November 04, 2011
— DrewM It's not subtle.
As many of you know, I'm not a fan of Cain's candidacy, so add whatever amount of salt you need to the rest of this post.
I'd be sympathetic to this notion that there's a racial angle here if Cain or his team provided a single shred of evidence for the charge. Put it this way, Mitt Romney has been a CEO too, if he had settlements (or "agreements" if you prefer) in his past based on allegations of sexual harassment, you don't think we'd hear about them? If Rick Perry had complaints lodged against him by female staffers while he was Governor, you think they'd be hushed up because he's white?
I think the most comical thing in the spot is the woman on the Imus program that kicks off the ad. No one is taking Cain on over his policy positions? What policy positions? Sure, he's got his 9-9-9 plan but plenty of people have taken him on over that. Our own Andy has been leading the charge in pointing out the holes and flaws in it. Beyond that, what great policy plan has Cain laid out that we're ignoring?
I'm not a fan of playing fast and loose with charges of racism when the left does it, I'm not entirely sure why I'm supposed to nod my head in agreement when Cain does it.
By the way, who exactly is Cain charging with figuratively lynching him? Sure the spot goes after Al Sharpton and Cornell West but Cain is still insisting that the harassment story was leaked by a Perry staffer. Is that staffer or Perry the lyncher here? Don't forget that Cain was quick to jump on Perry over the 'racist rock' crap, so there's some history here.
If Cain wants to call someone in the Republican party a racist and a lyncher, have the guts to say it.
Added: If you want to say this is a separate PAC and not Cain himself, note that the themes and charges echo exactly what Cain has been saying.
Related enough: Cain, hey maybe I should sue Politico.
From floating the idea that communities could ban mosques because they don't like Islam and now considering suing a press outlet, Cain is actually worse on the First Amendment than John McCain. Who even knew that was possible?
Also related: Cain keeps climbing in the polls post allegations. Sometimes polls are lagging indicators as there's often a rush to rally around "our team" and the allegations are nebulous at best. The real damage has been done by Cain's handling of the situation and judging by some here, that's just not a factor for them.
Posted by: DrewM at
07:30 AM
| Comments (448)
Post contains 459 words, total size 3 kb.
As many of you know, I'm not a fan of Cain's candidacy, so add whatever amount of salt you need to the rest of this post.
Salt's bad for you; just ask Mayor Bloomberg.
But butter goes well on everything.
Posted by: David Frum at November 04, 2011 07:33 AM (zgHLA)
Posted by: Herman Cain at November 04, 2011 07:33 AM (mvvAu)
What a dumbass. This ad is not by Cain.
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 07:33 AM (OhYCU)
Posted by: Countrysquire at November 04, 2011 07:35 AM (1hLHC)
Posted by: nevergiveup at November 04, 2011 07:35 AM (i6RpT)
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 07:36 AM (OhYCU)
Posted by: Lincolntf at November 04, 2011 07:37 AM (Qjh0I)
Posted by: DrewM. at November 04, 2011 07:37 AM (ehlWj)
Posted by: Truman North at November 04, 2011 07:37 AM (e8YaH)
Posted by: joncelli at November 04, 2011 07:38 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: Bob Saget at November 04, 2011 07:38 AM (SDkq3)
Uhh... really? I mean, advocating a blanket ban on everyone's speach is totally the same as trying to bring attention to the madrassas financed by the Wahhabist movement springing up all over the world. I mean, why should local communities have any say in what goes on in them?
Also, suing press outlets makes you a foe of the first amendment? What is this, the Hustler rule? "The Press" is automatically immune to suit?
If he has a cause of action (for defamation, say), who would he sue other then a press outlet?
Posted by: Marashir at November 04, 2011 07:39 AM (VhJ7Z)
Posted by: Lifeisdeath at November 04, 2011 07:39 AM (p/EJ/)
Posted by: Rick Perry at November 04, 2011 07:39 AM (rJVPU)
" considering suing a press outlet, Cain is actually worse on the First Amendment than John McCain"
Why is suing a 1A problem? A "press outlet" can commit libel just like anyone else, being a "press outlet" is not immunity. NYT v. Sullivan just makes it harder to win.
Posted by: Bob from Ohio at November 04, 2011 07:40 AM (ROFkf)
A smart and informed conservative candidate would have used this sex-free sex non-scandal as an opportunity to discuss tort reform.
Human Cain is neither a smart nor an informed candidate, though.
Posted by: Soothsayer at November 04, 2011 07:40 AM (G/zuv)
Posted by: TRO at November 04, 2011 07:40 AM (AiMaG)
Posted by: Dave at November 04, 2011 07:40 AM (Xm1aB)
The ad puts Cain on offense, and the media on defense. Fire at will.
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 07:40 AM (OhYCU)
Posted by: nevergiveup at November 04, 2011 07:41 AM (i6RpT)
I'm still tired of this.
Someone e-mail me when the Ace 24-hour Cain news cycle is over so I can come back and enjoy myself again.
Posted by: Rob K at November 04, 2011 07:41 AM (cpr0i)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 04, 2011 07:41 AM (8y9MW)
Auboy....this could do more harm than good. ...It's a shame someone in the Cain camp didn't think this through.
Here's the thing, with Cain's years in corporate world.....there is the possibility of more things coming out, as people dig further.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at November 04, 2011 07:41 AM (v26Nx)
Posted by: Sukie Tawdry at November 04, 2011 07:41 AM (MPtFW)
Exaggerate much here, Drew? How does Cain thinking about doing something compare to McCain actually writing, lobbying for, and helping get enacted laws that restrict free speech?
Posted by: taylork at November 04, 2011 07:41 AM (5wsU9)
Posted by: Lifeisdeath at November 04, 2011 07:41 AM (p/EJ/)
Posted by: tasker at November 04, 2011 07:41 AM (rJVPU)
So I guess he would have to settle for suing Politico, but as the post points out, successfully prevailing in a libel case would be tough.
He'd have to try to sue them for something else, like unlawfully inducing the woman to breach her confidentiality agreement.
Posted by: Arms Merchant at November 04, 2011 07:42 AM (hW3KZ)
The problem for Cain is that crisis management reveals the basic competence of a campaign and the character of a candidate. This week, Cain failed on both counts. His campaign fumbled their initial response, then resorted to character assassination of an innocent man as a defense.
They went on national television and accused a man whose livelihood depends on good relations with candidates of leaking information about another candidate. They then sent out an email making those same accusations, and solicited funds by trying to elicit sympathy. They are now trying to walk away from that smear without apologizing to the man whose career they could have damaged.
Maybe it's just me, but threatening an honest guy's ability to earn a paycheck by lying about him shows a disturbing lack of character on Cain's part. Really shoddy behavior.
Posted by: Slublog at November 04, 2011 07:42 AM (mIOqx)
Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at November 04, 2011 07:42 AM (AF1jB)
Posted by: Heralder at November 04, 2011 07:42 AM (/Mxso)
/s
Posted by: Y-not at November 04, 2011 07:42 AM (5H6zj)
Posted by: laceyunderalls at November 04, 2011 07:43 AM (pLTLS)
Posted by: Truman North at November 04, 2011 07:43 AM (e8YaH)
Posted by: The Herman Cain Mutiny at November 04, 2011 07:43 AM (GBXon)
"Put it this way, Mitt Romney has been a CEO too, if he had settlements (or "agreements" if you prefer) in his past based on allegations of sexual harassment, you don't think we'd hear about them?"
Sure, John Edwards was a sitting Senator who fathered a love child during his candidacy, but no one reported on it.
We won't hear about shit that the media doesn't want to report.
Posted by: Rev Dr E Buzz Racism Identifier at November 04, 2011 07:43 AM (tcSZb)
Cain's playing of the race card, and he has done so, in my mind has effectively ended his Presidential Campaign. Bachmann will throw him under the bus on the 9th at the next debate regardless of the subject matter being foreign policy. Just to do it.
Playing the race card. Bye Herman.
Who was it around here that has been predicting a Cain endorsement of Romney by the end of March? Looks like they will be proven correct.
Posted by: Dick Nixon at November 04, 2011 07:43 AM (kaOJx)
Posted by: maddogg at November 04, 2011 07:44 AM (OlN4e)
A Professional like Romney would have handled it much better, that's why these outsiders are so icky.
Posted by: David Frum at November 04, 2011 07:44 AM (ytdP/)
Posted by: tasker at November 04, 2011 07:44 AM (rJVPU)
Herb was terrible on Hannity yesterday.
He sounded like a bumbling politician.
Herb Cain will not win a single primary; I don't care what the polls show.
Posted by: Soothsayer at November 04, 2011 07:45 AM (G/zuv)
Offense how? By claiming he's being targeted because he's black? That's BS on it's face.
Offense against whom? The media for reporting a scandal? Some shadowy cabal of Republicans?
I'm sorry- the "Hi-Tech Lynching" line will not fly. Republicans are not authorized users of the Race Card (and, even if they were, it's limit has been maxed out).
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 04, 2011 07:45 AM (8y9MW)
Unless the people making these anonymous charges of sexual impropriety return the money and put their names and faces out there and explain exactly what Herman Cane did, this will only make us back him more.
Posted by: McLovin at November 04, 2011 07:45 AM (j0IcY)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 04, 2011 07:45 AM (FkKjr)
Posted by: DarkLord© for Prez!
This message brought to you by Morons Against HTML Abuse
at November 04, 2011 07:45 AM (GBXon)
Posted by: The Left at November 04, 2011 07:45 AM (qndXR)
Posted by: Crunch McLargehuge at November 04, 2011 07:45 AM (e8T35)
Posted by: Oh good at November 04, 2011 07:46 AM (q/891)
Not until you properly acknowledge them as Caininites
Posted by: taylork at November 04, 2011 07:47 AM (5wsU9)
Yup. Too bad, because I got a great fundraising letter from the Cain campaign that rails again 'the Republican establishment." Red meat to my ears (to mix metaphors).
"You were s'posed to take care'a me! I could'a been a contendah!"
Posted by: Arms Merchant at November 04, 2011 07:47 AM (hW3KZ)
Posted by: Lifeisdeath at November 04, 2011 07:47 AM (p/EJ/)
That is the punchline, isn't it? It's never the spark, it's the reaction...
Posted by: DarkLord© for Prez!
This message brought to you by Morons Against HTML Abuse
at November 04, 2011 07:47 AM (GBXon)
Romney has struggled to win over tea party supporters, and his plan will not go as far as some would like. But he says he would cut $500 billion in his first term as president.
I bolded the last part. Wow, a whole $500 billion over 4 years when we have deficits over $1 trillion scheduled as far as the eyes can see. Visionary. Oh baby, imma cutting the deficits by maybe 10% because I don't want to offend anyone. Vote fer me.
Maybe Cain isn't the way to go but Romney is just more of the same crap. Ron Paul is a flake but he's proposing cutting $1 trillion in his first year.
Posted by: GnuBreed at November 04, 2011 07:47 AM (ENKCw)
So you missed the mark? Big deal.
Just keep shootin'. Sooner or later you'll hit something.
You betcha!
Posted by: Sarah Palin at November 04, 2011 07:48 AM (mvvAu)
Posted by: Miss'80s at November 04, 2011 07:48 AM (d6QMz)
How on earth does Perry get blamed for this?
Posted by: Jumbo Jogging Shrimp at November 04, 2011 11:46 AM (qjUnn)
why is everybody looking at me?
Posted by: A certain rock at November 04, 2011 07:48 AM (FIDMq)
No, he didn't. The Association of which he was the CEO did.
I'm not seeing a huge qualitative difference.
To quote one of the few good "racial tension movies" "Attitude reflect leadership. Captain." If the Association "came to an agreement," they did it with Cain's consent- tacit or implicit.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 04, 2011 07:48 AM (8y9MW)
Iirc, a guy who worked for Cain recently joined Perry's staff. But as several folks have pointed out, a couple of NRA board members are on Team Romney.
The trouble with Cain's allegations against the Perry person is that they were inconsistent - because at first it was that they claimed he was briefed about this back in 2004 (?) but then when he said that he didn't know about it, Cain's campaign criticized him for not knowing. Or something. I can't keep all the obfuscations straight, frankly.
Posted by: Y-not at November 04, 2011 07:48 AM (5H6zj)
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at November 04, 2011 07:48 AM (JYheX)
Posted by: maddogg at November 04, 2011 07:48 AM (OlN4e)
--------------------
The problem with Newt is that he's really, really smart and stuff.
The other problem with Newt is that he really, really believes he's smart and stuff. Because of this, he quite often takes positions and then makes statements that are stunningly stupid.
Posted by: Racist, Right-Wing Terrorist in Midwest...Or Tea Party Member for Short at November 04, 2011 07:49 AM (fOPv7)
Let's use proper terms here...
Posted by: Slublog at November 04, 2011 07:49 AM (mIOqx)
Nope. Shoot first (generally, in own foot), ask questions later.
Posted by: Arms Merchant at November 04, 2011 07:49 AM (hW3KZ)
Don't expect consistency from Herman because-Cain inconsistent on everything.
Posted by: tasker at November 04, 2011 11:41 AM (rJVPU)
So he is consistently inconsistent?
Posted by: Grey Fox at November 04, 2011 07:49 AM (MSCON)
Attention whore SCFOAMF. Tommy Turban doesn't look too happy about it either.
Posted by: WalrusRex at November 04, 2011 07:49 AM (Hx5uv)
It's never the spark, it's the reaction...
Precisely, ol' chum. Herb couldn't handle it; he needs to get out the kitchen.
Posted by: Soothsayer at November 04, 2011 07:50 AM (G/zuv)
You know what else is a stupid defense of Cain, as stupid as the "it came from Politico, it's a lie!" defense?
The whole "everybody was getting hit with silly sexual harassment claims in the 90's." Sure, OK. Let's look at that: Cain was there 3 years. What'd you wanna bet that neither the guy before Cain nor the guy after Cain had ONE single sexual harassment charge or claim against them?
You really think the newshounds dogging this story didn't check that angle?
You do realize that's one of the next shoes to drop, right?
But then, of course, they were probably white--and this is all racism, straight up, yo!
___________
And this ad? Just when I thought Cain couldn't be any more incompetent at handling a crisis, he goes right out and begs the media to show how, "no, this is just a fact" and that no other NRA head got hit with harassment charges. Stepping right into their trap. And keeping this story alive even longer. Jeez. What an idiot.
______________
And remember how over the last 3+ years we'd tell ourselves how anytime the left threw down the race card, it meant' they'd lost the argument?
But now that Cain is throwing down the race card it means he's winning? And it is awesome?
You really think that Cain won't whip the race card out on the GOP if he has to? You know, like he already did with Perry--once directly and now another time, indirectly?
Yeah. Let's keep this guy around. He's good for the party.
Oh, I almost forgot: Cain will--WILL--endorse Romney by March 31, 2012. Cain will never endorse anyone else no matter what.
Posted by: Jimmuy at November 04, 2011 07:50 AM (hROVJ)
Posted by: Dave at November 04, 2011 07:51 AM (Xm1aB)
Good news for you Perry supporters. From CNN:
PerryÂ’s comments are another indication that he has one of the more nuanced immigration records in the field of GOP candidates.
Posted by: pep at November 04, 2011 07:51 AM (YXmuI)
Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at November 04, 2011 07:51 AM (ZDUD4)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at November 04, 2011 07:51 AM (XE2Oo)
Being tired of it makes this all the better. The race card is increasingly devalued every time someone plays it, so I don't mind our side aiding in that cause by throwing it out at all.
Posted by: Abe Froman at November 04, 2011 07:51 AM (E55AK)
Posted by: Lifeisdeath at November 04, 2011 07:51 AM (p/EJ/)
Posted by: taylork at November 04, 2011 07:51 AM (5wsU9)
Yay. Wake me up when the Cain newscycle is over.
Posted by: Oh good at November 04, 2011 11:46 AM (q/891)
Have some cheese with your whine.
Posted by: Heralder at November 04, 2011 07:52 AM (/Mxso)
Wes Pruden today:
"Politico, the political daily of liberal pedigree that set the hounds on Mr. Cain, has not said what he is guilty of, or when, or where, or who says so. Innuendo is enough. Politico says it has a half-dozen sources "shedding light on different aspects of the complaints." Once upon a time, a reporter trying to get a story merely "shedding light" on "aspects" past a gruff old city editor would have been thrown down the stairs if the gruff old city editor was having a particularly bad day."
Posted by: Quilly Mammoth at November 04, 2011 07:52 AM (ytdP/)
A lot of my evenings are taken up helping my wife with the kids, now numbering three. By the time I get to the computer, I'm pretty brain dead.
Posted by: Slublog at November 04, 2011 07:53 AM (mIOqx)
Sure. Just as soon as his everyone on his campaign quits bumblefucking around like a bunch of blathering idiots.
Posted by: laceyunderalls at November 04, 2011 07:53 AM (pLTLS)
Posted by: Julie Andrews topless at November 04, 2011 07:53 AM (2DaHw)
If Romney gets the nod in the primaries, then I will support him, with all known faults. However, with Cain, as a sort of citizen civil servant, his biggest faults can mostly be corrected with a properly chosen cabinet. Romney, as a serial politician and serial lefty squish, has no conservative core principles with which I can identify. He cannot suddenly grow them once he gets a primary nod. People forget that a Massachusetts R would be a D in almost any other R state.
I am all for letting the facts be reported here for what they are. Doing anything else lessens the utility of this site. If it turns out that Cain is in league with Lucifer, then so be it. Report it.
Playing the same games with selective coverage as the MFM plays does nothing more than legitimize/exonerate this tactic that brought you such things as acceptance/forgiveness of actual sexual harassment of a White House intern with a cigar. Let's not go that route.
Posted by: Flounder at November 04, 2011 07:53 AM (Kkt/i)
Posted by: maddogg at November 04, 2011 07:53 AM (OlN4e)
I think that's really stretching it. Lynching is associated in particular with racially motivated attacks against African Americans.
Posted by: Y-not at November 04, 2011 07:54 AM (5H6zj)
Sitting President subpoenaed over actual deaths caused by illegal gun running operation.
Anonymous account of gestures (not actual sex or pictures of sex, or talk of sex, or semen stains, etc. ) by one of the 8 or more GOP nominees.
Which event drew 1000 times more coverage?
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 07:54 AM (OhYCU)
Bullshit. The very term "Lynching" brings race into it. They're not "lynching" anyone. At worst, they're "smearing" a Conservative.
He could have stayed with "Unsubstantiated Smear." He could have used, "Hit Job." There are any number of other metaphors which he could have used. He chose (and I don't think for a minute this hit the internet without him having a chance to veto), to use the word "Lynching."
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 04, 2011 07:54 AM (8y9MW)
Life is unfair. But Politico didn't go out and tell Cain to fumble his multiple, inept responses so badly. He did that himself.
Posted by: Arms Merchant at November 04, 2011 07:55 AM (hW3KZ)
Posted by: The Robot Devil at November 04, 2011 07:55 AM (136wp)
bye herman...it was nice knowin' ya
Posted by: phoenixgirl at work at November 04, 2011 07:56 AM (s+J9D)
Oh and by the AoS's second most tiresome guest co- blogger.
Repaired.
Posted by: Soothsayer at November 04, 2011 11:48 AM (G/zuv)
What did I say now?
Posted by: Truman North at November 04, 2011 07:56 AM (e8YaH)
Who is the most tiresome of us all? I like to know who my competition is.
Posted by: DrewM. at November 04, 2011 07:56 AM (ehlWj)
Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at November 04, 2011 11:54 AM (OWjjx)
I'm thoroughly convinced they're unteachable.
Posted by: Tami at November 04, 2011 07:56 AM (X6akg)
At least we're not teetering on a recession and the collapse of the Euro-zone's economy.
Oh wait, yes we are.
Posted by: Soothsayer sees the future at November 04, 2011 07:57 AM (G/zuv)
Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at November 04, 2011 07:57 AM (ZDUD4)
Posted by: Lifeisdeath at November 04, 2011 11:51 AM (p/EJ/)
perry didnt blame romney, he alluded to romney staffers having closer connections to the NRA. what block did on tv was blaming someone, what perry's guy did is nothing compared to that.
Posted by: chas at November 04, 2011 07:57 AM (TKF1Y)
Hell if I know
Zip has an article (I can't get there right now to link it) that 69% of Cain supporters aren't backing down off their support.
In other words, they're giving his shitty campaign a free pass...and another free pass...another free pass....and other...... Why? You got me.
Posted by: laceyunderalls at November 04, 2011 07:57 AM (pLTLS)
It will be interesting to see if they try that again against Allen. I have the feeling it won't go so well for them this time.
Posted by: pep at November 04, 2011 07:57 AM (YXmuI)
tami
lol, i think you're right...they are unteachable.........and i laugh because crying will make my headache worse...........
Posted by: phoenixgirl at work at November 04, 2011 07:58 AM (s+J9D)
You know, we'd love to be talking about the fact he's being smeared. If he'd handled this competently, we could be. Instead, he comes out with 4+ different stories on the first day, at least one more the next, attempts to deflect by blaming another campaign for the leak on the next, and never, never just lets us have all the details.
So: 1- Cain made his handling of the scandal "the issue" when he handled it so badly. 2- We don't know that it's a smear. We suspect that. We're pretty sure this is either "nothing-nothing" or at least "not much-nothing." But we don't know that.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 04, 2011 07:58 AM (8y9MW)
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at November 04, 2011 07:58 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: tasker at November 04, 2011 07:58 AM (rJVPU)
If you can't see the ... glee... with which the MSM is pursuing this story... and note the Lack of ANY Vet'ing of Obama, and the crickets origionaly on John Edwards, and Clinton?
THAT is the story... the MSM dismissed stories on Democrats, but goes for the Jugular on stories like this, or Bush's supposed Waiver for the National Guard.
Posted by: Romeo13 at November 04, 2011 07:58 AM (NtXW4)
Posted by: Countrysquire at November 04, 2011 07:58 AM (1hLHC)
All butthurt 'cause you're a victim, Hermie? Too bad. Enjoy retirement.
Posted by: jwpaine at November 04, 2011 07:58 AM (FUozQ)
Posted by: Abdominal Snowman at November 04, 2011 07:59 AM (rVfMa)
Posted by: Arms Merchant at November 04, 2011 11:55 AM
Bingo! We have a winner!
Posted by: huerfano at November 04, 2011 07:59 AM (fecOD)
There's really no need to disparage Gabriel when he's not around, so I prefer to not answer your question, Drew.
Posted by: Soothsayer sees the future at November 04, 2011 07:59 AM (G/zuv)
Posted by: Dr Spank at November 04, 2011 07:59 AM (Sh42X)
Bennett, who has a copy of the settlement agreement, said four people signed it: the woman, two lawyers representing the association and Bennett himself.
Bennett said the agreement was resolved relatively quickly, about two or three months after she complained.
That means it may have been reached after Cain left the association, and Bennett said it's conceivable that Cain didn't even know about it."
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 08:00 AM (OhYCU)
What? They've never tried that against me.
Wait. Different Allen. Carry on.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 04, 2011 08:00 AM (8y9MW)
Posted by: GnuBreed at November 04, 2011 08:00 AM (ENKCw)
lol, i think you're right...they are unteachable.........and i laugh because crying will make my headache worse...........
Posted by: phoenixgirl at work at November 04, 2011 11:58 AM (s+J9D)
Trying to teach the GOP establishment anything is like trying to win the hearts and minds of Muslims. Exercise in futility.
And sorry about your headache!
Posted by: Tami at November 04, 2011 08:00 AM (X6akg)
This harmless bullshit wouldn't matter were he a good liberal.
Well, to be fair, Mel Reynolds did go to jail for boinking a 16 year old girl.
Posted by: Rev Dr E Buzz Racism Identifier at November 04, 2011 08:00 AM (tcSZb)
You can't make an omelet without it ain't horseshoes.
Posted by: WalrusRex at November 04, 2011 08:00 AM (Hx5uv)
Posted by: No name at November 04, 2011 08:01 AM (YXEFw)
Cain left the association June 30, 1999, according to the NRA. Under that timeline, Cain would have been gone when the settlement was reached--and may well have been gone when she filed the complaint.
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 08:01 AM (OhYCU)
Cain keeps climbing in the polls post allegations.
We have two polls, one is Ras and the other is another worthless news poll. Both were ran as the story was breaking. These poll numbers will change by next week.Posted by: Vic at November 04, 2011 08:01 AM (YdQQY)
This is where Cain lost any chance of me supporting him or even giving him the benefit of the doubt as a candidate. If your first instinct is to play the race card...and you do that repeatedly...I don't think you're much of a conservative, and you're surely not the "nice/charming" guy that your supporters keep insisting you are.
It's disgusting when a Dem does it; it's even more disgusting when a "conservative" who should know better - if he really is conservative - does it. The same folks who are gleefully reporting on this in the MSM would be just as gleeful about reporting the same sort of thing about anyone running for the GOP nomination. Does this idiot think that Sarah Palin was black back in '08 when the MSM went after her and her family? BTW Herman, crap like this also tends to make me *more* likely to believe you did something wrong.
When this sad and pathetic episode has run its course, and Cain ends up dropping out, I would be utterly unsurprised to have him give some sort of, "Well, I never would have believed it, but it seems the GOP is just as racist as some people have claimed it is because they wouldn't give me the nomination." Something like that, after all this, coming out of Cain's mouth would not surprise me one little bit.
Posted by: davidinvirginia at November 04, 2011 08:01 AM (haFNK)
I'm sorry, but maybe it's my upbringing coming through but I expect a higher standard of proof than that.
It's interesting to me that the general tone around here is that women who experience problems at work must be playing the system and cannot possibly have real grievances of gender-based discrimination, even if they go through the (trust me) onerous process of filing complaints and leaving their jobs (unlike Anita Hill who only complained when it was politically opportune), but any criticism of a black (Republican) must be racially-motivated.
Posted by: Y-not at November 04, 2011 08:01 AM (5H6zj)
CBS news online is reporting that the accuser's attorney, who originally said that Cain's name was on the agreement, is now saying that Cain's name was not on the agreement
"it may have been reached after Cain left the association, and Bennett said it's conceivable that Cain didn't even know about it."
"Cain has insisted he only knew of one complaint, and says he knew of no legal settlements--only what he calls a severance agreement with one woman. This timeline could well bolster his claims."
Oops, I guess the threat of a lawsuit does wonders for people's memories.
Anyone wanna bet the accuser's lawyer was the leaker?
Posted by: M at November 04, 2011 08:01 AM (dzjuy)
Not all liberals are foolish (some are simply self-interested -- bigger government profits them personally) and not all conservatives are wise.
Posted by: JB at November 04, 2011 08:02 AM (7T+Mz)
Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at November 04, 2011 08:02 AM (AF1jB)
There is a time to pull the "lynch" card but the Cain team is too stupid to know when that is.
It was only a matter of time until it was leaked that all of Cain's accusers are white and that "everyone knows" Herman has a proclivity towards the white bitches.
I was really looking forward to that tidbit finding its way into this silly story, too.
Posted by: Soothsayer at November 04, 2011 08:02 AM (G/zuv)
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at November 04, 2011 11:58 AM
Yup. And the Usual Suspects have their canned responses all ready to trot out at the mere mention of Cain's name. Probably 100 of the 125 appearing in this thread so far.
Haven't seen so many irrational howlers in one place since I checked out a Kos page a few months ago.
Guess we'll all have to bend over and accept our True Savior, Mutt Romney. Of course he'll get the same treatment as Cain soon enough, but right now, he's gold.
Posted by: MrScribbler at November 04, 2011 08:02 AM (HkOAc)
Posted by: Fritz at November 04, 2011 08:02 AM (/ZZCn)
Then Cain is lying about being under a confidentiality agreement, isn't he? Because, you see, if he was no longer the CEO at the time when the agreement was reached, and it was "settled without his knowledge," then he didn't sign any paperwork that says he can't talk about it.
So when he says he's bound by a confidentiality agreement, he's either admitting to knowledge of the settlement (and, therefore, its terms, to some extent) or he's lying. Wait- he's lying either way- because he's trying to claim both.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 04, 2011 08:03 AM (8y9MW)
Alternate headline: CEO Cain leaves organization under a cloud.
Honestly, what is the point of your post? I don't see how it helps Cain who admits he knew about the allegations.
Posted by: Y-not at November 04, 2011 08:04 AM (5H6zj)
Posted by: alexthechick at November 04, 2011 08:05 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: Dr Spank at November 04, 2011 08:05 AM (Sh42X)
Posted by: bernverdnardo at November 04, 2011 08:05 AM (xXhWA)
It takes time to type in 20,000 words. Even if you are using both feet and hands.
Posted by: The Robot Devil at November 04, 2011 08:05 AM (136wp)
Posted by: Poosh at November 04, 2011 08:06 AM (ST2nm)
Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at November 04, 2011 08:06 AM (ZDUD4)
Who the hell is "Andy"?
That's a rhetorical question. You're taking this ad awfully personally, Drew. It's not directed at you. It's meant to stir up anger at the MFM.
Posted by: AmishDude at November 04, 2011 08:06 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Dr Spank at November 04, 2011 12:05 PM
Justin Beiber's going into politics?
Oh, shit....
Posted by: MrScribbler at November 04, 2011 08:06 AM (HkOAc)
Meh.
I can't get really outraged at the media for doing what I (and most of us) knew they would do. Unfair? Yes. Do I hate them with the intensity of a thousand suns? Absolutely. This isn't going to make my seething hatred any worse. And in the long run, if Cain gets the nom, the experience will be good for Cain's politikin
He bungled it, no doubt. Amateur at best; Though he is an amateur, one that had better get busy cause he is making his pro debut here real quick. No I am not angry at Cain either. For a total novice, I think he has been catching up quite quickly.
I am mad, outraged, and furious over the fact that Cain, a novice politician is really an attractive choice, given the quality of candidates delivered up by our bettors. All so seriously flawed that a strong argument to support any of them can be cut off at the knees. Yeah I'm pissed, cause the field we have is apparently the best we've got, and they are all weak weak weak.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at November 04, 2011 08:06 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: brando at November 04, 2011 08:06 AM (IPGju)
I pasted in a quote from an article. Why do facts upset you?
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 08:07 AM (OhYCU)
Posted by: MrScribbler at November 04, 2011 12:02 PM (HkOAc)
What!? He's been vetted, nothing new to be found. Teflon Rom is going to clean odipo's clock!2!!!2
Posted by: Rombot at November 04, 2011 08:07 AM (FIDMq)
It is against an Black American. It is racial.
Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at November 04, 2011 11:57 AM (ZDUD4)
And we've now come full circle to the left's defense of Obama based on race.
Posted by: Heralder at November 04, 2011 08:07 AM (/Mxso)
Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at November 04, 2011 08:08 AM (ZDUD4)
Posted by: maddogg at November 04, 2011 08:08 AM (OlN4e)
-----
That's a separate matter from the assertion that this is racially motivated.
Posted by: Y-not at November 04, 2011 08:08 AM (5H6zj)
This is a slow bleed of a story and I feel like some places, such as AoS, are giving it a little overkill despite any new information.
Posted by: taylork at November 04, 2011 08:08 AM (5wsU9)
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at November 04, 2011 08:08 AM (JYheX)
Can't post to blog, but here's a link for the ladies from the Berry:
http://tinyurl.com/3qnptj2
Posted by: The Robot Devil at November 04, 2011 08:08 AM (136wp)
Posted by: t-bird at November 04, 2011 08:10 AM (FcR7P)
What does concern me, and did well before this current flurry of activity, is Cain's level of preparation. It gives me no indication he will be an effective candidate who is ready to be president. Especially on foreign policy and social issues (which I don't even particularly care about) he can be nonsensical. This is disqualifying when running against Obama.
Those who think the president is on his way out if we select a not-too-terrible candidate are wrong. What we know about Obama is that his machine runs a solid campaign and that in 2012 he'll be doing everything possible to distract voters from the last 3 years. Cain's gaffes and lack of knowledge/preparation play directly into that strategy. Remember, everyone thought Harry Reid was written off until he seized on Angle's nomination and wrung her neck. Nominating a political neophyte usually has negative consequences. In addition, I have doubts about Cain's effectiveness if he gets into office. We all agree mountains need to be moved to even begin addressing the economic and financial issues facing the country and I have seen little evidence Cain will be able to do that in Washington.
The others aren't much better. I was initially intrigued about Perry, like Ace, but now he seems to be making it up as he goes along having worn out the Texas jobs record one trick pony. And let's face it, he's not even good at articulating that one bright point.
Romney's weaknesses have been hashed over but he has two fatal flaws for me. First, Obama will tie RomneyCare around his neck and drag the rest of us kicking and screaming to the bottom. I see some Republicans plastering over this, saying it can be overcome (not so much at this site). I don't think it can. Look what happened to McCain in '08 when Palin was picked as a way to invigorate the campaign. It did do that, for sure. But it also took away McCain's main strength against Obama: experience. The one good rationale voters had for picking McCain was shattered and Obama exploited it ruthlessly. Similarly, Romney's healthcare experiment undermines many of the issues we want to focus on this election and will allow Obama to attack with impunity. Second, I don't think Romney will do what is necessary if elected.
So what's left? In my mind Gingrich. And two weeks ago I didn't think I'd say that. But he's the only viable choice, and I see others slowly coming to that conclusion (the polls seem to confirm this). Sure he's got baggage, but note that it's personal baggage that's already been hashed over for years. In an election where voters should be more serious than '08 given the state of the economy I think those worn-out attacks will get less traction. And importantly, Gingrich knows the debate we want to have in 2012 better than anyone because he has been talking about it for over 15 years. If Obama even managed a draw against Gingrich in a presidential debate I'd be fairly shocked. He offers bland platitudes endorsing government that Gingrich has made a career of skewering. I'm not saying Gingrich is ideal, he's not, but the sum of his negatives seem less debilitating than the others. And his strengths are well positioned to run against a stumbling Obama in 2012.
Posted by: wte9 at November 04, 2011 08:10 AM (OYaaT)
Posted by: tasker at November 04, 2011 08:10 AM (rJVPU)
I'm not upset. You're projecting your emotion onto me.
The facts (that he may have already left the organization) directly contradict Cain's assertion that he is bound by a NDA.
Secondly, the timing of him leaving the company around when complaints were filed does not help him.
Posted by: Y-not at November 04, 2011 08:10 AM (5H6zj)
Who was it around here that has been predicting a Cain endorsement of Romney by the end of March? Looks like they will be proven correct.
Posted by: Dick Nixon at November 04, 2011 11:43 AM (kaOJx)
Me. And you know why? Because nothing--NOTHING--in Cain's campaign is designed to win the nomination. It is all show, it is all profile raising, it is all fluff.
Is he in Iowa? No. Is he in New Hampshire? No. Is he in Florida? No. Is he in Nevada? No. Is he in South Carolina? No. In fact, I have no damned idea where he is. But I do know he isn't doing retail politics in the early primary states. And he is attacking the only candidate who has a chance of beating Romney.
His ad buy on Rush? His ad buy on here? Is any of that going to do him one damn bit of good in the Iowa caucus? Rush's regular listeners are a small part of the GOP (we have jobs that don't allow us to listen, you know) and Iowans are an even smaller part of those. Waste of money. But, he's keeping his name out there. 'Cause that is all he cares about. Like I said, it's like the new store spending all it's marketing budget on bringing in an elephant at the grand opening. Lots of buzz, lots of hype, lots of looky-loos. But it does jack diddly shit for bringing in the type of people who will regularly come back to the store.
Posted by: Jimmuy at November 04, 2011 08:10 AM (hROVJ)
But it is. The Left must destroy Cain. They can't let black voters migrate over to the GOP.
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 08:10 AM (OhYCU)
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 08:11 AM (OhYCU)
Alan Keyes.............2012
He is black, he is conservative, he will tell the establishment to go to hell.
what is there not to like?
Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at November 04, 2011 12:10 PM (OWjjx)
Yep, he proved his mettle in Illinois...
Posted by: The Robot Devil at November 04, 2011 08:11 AM (136wp)
Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at November 04, 2011 12:10 PM (OWjjx)
Hell no. If yer gonna wish, go West/Rubio. Don't waste wishes on weak shit.
Posted by: maddogg at November 04, 2011 08:11 AM (OlN4e)
I don't think any of us (Ace excepted) believe this scandal or hold it against Herman.
Our disappointment in Cain is purely for the Cain team's ineptitude in handling the matter.
Posted by: Soothsayer at November 04, 2011 08:11 AM (G/zuv)
Posted by: Honey Badger at November 04, 2011 08:12 AM (GvYeG)
Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at November 04, 2011 12:08 PM (ZDUD4)
You're correct, I did. I apologize.
Do take into account, however, that even with context that first sentence is a stumbling block to your argument.
Posted by: Heralder at November 04, 2011 08:13 AM (/Mxso)
Anthony Weiner unavailable for comment.
Meh. We had more than just vague allegations on Weiner. We had (and most of us have seen) a no kidding picture of his D*ck that he sent to a woman, not his wife. And it was done like yesterday, not like over a decade ago.
That's my new mantra for this since it has not really moved off TDC since yesterday. "Where's the dicpic?"
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at November 04, 2011 08:13 AM (0q2P7)
This story came to the forefront because Cain has consistently been the frontrunner these past few weeks and currently represents the conservative movement, not because of the color of his skin. Do you think the liberals would be nicer if he was white?
Posted by: Miss'80s at November 04, 2011 08:13 AM (d6QMz)
1) The facts (that he may have already left the organization) directly contradict Cain's assertion that he is bound by a NDA.
2) Secondly, the timing of him leaving the company around when complaints were filed does not help him.
1) There were 2 women/charges.
2) The claim by this woman was made AFTER he left
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 08:13 AM (OhYCU)
While Thomas used the high tech lynching line in his testimony, that was in the midst of an idiot badgering him repeatedly over clearly false charges. He was otherwise very restrained throughout the proceedings. The notion of him trying to cash in on his plight is unthinkable. He didn't write an autobiography until 15 years after the hearings.
Whereas Cain almost seems gleeful he is being attacked and plays the race card in a manner that is totally unbecoming for a conservative. I don't see the quiet moral dignity that Thomas had throughout his ordeal
Posted by: Chris P at November 04, 2011 08:13 AM (LuvqF)
Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at November 04, 2011 08:14 AM (ZDUD4)
I understand Herman Cain once held a door open for a woman, then called her a lady, and complimented her on her attire.
THE CAD!!!!
He should have known that that behavior is the behavior of the hegemonic patriarchy!
Doesn't he know anything about gender studies??
How can he be so stupid!
Posted by: Rev Dr E Buzz Racism Identifier at November 04, 2011 08:14 AM (tcSZb)
Herman Cain once delivered a pizza to my grandmothers house while wearing a kilt...and left her a tip.
IFYKWIMAITYD.
Posted by: dananjcon at November 04, 2011 08:15 AM (8ieXv)
Oooh! Oooh! Pick Me! I said it!
Seriously, Caniacs: Either Herman Cain is lying about being bound by any form of confidentiality agreement regarding the incident (because the "agreement" was made without his knowledge after he was no longer with the Association), or he's lying about not knowing anything about the agreement.
Pick one.
Either way you're supporting a serial liar.
Congratulations.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 04, 2011 08:15 AM (8y9MW)
I don't remember Cain saying he was bound by an NDA but I haven't seen every statement, so just checking if you guys are sure?
and F to the M.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at November 04, 2011 08:16 AM (JYheX)
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at November 04, 2011 08:16 AM (f9c2L)
Either way you're supporting a serial liar.
Congratulations.
Please direct me to the republican candidate that is not a serial liar. Last I checked they were all politicians.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at November 04, 2011 08:17 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Herman "Caveman" Cain at November 04, 2011 08:17 AM (vFVJi)
Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at November 04, 2011 08:17 AM (ZDUD4)
Posted by: phoenixgirl on other work computer ready to drink the perry flavor-aid at November 04, 2011 08:18 AM (s+J9D)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 04, 2011 08:18 AM (8y9MW)
Posted by: zmdavid at November 04, 2011 08:18 AM (ga/K8)
John, sweetie, darling, don't take this the wrong way, but I'd vot for RON PAUL!!!!ELEVENTY!!!! over you in a heartbeat.
Posted by: alexthechick at November 04, 2011 08:19 AM (VtjlW)
http://tinyurl.com/646vjef
Posted by: Derak at November 04, 2011 08:19 AM (8tAhu)
........
Well said. It's almost as if he was doing this as a lark to sell some books and command high speaking fees once this is over. He never planned to be a front runner.. he has no organization.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at November 04, 2011 08:19 AM (f9c2L)
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at November 04, 2011 08:19 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Vic at November 04, 2011 08:20 AM (YdQQY)
Did Cain make some racial references following the lynching defense, yes.
Cain may learn from this and get better at crises management.
I personally want any conservative Repub candidate to use every possible tool/weapon they can in this election.
We will not win by continuing to play by queens-berry rules and allowing the democrat to kick us in the balls over and over again. This high minded holier than thou / we must be morally superior in our politicking is bullshit.
Most here easily supported water boarding and light forms of torture on terrorists trying to destroy this country but now get squeamish when using hard politics against another enemy of this country's constitution? Seriously their is little difference.
Posted by: Fire with Fire at November 04, 2011 08:20 AM (lcwvr)
Posted by: Max Power at November 04, 2011 08:20 AM (q177U)
Posted by: Y-not at November 04, 2011 12:01 PM (5H6zj)
Well, as a guy, I tend to identify with being the victim of false accusations and, as a single guy, would not be too upset if a little sexual harassment came my way.
So there you go. I guess, without any firm descriptions of the activity involved, we're reminded of all of the nebulous definitions of sexual harassment from the 90s and that's assuming they're not outright lies.
These women could indeed have been harassed by Cain. They could have felt harassed by Cain when he intended no such thing. They could have been gold-diggers hoping to cash in. There's still no way for us to tell.
But the nebulousness of the charges and the unwillingness of anyone to go on the record with a specific charge from a specific person makes this sound like a hit-job.
Posted by: AmishDude at November 04, 2011 08:21 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: tasker at November 04, 2011 08:21 AM (rJVPU)
Posted by: deepelemblues at November 04, 2011 08:21 AM (Jov5i)
Look, if we actually had a competent candidate, life would be too easy, wouldn't it? sigh
Posted by: Adrian at November 04, 2011 08:22 AM (PY4xx)
Bull, and you know it. And, even when they do lie (when we catch them at it) we decry the lies, and talk about how they've "broken trust" with us.
Well, the only thing Cain has is "trust," since we don't have a record to look at. What conservative judges has he appointed? What laws has he signed or vetoed? Heck, what judges has he voted for/against in an "Advise and Consent" capacity? What laws has he authored and/or co-sponsored?
None- because he's never held office.
Therefore, the only thing I've got to make me vote for Herman Cain is his word that he'll be a good President. And I see him treating his "word" like worthless garbage every day this "scandal" goes on, because I know he has to be lying about something.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 04, 2011 08:22 AM (8y9MW)
Congratulations.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 04, 2011 12:15 PM (8y9MW)
Orr... he's busy, and he does not remember it because nothing happened... and IT WAS 10+ YEARs AGO?
Heck, as a guy I can't remember stuff the current Girlfriend said I did 2 weeks ago.
Ten years ago??? especialy somthing that was not important AT THE TIME? Heck, I was dating and I can't even remember the name of the woman I was with then...
Some of us are not blessed with photographic memorys.
Posted by: Romeo13 at November 04, 2011 08:22 AM (NtXW4)
Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at November 04, 2011 12:17 PM (ZDUD4)
Can we assume every time someone attacks a white frontrunner it is racist, or can we only do that when they're non-white?
I'm aware liberals tend to have a particularly sharp animus towards blacks and hispanics that are conservative ... I just don't think this is a case of that.
Posted by: Heralder at November 04, 2011 08:23 AM (/Mxso)
In the comments to probably every post I did on 9-9-9, I also said that while I didn't like the plan, I'd vote for Cain if it came down to it.
But no more. He's now with Mitt under the category of No. Fucking. Way.
Slu did a very good job at comment 40 of explaining why. The fact that Cain would maliciously go after Curt Anderson the way he did (doubling down on it even after his campaign manager started walking it back, too) says lots of things about Cain's character, and none of them are good.
Second look at ... oh, fuck it. We're going to be stuck with Mitt, aren't we?
Posted by: Andy at November 04, 2011 08:23 AM (5Rurq)
Cain left the association June 30, 1999, according to the NRA. Under that timeline, Cain would have been gone when the settlement was reached--and may well have been gone when she filed the complaint.
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 12:01 PM (OhYCU)
Here's your downside (spin) to that: Cain has already acknowledged there was more than one claim he knew about. If this one happened possibly without him even knowing? Well, well, well. Rather than getting Cain off the hook, the water is now starting to boil. How many more women are there, for crying out loud?
See? Now you see why he should have gotten out in front of this? How he should have been ready for it since (depending upon which version of his story you believe) 2004 or at least 10 days before it broke? (If he planned to win, if he was serious?)
You remember how Ace bird-dogged the Weiner story? And kept telling everyone, "The guy is guilty 'cause he keeps acting like he is guilty!! It's not that complicated!" Gee, see a pattern here?
Posted by: Jimmuy at November 04, 2011 08:24 AM (hROVJ)
Posted by: Honey Badger at November 04, 2011 08:24 AM (GvYeG)
If he keeps rising, it is only a matter of time. Look at what they did to Perry. They will do the same thing to Romney as well.
Posted by: Miss'80s at November 04, 2011 08:24 AM (d6QMz)
Posted by: tasker at November 04, 2011 08:24 AM (rJVPU)
Herman Cain invented the little mouse tables use to keep the pizza box from damaging the pizza. He also invented the foot mirror and for this I am very thankful.
Posted by: dananjcon at November 04, 2011 08:25 AM (8ieXv)
Jeesh, there were 2 women. 2 incidents. Hello!!!
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 08:25 AM (OhYCU)
That's why I want someone with a spine in the whitehouse. I know that John Boehner True Conservative Man of Action, and his Sidekick Mitch McConnell the Fearless Wall on the Right, miiighht not be ready to tackle entitlement reform without some goading from above and below.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at November 04, 2011 08:25 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at November 04, 2011 08:26 AM (dIHHd)
Posted by: PR at November 04, 2011 08:26 AM (zpJOD)
Then he would say, "I don't recall." Now wouldn't he? Not "Nothing happened." Not, "This is a complete fabrication." Not, "This is a Hi-Tech Lynching."
None (none. One more time: None) of Cain's denials* have said "Hey, that was 10 years ago, and the accusation came after I left. So, yeah, I guess it's possible someone took offense at something I said, but if so, I have no clue what." He has said, pretty unequivocally, "I didn't do it."
* -The closest he came, he still claims to remember the incident clearly, because he describes the conversation and the supposed gesture.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 04, 2011 08:28 AM (8y9MW)
But, I will defend Cain against lynchings by others.
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 08:28 AM (OhYCU)
Cain's gotten plenty of attacks, just because he's a black conservative, see Harry Belefonte and Jeannine garafafafalo as examples.
The Politico piece may not be racially motivated, but there's been plenty of other stuff.
Posted by: taylork at November 04, 2011 08:29 AM (5wsU9)
Posted by: Adrian at November 04, 2011 08:29 AM (PY4xx)
Posted by: tasker at November 04, 2011 08:29 AM (rJVPU)
I believe you have egregiously misrepresented a majority view here. Most here seem to believe a person (male or female) who makes anonymous accusations about a persons actions and have received a nuisance fee award in court where no assessment of guilt seems to have been found are THEN probably playing the system.
What you posted above is a willful false stereotype of many views on this board around the subject.
Posted by: Fire with Fire at November 04, 2011 08:30 AM (lcwvr)
http://tinyurl.com/5v4u4e7
As Secretary of State "I know nothing about the laws".
Posted by: An Observation at November 04, 2011 08:30 AM (ylhEn)
And he claimed confidentiality agreements regarding both incidents.
But, please continue in your cultish worship of a man with no political history who is proving- at best- to be unreliable in his recollections.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 04, 2011 08:30 AM (8y9MW)
Thanks for the info. Love that movie.
Posted by: Miss'80s at November 04, 2011 08:31 AM (d6QMz)
John, sweetie, darling, don't take this the wrong way, but I'd vot for RON PAUL!!!!ELEVENTY!!!! over you in a heartbeat.
Like I miss a boil on my ass.
Such animosity, my friends. I'm.. well, honestly, I'm buthurt.
Posted by: John McCain at November 04, 2011 08:32 AM (FUozQ)
Yeah, Obama would never have gone there before this happened.
Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at November 04, 2011 08:32 AM (dIHHd)
Posted by: davidinvirginia at November 04, 2011 08:32 AM (haFNK)
Posted by: Brainpimp at November 04, 2011 08:33 AM (Qb/vm)
Posted by: Megaton McCain at November 04, 2011 08:33 AM (jucos)
Posted by: taylork at November 04, 2011 08:33 AM (5wsU9)
I guess I'm offended that Cain is trying to compare his problems with what Justice Thomas went through. To me they are miles apart.
The Clarence Thomas hearings had a big impact on me. They happened around the time that I had left a job over harassment (yes, it rose to the physical and no, I did not extract money). Anita Hill's charges never rang true to me and were clearly politically motivated. I know Justice Thomas used the phrase high tech lynching. Whether or not it was, I don't know, but I do think that the salacious details raised against Thomas were more along the lines of the stereotypical sex-crazed black man.
I think the Left's overwhelming motivation in attacking Thomas was that he was too conservative, not that he was black. The charges that they used happen to align with a stereotype, particularly in their salacious details. They took a fine legal mind and smeared him with undocumented charges that were transparently politically motivated in their origins. I'm glad Thomas prevailed and is sitting on the court.
In this case, with the exception of Pajama Media's really sloppy report, the details are very limited, not salacious, and much more in line with what would come out of an HR-driven investigation. Nevertheless, the fact remains that two (I think that's established now) women went through the non-trivial exercise of filing complaints against Cain which were not disproven - nor proven - but which led to them leaving the company with 1-yr severance packages (larger than what I've seen as being typical in most job separations) and, we now helpfully learn, also happened around the time that Cain left the organization. That latter point may or may not be relevant.
In any event, unlike Justice Thomas whose qualifications for the position he sought were really beyond question and who had a long track-record in public life to examine, Herman Cain's entire candidacy is predicated on the value of his skills as CEO. I don't care if he's a sex fiend or cheats on his wife. I care how he treats his employees. So they could be the most bland version of sexual harassment cases in history, but if they were valid, that is a big mark against him in my book. As a separate matter, I do not like how Cain has responded to the allegations.
These charges did not stem from political motivation. We do not have any inkling that they stemmed from racial bigotry either. We actually don't even have any evidence that the women sought out Politico (initially) and not the other way around. (One media report I read yesterday made it clear they tracked one of the women down themselves.) I just don't see the comparison to Thomas on anything more than a superficial level.
Of course, I already took him off my list based on his track-record, his ideas, and his performance during the campaign, but that's a separate matter.
Posted by: Y-not at November 04, 2011 08:33 AM (5H6zj)
Posted by: jwpaine at November 04, 2011 08:33 AM (FUozQ)
It's interesting to me that the general tone around here is that women who experience problems at work must be playing the system and cannot possibly have real grievances of gender-based discrimination, even if they go through the (trust me) onerous process of filing complaints and leaving their jobs (unlike Anita Hill who only complained when it was politically opportune), but any criticism of a black (Republican) must be racially-motivated.
I don't get that impression. In fact, I have no doubt at all that the male morons here would be the first to defend any woman who was actually being sexually harrassed at work. The issue is that "sexual harrassment" has become a term that requires the use of quotation marks. There is an enormous difference in kind between sleep with me or you will lose your job/I will trash your reputation so bad you will never work again and "oh he did something that made me uncomfortable". The latter is open to massive abuse and is basically impossible to defend against.
As far as the racial stuff goes, the Left shit in this bed, they can lie in it. If the rules are any criticism of someone black is raaaacist, then fine. How you like them apples?
Posted by: alexthechick at November 04, 2011 08:34 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: t-bird at November 04, 2011 08:34 AM (FcR7P)
If I am elected, I will take a wrecking ball to the Washington establishment so we can get America working again.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 04, 2011 08:34 AM (8y9MW)
Not sure that this harrassment controversy is racist per se, but harrassment is not the only criticism this ad is addressing. The Cornel quote was from before this.
Posted by: Cornfused Yet Again at November 04, 2011 08:34 AM (AyzfE)
Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at November 04, 2011 12:32 PM (dIHHd)
I think team cain misused it here , so he opened a new can of worms for later.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at November 04, 2011 08:35 AM (bAL0J)
Cain is fucking things up for all Republicans now.
Posted by: Clubber Lang at November 04, 2011 08:36 AM (QcFbt)
http://tinyurl.com/646vjef
Posted by: Derak at November 04, 2011 12:19 PM (8tAhu)
Those are great pictures. I particularly enjoyed the flier asking the communists and anarchists to stop squabbling amongst themselves and untie to face the common enemy.
Posted by: WalrusRex at November 04, 2011 08:36 AM (Hx5uv)
Sure. Ok Herman, it looks like you lied about a personal matter most would have stretched to the truth on. You have broken your trust with me, when it comes to personal matters I will view your statements suspiciously. Are we done or are you going to insist I support a different liar?
Because they have a record? Most of those "records" are not much to brag about. They are a lot of lying and compromising conservative principals.
Listen, I'm not going to tell you, Cain is the best choice, he's probably not. My own logic says Perry is the best candidate not bearing the name Rompaulman.
But Perry destroyed his own campaign by insulting the base to their face, then acting like a bumbling idiot in the debates.
After Perry, Newt looks to be the best choice. But in the years since he stepped down as speaker, he has not rehabilitated his image. He is not well liked by the base, or by the public as a whole. It would be a huge effort just to get him enough support to take down Romney, not to mention to win a general.
So we are down to Cain. Oh well. I could want a better candidate, I just don't have one.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at November 04, 2011 08:36 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: taylork at November 04, 2011 08:37 AM (5wsU9)
The Politico piece may not be racially motivated, but there's been plenty of other stuff.
Posted by: taylork at November 04, 2011 12:29 PM (5wsU9)
Agreed, there has, but just throwing the "I'm attacked because I'm black" net over everything, including problems he's having not even related to race helps no one.
Posted by: Heralder at November 04, 2011 08:37 AM (/Mxso)
1) And he claimed confidentiality agreements regarding both incidents.
2) But, please continue in your cultish worship of a man with no political history who is proving- at best- to be unreliable in his recollections.
Oh brother
1) Linky?
2) I'm not even for Cain. I'm against lynchings.
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 08:37 AM (OhYCU)
Drew, you and the blogs are supplying the rope. With the big Corzine scandals and Solyndra, Fast and Furious, this supposedly conservative blog has been running 4:1 articles attacking Republican candidates, mainly Cain. This is a freaking mirror site for the Dailykos.
Let me put it this way, for all your attacks about how you all can't support Cain, not because of the charges, but because they weren't handled well when they came out, his poll numbers are the same or better than they were before the charges.
Hell, was the only way this black man could have succeeded in handling this crisis according to Ace of Spades was if he instantly came out of it with 95% of the vote?
Keep on doing your high-tech lynching. I can assure you if Perry or another of the white candidates came out with similar polling numbers this site would be praising the effectiveness of how they handled the situation. But with Cain, you can't bring yourself to say it.
Posted by: doug at November 04, 2011 08:38 AM (gUGI6)
Speak for yourself. I've been doing gangbusters for 5 years.
Posted by: Race Card Salesman at November 04, 2011 08:39 AM (5wsU9)
The real action is on the sidebar. Perry's five steps are pretty easy to grasp, Mitt, and they set a new course.
Thanks for the heads up!
Posted by: TypicalWhitey at November 04, 2011 08:39 AM (xeVap)
Nope. The fans of Sarah also hope for the same.....because somehow, in a brokered convention run by the Establishement that hates her, she will prevail.
Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at November 04, 2011 12:35 PM (OWjjx)
I'm not hoping for a Palin emergence (or whatever it would get called)...I'm just hoping for a nominee who can string 3-4 coherent sentences together without stepping on his dick in the process.
Posted by: davidinvirginia at November 04, 2011 08:40 AM (haFNK)
Posted by: BeckoningChasm at November 04, 2011 08:40 AM (i0App)
Here's how I see it:
Cain: Armed & Suicidal
Romney: McCain without the war record. This is who Obama wants to run against, since he kicked the last waffling centrist in the 'nads last time.
Perry: Problems, but not insurmountable
Gingrich: Smartest and arguably the most experienced politician in the group
I don't trust Gingrich not to fuck us, but in this field, he's starting to look like a contender.
Posted by: jwpaine at November 04, 2011 08:40 AM (FUozQ)
From the sidebar. What's not to like about this?
1) I will order HHS to stop implementation of Obamacare until we can repeal it. 2) open up domestic energy exploration and production. 3) immediate moratorium on federal regs, audit to see which ones kill jobs, and eliminate em 4) National Guard on the border. 5) Cut, Balance, Grow, and the rest of my economic legislative agenda.
Posted by: Havedash at November 04, 2011 08:40 AM (sFD5n)
And the 10-day advance warning Politico gave the campaign on it didn't even jog his memory that maybe ... hey, just spitballin' here ... the Politico story was on the same incident he had told his old campaign staffer about?
Cain's either: (a) an amnesiac or (b) a very bad liar.
Explain to me again why he should be our nominee.
Posted by: Andy at November 04, 2011 08:41 AM (5Rurq)
I thought the NRA was doing that today?
Posted by: taylork at November 04, 2011 08:41 AM (5wsU9)
Posted by: taylork at November 04, 2011 12:37 PM (5wsU9)
Or not.
Posted by: davidinvirginia at November 04, 2011 08:41 AM (haFNK)
Just imagine -- Jesus Christ just announced running for the presidency, NYT reports He has been known to defend adulteress. Also, anonymous sources reported He was seen entering the known adulteresses house with several other women, after leaving the house Jesus was covered in oil. According to one source the oil appeared of a type that could be used in more exotic sexual practices. More developing.
Remember who we are dealing with here.
Posted by: Fire with Fire at November 04, 2011 08:41 AM (lcwvr)
Posted by: Inspector Asshole at November 04, 2011 08:42 AM (1DqBk)
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at November 04, 2011 08:42 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Fire with Fire at November 04, 2011 12:43 PM (lcwvr)
Hell yes, I'm taking a day off work on that one.
Posted by: Heralder at November 04, 2011 08:44 AM (/Mxso)
Posted by: Soona at November 04, 2011 08:44 AM (pWrDE)
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 12:37 PM (OhYCU)
And we're not?
2003 he knew this could be a problem for him running for dog catcher.
2011 he's unprepared running for POTUS!
Never won an election , not even a primary.
He said he had no skeletons in the closet.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at November 04, 2011 08:44 AM (bAL0J)
Cain can't force the NRA to do anything. Sheesh.
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 08:44 AM (OhYCU)
Posted by: tasker at November 04, 2011 08:44 AM (rJVPU)
Well, I'm shocked, shocked that writers at a conservative blog are writing about the GOP candidates during the GOP primary!
Posted by: Slublog at November 04, 2011 08:44 AM (mIOqx)
I'm just hoping for a nominee who can string 3-4 coherent sentences together without stepping on his dick in the process.
Yeah, I hate to tell you this, but that's setting the bar, way way way too high.
May I suggest a little cleansing of the political palate? Like, say, a thread about the various MMORPG's coming out in the next few weeks and their implications for geeks, nerds, and dorks? As well as the impact in business for Blizzard and their product World of Warcraft?
Fucking Blizzard. I finally get out and then they suck me back in with promises to let me play a panda Drunken Master style. Bastards.
Posted by: alexthechick at November 04, 2011 08:45 AM (VtjlW)
Because in 2008, the Democrats nominated a political novice with no experience and bad plans................and we should too!
Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at November 04, 2011 12:43 PM (OWjjx)
It does seem to be exactly that with some. Good lord. Yes, the last 3 years have been so wonderful for our country, let's try to exactly emulate what happened in 2008 this time around.
Posted by: davidinvirginia at November 04, 2011 08:45 AM (haFNK)
But Perry destroyed his own campaign by insulting the base to their face, then acting like a bumbling idiot in the debates.
And I think Perry can still come back (if people will use their brains for a few minutes). He's apologized (at least 3 times that I've heard/seen) for the "heartless comment," and, by all accounts, he's getting better in the debates. If his record says he's the best, then support him.
And you're missing the point with "on personal matters." If I go to, say, a computer shop to buy a new computer. I haven't heard of this shop before, and I don't know anyone who has. They're brand new in town, but they look pretty good and they have personable staff. Then I find out the manager is a man of less-than-noble character. Am I still supposed to shop there? 'Cause I'm not gonna. I'm heading back to a place I know, even if it's not quite as friendly. Why? Because of history- I can see how they've done business before.
It's like Ace's "Show me the carfax" yesterday: Most people supporting Herman Cain are saying "they just know" that he's got a noble heart- or whatever. They pooh-pooh the fact he has absolutely no record, and give him a pass on some major missteps because of this. Well, now we're seeing that he doesn't have such a noble heart- he's a "politician" just like everyone else- willing to lie to get out of trouble, and willing to make baseless accusations against a rival to take the heat off of himself.
Sorry, no sale.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 04, 2011 08:45 AM (8y9MW)
A deranged homeless man who has been squatting among the Occupy Wall Street protesters in lower Manhattan went on a violent, early-morning rampage yesterday, cursing incoherently and kicking down tents.
The only thing that could stop Jeremy Clinch from his Godzilla-like rampage was a left hook to the face delivered by a paranoid fellow protester who claimed to be an ex-Turkish diplomat -- and charged that his assailant was carrying out a plot hatched by Mayor Bloomberg.
“I’ve been here from Day One! I haven’t got a tent!” the Cleveland-native Clinch shrieked as he furiously kicked down tents onto sleeping protesters at about 8 a.m.
“I’ve been here for three months, and I haven’t been able to sleep!” the out-of-his-head Clinch screamed.
Posted by: WalrusRex at November 04, 2011 08:45 AM (Hx5uv)
Posted by: Osama bin Truck Monkey, TEArrorist Son of a Bitch at November 04, 2011 08:45 AM (jucos)
Posted by: Chuckit at November 04, 2011 08:45 AM (ir2ZD)
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 08:46 AM (OhYCU)
Posted by: BurtTC at November 04, 2011 08:46 AM (Gc/Qi)
Posted by: Fire with Fire at November 04, 2011 08:46 AM (lcwvr)
Posted by: jewells45, teapartyterrorist at November 04, 2011 08:46 AM (l/N7H)
I'm not sure if it's a new can. Obama gets no benefit of the doubt from me. I fully expect him to go totally scorched earth if he's in real danger of losing.
Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at November 04, 2011 08:47 AM (dIHHd)
Cain's either: (a) an amnesiac or (b) a very bad liar.
Explain to me again why he should be our nominee
This is why the story won't die.
It is always the coverup....not the crime.
"Back in the 90's, business environments were a lot looser and joking around, a little flirting was not seen as it is today. If I offended anyone then I sincerely apologize. I would never intentionally want anyone to feel uncomfortable working with me. With that said, even though 2 claims were made and settled, I still do not feel they rise to the threshold of harrassment. But my feelings on this are second to the women who did feel harrassed. Again, I would apologize for the misunderstanding and wish both women well in the future. And this is the only statement I will be making on this issue as I would like to preserve the privacy of the women involved.
Thank you"
Posted by: TypicalWhitey at November 04, 2011 08:47 AM (xeVap)
The only thing that could stop Jeremy Clinch from his Godzilla-like rampage
Okay, I am officially a horrible person because I am sitting here giggling madly at the thought of that.
Needz moar Mothra babe tho.
Posted by: alexthechick at November 04, 2011 08:47 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: Shiggz undecided - weighing pros-cons-balls at November 04, 2011 08:47 AM (I9fXA)
Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at November 04, 2011 08:48 AM (ZDUD4)
Skyrim
The Old Republic
For a few weeks you all will have to got along with out me!
Posted by: Shiggz undecided - weighing pros-cons-balls at November 04, 2011 08:48 AM (I9fXA)
Let's not forget that debates in August and September aren't exactly well watched.
But I think Perry only comes back if Cain goes to the crapper.
Posted by: taylork at November 04, 2011 08:48 AM (5wsU9)
2) I'm not even for Cain. I'm against lynchings.
Look at the archives, I'm sure you'll find it. From the beginning there were two incidents, and Cain said, from the beginning, "I can't talk about these incidents, because I'm bound by a confidentiality agreement."
This isn't a lynching. A "lynching" is racially motivated, and this has nothing (or at least so little that it doesn't matter) to do with his race. It has everything to do with him becoming a threat to someone (Perry, Romney, Obama, the MFM, take your pick).
I'll grant "smear," but if he'd handled this in a stand-up manner (no quips from the peanut gallery, please) from the beginning, he'd still be being defended against the smear. Instead, he obfuscated and attempted to deflect attention.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 04, 2011 08:49 AM (8y9MW)
Again, chumps, this is too easy. YouÂ’re not even making us work for it.
What’s amazing about your perpetual circular firing squad is that your wingnut blocs are so deranged they can’t even grasp the irony. Your “base” wants an “outsider” as its candidate and in connection therewith government experience is considered a negative. How insane is that? In what alternate reality does lack of experience count as a positive when hiring someone to perform a crucial job. Sorry, rubes, but if I’m getting my spleen removed I want the guy with the scalpel, you know, to have experience as a surgeon. Duh.
Speaking of which, FYI, when this campaign began we were most concerned about Perry and then to a lesser extent Romney. Perry because his state creates more jobs in one month than Barack has created during his entire presidency; Romney because heÂ’s a good politician who can appeal to various demographics that largely went for Barack in Â’08.
Then your robo-rubes switched to Cain.
Herman Cain. ROTFLOL.
Sorry to burst your bubble, honey, but Herman Cain is Alan Keyes with a business degree. Barack could spend next year literally smoking crack and heÂ’d still beat Cain by a few million votes. Seriously.
Anyways, stay classy, conservatives. Fight the good fight. Send your messages. Prove your points. Purify the party.
WeÂ’ll raise a toast in your honor at BarackÂ’s 2nd inaugural ball. Heh.
Posted by: David Axelrod at November 04, 2011 08:49 AM (f8XyF)
Posted by: Inspector Asshole at November 04, 2011 08:49 AM (1DqBk)
Posted by: TypicalWhitey at November 04, 2011 08:50 AM (xeVap)
I bet this ad is going to make an awful lot of people very very very uncomfortable.
Posted by: cain supporter, formerly know as at November 04, 2011 08:51 AM (k1rwm)
Posted by: WalrusRex at November 04, 2011 08:51 AM (Hx5uv)
I'll grant "smear," but if he'd handled this in a stand-up manner (no quips from the peanut gallery, please) from the beginning, he'd still be being defended against the smear. Instead, he obfuscated and attempted to deflect attention.
Whateva', we do what we want!
Posted by: The Peanut Gallery at November 04, 2011 08:51 AM (5wsU9)
Posted by: Scott J at November 04, 2011 08:51 AM (/bVuS)
Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at November 04, 2011 08:52 AM (ZDUD4)
Posted by: Joey 'Plugs' Biden at November 04, 2011 08:53 AM (jucos)
That may be true, but I'm pretty sure we're watching that happen.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 04, 2011 08:53 AM (8y9MW)
I've been turning this over since the story broke, trying to figure it out. Who benefits? Not Perry, certainly. Not Romney. Not even the Democrats, and when I write 'Democrats' I'm including Politico.
My guess? Cain and his campaign manager, Mark Block, leaked the (relatively small potatoes) sexual harassment claims to Politico, probably through a trusted third party for the sake of plausible deniability. When the story broke, they fingered Perry for the leak. Now they claim media bias and racially based persecution and invoke Clarence Thomas' ordeal. Doing so, Cain and Block simultaneously get rid of the sexual harassment scandal that's been hanging over their heads since Cain announced his candidacy, prevent a possible Perry resurgence, and generate enough circle-the-wagons sympathy to cause conservatives to coalesce around Cain the as the Not Romney candidate.
Think about it. The scandal itself involves the kind of low-level, nuisance allegations common to any corporate setting, so the details of the scandal itself aren't exactly harmless but not damaging enough to derail a campaign--unlike, say, Nixon's Watergate or Gary Hart's Monkey Business scandals. And then there's the timing of the thing. Remember how George W. Bush's DUI scandal broke just prior to the presidential election? A smart opponent would time the release of the damaging information just prior to the first primaries, before Cain and his people could prepare and respond, not now.
To me it plays like a classic con and we--Republican primary voters--are the marks.
But of course I'm also a guy who thinks the Fast & Furious operation was orchestrated to influence gun control laws and regulations, so pardon me while I adjust my aluminum foil beanie, the one that keeps out subliminal radio messages from the Draconian Reptoids secretly controlling the US government.
Posted by: troyriser at November 04, 2011 08:54 AM (vtiE6)
---------
The two who filed complaints were not anonymous to the only people who needed to be in the know - the NRA management and Cain (in at least one case). We do not know that they initiated the story in the media. I think it's pretty clear the media found them after they were outed by someone, probably someone at the NRA. If I were in their shoes, I'd remain anonymous, too.
Very different than Anita Hill who only came forward with charges that she never pursued when it was politically expedient for her to do so.
Posted by: Y-not at November 04, 2011 08:54 AM (5H6zj)
http://tinyurl.com/3k2pl6z
Things that make you go hmmmmm.
Why are the Romney robo calls hitting Perry and not Cain?
Posted by: TypicalWhitey at November 04, 2011 08:55 AM (xeVap)
Posted by: maddogg at November 04, 2011 08:55 AM (OlN4e)
Maybe, but when your poll numbers aren't taking a hit and your fundraising is doing better, I find it hard to argue that he's swirling the drain...yet.
Posted by: The Peanut Gallery at November 04, 2011 08:55 AM (5wsU9)
Posted by: tasker at November 04, 2011 12:47 PM (rJVPU)
You should be banned for that.
Posted by: Your Papers Please at November 04, 2011 08:55 AM (EL+OC)
Drink!
Heh. He's burning up the word today. At this pace, it's going to replace "titular head."
Cain's used two occasions now to pull out the race card -- and in a relatively short span of time. I'm extremely uncomfortable with this being his early inclination. I was irritated when he pulled the Perry/racist rock bullcrap. This is yet another example. I don't know what it is, but I have become very wary of the Herminator. It didn't start out that way, but his actions have left me with a little intuition red flag. I'd still pull the lever for him if he's the one..but this racism thing and his Perry hatred is uncalled for and disconcerting.
Posted by: Lady in Black at November 04, 2011 08:57 AM (ycuSb)
If I am elected, I will take a wrecking ball to the Washington establishment so we can get America working again.
---
Violent rhetoric!!!
Posted by: Mitt Romney, BA English at November 04, 2011 08:57 AM (5H6zj)
Posted by: Bob Dole at November 04, 2011 08:57 AM (jucos)
This issue may turn out to be the media's Birther topic.
We should call people that are "just asking questions" about this... Gesturers
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 08:58 AM (OhYCU)
Posted by: tasker at November 04, 2011 08:58 AM (rJVPU)
As far as Perry goes, I'd vote for him of course, but anybody who thinks he would take a wrecking ball to DC is dreaming. He will continue the growth of govt, just less than Romney. But it will grow.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at November 04, 2011 08:58 AM (JYheX)
Given his performance, one could argue that he has spent the last 3 years doing that, between vacations and golf.
Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at November 04, 2011 08:58 AM (dIHHd)
http://tinyurl.com/3k2pl6z
Things that make you go hmmmmm.
Why are the Romney robo calls hitting Perry and not Cain?
Posted by: TypicalWhitey at November 04, 2011 12:55 PM (xeVap)
Cain's a stalking horse. If Perry is really out of it and in single digit polling, why is EVERYONE ganging up on him?
Posted by: Havedash at November 04, 2011 08:59 AM (sFD5n)
Posted by: t-bird at November 04, 2011 08:59 AM (FcR7P)
Posted by: tasker at November 04, 2011 08:59 AM (rJVPU)
Posted by: Viv Lee at November 04, 2011 09:00 AM (SaFTt)
Based on this ad ... I think it's safe to conclude that anyone, like Ace - who's glad this story came out NOW and wants to know the truth - is participating in a "high tech lynching" - and that means you're a racist.
This is what the GOP has become. This is what NOW flies for responsible debate. Conservatives who simply want to know the truth about these allegations - so that we don't make a grievous mistake with nominating a completely unacceptable candidate - are now RACISTS.
Either you are "with Cain" or you're a goddamn racist.
Sounds like Team Obama to me - no thanks.
Posted by: HondaV65 at November 04, 2011 09:00 AM (8X9tr)
Posted by: kansas at November 04, 2011 09:00 AM (mka2b)
He loves ObamaCare and his tenure as Senate majority leader makes McConnell look like a man of principle and a statesman.
Posted by: Miss'80s at November 04, 2011 09:00 AM (d6QMz)
Posted by: DaMav at November 04, 2011 09:01 AM (QNU76)
Posted by: kansas at November 04, 2011 09:01 AM (mka2b)
Posted by: phoenixgirl on other work computer ready to drink the perry flavor-aid at November 04, 2011 09:01 AM (s+J9D)
Posted by: alans at November 04, 2011 09:02 AM (gf3Qi)
Posted by: phoenixgirl on other work computer ready to drink the perry flavor-aid at November 04, 2011 09:02 AM (s+J9D)
Posted by: tasker at November 04, 2011 09:02 AM (rJVPU)
So Cain is smart enough for all these machinations but not to coherently put the issue to bed quickly?
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 04, 2011 09:03 AM (FkKjr)
Posted by: phoenixgirl on other work computer ready to drink the perry flavor-aid at November 04, 2011 09:03 AM (s+J9D)
Posted by: HondaV65 at November 04, 2011 01:00 PM (8X9tr)
Another Gesturer "just asking questions".
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 09:03 AM (OhYCU)
Are you that big an asshole?
If this is directed towards me, then yeah, pretty much. But if it's directed towards DrewM, well, then yeah, pretty much.
Posted by: Soothsayer at November 04, 2011 09:04 AM (G/zuv)
String the thing out, all the while calling out the media for being biased or racist or what have you, raising a bunch of money and getting free press in the process.
When we find out the charges our BS, he becomes Teflon against any media criticism.
This is the ideal scenario, and I have my doubts he could pull it off, but a man can dream of a totally discredited MFM, can't he?
Posted by: taylork at November 04, 2011 09:04 AM (5wsU9)
Posted by: phoenixgirl on other work computer ready to drink the perry flavor-aid at November 04, 2011 09:04 AM (s+J9D)
Posted by: Laughing in Texas at November 04, 2011 09:04 AM (dL9LY)
Nice try at missing the point. You basically said members here are quick to assume the women are abusing the system for their benifit. You left out any context as to why many here might believe that. I added the context which still hold true per the part I underlined above above. This and the previous post was not about the story but about your generalization of peoples motives on this board. You are the only one jumping to quick and broad generalizations and you are doing so without supporting data.
The rest of us refuse to indict on unsupported accusations,they may or may not be true how can anyone know at this point, no one is willing to own them.
Oh and for the record, serve on a coed navy ship if you really want to see harassment. I lost count of the number of times females patted me on the ass as I walked by, and as a married man it was totally unwelcome. There was nothing I could do about it! Single "sexually liberated" women are, from my experience, the most aggressive group sexually to exist in our species.
Posted by: Fire with Fire at November 04, 2011 09:05 AM (lcwvr)
I realize that from Perry I have no heart and Mitt is a Cyborg but I would still support both of them over the SCOAMF.
Perry didn't handle the "heartless" question well but I still support him.
And Mitt hasn't handled Gorebull Warming well or every other flip flop.
The handled meme is applicable to all of them. Not as much as SCOAMF but really, frap that chicken elsewhere.
Posted by: Heartless Nora in GA at November 04, 2011 09:06 AM (VxqUc)
Posted by: John McCain at November 04, 2011 09:06 AM (FkKjr)
Posted by: BurtTC at November 04, 2011 09:06 AM (Gc/Qi)
Can someone tell me why Michael Jackson's, who killed himself with an overdose by his own hand, doctor is on trial for Jackson's death but Gary Coleman's former ex-wife is not?
Posted by: Soothsayer at November 04, 2011 09:07 AM (G/zuv)
Drew,
Hey, anything to stop the guy that is beating your guy, right? Too bad your guy can't hold a candle to Cain.
Posted by: JPF at November 04, 2011 09:07 AM (PoAQX)
Herman Cain stole my bicycle in 1958 and used it ride to my cousin trixy's house and the he groped her, repeatedly, with aunt Suzies oven mitts on.
Posted by: dananjcon at November 04, 2011 09:07 AM (8ieXv)
Or until the whole thing comes out. That's what's so maddening here: he could have ended this the first day, if he so desired. Instead, he tried to outsmart the media at their own game.
It reminds me of the part in Clear and Present Danger (the movie) where the President's friend is found out to have been involved with drug smuggling. His advisers are all telling him to distance himself from the friend, and Jack Ryan breaks in, saying, basically- no, embrace him. Don't give them anywhere to take the story.
Now, I'm not saying that exact strategy would have worked, but he needed to do something similar. Either a complete stone-wall (Give me specifics, until you do I'm assuming this is made up) or come completely clean, (Here is what happened, who with, and when.) Instead, he tried to say "Give me specifics, but I didn't do anything." which lead to this "drip, drip, drip" that's causing us so much angst.
And in the mean time Obama still doesn't get vetted.
Cry me a river. Let's say all other news stopped for two weeks. No anything going on. Do you think the Media would vet Obama?
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at November 04, 2011 09:07 AM (8y9MW)
Don't blame it on me
It's nobody's fault
But we need somebody to burn.
Blame it on Cain
Don't blame it on me
It's nobody's fault
But it just seems to be his turn.
Posted by: Elvis Costello at November 04, 2011 09:07 AM (hIWe1)
Posted by: tasker at November 04, 2011 09:08 AM (rJVPU)
Posted by: Maureen Dowd at November 04, 2011 09:08 AM (dIHHd)
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at November 04, 2011 09:08 AM (bAL0J)
Posted by: blaster at November 04, 2011 09:09 AM (7vSU0)
Posted by: Fire with Fire at November 04, 2011 09:09 AM (lcwvr)
Posted by: Osama bin Truck Monkey, TEArrorist Son of a Bitch at November 04, 2011 09:09 AM (jucos)
That means it may have been reached after Cain left the association, and Bennett said it's conceivable that Cain didn't even know about it.
Posted by: Quilly Mammoth at November 04, 2011 09:10 AM (ytdP/)
Wahoo. We don't need no stinkin citizenship.
Posted by: Frito Bandito at November 04, 2011 09:11 AM (JYheX)
Posted by: Cornfused Yet Again at November 04, 2011 09:11 AM (AyzfE)
Posted by: t-bird at November 04, 2011 09:12 AM (FcR7P)
Posted by: joncelli at November 04, 2011 09:12 AM (RD7QR)
This is bullshit from Cain trying to distract everyone from the fact that there might be something to the story. I for one hope the gag order is lifted and the accusers do come forward so we can get all sides of the story. I am not going to the mat for a mediocre candidate who I know nothing about. The dude wasn't even the best guy running for the job BEFORE this shit came out and his handling of this has been pure crap.
Posted by: Ken Royall at November 04, 2011 09:12 AM (9zzk+)
Things that make you go, hmm-mmm.
Posted by: That black guy with the long fingers who had a talk show in the 80s whose name escapes me at November 04, 2011 09:13 AM (ycuSb)
Posted by: cain supporter, formerly know as at November 04, 2011 09:13 AM (k1rwm)
Hurry, get up post #20!
Posted by: AoSHQ / CNN / ABC / NBC / MSNBC at November 04, 2011 09:14 AM (xm1A1)
Saying that THE SCENARIO PRESENTED TO YOU, i.e. there was a rock with the n-word printed on it and visible for DECADES, and your response is, "that would be insensisitve if true" does not equal calling someone racist.
Dood.
Posted by: Heartless Nora in GA at November 04, 2011 09:14 AM (VxqUc)
Posted by: t-bird at November 04, 2011 09:14 AM (FcR7P)
Posted by: baldilocks at November 04, 2011 09:14 AM (T2/zQ)
Posted by: jwpaine at November 04, 2011 09:14 AM (FUozQ)
Just "asking questions", huh? Cain said he has never sexually harassed anyone.
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 09:15 AM (OhYCU)
oh this is some campaign season. pass the pop corn please.
Posted by: cain supporter, formerly know as at November 04, 2011 09:15 AM (k1rwm)
Posted by: Osama bin Truck Monkey, TEArrorist Son of a Bitch at November 04, 2011 09:16 AM (jucos)
Posted by: devilish at November 04, 2011 09:17 AM (3eTJD)
Look, I'm not going to go through every comment. That's been my impression which is why I used the word "tone."
There is no evidence the women filed complaints did so without merit.
There is no evidence the women who filed complaints did so out of racial or political motivation.
And there is no evidence that the women's stories are coming out now because they (the women) initiated contacts with the media.
And, frankly, the fact that now a lot is being made of the timing of one of the complaints, the one Cain (I guess based on what he's asserted) didn't know about, and Cain's departure does not help Cain.
Here's the timeline:
Complaint one occurs during Cain's time there. He is aware of it. It is resolved in a way that prevents him from talking about it.
Cain's contract is not renewed with the organization (that would be the logical interpretation of a June 30, 1999 departure date for Cain - end of fiscal year).
Complaint number two is initiated in June or early July of 1999 and resolved, we are told today, two or three months later. Cain does not know about it. It, too, results in the complainant receiving a settlement package and an NDA signed by the complainant. I'm not sure if it has been established that both settlements were 1-yr salaries or not.
Posted by: Mitt Romney, BA English at November 04, 2011 09:17 AM (5H6zj)
shhh, it destroys the narrative.
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 09:18 AM (OhYCU)
Bingo. Thanks, t-bird. I didn't think I'd get very far Googling 'black guy with long fingers.'
Posted by: Lady in Black at November 04, 2011 09:19 AM (ycuSb)
Herman Cain, all the folk around Madison County cussed your name. Just a no-count share croppin colored man who would steal anything he can and they always laid the blame on Herman Cain.
Herman Caiiiin, you still walk the furrowed fields of my miiiind.
Posted by: Kenny Rogers at November 04, 2011 09:20 AM (2DaHw)
David invirginia , I agree. I have been a legal assistant for well over a decade. Cain not recalling this incident for days and then saying that he wasn't privy to the complaints or the settlements because of contract law, is unbelievable. Think about it. If you had two women come forward and lodge a complaint about you, one got 35k , the other 45k, and both had to leave their jobs, you dang sure would want to see how that might have damaged your character, or so you could rebute it. This is America! This vague recall on something major like this, is a red flag. And then on Greta, he tried to laugh it off and said he liked to look at pretty flowers, that was a terrible answer to her question.
On Mark Levin show , a caller called these women "bimbos and huzzies". These women did not leak this. How dare we treat them this way until we know the facts. Are the ones that accuesed Cliinton the only believable ones ? We were quick to believe that he was a sleeze, because there were too many stories. Now with Cain we have at least 4 so far. We have to sit back and watch this unfold. But it is too late for me to believe Cain anymore. I don't believe that he didn't know every detail to this sealed agreeement. I am sick about it , because I thought he would have made a great VP. I know that others love his rhetoric, but I look at actions (like Perry). I am sick and tired of teleprompter West Wing, Roman columns speeches, while our country is burning to the ground. We need a seasoned professional to come into the White House and start to work to turn us around. With Forbes and Bolton, Perry can't miss. And we need Rudy in the Attorney General position too!
Posted by: Patrice at November 03, 2011 08:31 PM (GkYyh)
From Today:
Accuser's lawyer said Cain didn't sign the settlement.
http://bit.ly/vNdUHW
Indeed, he was already gone when the settlement was reached, which also backs the claim 'I didn't know of a settlement.'
There is a legitimate question here: Did he leave because of this?
Posted by: blindside at November 04, 2011 09:20 AM (x7g7t)
I think it is just Bennett's client whose claim was resolved after he left. It is not clear if she filed the complaint in June 1999 or July 1999. Cain left at the end of June 1999.
It seems unlikely that both claims were resolved after he left if he knew about one of them (which I believe he concedes he does) and is bound by an NDA over that one.
Posted by: Y-not at November 04, 2011 09:21 AM (5H6zj)
Posted by: baldilocks at November 04, 2011 09:22 AM (T2/zQ)
Posted by: cain supporter, formerly know as at November 04, 2011 09:23 AM (k1rwm)
Look, I'm not going to go through every comment. That's been my impression which is why I used the word "tone."
There is no evidence the women filed complaints did so without merit.
There is no evidence the women filed complaints did so with merit
There is no evidence the women who filed complaints did so out of racial or political motivation.
And there is no evidence that the women's stories are coming out now because they (the women) initiated contacts with the media.
Posted by: Fire with Fire at November 04, 2011 09:23 AM (lcwvr)
Indeed, he was already gone when the settlement was reached, which also backs the claim 'I didn't know of a settlement.'
2) There is a legitimate question here: Did he leave because of this?
1) There was no "suit".
2) Cain left before any allegations were made (from this woman).
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 09:23 AM (OhYCU)
for you "where are his management skills"....types....you aren't seeing them?
Posted by: cain supporter, formerly know as at November 04, 2011 09:24 AM (k1rwm)
Severence packages, not settlements. Get this straight, if you have employees in your union who want to cause problems and can't easily be fired because of union contracts, you ask them to leave and agree to pay them one or two years' salaries. That is the easiest way to get rid of them.
I've seen it in person, it's a buyout and it is financially profitable for the business, else it wouldn't be done. I have personally seen it happen with doped up sexual harrassment charges as well. It is much easier for the company to part with the employee after they have shown that they will do whatever they possibly can do to get a payout in the future by continuing their past practice. The union protects them from being fired and promise to bring out their false claims to embarrass everyone.
Folks, Cain is living proof that we need to fix the civil legal system, yet we turn it on him like we are now liberals.
Posted by: doug at November 04, 2011 09:25 AM (gUGI6)
Posted by: cain supporter, formerly know as at November 04, 2011 09:25 AM (k1rwm)
Cain would not have signed any NDA regarding severance with anyone. Anyone.
He may have signed a general NDA at the beginning or end of his employment with NRA.
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 09:26 AM (OhYCU)
There is no evidence the women filed complaints did so with merit
Sure, I have conceded that many times.
However, in my experience, a one-year salary separation package for a junior employee is out of the norm.
In my experience, large separation packages with NDA agreeements are an indication of one of three things:
the person leaving is a very high-ranking executive and the package is essentially a bonus;
the person leaving has a grievance or sufficient grounds for a grievance to doubt the ability of the company to fight it off; or,
the person leaving the organization is a litigious trouble-maker but their discipline and/or termination from the company was not handled well by the organization (they did not get their HR ducks in a row and document their case against the employee.
I know people here are asserting that every harassment complaint results in a payout because it's cheaper, but I personally have not witnessed that and I've seen a fair amount of this stuff.
Posted by: Y-not at November 04, 2011 09:30 AM (5H6zj)
I don't know where your excuse him is from there, it doesn't matter.
Here's the point: Are you really going to sit there and tell me that the NRA shelled out thousands of dollars based on one side of the story? You mean to tell me they never, ever went to the guy accused of all this and said, "Hey, here's what we've been told, what's your side?"
Is this how it went down now: "Yes, Ms. Accuser, you may or may not have been harassed. Here's some money. No, we don't need to talk to Mr. Cain, it's not important."
Are you fucking kidding me? There's bullshit and then there's eating a shit sandwich and calling it a steak.
Posted by: Jimmuy at November 04, 2011 09:33 AM (hROVJ)
Are you fucking kidding me? There's bullshit and then there's eating a shit sandwich and calling it a steak.
Cain NO LONGER worked for them. The NRA is not the court system. Sheesh.
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 09:37 AM (OhYCU)
Posted by: baldilocks at November 04, 2011 09:38 AM (T2/zQ)
Posted by: alans at November 04, 2011 09:39 AM (gf3Qi)
Waltzing Matilda ... waltzing Matilda ... you'll come a waltzing Matilda with me. And he sang as he watched and he waited till he billy boiled. You'll come a waltzing matilda with me.
just a brief musical interlude ...
Posted by: Honey Badger at November 04, 2011 09:39 AM (GvYeG)
"WASHINGTON (AP) -- Rep. Laura Richardson charged Friday the House Ethics Committee has singled her out for scrutiny because she's African-American.
Richardson, D-Calif., effectively announced the committee's investigation before the panel revealed it, accusing fellow lawmakers of ignoring wrongdoing by others in order to focus on her."
Posted by: alans at November 04, 2011 09:39 AM (gf3Qi)
wow choosing the race card instead of the woman card....interesting.
Posted by: cain supporter, formerly know as at November 04, 2011 09:41 AM (k1rwm)
Posted by: Gault Falcon at November 04, 2011 09:45 AM (evTki)
Also, suing press outlets makes you a foe of the first amendment? What is this, the Hustler rule? "The Press" is automatically immune to suit?
While what you say is true, name for the me the last time a public figure sued the press and won? the last one I am aware of was the 1983 case of Carol Burnett v. National Enquirer, Inc. That's one.
As a public figure, the burden of proof regarding libel is very high. That's two.
Three? it'll be an on-going distraction to his campaign, for however long that happens to last.
Four? if he does sue, discovery goes both ways. Politico will be able to access the NRA settlement, as well as depose the people involved in the settlement(s).
Suing Politico? sure it sounds great. In practie, not so much.
Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie © at November 04, 2011 09:51 AM (1hM1d)
The stories about limo's and crap are chickenshit. The circumstances happen all the damn time. The person shows up to work upset? Did her dog die? I dunno, seems some morons are coming to conclusions and helping the traitors in the media with their 'out of control black man' stereotype storyline going on.
I swear to god, if President O'Dipshit gets re-elected because of shit like this, I will blame the right wing blogoshere. Our country is done. He's already beat the class warfare drum until we've now got riots breaking out in every major city. Directly because of him. He's a traitor to this country.
If you're a blogger, and its come into your mind that it might be better for business if obama wins again, you are not one of us. You are filth. If its entered your mind once, you could do us all a favor and find an overpass
Posted by: Governor Moon Beaner at November 04, 2011 09:52 AM (bcmD0)
No one knows anything other than an allegation was made and a settlement was paid out. A really, really small settlement.
This settlement was paid out in the age of Gennifer Flowers and Paula Jones.
Paula Jones got a pretty decent settlement, but the alleged harasser got to keep his job.
And after all this, the Washington Post released a poll in which a majority of those polled don't think the allegations are serious and 70 percent think it won't affect Cain's chances (I can't link the article because you have to register for it).
Seems the general public don't really care what a few hysterical chickens are clucking about in certain camps on the Right and the Left.
The allegations against Harman Cain continue to be a non-issue everywhere except here and MSNBC.
Posted by: Sgt. York at November 04, 2011 10:06 AM (EIAxq)
Posted by: Trench Report at November 04, 2011 10:12 AM (n1YFn)
No one knows anything other than an allegation was made and a settlement was paid out. A really, really small settlement."
On the one hand, you are so right. why let the MSM lead us around like this? We don't know much, as no one is willing to personally vouch for any specific bad acts by Cain, so why not just ignore this until that time?
On the other hand, what I actually hold against Cain is that he's trafficking in baseless defenses, such as what he did to Curt before he withdrew that. Cain has a pattern now of taking any opening, no matter how unjustified, to attack Perry. For the most part, it's BS and says a lot about Cain.
As does this 'it's only because I'm black' BS. Cain is no Clarence Thomas, that's for damn sure.
I hold against Cain only what Cain personally did. I think the way he handled this scandal was A) very stupid and B) contradictory and C) guilty of smearing parties without evidence and in at least one case, an innocent party.
That's what I hold against him. Unfortunately, that kind of stuff also suggests Cain has something to cover up, but I don't see any reason to even bother worrying about that at this point. If the MSM wants to prove something, they need to prove it, IMO.
Posted by: Dustin at November 04, 2011 10:16 AM (rQ/Ue)
Mavbe because he's raising money, raising in the polls, and raising cain.
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 10:19 AM (OhYCU)
I don't see how. Nothing about this attack is racist. It is quite obvious Politico would have covered such a smear against most other Republicans running. For Romney or Huntsman, I guess maybe they would have held onto it post primary if they are really biased, but this is probably paranoia, and they surely would have run with it at some point.
Cain's skin color is not an aspect of this. Bringing it up is very unfortunate, in my opinion, and it's not the first time Cain has referenced race for political advantage.
I liked Cain a lot just a couple of months ago, and this stuff has totally burned me on the guy. I'll vote for Newt before Cain. Hell, I'll probably vote Santorum before Cain.
Posted by: Dustin at November 04, 2011 10:23 AM (rQ/Ue)
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 02:19 PM (OhYCU)"
Yeah, there's that angle, but I don't think Cain is necessarily rising in the polls. The polls need at least a week to digest this.
Anyway, it's a proven political factor now that if someone is unfairly attacked, the right will rally behind them as they have for Palin. But at least in Palin's case, she fought 100% on the facts, and was totally cleared. It wasn't about rolling eyes at the allegations. We're talking harsh scrutiny from which Palin emerged 100% clean... probably the cleanest politician I've ever seen. We even saw her private emails from years back, and there's nothing bad there.
That's a big reason why the attacks began to help Palin. If Cain is trying to tap into that, he should do all he can to prove this is a baseless smear.
You didn't see Palin complaining of sexism at the drop of a hat, and you didn't see Palin blaming every smear on her on political foes like Lisa Murkowski. She blamed those she knew were doing it, and didn't fight smear with smear.
Now I'm not demanding Cain release jack squat. I don't even care if he's not a perfect person, and since I don't know the specific allegations, or at least they aren't vouched for, I'm not really convinced at all about that stuff. But Cain doesn't get the 'I'm a victim' bonus until he shows he's actually a victim. As long as it's just 'I'm not convinced', then we're also not convinced he's a victim.
Posted by: Dustin at November 04, 2011 10:29 AM (rQ/Ue)
ALINSKY RULE 5: "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon." There is no defense. It's irrational. It's infuriating.
This is why Cain's offensive attack is so sweet. It's infuriating. It's irrational.
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 10:33 AM (OhYCU)
He's lied his butt off consistently here, trying the "modified limited hangout" of only admitting to what you know is known or bound to come out, but no more. That's the trap Politico set for him, and he fell for it.
If Cain's supporters want to stick with him after he has looked them in the eye time after time and LIED through his teeth, that's their business. But it tells me they must either be dumb as rocks or dishonest themselves.
People so desperate for "ideological purity" that they are willing to sacrifice every ideal to get it are not only foolish, but downright dangerous.
Posted by: Adjoran at November 04, 2011 11:15 AM (HJBJB)
Conservative black man is a no-go in the liberal press, period, end of story. Therefore they must destroy him for the crime of being a non-liberal, viable black candidate.
Not only that, but a Cain candidacy effectively kills the race baiting that you're going to hear every 5 minutes from now until election day. If you so much as whisper that you don't love everything Obama has ever said and did, you are a racist. That's their angle and Cain kills that.
But no, Cain has to stop the universe and his campaign and prove all this.
He might as well stand at a blackboard and write out equations proving that water is wet.
Posted by: Chris W. at November 04, 2011 11:15 AM (fN+Wl)
Posted by: The Ghost of Kim Novak at November 04, 2011 12:05 PM (8DdAv)
And BTW, this group. I got an email via Townhall Spotlight that was an advertisement/donate/support me for Cain. One of the things that they stated against Perry was that the provided free tuition for illegals in Texas. The other two bad things were the Gardasil issue and that Perry do not want to build a fence.
I think the guy who runs this PAC is some Washington marketing bigwig. When you've got to lie about your opponent, it's kind of like cheating, IMO.
Posted by: The Ghost of Kim Novak at November 04, 2011 12:12 PM (8DdAv)
The ad puts Cain on offense, and the media on defense. Fire at will.
I have zero problem with this ad, about time some one "the right" started firing back at the lefty media.
Its effective and punches them right in the nuts.
As Rush covered today, there is no factual information Cain has done anything wrong, just a bunch of smear mongering.
Posted by: gdonovan at November 04, 2011 12:23 PM (+hEiA)
Posted by: NZGORAO at November 04, 2011 12:36 PM (nTd0a)
Posted by: steevy at November 04, 2011 12:58 PM (fyOgS)
Posted by: Cherry pi at November 04, 2011 02:33 PM (OhYCU)"
Interesting. I see your point.
Posted by: Dustin at November 04, 2011 12:59 PM (rQ/Ue)
Posted by: Winter Moon Rises ePub at November 04, 2011 06:35 PM (Omjkj)
Posted by: The Wedding Quilt iBooks at November 04, 2011 07:06 PM (8K2/b)
Posted by: Assassin of Secrets AudioBook at November 04, 2011 07:29 PM (ukwQ3)
avi to flash swf to avi converter flv to dvd converter
Posted by: chinedbh at November 04, 2011 10:23 PM (g+2lY)
Posted by: Catherine the Great ePub at November 04, 2011 10:34 PM (1I3mC)
Posted by: Thorvald at November 05, 2011 04:25 AM (OhenJ)
#90 has it right. All who think this is the 'race card' miss the point, it is the fact that Cain was caught being black and on the wrong side politically - conservative. Unforgiveable.
Don't find this particular take on Cain's ad either fair or reasonable. But if you have preconceptions against Cain, you will probably not need logic to agree with it.
Oh, yes, he has handled it badly. Hmmph. That's why he is rising in the polls. To use your own arguments, those who claimed mishandling must now be Cain supporters.
Egads,. the GOP is the stupid party.
Posted by: Carmelita at November 06, 2011 08:40 AM (Y/2U4)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2295 seconds, 576 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Posted by: Rob K at November 04, 2011 07:32 AM (cpr0i)