To: new cruelty
He may be an idiot and his wife a clueless fool obsessed with demonizing guns, but they also have the right to fire a nanny who doesn't demonstrate the values they espouse. It is their house, and she works for them and follows their directions.
To: Diddle E. Squat
Good point. But she also claims that she was defamed when Imus later announced on his program that he had been forced to "disarm" his nanny, whom he labeled as dangerous and a "terrorist."
To: Diddle E. Squat
They couldn't have found a better time to do it than 1am?
Sounds like his wife had something against this woman. Maybe she was better looking that his wife, perhaps?
25 posted on
11/30/2004 11:01:50 AM PST by
Sabretooth
(I'm not SabERtooth, I'm SabREtooth.)
To: Diddle E. Squat
He may be an idiot and his wife a clueless fool obsessed with demonizing guns, but they also have the right to fire a nanny who doesn't demonstrate the values they espouse. It is their house, and she works for them and follows their directions.
Well, of course, you're right - but I think the suit will largely hinge on their actions afterwards. IF they gave this woman no specific instructions not to bring certain items, fired her with no warning, and then proceed to publicly paint her as a terrorist and unfit to be around children, there's probably something actionable in there somewhere.
28 posted on
11/30/2004 11:03:43 AM PST by
beezdotcom
(I'm usually either right or wrong...)
To: Diddle E. Squat
Stuff likes this drives me crazy. They have a right to fire whoever they hire to watch their son. I read part of the complaint and it starts off with gratuitous shots at Imus.
34 posted on
11/30/2004 11:05:03 AM PST by
babaloo
To: Diddle E. Squat
35 posted on
11/30/2004 11:06:42 AM PST by
Howlin
(W, Still the President)
To: Diddle E. Squat
He may be an idiot and his wife a clueless fool obsessed with demonizing guns, but they also have the right to fire a nanny who doesn't demonstrate the values they espouse. It is their house, and she works for them and follows their directions. Last I saw, this woman is suing Imus for calling her a terrorist and claiming he "disarmed" her.
44 posted on
11/30/2004 11:11:35 AM PST by
Prime Choice
(I like Democrats, too. Let's exchange recipes.)
To: Diddle E. Squat
LOLOL.....the very thought of following the values espoused by imus and his yuppie wife just brings a smile to my face!!!!
One of the reasons imus supported ketchup boy was because dizzy tizzy funded imus' wife on some projects.
63 posted on
11/30/2004 11:30:05 AM PST by
OldFriend
(PRAY FOR MAJ. TAMMY DUCKWORTH)
To: Diddle E. Squat
He may be an idiot and his wife a clueless fool obsessed with demonizing guns, but they also have the right to fire a nanny who doesn't demonstrate the values they espouse.He does not have a right to defame her on his radio show without giving citizens a right to reallocate his wealth to her in court.
To: Diddle E. Squat
Did they specifically ever tell her not to bring TOY GUNS to play with the kid? Sounded like it was a well thought out activity. Imus' trophy wife is a bit of a nut and old men with trophy wives are even nuttier.
131 posted on
11/30/2004 4:49:37 PM PST by
Hildy
(The really great men are always simple and true)
To: Diddle E. Squat
they also have the right to fire a nanny who doesn't demonstrate the values they espouse You should read the text of the complaint at smoking gun. They did not just fire her. They escorted her off the ranch in the middle of no where in the middle of night. They did this knowing she had no way to get herself back home to New York or finding shelter.
146 posted on
11/30/2004 5:43:24 PM PST by
Jeff Gordon
(Now is the time for all wise men to gloat. FOUR MORE YEARS,)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson