This woman is a graduate student, so presumably she is not a minor. He only tried to kiss her and missed, so this act barely meets the definition of sexual or common assault.

However, the professor's behavior is frankly disgusting. What on earth is the point of trying to kiss a woman if you don't have a reasonable expectation that this will be welcomed? It is asking for trouble.

So either he is a grossly incompetent (and married)suitor, or he is simply trying to use his position of power relative to a student to fulfill his own sexual needs. Most likely the latter. Either way it is not a pretty picture.

Really it all depends on the woman, as to whether she wants to make a complaint. If she does not, then reporting the rumors, e-mails etc. to authority is pointless. The guy will just have some sob story about how he was abused as a child, depressed after a parent's death, or whatever he can come up with.

If she does want to make a complaint, then the LW can certainly offer her support and assistance, which he/she obviously wants to do.

But if she does not, well, he is a heel, but it would be very hard to prove this is a criminal offense, or any offense, so a better course might be to write to him anonymously and let him know that he is being watched.

.. the so-called amnesty would bother Republican voters.

I have illegal Mexicans as my tenants in Florida.

The poor bastards work hard in agriculture and construction (if available) for low wages under a hot sun and can hardly pay their rent and electric.

The idea that they can afford to pay fines of several thousand dollars to come back to the country is quite absurd. Most of them don't have 2 cents to rub together, and could never save such an amount. If they borrowed it from loan sharks, they could never repay it.

This fines thing might work for the tiny number of illegals who are working as dentists, plastic surgeons, or Hollywood actors, but it will be just as effective as a fifteen foot electrified fence for most of them.

Once the round-up starts we are going to be seeing scenes that haven't been seen since 1930's Germany, with bounty hunters herding millions onto freight trains carrying human cargo to deportation points at the border.

And then many crops, like winter vegetables, will not be planted any more, because no one will want to pick them. So they will have to be grown and picked with cheap labor in Mexico and the banana republics.

And the pickers won't be spending money in Wal*Mart, using Western Union to send money home and Sprint telephone to talk to loved ones, and they won't be buying power from Florida Power and Light, and beverages from Bud Light.

Oh, well.

Seeing that Bush promised in his TV debate with Al Gore that his administration would not be in the business of nation-building (the people who are in the nations there should build them themseves is what he said) and that only weeks before the war in Iraq started, Bush said that no decision had been made on attacking Iraq and that any decision that was made would be based on intelligence, it seems that there is a prima facie case that our CEO was misleading the company on several fronts and ought to now restate earnings.

One wonders why the Democrats don't make more of this.

A handball has to be deliberate. The question is whether it was ball to hand, or hand to ball.

First goals often rule, but who can forget the amazing game between these two same teams two years ago when Milan went in at half time with a 3-0 scoreline and then Liverpool pulled back three goals and finished off Milan in the penalty shootout?

I checked out some references to the handball rule, and while there are some subtle differences in interpretation between different countries and different levels of the game (e.g children vs adults) the consensus seems to be that it must be DELIBERATE handball for a foul to occur, which generally means that the player did not try to avoid the ball hitting the hand/arm or that the player had the hand/arm in "an unnatural postition" or away from the body.

Hence, for example, a player jumping to head a ball with his/her arms spread would automatically be penalized if the ball hit them, even if he did not intend it. A player who has his arm held closely to the body who is hit on the shoulder by the ball is unlikely to be penalized.

Of course the outcome of numerous important soccer games is determined by controversial decisions as to whether a penalty should have been given. In the English premier leagues it is routine for managers (coaches) to say in their post game comments on a 1-0 defeat something like "the opponent's penalty should never have been given, and we had two good penalties disallowed, so in my mind we should have won 2-0. We wuz robbed."