|
Posted on 12.06.07 by dancurry @ 9:53 pm
In a world that was logical, a group that claims to protect women wouldn’t be endorsing a presidential candidate who has a top donor accused by the federal government of “egregious” sexual harassment. Not only did Hillary Clinton accept about $165,000 in campaign donations from business owner and accused sexual harasser John Burgess, she rode on his International Profit Associates jet and spoke at an IPA company function. All while the allegations were pending in U.S. District Court in Chicago. None of that seems to bother the Illinois chapter of NOW, which proudly endorsed the sexual harassment enabler from New York, for her “long history of support for women’s empowerment.” I wonder how empowered these women felt, as described by the EEOC’s pending lawsuit.
Here’s what EEOC lawyer Diane Smason said about the case in a May 2006 story in the New York Times.
The Chicago Tribune’s “Swamp” covered the endorsement and of course didn’t ask about the incongruity of a so-called women’s group endorsing a woman who embraces the support of John Burgess. I guess the reporter didn’t feel empowered enough to ask a tough question.
Technorati Tags: 2008 election, Chicago media, Hillary Clinton, Illinois, International profit associates, journalism |
