Word: tells
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 1990-1999
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...then, did NOW not support Paula Jones? Simple: So far as anybody can tell, Jones' story was garbage. Her legal fees were funded by a conservative, and, hence, more than likely anti-feminist institute. Her case was ultimately thrown out of court. She used the money earned by the scandal for cosmetic surgery on her nose. This sounds less and less like a woman victimized by the president and more and more a pawn in a political game. Given this, NOW would have no reason to get involved. To do so would do nothing for women's rights and would...
...drama began when Dr. John White Webster borrowed some money from Dr. George Parkman, both HMS professors. Webster offered Parkman a mortgage on his personal property, which included a precious mineral collection, as collateral for the loan, but conveniently did not tell Parkman that he was using the collection to back another debt. When Parkman learned of the situation, he decided he had to hit up Webster for a payback. But soon after he began his pursuit, Parkman disappeared...
...drama began when Dr. John White Webster borrowed some money from Dr. George Parkman, both HMS professors. Webster offered Parkman a mortagage on his personal property, which included a precious mineral collection, as collateral for the loan, but conveniently did not tell Parkman that he was using the collection to back another debt. When Parkman learned of the situation, he decided he had to hit up Webster for a payback. But soon after he began his pursuit, Parkman disappeared...
...Drowning out speech is a tactic of intimidation. Since the students obviously felt that the Faculty was subject to intimidation, what does this tell us about the moral climate we have spawned? Is it simply coincidence that the Faculty voted according to the demonstrators' wishes, or did the students expect their intimidation to work? Will this now encourage greater contempt for a faculty that is presumed to vote according to the dictates of a mob? Although Faculty may well have cast their votes irrespective of the chanting, the demonstrators ensured the corruption of the process, cultivating disrespect for the deliberative...
Drowning out speech is a tactic of intimidation. Since the students obviously felt that the Faculty was subject to intimidation, what does this tell us about the moral climate we have spawned? Is it simply coincidence that the Faculty voted according to the demonstrators' wishes, or did the students expect their intimidation to work? Will this now encourage greater contempt for a faculty that is presumed to vote according to the dictates of a mob? Although Faculty may well have cast their votes irrespective of the chanting, the demonstrators ensured the corruption of the process, cultivating disrespect for the deliberative...