Clicking on banner ads enables JWR to constantly improve
Jewish World Review April 4, 2000/ 28 Adar II, 5760

Kathleen Parker

Kathleen Parker
JWR's Pundits
World Editorial
Cartoon Showcase

Mallard Fillmore

Michael Barone
Mona Charen
Linda Chavez
David Corn
Ann Coulter
Greg Crosby
Larry Elder
Don Feder
Suzanne Fields
Paul Greenberg
Bob Greene
Betsy Hart
Nat Hentoff
David Horowitz
Arianna Huffington
Marianne Jennings
Michael Kelly
Mort Kondracke
Ch. Krauthammer
Lawrence Kudlow
Dr. Laura
John Leo
David Limbaugh
Michelle Malkin
Jackie Mason
Chris Matthews
Michael Medved
MUGGER
Wes Pruden
Debbie Schlussel
Sam Schulman
Roger Simon
Tony Snow
Thomas Sowell
Cal Thomas
Jonathan S. Tobin
Ben Wattenberg
George Will
Bruce Williams
Walter Williams
Mort Zuckerman

Consumer Reports
Newswatch

Econophone

Trakdata


Sue-happy American society is out of control

http://www.jewishworldreview.com --
I'M RACKING MY BRAIN. Surely somewhere, sometime, someone dissed me on account of gender, sold me a swamp, said I could smoke and not die.

Oh, please, dear Memory, abandon me not in my hour of need that I may sue someone and grow rich.

Like those 1,100 women who last week were awarded $508 million from the U.S. government -- make that us -- for having been denied jobs 23 years ago. Why they not I?

The women reportedly were turned away by the now-defunct U.S. Information Agency because, as one interviewer allegedly told the first female applicant, "You're a woman."

Bad move, Tonto.

Hard as it is to fathom another 1,099 women being turned down for jobs from the same agency, the federal government decided to settle. Each woman will receive about $450,000 before taxes. The government also must pay the women $23 million in back pay and interest, as well as attorneys' fees of as much as $12 million.

Somewhere in my memory bank, I recall interviewing for a job as press secretary for a U.S. senator in the late '70s. I could swear that his male assistant told me: "I hate to say it, but he won't hire a female." To think, I just shrugged and found a job elsewhere. Who knew?

Meanwhile, in San Francisco recently, a dying smoker earned $20 million in punitive damages from Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds. A superior-court jury ordered the companies each to pay $10 million to Leslie Whiteley and her husband because Mrs. Whiteley smoked a zillion cigarettes even though everybody older than 2 knows that smoking might put you in the cancer ward.

Never mind that Mrs. Whiteley began smoking after the surgeon general's warnings began appearing on cigarette packs in the 1960s. Ignore, too, the fact that Mrs. Whiteley admits also to smoking marijuana, which '70s-era reefer prohibitionists told us is 10 times more corrosive to the lungs than cigarettes.

But, then, whom do you sue when you're breaking the law?

Give us a little time here; where there's a victim, there's a bank account.

Not that I'm proud of it, but I recall smoking cigarettes when I was a witless teen. I knew that they were bad for me, but I didn't care. I was a witless teen. When I grew up, I quit smoking because -- call me brilliant -- I didn't want to get lung cancer.

I suppose it's too soon to sue anyone for the cancer I might yet contract, given my earlier stupidity, but, then, maybe not. Should I suffer the terrible misfortune of contracting cancer someday, which is a virtual certainty if I live long enough (age is the greatest predictor for cancer), there's yet hope for a late-life fortune: Vitamin C.

New research suggests that Vitamin C, in fact, may be bad for you if you have cancer. Apparently, the cancer cell actually wants vitamin C because, no dummy, it wants antioxidant protection like everybody else, said Dr. David Golde, author of the research.

To think, just 30 years ago, the darling and brilliant Nobel Prize-winning Linus Pauling urged the world to take Vitamin C for protection against everything from the common cold to the Big C. Now whom do we sue?

We can't sue Pauling, who died in 1994 at age 93. Of cancer. See what I mean about age?

But perhaps his estate would be worth pursuing. After all, a female smoker with lung cancer once denied employment because of her sex, who subsequently took large doses of Vitamin C, could install her progeny in Trump Tower for several generations.


JWR contributor Kathleen Parker can be reached by clicking here.

Up

03/30/00: Duct-taped baby serves as warning
03/28/00: Stay-home parents know that their kids need them
03/24/00: No 'Great Expectations' when schools shun the classics
03/21/00: It's common sense to restrict Internet usage in libraries
03/17/00: You want to be just a mom? For shame!
03/14/00: Colonoscopy: Important, but bad TV
03/10/00: I made a mistake about trigger-locks
03/08/00: After this school shooting, no easy target for our contempt
03/03/00: Car crash helps bridge our divide
02/28/00: Nasty politics? Americans like it down, dirty
02/14/00: College testing via Lego-building -- yeah, right
02/02/00: Bubba should spare us phony love theatrics
01/26/00: What sets off Those Who Speak for Women
01/13/00: Fools in love: Premarital counseling could help school kids
01/11/00: Who funds these studies!?
12/29/99: Grandparents' rights impinge on family autonomy
12/13/99: When did fathers become fair game?
12/09/99: Don't be stupid about at-risk kids
12/07/99: Pokemon is no substitute for a father
12/02/99: Blaming the victim --- men
11/30/99: Baby-killer's story has less-than-Precious ending
11/23/99: Pendulum swings back toward discipline, responsibility
11/18/99: Put the babies first in this mighty mess
11/11/99: Skip the applause for this baby news
11/09/99: Gore could benefit from a secret in Wolf's clothing
11/03/99: Who needs 'birds and bees' when we have MTV?
11/01/99: Women Can't Hear What Men Don't Say
10/26/99: Children's needs must take priority in divorce system
10/19/99: The deadbeat dad is less a scoundrel than an object of pity
10/15/99: Bullying boys ... and girls
10/12/99: Divorced dads ready to wage a revolution
10/04/99: A father's best gift? His presence
09/30/99: Sorry, guys, Faludi is no friend of yours
09/28/99: Science's new findings: Scary future for families
09/23/99: The great blurring of need and want
09/21/99:Focus on more than baby's first 3 years
09/16/99: Commentary from kids sheds no light on day-care debate
09/14/99: Fathers' group seeks to right inequities
09/09/99: Son now has a license to grow up
09/07/99: A slap in the face of domestic violence
09/01/99: No, ma'am: Legislation on manners misses the mark
08/26/99: For better boys, try a little tenderness
08/24/99:The ABC's of campaign questions
08/19/99: Male 'sluts'
08/11/99: Language doesn't excuse bad behavior
08/09/99: When justice delayed is still justice
08/03/99: Unemployment? Not in this profession
07/30/99: It's not about race -- it's about crack babies
07/22/99: Tragedy tells us what's important
07/19/99: Study denouncing fathers sends danger signals
07/15/99:'Happy marriage' belongs in the Dictionary of Oxymorons next to 'deliciously low-fat.'
07/11/99: 'Brother Man': An American demagogue in Paris
07/08/99: Only parents can fix broken families
07/06/99: America is home, sweet home
07/01/99: Tales out of Yuppiedom
06/28/99: Men aren't the only abusers
06/23/99: Is the entire country guzzling LSD punch?
06/20/99: The voice remains -- as always -- there beside me 06/16/99:Stating the obvious, a new growth industry
06/14/99: Calling for a cease-fire in the gender war
06/10/99: We owe children an apology

©1999, Tribune Media Services