A Santa Fe jury on Monday awarded more than $840,000 in damages to a former state employee who accused Public Regulation Commissioner David King of sexually harassing her…
Wyla Green, who tearfully told the jury that King had at one time been a mentor to her when she was a teenager in the Estancia Valley area, claimed that soon after she began working for King in April 2003, he began making suggestive comments. She said his comments quickly escalated to inappropriate touching despite her telling him to stop. On one occasion, she testified, she ran out of King’s office after he “pressed his pubic area against my butt.”
When she filed a sexual-harassment grievance, she said, King began finding fault with her work and eventually fired her.
King, who did not respond to messages seeking comment about Monday’s verdict, has denied her accusations and said his declarations of love to Green were meant in a Christian — not romantic — sense.
A hell of a defense. It took the jury only four hours.
Since he is use Christ as a fig leaf I have to assume he is Republican. Are there any Republicans out there that aren’t repressed hypocritical slimy horndogs (gay or strait)?
Of course, he used the “christian defense” – the dude is as much a professional xhristian as full-time politician.
You might think repercussions would be stronger in that arena – since King’s on some national body of the Southern Baptist Convention.
Wanna bet?
He’s “officially” a Republican – but his uncle is a former Democrat governor.
Doesn’t mean anything to NM voters. We can match any state in the union when it comes to ignoring ethical qualifications. This dude was elected – and re-elected – even though the state previously paid out $300K for his “christian love”.
Maybe if the Republican politicians ditch that “I’m and living, breathing, anorgasmic individual so Christians please vote for me” image, maybe their credibility would rise rather than their penises.
Hey Chin up Republicans at least he grinded against a girl!
I think in today’s society being a christian MEANS your a sexist pig.
Kudos to the joke on #5
the right-wing christian conservative movement in this nation has really come to represent abject depravity, perversion and lack of respect.
the emperor has no clothes, well his pants are always down anyway.
BREAKING STORY! EXTRA! EXTRA! READ ALL ABOUT IT. SOME CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIANS ARE HYPOCRITES!
Oh, come on. This is a pounding with no informative value.
You could pick just about ANY group and find plenty of hypocrites among them.
I suggest running a series of a few hundred blog entries about loud-mouth atheists who pray “Oh, God!” when they nearly get run over by a semi or find themselves in the middle of hold up.
#7 – now that last line is really funny.
I’d get harrassed for $840,000. Please.
That’s odd…
I thought we decided in the ’90s that sexual harassment by high government officials was OK.
#11
I know this is hard for you to grasp..so I’ll type slowly.
Try and understand the difference between harassment and sex. They are not synonyms (well, unless you are Republican I guess).
That kind of behavior doesn’t sound like “being a good Christian” to me. Anyone can hide behind the cross.
#12 How quickly you forget…..
Kathleen Willey
>>How quickly you forget…..Kathleen Willey
Kathleen Willey is a flake. She admitted she lied about Clinton “assaulting” her as part of her plea bargain not to be prosecuted for perjury.
She also lied to the FBI about being pregnant and having a miscarriage (neither happened), and she has a history of “controversial claims”
Linda Tripp testified before the grand jury that Willey had been hot to trot for Clinton from the time she started working in the White House, and had been angling to get her hands on his willy right from the get-go.
Heh heh. Gotcha.
Wait a minute, Mr Mustard. They prosecute for perjury now? Wow, that’s another one that I thought we were OK with in the ’90s. I think I detect a pattern.
>>Wait a minute, Mr Mustard. They prosecute
>>for perjury now?
It would seem not.
Kathleen Willey got off scott-free, even though she lied through her teeth making up a cock-and-bull story about Bill Clinton “assaulting” her, just to try an make a profit off of her lies. And that was just the tip of the iceberg with Ms. Willey; she seems to be a congentital liar, although she’s never been held accountable for her dishonesty.
#8, Have you ever criticized politicians? Do you deny the bad ones taint the overall impression of politicians? How about lawyers? Have you ever made critical comments about a lawyer, a policeman, the police, the government? Surely they aren’t all bad and there’s just a few bad apples…
Greg Allen:”I suggest running a series of a few hundred blog entries about loud-mouth atheists who pray “Oh, God!” when they nearly get run over by a semi or find themselves in the middle of hold up.”
Hey, if you can find one Greg, bring it on!
As my favorite term for these types… Bible Humpers!
@19
Hey, I say “thank god” sometimes, but as common western colloquialism. You don’t have to believe in god to use it.
When the hard questions arrive the religious disappear from DV.
On the surface this story is about the failings of a religious man and the revenge of a religious woman. Yes, revenge. Restitution would be that the man be fired and the woman get compensated by taking the man’s job, or getting a raise. She was inappropriately touched, she wasn’t raped. An award of $840,000 is revenge. Hardly a Christian response, is it? Both of them are religious hypocrites. This also smacks of the despicable opportunism of the coffee-drinking-driving biatch that sued McDonalds.
So Greg says “You could pick just about ANY group and find plenty of hypocrites among them”. Yes you can Greg, but BY FAR the most prolific groups for hypocrites are religious.
Why is that? Could it be their beliefs? Take for instance the belief that we are somehow sacred. We are not animals, we are divine creations in His image. But if we are created in His image, we shouldn’t have animal instincts, and all the other animal characteristics. But we do, and christians have to pretend that because we can reason (as if other animals can’t – HAH!) we should be able (aka act) to suppress our urges (aka instincts) and be civilized.
The thing about reality, as opposed to denial, is that reality marches on as unrelentingly over denial as a glacier crushes gravel to dust. A man who is attracted to a woman by animal instinct is sometimes no more able to banish his desire than a man who tries not to breathe. Religion has molded society by their warped religious beliefs that man is above animals, he is not an animal. Therein lies a lot of societal problems.
I’ll leave it there for brevity.
#18
In the groups you listed, I’m not buying the “few bad apples” defense anymore. Maybe I’ll change my mind if I ever see politicians bringing criminal charges against other politicians (of the same party), lawyers bringing proceedings against other lawyers, Police testifying against the supposed “rogue” police in their midst, Prosecutors who prosecute other prosecutors for being more interested in their conviction counts than actual justice (and no..it’s the defense lawyers job to be adversarial, the prosecutors job is to try those whose guilt seems likely, not hide evidence that points to a different outcome), and a government that ever says “oops, you’re right, we broke our own treaty..lied to our citizens…locked up a bunch of people who pointed that out…and quite probably killed a few people that you’ve never heard of because we thought they were bad guys….my bad”….
Until then…I think you’ll have trouble finding any fresh apples in those particular barrels. Good choices though..I didn’t have to weaken my argument by leaving anyone out of your list…and was even able to squeeze another subdivision in. Notice any common thread amongst this mob? I knew you would…
The majority of hypocrits are religious? Sure. They are the ones with a definate moral code, and failure to live up to it can be spotted and proven. Very much unlike the left, with a relativistic moral code.
No morals? No hypocrisy.
Shin, My post was directed at #8. It’s #8, Greg Allen that is in conflict with those suggestions. I listed them as examples of groups that are regularly dragged over the coals on this thread. Greg thinks only the religious are targeted, yet I know he goes after the other groups just like everyone else, so what does that make him? You guessed it. Notice he hasn’t responded?
In other words Shin, you goofed. It can happen to anyone. 🙂
Phillep, real morals come naturally from nature. Religious morals are real morals that are distorted to fit with self-serving religious interests. Thats why many christians are bigots. To them gays are immoral. to realists, gays are one product of many in evolving humans. There is nothing wrong about them.
#22, JimR,
This also smacks of the despicable opportunism of the coffee-drinking-driving biatch that sued McDonalds.
Perhaps you could link to that despicable coffee drinking bitch that sued McDonald’s. Did you mean this case?
http://www.caoc.com/CA/index.cfm?event=showPage&pg=facts
#26, JimR,
Well made point.
Mr. Fusion, thanks for that subtle correction. I was way off on the coffee-drinking-passenger-victim (as I’ll call her now). My apologies to Ms. Liebeck as well. I got sucked in to an erroneous report that she was driving. But really, would you open a drink in a styrofoam cup, hot or cold, between your knees and then take off the lid? 🙂
Re: #26, thanks for that acknowledgment as well.