Martha Gets 5 Months

[Lee]

:eek:

What do you all think of this?

To little? To much?

Did her celebrity status effect the outcome?

Regards,

Lee

[Gary-Alan]

Ok I'm going completely on my person take of this...

I'm not a huge Martha fan when it comes to decorating and her oatmeal recipe (which take too long for me, I'd fall over from hunger by the time I was done LOL) I AM a fan of her business savvy.

I think this even went as far as it did because Martha is a woman. She supposedly (even though the court found she did I still don't think so) lied. OUCH we all got hurt by that.

Enron FELL! Masses lost all they have. I see that one walking around smiling.

Martha gets jail time? I think it's what my mother calls the Bitch Factor... if a man does something in business he's called a genius. If a woman does the same thing, she's a bitch or a whore.

We both watched this happen all the time on Wall Street.

So with all that said, I think Martha got Bitch Factored.

My opinion...

Gary-Alan

[Bec]

Thinking I agree with you Gary -- others have gotten away with lots more than this, and I really feel she got "made an example of" for a lack of a better description. She is one smart savy business person, and inspite of the tendency for many of us to poke fun, I'm sad to see that this has hurt her in areas we can't begin to fathom.

[Jasun]

I was hoping for execution.

Ah well.


Can't win them all.


(to be honest, she's being made an example of because she's a woman who didn't "know her place". Although I find her to be more annoying than fingernails down a sun-burned back, I'm capable of turning the channel. If she gets five months, Dick Cheney, Ken Ley... they should get life... and the life of their children)

[basschick]

isn't that funny? i never thought of her going in 'cause she was a woman - i figured she was the scapegoat 'cause they didn't want to throw the rich and powerful in. she really is small potatoes compared to the others involved, and they had to show they would punish someone.

[dirtygeek]

I like her in the fact that she did it. Herself. Even being nutty. (I was forced to watch her bio on ABC.)

I think it's a mix of her being a woman and someone needing to be punished to show the government isn't a push over.

[gaystoryman]

Have to go along with everyone here. I think she got nailed simply because she was a powerful woman in a male dominated industry and they didn't like that.

Don't care for her shows but I can always switch to the Naked Chef.

[Sana Chan]

Bad Rich Bitch!! No silk table clothes for your home made icecream and fresh baked triple layer double chocolate cake.

[desslock]

Well

You know if people were just asked upfront about the legitimacy of insider trading laws, I would expect most people would find them critically important. (they were after all a component of the New Deal reforms)

However, in the case of Martha Stewart people think she is being made some kind of victim. She used to be a stockbroker for crying out loud. I thought people making fast windfalls on drug profits (Erbitux in this case) was a supposed evil?

If this exact scenario were carried out by some rich republican guys, Oliver Stone would probably make a sequel to Wall Street about it.

So are insider trading laws legitimate or not? I happen to think they are kind of goofy. What really is insider information anyway? And particularly since Martha Stewart was ultimately just convicted of lying --- and not really the offence itself, I think that calls into question just how enforceable a federal insider trading law is.

That is like the Federal Interent porn law, or unenforceable state laws regarding obsenity - it allows procesutors to scare people into something. And in the end they can always get them for an unrelated technicality like lying.

Steve

[Bec]

They got Al Capone for tax evasion ... not saying Martha is a mafia godfather, but those little lies do tend to catch up with a person.