Ah, the dreams of the women’s movement. We envisioned a day when there would be women in high places, and here we are, with a female national security adviser, a female Secretary of the Interior, a female Labor Secretary and even our latest female corporate felon. Now, I’ve never been a fan of Martha. Her elevation of domestic chores to… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (12)Page 1 of 1 pagesI am always amazed at how quickly women and minorites are held to the strictest letter of the law, while white men are traditionally given the benefit of the doubt and treated as if they are just incapable of staying within the law. I worked as a crime scene technician for a large police department for some time. During that time I saw things such as white boys who stole a car being taken home by the police. They would arrest black boys and hold them to the exact letter of the law. Now with Martha, she is being held to the exact letter of the law. I understand that she was aquitted of the orginial charges of insider trading. The crime for which she is being punished is lying to a federal investigator. Of course she would not have been talking to an investigator in the first place if not for the original charges. So essentially she is going to jail for lying. Interesting that President Bush has lied numerous times to us and is not under arrest. Also interesting that he sat on the board of an oil company that was about to tank and that he unloaded his stocks just before that happened. He then told investigators that he did not know it was going to happen. So he gets rewarded for lying and Martha goes to jail. Ah the rewards of being a rich white male.
Posted by Michele Nichols on Mar 23, 2004 at 3:54 PM Poor Martha? Any time a billionaire goes down, be they woman or man, that’s good news.
No one “deserves” that kind of power and influence; no one earns it.
Ruthless business people are to be despised.
Sure, it’s a shame Lay isn’t already serving a long sentence. You could add quite a large number of people to that list.
The U.S. prison population has grown enormously over the last decade or so...with many a wrong person sentenced via “the letter of the law.” Why is Martha getting so much attention while each and every one of these gets ignored?
Posted by terry on Mar 25, 2004 at 5:59 AM Great article! MsMagazine Online is running a poll on whether Martha Stewart is a victim of a Bitch Hunt.
You can see it at www.msmagazine.com
Posted by Jeanne Clark on Mar 25, 2004 at 3:57 PM Michele,
Actually your understanding is backwards.
Charges of lying to investigators were dropped. She was convicted of insider ttrading.
Posted by Nus on Mar 26, 2004 at 3:14 PM There are far more males than females in prison—yet another example of the war on boys. Martha will get minimal jail time—a slap on the wrist.
Posted by Pat on Mar 26, 2004 at 9:37 PM First of all, what Martha did wasn’t nearly as bad as what Ken Lay did. Martha was incredibly dumb, she made only 60,000 and that is nothing to her. And she did something that most people would have done in the same position, sell when her broker told her to. Martha wasn’t prosecuted to the fullest extent because she is a woman, it is because she is rich celeb.
Michele, if your going to talk about Bush being a liar, you should mention Bill Clinton as well.
And terry, why is it good news when a billionaire goes down? Wouldn’t it be better if they lived by the rules that everyone else lives by? And to the charge that no one earns that power and influence, thats bogus. Some people have it given to them sure, but people work hard and they are creative and they deserve what they get.
Posted by brad on Mar 27, 2004 at 9:14 PM Bush threw Christy Todd Whitman out on her ass because she (probably) refused to conform and submit to his scorched earth environmental degradation. I find it amusing the way that Bush gets rid of people who don’t conform by sayig that they resigned to"spend more time with their families”. The asshole! j. russ
Posted by J Russ on Mar 29, 2004 at 10:39 PM Brad: If I have to talk about presidents being liars then I would have to include many of them. Johnson got us into VietNam by lying about the Gulf of Tonkin. Nixon lied about knowing about the break-in. George the First about babies being tossed from incubators. Clinton about whether he had sex or not. Okay 3 of them lied and got us into wars that costs the lives of Americans and many others. I think they are the ones we should be upset with. I think impeachment should be talked about. It is time to hold presidents accountable. This is especially true for the ones that tell lies that costs lives.
Posted by Michele Nichols on Apr 6, 2004 at 4:02 PM Michele you made my point for me. Every president lies, but we shouldn’t go around impeaching everyone of our presidents
Posted by brad on Apr 12, 2004 at 7:00 PM What are you saying, Brad? It’s okay, because they all do it? That’s the impression I get from your last response to Michele. If so, are we all expected to look the other way?
Have you not considered the fact that when we dismiss corruption and other activities that undermine our democratic rights and responsibility to 1. monitor our tax-paid representatives and other government employees, and 2. work as a united force to insure that people in high places are just as vulnerable to suffering consequences for their own actions as ordinary, working-class people, then we may as well forget about democracy and just let them all decide which of them will be the country’s ruler and simply accept that they’ll do as they please.
Clinton paid fines and still faced more legal troubles after he left office, all over a lie to conceal his affair with that girl. That lie didn’t allow over 3,000 people to die in one morning, nor did it cost the lives of tens-of-thousands (or more) foreign civilians and over 600 troops, plus other lives lost.
I wonder, did you support the Republican effort to impeach Clinton? (I’m not Democrat and I don’t like Clinton, so please make no assumptions about me.) If you did and that was important to you, compare the dead and injured body count that resulted from his lies to that resulting from the Bush regime’s lies, coverups and negligence.
Posted by Treva L. V. F. on Apr 13, 2004 at 4:16 PM “I’m not Democrat and I don’t like Clinton, so please make no assumptions about me.”
Sorry, already did - I assumed you were not democrat and didn’t like Clinton. It was an easy assumption to make.
Why mention Clinton? Why mention anybody else?
My statement is “Babe Ruth was a great hitter”
Where is the logic in saying “You should mention Hank Aaron too”
Why? I am not talking about him.
Can’t I say something about George Bush that is true for him without having to qualify the statment? It would be (is) tough to have conversations like that.
“Then Bush took off iin a helicopter, not forgetting that traffic reporters, the police, tour operators, rescue pilots, fire fighters...also take off in helicopters”
Posted by Nus on Apr 16, 2004 at 1:02 PM Insider trading.
I surprised so many think this crime desrves no punishment.
What happens is the rich get richer (only 60,000? How many years do you have to work to earn that?) and the struggling middle-class investors lose even more than they would if the insider hadn’t dumped their shares.
I thought people here were for the little guy. Apparently only if they are getting screwed by a white male fat cat.
Posted by Nus on Apr 16, 2004 at 1:06 PM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Susan J. Douglas
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1968 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
459 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
426 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2004 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
