An ex-"Late Show" intern unmasked herself Saturday as one of David Letterman's former flings - and sources revealed the randy funnyman keeps a bachelor pad atop the Ed Sullivan Theater.

"I was madly in love with him at the time," said Holly Hester. "I would have married him. He was hilarious."...

[There was a] year-long, secret romance... she said, until the funnyman called it off because of their age difference.

Outside what is believed to be Hester's country home in Sebastopol, Calif. - in ritzy Sonoma County - a middle-aged man lashed out at a Daily News reporter last night. "Get the f--- out of here. We're being offered a lot of money for this s---," he said.
Ha ha. I love that quote. Get the fuck out of here. We're being offered a lot of money for this shit. Reporters! Trying to get the story for free!
An ex-"Late Show" staffer said Letterman kept a room insiders dubbed "the bunker" that was open only to his favorite young female underlings....

A woman identified as a former paramour, Stephanie Birkitt, 34, remained in hiding Saturday. She was, until recently, dating Joe Halderman, who was arrested Thursday for allegedly threatening to go public with Letterman's dalliances unless he was paid $2 million.

A "Late Show" office worker in 1997, Birkitt quickly developed a role as Letterman's Girl Friday. She went on to appear in several skits as his comic foil. Behind the scenes, their relationship became intimate, sources said.

"The creepy relationship that Letterman maintained with Stephanie was obvious and not normal," an insider said. "She was able to do anything and everything ... It was pretty well known that Stephanie was the one that Letterman was having fun with."
And there you see why we speak of "sexual harassment" even when the employee getting the sex is eager to receive it. It hurts the rest of the employees. It skews the work assignments in a way that feels unfair.

But perhaps an exception should be made for a great late night talk show host. The funnyman's mood and ego need boosting. Just as he must have an office full of people who can write jokes and comic routines — who must share a lot of not-that-businesslike camaraderie — he needs pretty ladies to keep his senses well-honed. It's part of the structure of a business that revolves around a performer. The funnyman needs his supply of sex, and the paying career positions on the staff can be used to create a pool of potential sexual partners who will keep the old man bolstered up.

Perhaps, I said. Perhaps. Please discuss. And take into account the other examples we've seen lately of great men to whom the rules arguably do not apply: Roman Polanski (movie director might be allowed to rape), Harvard students (elite collegians might be allowed to stalk), Richard Prince (important artist might be allowed to display child pornography), Brian David Mitchell (man of God might be allowed to rape). And not so recently: Bill Clinton (Presidents of the United States might be allowed to have sex with subordinate employees).
ALSO:
“I don’t see this dark fearful thing you seem to see in David Letterman,” I told him. “The man has freckles. He used to be a local weatherman. He’s witty. But so am I, Rudy.” I did want a Xanax. “We both know me. I’m an actress who’s now forty and has four kids, you’re my second husband, you’ve made a successful career change, I’ve had three dramatic series, the last two have been successful, I have an Emmy nomination, I’m probably never going to have a feature-film career or be recognized seriously for my work as an actress.” I turned in the back seat to look at him. “So so what? All of this is known. It’s all way out in the open already. I honestly don’t see what about me is savageable.”

My husband ran his arm, which was well-built, out along the back seat’s top behind us. The limousine smelled like a fine purse; its interior was red leather and buttery soft. It felt almost wet. “He’ll give you a huge amount of grief about the wiener thing.”

“Let him,” I said.

47 comments:

james james said...

Stephen Colbert talks about cock holsters.

Letterman actually used them.

- james james

Lloyd W. Robertson said...

I commented on the Letterman tribute, and Franken being cut, a few days ago. It's not hard to imagine a similar show a few years ago, with jokes like: Dave has been pursued by at least one crazy woman [a stalker who started bothering him at home], but then he has been a sex-crazed pursuer of a number of women, so fair is fair. I seem to remember on the short-lived Pat Sajak late-night show, he said his sidekick had celebrated Valentine's Day by freeing his love slave.

Chuck said...

Actually, the Letterman/Mark Twain award was edited shortly before airing for the most ironic of reasons. It was to minimize the taped appearance of Al Franken's portion of the tribute.

So, uh, yeah...

But does anybody care so much about retired tv personalities, as the 51st vote in the U.S. Senate?

dreams said...

He was guilty of sexual harassment too, David Letterman is just another liberal thug. I was never a fan and I'm proud of it.

Fernandistien said...

I considered telling him the truth,

That's why we believe everything she wrote.

dreams said...

I read somewhere years ago that David Letterman was a very insecure man and how he screwed up the Academy Awards show. Here is some info but the article I read at the time.

"But the gold standard of Oscar bombing remains David Letterman, whose notorious turn as host is now 20 years old. In 1995, the late-night host was at the peak of his career. His Late Show, which debuted on CBS two years before, was wildly popular, consistently beating NBC's Tonight Show, hosted by Letterman's bitter rival Jay Leno, in the ratings. But almost from the minute the Oscars began, it became clear that it wasn't going to be Dave's night."

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2015/02/the-night-david-letterman-bombed-the-oscars/385738/

EDH said...

She's right about the tribute. Here's the announcement from the (aptly named!) Kennedy Center...

Why should we mind if the TV star has an apartment in the building to retreat to before and after the show? ...He should be able to easily get away from the workplace to nap, watch TV, eat, and, yes, have sex.


"We call this the 'Kennedy Room.' Pretty nifty, huh?."

zipity said...

Letterman is a scum bag of the first order. The fact that he was able to continue to thrive after it became apparent he was a sexual harasser of the first order is unforgivable.

Burn Hollywood down.

Saint Croix said...

I thought Althouse was a really cool blog but I stopped posting there because that Meade guy was sleeping with the boss and he had access to all this inside information and I really felt demeaned and I feel like it's some kind of tort or something.

MayBee said...

I love it, Althouse!

I'm beginning to think Billy Bush must have been paid a lot of money by NBC when they fired him. Either that, or he's the source. Because can you imagine watching all this happen, knowing you got fired for doing what apparently was the accepted practice (ignoring the sexual antics of the celebrities)?

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Hillarywood award shows - so OVER them. Do these people ever stop adoring each other?

ndspinelli said...

The Mark Twain Award show was actually an anti-Trump extravaganza. I always take note of entertainers who don't do political humor and surmise they may be conservative. On this show, I don't remember Steve Martin doing any political humor. Neither did Bill Murray or Norm Macdonald.

Rick said...

This may be the first serious commentary on this. Did these female staffers have access to information and wield power disproportionate to their job titles?

Anyone who does nto acknowledge and oppose this isn't serious.

Drago said...

"Bowe Bergdahl Republican" Chuck: "But does anybody care so much about retired tv personalities, as the 51st vote in the U.S. Senate?"

LOL

Yeah, can't we get back to the important pie discussions?!

madAsHell said...

Matt Lauer....there's a face my fist would love to meet.

Unknown said...

Prostitution should be legalized so powerful men can get their rocks off without sneaking around. In Letterman's case, his staff could have included writers, performers, stage hands, sex workers, caterers, audio technicians, etc. Problems arise when people are providing these "services" and getting rewarded off the books.

MayBee said...

Why does Louis CK have to be chilled off all of the pyramids when Letterman is free to roam the stage of the Kennedy Center (and hahhhahahha, good observation about *that*, Althouse). Perhaps from now on we should truly honor the Kennedy Center by only celebrating sexual harassers.

Amexpat said...

Why does Louis CK have to be chilled off all of the pyramids when Letterman is free to roam the stage of the Kennedy Center

Because masturbating in front of women they way he did is downright creepy. Powerful men having consensual sex with female underlings may be morally wrong or in violation of some laws but it's viewed by most people as "bad" but normal male behavior.

Curious George said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Curious George said...

"Chuck said...
But does anybody care so much about retired tv personalities, as the 51st vote in the U.S. Senate?"

So sexually assaulting and harassing women is all about politics to you, you titty twisting son of a bitch?

Sebastian said...

"Perhaps from now on we should truly honor the Kennedy Center by only celebrating sexual harassers." Yes, to honor the Kennedy legacy properly.

On the other hand, why is the Kennedy Center still named the Kennedy Center? Because all the harassees are dead?

Chuck said...

Curious George said...
"Chuck said...
But does anybody care so much about retired tv personalities, as the 51st vote in the U.S. Senate?"

So sexually assaulting and harassing women is all about politics to you, you titty twisting son of a bitch?

No.

In fact, it appears that the one person in the United States for whom sexual assaults are all about politics, is Donald Trump. At least, he's now made himself the clearest and most prominent public face of such cravenness.

Trump's view is that the most important thing in the Alabama special election is preventing a Democrat from winning. Trump, in his own words:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/21/politics/donald-trump-roy-moore-alabama/index.html

It would be unfair of me to fail to acknowledge that Trump endorsed Luther Strange in the primary. One of those times when Trump did the right thing. But now, whatever your think of any of the candidates, Trump is now putting partisan politics over the allegations of the Moore accusers.

For her part, Sarah Huckabee Sanders announced the official White House position as being that the women who accused Trump of sexual misconduct are all liars:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/10/27/all-of-the-women-who-have-accused-trump-of-sexual-harassment-are-lying-the-white-house-says/?utm_term=.d36653c1f61a

Trump declared that he would sue all of them. He hasn't raised a finger to do so. And no one has been given a reason why Trump hasn't done it:

http://thehill.com/homenews/media/360975-cbss-major-garrett-why-hasnt-trump-sued-his-sexual-misconduct-accusers

For my part, politics don't matter. I would apply the same rules of behavior and due process, for instance, to Bob Packwood, or Al Franken, or John Conyers, or Roy Moore... or Donald Trump.

What I was saying about the 51st Senate vote is that the Roy Moore case is so much more pertinent to me, than Matt Lauer or David Letterman or Harvey Weinstein.

Thanks for asking. You moronic son of a bitch.


mockturtle said...

Chuck asks: But does anybody care so much about retired tv personalities, as the 51st vote in the U.S. Senate?

Apparently those in the media do but I'm with you on this, Chuck. I personally don't give a fat rodent's gluteus about show biz personalities and what they do. The tax reform bill is the most important piece of legislation in decades.

Leslie Graves said...

I agree with the idea that what the linked article calls "sexual favoritism" is problematic and wrong.

That said, one might distinguish Letterman's sexual behaviors from the sexual behaviors being revealed in the post-Harvey Weinstein cluster of revelations. Letterman seems to have been running a harem but (except for the sexual favoritism problem) it seems to have been...well, a happy harem. The women who were enjoying his favors do seem to have enjoyed his favors.

Whereas, with Harvey, Charlie, etc., etc., there was pervasive non-mutuality in every way, intrusive repellent violations, etc.

Again, I understand that sexual favoritism in the workplace is a serious problem.

Chuck said...

So, mockturtle; you're agreeing with Trump, I take it. Anything, that is, to get the tax bill passed. Roy Moore or not.

You'll need to get with Curious George on whether that amounts to whether "sexually assaulting and harassing women is all about politics..."

gregq said...

"Was I aware of rumors that Dave was having sexual relationships with female staffers? Yes. Was I aware that other high-level male employees were having sexual relationships with female staffers? Yes. Did these female staffers have access to information and wield power disproportionate to their job titles? Yes. Did that create a hostile work environment? Yes. Did I believe these female staffers were benefiting professionally from their personal relationships? Yes. Did that make me feel demeaned? Completely."

Yeah, we've now cut tot eh heart of the matter!

What she's saying is that women should NOT BE ALLOWED to have sexual relations with anyone higher than them at work.

Not "you're not allowed to harass women who work for you to have sex with you", but "there can be no sexual relationships in that situation."

I believe that is typical military policy, for just the reason she mentions: those who aren't part of the sex feel screwed. Because the ones putting out get benefits for the sex they give.

So, should we make these consensual relationships illegal? As a guy who's not get to get to screw my way to the top, I have no personal problem with such a change.

But that would be a rather large and intrusive change

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Althouse front page 11.29, Althouse comment section 11.22:

Althouse - CBS This Morning May Have Fired Charlie Rose...

HoodlumDoodlum said...
I don't follow late night TV so correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Colbert in David Letterman's old slot?

Has Colbert or anyone else addressed the (apparently) rampant intern-fucking behavior of Letterman? Isn't that, you know, another of those "everyone knew" type of stories where there are plenty of people who've talked about aspects of Letterman's behavior over the years?
Seems like he's more than a bit overdue for a reckoning. If these people were serious, anyway. Which, you know, they aren't.

11/22/17, 9:55 AM

HoodlumDoodlum said...
From Wikipedia article on Stephanie Birkitt (former Late Show intern):

On October 1, 2009, Letterman announced on-air that he had been the victim of an extortion attempt in which an alleged blackmailer—since identified by police as CBS television producer Joe Halderman—[18] Letterman said that the allegation was true, but did not reveal the names of or any identifying information about the female employees.[18] Soon afterward, the extortionist was identified by media as a former boyfriend of Birkitt, and anonymous sources alleged that Birkitt and Letterman has had a sexual relationship.[18]

Birkitt reportedly was neither aware of nor involved in the blackmail attempt.[19][20][21] According to CBS News, Birkitt and the CBS News producer Joe Halderman lived together in Halderman's Norwalk, Connecticut, home until August 2009, when she reportedly moved out; she was also romantically linked to Letterman during the same time. The New York Post broke a story on October 6 that Birkitt had an affair with Letterman, which continued during her relationship with Halderman.[22][23] Copies of Birkitt's diary, as well as emails between her and Letterman, were reportedly the basis of the blackmail package allegedly placed in Letterman's car by Halderman.[24]


My bold. Here's some irony:

Al Franken Cut from Letterman's Mark Twain Prize Broadcast

Anyway my larger point is that if hitting on and banging interns (while married, naturally) is a problem then seems like the Media types should have a bit more to say about Letterman.
If they meant it.
Which, you know, they don't.

11/22/17, 10:23 AM

Curious George said...

Me to LLR&TT Chuck
"So sexually assaulting and harassing women is all about politics to you, you titty twisting son of a bitch?"

LLR&TT Chuck to me:
"Donald Trump....Trump....Alabama special election....Trump....Luther Strange....primary....Trump....candidates....Trump....partisan politics....Moore...Sarah Huckabee Sanders...White House...Trump....Trump....Trump...."


You make fun of Trump as a witness? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You're a fucking attorney? Let me guess, DUI and other assorted traffic offenses.

gregq said...

Leslie Graves said...

"That said, one might distinguish Letterman's sexual behaviors from the sexual behaviors being revealed in the post-Harvey Weinstein cluster of revelations. Letterman seems to have been running a harem but (except for the sexual favoritism problem) it seems to have been...well, a happy harem"

Sorry but no, wrong, you're completely missing the point.

They were a "happy harem" because they were getting "paid off" with "access to information and [the ability to] wield power disproportionate to their job titles".

Which means:
1: If you're female, you feel pressure to join the harem in order to keep up with your competitors
2: If you're male (or a female who won't put out), you just feel cheated. People with less talent / ability / seniority than you are routinely getting promoted over you because they're having sex with your boss, and there's absolutely nothing you can (will) do about it.


The most pathetic thing about Weinstein et. al. was that they didn't need any of the bullying. You leave the offer out on the table, and reward those who take it. But apparently his ego was too fragile to handle women turning him down

But make no mistake, in the final analysis, there's no real difference between Harvey and Dave. "Hey beautiful woman: do you want to get ahead in this business? Then have sex with me, and pretend to enjoy it."

Every person who takes that offer is used.

Every person, male or female, who doesn't take that offer (or isn't even offered it) is in a "hostile work environment".

It may not be reasonable, possible, or even the right thing to do, to block the "consensual" version. But let's not pretend there's any big difference between the two

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Saint Croix said...I thought Althouse was a really cool blog but I stopped posting there because that Meade guy was sleeping with the boss and he had access to all this inside information and I really felt demeaned and I feel like it's some kind of tort or something.

Did she cut your hours or reduce your weekly check at all? I think you might have a case on this one--maybe some blog employment lawyers can help out.

Bay Area Guy said...

It's hard to overstate how HUGE Letterman was in the 80s. He was very silly, but witty. There were entire dorms and Frat houses devoted to watching his show (12:30 am!), and then trying to duplicate his antics.

And, at least his persona, was not sleazy at all. He was an "aw shucks" dude from Indiana.

Behind the scenes, it looks like it was pretty messy, though. The Vanity Fair piece by Nell Scovell is quite excellent. She nails (in my view) the overlooked detriment of an overly sexed up work environment, where the girls that put out rise to the top, while the ones that don't fizzle away. The first group invariably gets dumped, while the second group can only tolerate so much. Very impressed by Ms. Scovell.

gregq said...

One last thing:

Regret is not rape. It also isn't sexual harassment

If you accept Dave's deal, then decide later it wasn't the right thing for you? Tough!

If you decide to have sex with that cute guy from your class, and after that he's no longer interested in you, because he's already had you? Tough!

The point of all that "bourgeois morality" was to keep you from getting into those kind of situations you would end up regretting. In Hollywood, which reject that "stupid bourgeois morality", the girls got screwed, and dumped to the side of the road.

In the business world, where the bourgeois morality was more prevalent, and "good girls don't do that", the secretaries got married to the boss.

Actions, and choices, have consequences. Life is not a la carte. If you're not willing to take the bad, then you can't have the good, either.

So pick, and don't whine when teh logical consequences of your pick come home

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Chuck said...What I was saying about the 51st Senate vote is that the Roy Moore case is so much more pertinent to me, than Matt Lauer or David Letterman or Harvey Weinstein.

Oh thank goodness--I was worried we might not get an official account of "what's more important to commenter Chuck" on this particular topic. I'm sure everyone else was just as nervous we might miss out. Thanks for delivering!

HoodlumDoodlum said...

"You're talking about X but you SHOULD BE talking about Y" is just about the lamest recurring comment type, isn't it?
Yes, it is.
Thanks other Hoodlum.

Big Mike said...

But perhaps an exception should be made for a great late night talk show host.

Okay, Althouse, you said "perhaps" and "please discuss." I think it's typical of a woman, in this case Nell Scovell, to ignore that what's happening to her is happening to everybody else. The problem come when the firm has the mistress of the top guy do other work. Now she has real power, and the lines on the org chart are scrambled. As a lower level manager, how do you give direction to a female who is the love interest of your boss's boss? Really, you can't. How can you share assignments equally among subordinate staff when one of your staff members can go directly to the top guy and complain that someone else got to do when she wanted to do?

Now if you paid the woman to provide sexual services to the top guy and didn't allow her to do anything else, you might be able to make it work. There's a reason for an org chart.

I speak as someone who once worked for a small technical startup where the lead admin could decide whose work she did and when it got done. If I used word processing software for my software documentation (Nroff in those long-ago days) I would and did catch Hell from the boss because I was supposed to be producing code and the admin staff was being paid to do word processing. But if I let her do it, it probably wouldn't get done and then I'd catch Hell because my documentation was overdue. Was she sleeping with the guy? I don't know -- all the women thought he was "dreamy," but I had reason to believe some other woman was his bed partner. Anyway, the only way to work for a dysfunctional organization like that is briefly. After I left I heard they went bankrupt. But I doubt the founder learned anything from the experience.

buwaya said...

As Instapundit is fond of pointing out, culture is upstream of politics.
The Liberal hegemony understood this much better than the Republican establishment.

Rick said...

She nails (in my view) the overlooked detriment of an overly sexed up work environment, where the girls that put out rise to the top, while the ones that don't fizzle away. The first group invariably gets dumped, while the second group can only tolerate so much.

Right. And we should distinguish between these groups of complainants as one are victims while the other are participants. It's not clear to me that any of the main people involved thus far have been participants whose benefits expired before they expected but inevitably some of that group will claim to be victims.

FullMoon said...

LLR&TT Chuck believed before the election that Trump is a sexual harasser and a pathological liar and a man who cheats his contractors and hides his taxes and is completely incompetent.

In spite of all this, Chuck voted for Trump. Apparently it was more important to have a pseudo Republican defeat the Democrat.

I Have Misplaced My Pants said...

Anyway, the only way to work for a dysfunctional organization like that is briefly.

I don't think sexcapades at work should be illegal, but it seems like good corporate policy to disallow them. Husband works for a marketing agency that has a monstrous contract with a monstrous retailer. Part of the team dedicated to this client contains a man (married with children) who started screwing around with a coworker also on the team (not married, 15 years younger, his subordinate, same old story). They were so blatant about it with the PDA and the googly eyes and the pissed-off other subordinates who were now doing all the homewrecker's work while she went out for long romantic lunches with the boss that reps from the client (old school, southern, not down with this sort of behavior) could see it and discussed moving part of the work not specifically under contract to a competing agency with less sexual drama in the workplace. The powers that be quickly informed the lovebirds that one or both of them would be finding other employment, either by choice with recommends or by force without, and it was pulled out of the fire, but damn. So much drama and headache which could have been avoided if the morons had found their jollies outside of work.

Ken B said...

Step back a moment. Weren't the social conservatives kinda right?
Just a thought.

As I said before, this seems endemic in the "look at me" industries. And for it all to work it took a lot of collusion and looking the other way.

Jupiter said...

"Did Dave hit on me? No."

I think I see the problem here.

Darrell said...

Althouse needs a "What's Chuck Thinking?" box on her front page.

Jupiter said...

It has usually been my observation that Chuck is thinking about the President.

EDH said...

"But David Letterman remains the man with the best timing on earth. I think they actually just did a tribute to him the other night!!"

Seinfeld, on 'going out on a high note'.

openidname said...

Thanks for the DFW link.

Rudy reminds me of Meade.

Unknown said...

I'm gonna call this post

"Orgasms and Org Charts"

> here's a reason for an org chart.
> What she's saying is that women should NOT BE ALLOWED to have sexual relations with anyone higher than them at work.

Can we hang human relations on HR "roles" and hierarchy charts drawn up in Visio by low level staffers?

What if the company is small, and has no org chart?

How about if the worker is a contractor?

Which positions are "higher"? Direct report or indirect report?

no wonder the US has employment law that fills shelves of books and is constantly updated.

Some countries don't have such red tape.

Such complexity is a sign the legalism has gone too far.

Unknown said...

> a sign the legalism has gone too far.

McCain Feingold is a good example of this.

Sounded good - McCain was one of the Keating 5, so if "one of our best" can fall, then

"Let's the money out of politics".

Money isn't speech - right?

Next thing you know, a federal commission is deciding when movies can be released.

The Supreme Court stopped that, and for thanks, Obama insulted them to their face at state of the nation speech for "Citizen United".

another theme - they sin, we pay.

McCain is corrupt, so we lose free speech.
Weinstein is a perv, so my carpet company needs more workplace laws.