Comments on: Squelching the Whistleblowers http://www.theamericanconservative.com/mccarthy/2006/05/31/squelching-the-whistleblowers/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=squelching-the-whistleblowers www.ToryAnarchist.com Mon, 30 Jan 2012 11:59:48 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Daniel McCarthy http://www.theamericanconservative.com/mccarthy/2006/05/31/squelching-the-whistleblowers/comment-page-1/#comment-178 Daniel McCarthy Wed, 31 May 2006 22:29:56 +0000 https://toryanarchist.wordpress.com/2006/05/31/squelching-the-whistleblowers/#comment-178 True! True!

]]> By: Brian Rapp http://www.theamericanconservative.com/mccarthy/2006/05/31/squelching-the-whistleblowers/comment-page-1/#comment-177 Brian Rapp Wed, 31 May 2006 22:28:40 +0000 https://toryanarchist.wordpress.com/2006/05/31/squelching-the-whistleblowers/#comment-177 The hypocrisy in this is that this doesn't change any of the state or federal laws protecting "whistle blowers" from private businesses. Only if you work for the government you're not protected, but if you work for Citibank or whomever, the Feds or state govt will protect your job and make sure you can sue for millions. Just don't bite the hand that feeds you in the process. Honestly Dan, I think the decision was 5-4 only to make it look like it was being debated at all. Had it been a democratic majority with Kerry in the White Whore House, I think the decision would have been 5-4 the other way, with Scalia, Thomas all voting "nay". The hypocrisy in this is that this doesn’t change any of the state or federal laws protecting “whistle blowers” from private businesses. Only if you work for the government you’re not protected, but if you work for Citibank or whomever, the Feds or state govt will protect your job and make sure you can sue for millions. Just don’t bite the hand that feeds you in the process.

Honestly Dan, I think the decision was 5-4 only to make it look like it was being debated at all. Had it been a democratic majority with Kerry in the White Whore House, I think the decision would have been 5-4 the other way, with Scalia, Thomas all voting “nay”.

]]>