November 03, 2011
— Gabriel Malor I don't usually do follow-up posts to the monthly AOSHQ Straw Polls. The results are mostly self-explanatory and the poll post serves mainly to give us a place where we can hash out big-picture questions about all the candidates at once.
But we've got some serious issues to hash out this month. Newt Gingrich has never scored better in our straw polls than a fraction---a tiny fraction!---of a single percentage point. Until yesterday, that is, when he jumped to almost 19%.
So what's happening? I'll tell you what's happening. The Not-Romney supporters continue to run from candidate to candidate looking for someone they can get behind. They got real excited about Michelle Bachmann for a few weeks when it looked like she wasn't a flake. Then came the Tardasil fiasco. They were super-excited about Rick Perry for a few weeks. Then came his "you don't have a heart" comment. Next it was off to Team Herman Cain, who we now discover has a sexual harassment allegation problem.
Yes, it's a problem. It's going to be a problem for everyone except Mitt Romney right up until Cain drops out of the race. Tell me, I beg you: name one substantive policy issue that got any coverage, whatsover in the GOP candidate race this week. No googling, now. Just spit it out, what's going on this week with Romney, Perry, Gingrich, Bachmann . . . hell, anybody heard from Rick Santorum?
This is great for Romney, since he's the frontrunner. He can mark time until January and no doubt would prefer to. This, of course, is bad news for those of us who would rather he not be the GOP nominee.
Cain's defenders have a curious array of arguments that this whole problem is a "smear," from Ann Coulter's race card to the extremely odd claim that Cain's fumbling should be excused because the NRA accusers have chosen to remain anonymous. I say "extremely odd" because, while the NRA accusers are anonymous to the public, Cain certainly knows who they are, the claims they made, and the contours of the settlements. And he still couldn't muster a response other than his implausible explanations followed by inconsistent clarifications.
That might be my biggest issue. If his latest statement blaming Perry is to be believed, he had years to prepare for this issue, not just the 10 days that Politico gave him. And he still came out fumbling and generally doing everything you do when you think you have something to hide. Maybe it's just me, but I'd think I'd remember a bit of details if I were ever accused of sexual harassment. At a minimum, I would know what the person was claiming against me. You're telling me that Cain has so many confidentiality provisions in claims against him, he can't remember which claim is which?!
The Cain defenders say that this is all a "distraction" and they're absolutely right. It is a distraction from the issues that matter: jobs, the economy, Obamacare, etc. It's a distraction of Cain's own making. Unlike the rest of us, who had no idea this was waiting in the wings, Cain knew about the whole thing. He's not the "victim" of sexual harassment allegations; at this point, he's a "volunteer." Everything about this story was in Cain's power to control and he whiffed. This will continue---drip, drip, drip---for weeks.
And in the meantime, Obama will continue to rack up populist cred by bashing Republicans in Congress. In the meantime, when we could have been gaining ground on Republican issues---cramming them down the throats of the reluctant MSM---we're going to be talking about stupid harassment allegations instead. The Not-Romney people will continue to display their displeasure and we'll be another step closer to the Obama vs. Romney race that we've never wanted.
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at
03:32 AM
| Comments (357)
Post contains 642 words, total size 4 kb.
As to Cain's handling, the bottom line is this - do you believe that Herm Cain sexually harassed numerous women? If so, he sucks at handling this. If not, he's can't be doing too badly.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 03, 2011 03:38 AM (FkKjr)
This is a process error. Or, rather, a series of process errors. I don't care what he did 15 years ago. Right now, he's pouring gasoline on a bonfire.
I'm sticking with Great Malodorous on this one. Romney is winning by virtue of not being Herman Cain.
Posted by: Truman North at November 03, 2011 03:40 AM (I2LwF)
Posted by: Andy at November 03, 2011 03:40 AM (XG+Mn)
Posted by: Paul at November 03, 2011 03:42 AM (DsHk0)
Another thing Mail-order Goat gets right: This isn't just hurting Cain, but helping Obama. We're spending four news cycles now not attacking Obama.
Did you know he's just bitch-slapped Israel for building some houses? What a bitch. I want him out.
Every time I think I can't get exceited to vote for Romney, I just remember the alternative.
And I hate Romney.
Posted by: Truman North at November 03, 2011 03:42 AM (I2LwF)
None of the other republican candidates are in Obama's intellect tier.
Posted by: proudonkey at November 03, 2011 03:44 AM (NadeK)
Posted by: Andy at November 03, 2011 07:40 AM (XG+Mn)
I think ultimately it only matters what the results are. If he's handling this poorly, his poll numbers would be going down. Are they? I honestly haven't checked.
I'm going purely based off the bottom line. Do you believe Cain is guilty or not? If you believe he's guilty, he's doing this badly. If you believe he isn't, he's pretty much accomplishing his goals.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 03, 2011 03:44 AM (FkKjr)
Rick Perry may be the best fellow available to be president. But I can't imagine him winning debates against the current TOTUS. Which is too bad.
Greedy Mealworm, which of the candidates do you like best?
And I'm somewhat sorry I keep getting your name wrong. This is a great opinion piece to which I agree100%. But I'm feeling like a real asshole this morning and you can take it.
Posted by: Truman North at November 03, 2011 03:46 AM (I2LwF)
Posted by: Crunch McLargehuge at November 03, 2011 03:46 AM (e8T35)
Actually, Perry stutters alot more than obama.
Posted by: proudonkey at November 03, 2011 03:47 AM (NadeK)
I still like Cain. He's a good business man. The problem I have with him as president is that the post-Obama world will be a dangerous place. Someone is going to have to sit across the table from some implacable enemies and make decisions about missles and marines. As compelling as Cain's background is for getting businesses and jobs moving again, I'm not sure that he's the guy to stare down Putin or a nuclear armed Achmadinejad.
Other than that, I am a firm not-Romney. Mitts has upheld virtually every issue I oppose in this election. From health care to spending to amnesty, Mitts has been a pretty good Democrat on all these issues at one time or another.
Posted by: Advo at November 03, 2011 03:47 AM (7vbG1)
Posted by: proudonkey at November 03, 2011 07:44 AM (NadeK)
HAHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA!
Posted by: billygoat at November 03, 2011 03:48 AM (R3k3C)
Posted by: proudonkey at November 03, 2011 07:47 AM (NadeK)
HAHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA!
Posted by: billygoat at November 03, 2011 03:49 AM (R3k3C)
This blog has a twist of irony.
The fact that a portion of the base are Tea Party purists who refuse to accept Romney for his 17 and 10 year old flaws is the same reason they wont settle for the others. The others have flaws that are just as bad.
Which is why those of use who arent idealistic dreamers or angry madmen want Romney. He is the best candidate and will make the best president.
When the fickle base backs *their* candidate, all is right in the world. But these are the same people who thought Trump's birtherism was great and launched him to first, the same people who handed Bachmann an IA straw win over Pawlenty, the same people who take a pizza CEO who is still figuringout his Israel and Abortion, as a serious frontrunner.
Posted by: Winning at November 03, 2011 03:49 AM (80nuu)
No. Cain "sucks at handling this" whether he's guilty of sexual harassment or not.
In fact, his guilt is entirely beside the point. I don't have any idea whether he harassed anyone or not. But I do know that his answers on this have continually evolved; his answers have been inconsistent, evasive, unresponsive, and implausible. Those are the hallmarks of someone with a credibility problem.
And, having firmly established in the public consciousness that he has credibility issues, every fucking jerk with a beef is going start making claims against Cain because they know that he's guaranteed to handle it poorly.
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at November 03, 2011 03:52 AM (XVaFd)
Posted by: Yip in Texas at November 03, 2011 03:52 AM (FLFli)
Posted by: billygoat at November 03, 2011 03:52 AM (R3k3C)
Posted by: Andy at November 03, 2011 03:52 AM (XG+Mn)
Newt's better. While he may have supported a mandate, he never implemented one. He's also been elected more than once.
And let's not pretend Mitt endorsed Doug Hoffman. Mitt endorsed no one in the Scozzafava/Hoffman race. It most certainly wasn't Newt's finest hour, but it isn't like Mitt covered himself in leadership there.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 03, 2011 03:53 AM (FkKjr)
This right here is why, even if Cain's campaign had handled everything more smoothly, I don't believe his evolving explanations. Cain knew about this shit the entire time; apparently, so did the media that built him up to help defeat Perry, and now those exact same people are going to use Cain's past to kill his chances. Our nominee is going to be Romney, and that makes me want to puke.
Posted by: Rick Rombachcaingrichsman at November 03, 2011 03:53 AM (8/DeP)
Posted by: JewishOdysseus at November 03, 2011 03:54 AM (PYxvn)
Posted by: bannor at November 03, 2011 03:55 AM (6AXh/)
Mr. Malor, that comes across a bit off. You wouldnt afford this level of scrutiny for a dem candidate. If a dem had changed his stories like Cain has, I'm pretty sure you would've assumed he was guilty already.
Posted by: proudonkey at November 03, 2011 03:55 AM (NadeK)
No one here gives a f9ck what your opinion is. You support Obama, and voted for him. That proves your opinion and intelligence are rather suspect.
Posted by: Dick Nixon at November 03, 2011 03:57 AM (wZ3Ft)
On the other hand donkeyfellator, if we met in real life a few of us would blanket roll you, throw you in the trunk of a car, and then plunger rape you and leave you in the high weeds under a ghetto overpass. Go fuck yourself, troll.
Posted by: Rick Rombachcaingrichsman at November 03, 2011 03:58 AM (8/DeP)
Nah. Track record of reforming liberal entitlement trumps anything Romney's accomplished in his career.
Plus Romney is flat out a pussy. He will never deliver the cultural case for American exceptionalism or take it to the mainstream media like Newt has. Not even close.
A big pussy.
Posted by: JB at November 03, 2011 03:59 AM (7T+Mz)
How sad is it when Newt Gingrich has become our last hope?
Posted by: Little Miss Spellcheck at November 03, 2011 03:59 AM (a5ljo)
Posted by: Andy at November 03, 2011 03:59 AM (XG+Mn)
Mr. Malor, that comes across a bit off. You wouldnt afford this level of scrutiny for a dem candidate. If a dem had changed his stories like Cain has, I'm pretty sure you would've assumed he was guilty already.
Posted by: proudonkey at November 03, 2011 07:55 AM (NadeK)
The two positions are not mutually exclusive.
Posted by: Truman North at November 03, 2011 04:00 AM (I2LwF)
Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at November 03, 2011 04:00 AM (ZDUD4)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 03, 2011 04:01 AM (UlUS4)
Posted by: Rick Rombachcaingrichsman at November 03, 2011 04:02 AM (8/DeP)
I'm waiting for actual proof on Cain to worry about it. The fact he and his campaign have fumbled the ball is not overly worrisome to me. He seems to be able to lead (govern) well based on his life story.
Posted by: jjmurphy at November 03, 2011 04:02 AM (xjEAl)
Posted by: proudonkey at November 03, 2011 07:47 AM
Maybe so, donkster.
But when you add "clusterfuck of a miserable failure" to the mix, your love-object is in a class by himself. Every Repub candidate has a thicker (and more honest) resume than Osama Obama. None is as richly deserving of some serious jail time as the Traitor-in-Chief.
Shit, Elmer Fudd stutters more than the Chicago Jesus. But if he was running for president, I'd support him over the pitiful would-be third-world thug you're trying to re-elect.
Posted by: MrScribbler at November 03, 2011 04:02 AM (HkOAc)
Posted by: proudonkey
........
You don't get it. It doesn't matter if he's guilty or not. The way he handled it is so terrible I would never want that man sitting in the oval office. He's a retard.. and he appears very old and feeble minded right now. He had lots of notice and he still fucked up this little mini-scandal. What's he going to do when the Chi-Coms invade (name your Asian country)? Or any other crisis? No, thanks.. he's done.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at November 03, 2011 04:02 AM (UTq/I)
I would think it's somewhat important.
I have to say I just don't get that at all. If he didn't do it, how fucking incompetent are he and/or his campaign team to not be able to swat this away? With 10 days' advance notice, even.
There are numerous instances of politicians not being able to 'swat away' bullshit stories.
It's a smear campaign, and honestly the facts seem to swat this away fairly concretely. That's why no one here is saying he's guilty. So if this is about Cain being clumsy and inarticulate, okay fine. He can be. He always has been. This isn't new.
Maybe we just care about nominating truuuuuue conservatives and making some kind of statement now.
I'm hardly a Cain booster. My position is simply that until there's actual evidence, I don't think we should pay much attention to this. It's just a smear campaign.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 03, 2011 04:05 AM (FkKjr)
Anyway, you're about 80% right here, Greasy Meatball. The only thing you're missing is how bad Romney is.
We are well and truly in trouble.
Posted by: Truman North at November 03, 2011 04:06 AM (I2LwF)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 03, 2011 04:06 AM (UlUS4)
Posted by: Andy at November 03, 2011 04:07 AM (XG+Mn)
This is frakin' toxic here now folks. One of these candidates is going to take a huge hit. Either Cain or Perry is going to go down.
Personally I still smell the hand of of Romneybot staff.
Posted by: Vic at November 03, 2011 04:07 AM (YdQQY)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at November 03, 2011 04:07 AM (vzFJV)
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at November 03, 2011 08:02 AM (UTq/I)
YAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!
Posted by: Corky the Retard at November 03, 2011 04:08 AM (R3k3C)
So whether or not he sexually harassed women doesn't matter, only if he can handle accusations of it 'well'.
But if it's not about being convinced of his guilt or innocence, what the fuck is 'well?' His objective here is to convince you he isn't guilty.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 03, 2011 04:08 AM (FkKjr)
Where's the hook? Get him off of the stage!
Posted by: Fritz at November 03, 2011 04:09 AM (/ZZCn)
He knew about this thing since the settlement happened , and then he got told by media they would release it.
Still he didn't have a killer spin to put it down.
This one case of incompetent management alone makes him unreliable.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at November 03, 2011 04:09 AM (bAL0J)
Thinking about it.. maybe all these "scandals" and what not are good for us.. I've always thought Romney is going to be the nominee in the end.. I wavered a bit and was hopeful with Perry, but that seems less likely now. So, if Romney can keep himself above the fray, and dodge these type of scandals, many GOP voters will, in the end, probably be glad to have a candidate like him without all the goofy baggage.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at November 03, 2011 04:09 AM (UTq/I)
Posted by: Andy at November 03, 2011 04:10 AM (XG+Mn)
FWIW, a female co-worker once made a complaint of sexual harassment against me. She had done this with a couple of other managers prior, and the company had given her raises and other payoffs to keep her quiet. When the HR person informed me of the complaint, I informed the HR person that she would have a tough time making her allegation stick once it came out that I had been the co-chair of the Gay and Lesbian Law Students in college. The matter was promptly dropped, and the woman left the company a few weeks later.
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 03, 2011 04:10 AM (PLvLS)
Maybe there is something wrong with me, a lifetime libertarian conservative, since I simply do not seem to find a strong affinity for any of the current crop of Republican candidates.
I will vote ABO, even if I have to hold my nose, as I suspect will many independent voters, and pull the plunger.
And right now the Dems are running a smarter campaign then the Republicans. Stop the inter-party attacks and bickering, concentrate on the issues and how you would solve the problems we face, compare yourself to BHO and tell us why you would do better.
And rach candidate must continually affirm, announce, annunciate, blast, blaze, blazon, broadcast, call, circulate, declare, demonstrate, disseminate, enunciate, evince, expound, get on a soapbox, give out, herald, illustrate, indicate, manifest, mark, ostend, pass the word, profess, proclaim, promulgate, publish, shout out, show, sound off, spout, spread it around, stump, trumpet, utter, vent, ventilate, voice the fact that Republicans Create Jobs!
Posted by: Mister Money at November 03, 2011 04:11 AM (wN82N)
Posted by: kelley in virginia at November 03, 2011 04:12 AM (/Sgtl)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 03, 2011 04:12 AM (UlUS4)
Posted by: proudonkey at November 03, 2011 04:12 AM (NadeK)
No. It's not. Cain has admitted that there were two accusations and at least one settlement. That's not a smear. (Notably, that's all that Politico reported to get this ball rolling.)
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at November 03, 2011 04:12 AM (XVaFd)
Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at November 03, 2011 04:13 AM (ZDUD4)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 03, 2011 08:05 AM
Makes you a lonely figure in this crowd, doesn't it? Cain has gotten the same treatment (for something that may or may not have happened years ago) as the Weiner-wagger did. Post after post, with commenters venting their spleen in outrageous outrage.
All I know about Cain is that he got the Lyndon Johnson Treatment ("Mr Johnson, you can't prove your opponent screwed a goat!" "Ah know, but let's make him deny it!" while other hopefuls (*cough* Mutt Romney and, of course, Osama Obama) evade scrutiny.
At this rate, we may end up without a candidate. Hard to imagine even a political hack desperate to be elected (*cough* Mutt Romney, again) would put up with the eating-our-own tactics of the the Internet Conservatives.
Posted by: MrScribbler at November 03, 2011 04:13 AM (HkOAc)
We are well and truly in trouble.
Posted by: Truman North...............
Good lord.. no we're not.
If Obama gets re-elected, all Bush tax cuts expire - immediate tax hike for ALL of us on Jan 1, 2013. And, Obamacare starts to kick in unles the courts throw it out.
Those 2 things alone are enough reason to vote for Romney - unless you really want your taxes raised, Obamacare and all the social programs Obama has put in place to continue.. because that's what you get.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at November 03, 2011 04:15 AM (UTq/I)
If Perry drops out I don't now WTF I am going to do, but it sure as fk will not be RINO Romney or Noshit Newt.
Posted by: Vic at November 03, 2011 04:15 AM (YdQQY)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 03, 2011 04:15 AM (UlUS4)
I think that's about where we're at; in any event, barring a Lazarus-like move from Perry (or maybe Newt) it's definitely where we're heading. Grim.
Cain is a decent man, an American citizen, a conservative and a successful self-made businessman who has the smarts to at least hire excellent cabinet secretaries who come up to here.
Well, I'll grant you he's "an American citizen, a conservative and a successful self-made businessman." As for "the smarts to at least hire excellent cabinet secretaries who come up to here," not so much.
Posted by: Rick Rombachcaingrichsman at November 03, 2011 04:15 AM (8/DeP)
It does tend to make a claim that I tried to get her back to my hotel room rather implausible, idiot.
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 03, 2011 04:16 AM (PLvLS)
Posted by: Andy at November 03, 2011 08:10 AM (XG+Mn)
Then we should see that in the polling pretty soon.
Maybe I'm out in left field here, but this just seems depressingly familiar - Dems make a smear against a GOP candidate, GOP voters abandon like sandtrout in a waterfall.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 03, 2011 04:16 AM (FkKjr)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk
...........
No, not at all. His objective is to convince me he would be a good president. He hasn't.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at November 03, 2011 04:17 AM (UTq/I)
vic, we all share your sentiments that we don't love Romney (or maybe even Newt). but Obama is really, really bad. His SC nominees are bad; his cabinet picks are bad; his usurping Congress is bad: & his foreign policy is a giveaway program to evil regimes.
if anybody is as bad as Obama, I'm yet to see them.
Posted by: kelley in virginia at November 03, 2011 04:17 AM (/Sgtl)
Posted by: ! at November 03, 2011 04:18 AM (k1rwm)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 03, 2011 04:19 AM (UlUS4)
I can see why 0bama wants Romney as the nominee. Conservatives can't stand him and Romney will put the kibosh on conservative enthusiasm.
I feel like I'm in one of those movies where the bad guys always seem to win.*
*until the goodguy prevails at the end.
Posted by: Willy at November 03, 2011 04:19 AM (pDBCE)
Posted by: Vic at November 03, 2011 08:15 AM (YdQQY)
I'm not sure that Newt is evil, but he is craven, and willing to do and say anything for power. His political philosophy is secondary to his desire for control, and I really don't like that in a politician.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJconservative) at November 03, 2011 04:19 AM (3vSLn)
Posted by: phoenixgirl ready to drink the perry flavor-aid..can i get a different flavor? at November 03, 2011 04:19 AM (SH3gZ)
According to Cain, this "smear" (which he has confirmed actually occurred and is therefore not a smear) is coming from another GOP candidate, not the Dems.
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at November 03, 2011 04:20 AM (XVaFd)
I agree in principle. But suppose Cain is elected and suddenly has to push an agenda through a Congress dominated and controlled by thieves and criminals? Even a good man has to have some kind of asshole streak in him to prevail in that environment. Romney, at least, has that going for him. In abundance. Cain, not so much.
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 03, 2011 04:20 AM (PLvLS)
Posted by: ParisParamus at November 03, 2011 04:21 AM (LVSLx)
Posted by: proudonkey at November 03, 2011 08:12 AM (NadeK)
No, really, why don't you respect your ban, Dum-dum?
Posted by: nickless at November 03, 2011 04:22 AM (MMC8r)
Posted by: Rick Rombachcaingrichsman at November 03, 2011 04:22 AM (8/DeP)
I must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my fear.
I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing.
Only I will remain.
Posted by: Bene Gesserit at November 03, 2011 04:22 AM (3vSLn)
Posted by: The terrorist Hobbit formerly known as Donna at November 03, 2011 04:22 AM (5Wl/f)
We are well and truly in trouble.
Posted by: Truman North
...............
Good lord.. no we're not.
Hmmm... I guess it depends on what we're talking about! I sure feel like this is trouble! The only guy coming out ahead is the one who agrees with Obama on Obamacare?
Posted by: Truman North at November 03, 2011 04:22 AM (I2LwF)
I was giving Cain a pass on this until he started accusing Perry. Now he needs to produce some fkin proof or apologize.
This kind of shit will get that asshole communist reelected.
Posted by: Vic at November 03, 2011 04:22 AM (YdQQY)
Posted by: The terrorist Hobbit formerly known as Donna at November 03, 2011 04:23 AM (5Wl/f)
Handing over the nuke keys to such an indecisive person, regardless how good a person he is, what will Cain do after said launch? Can't remember he did it, then admit, then repent, then accuse and later on play the "v" card or the "r" card? What's worse, if he wants and looks forward for guidance and advise on foreign policies issues-we can certainly have a plant on the inside.
Yesterday we watched the movie "Coneheads" and in one scene the immigration gurus were brainstorming on how to protect the border. One of them said to run an electric cable from end to end, so when a Mexican crossed over he'd be electrocuted. They had a map on the table and the plastic Mexican lit up like a match. Umm, which candidate proposed a similar idea? I laughed and had a major "facepalm" moment-considering that this was thrown out in the open by one of our candidates.
Posted by: PPF at November 03, 2011 04:23 AM (uW+NQ)
Posted by: OscarMike at November 03, 2011 04:23 AM (FLFli)
Posted by: Andy at November 03, 2011 04:24 AM (XG+Mn)
Cains messy denial and later multi stage remembrance shows he cant manage critical campaign events.
Even with media telling him they're going to publish it in advance.
Usually media attacks first and ask later.
Does anyone like to have this surprise to show up when he's up against Obama?
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at November 03, 2011 04:24 AM (bAL0J)
Christ, please no. Can you fucking imagine the media hatefest that would be going on if she were? Get a grip man, it's over.
Posted by: Rick Rombachcaingrichsman at November 03, 2011 04:25 AM (8/DeP)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 03, 2011 04:25 AM (UlUS4)
Double incompetence.
This site is hard on Cain, and tends to be Pro-Perry. But two people fumbled the ball, and only one gets railed for it.
Yes, Cain had some mis-steps. But it was rash and idiotic for Perry's communication chief to implicate the Romney campaign based on a poltiical donoation.
Three Words: Bush League... Again.
Making such a serious allegation on such flimsy evidence is politically dangerous and dumb. And now that Cain officially pointed the finger at Perry, his campaign has egg in their face.
Posted by: Winning at November 03, 2011 04:26 AM (80nuu)
Posted by: Andy at November 03, 2011 04:26 AM (XG+Mn)
Herman Cain has a telling the truth/refraining from playing the race card/knowing what the hell he is talking about problem.
Posted by: davidinvirginia at November 03, 2011 04:26 AM (haFNK)
What seems different about THIS primary season is that so many on "our side" -- yes, I mean Ace -- are so incredibly eager to do the Democrats' work for them and make sure no candidate they don't like is not only defeated but sent away in disgrace.
Maybe I just didn't notice before, but in most cases I can't recall the kind of vitriol we read and hear today being spewed at past candidates. Well, there was Michelle Malkin and her foot-stamping whining about McCain in '08, but I thought that was an outlier.
The prospect of having Mutt Romney be our candidate appalls me. Having him in the White House -- which I don't think he'd get anyway -- would, IMO, merely slow down the destruction the SCoaMF has been pushing.
Yes, I'll vote for him IF.... But Perry, Cain, Newt and even Bachmann (in that order) would be far better for the country.
Posted by: MrScribbler at November 03, 2011 04:26 AM (HkOAc)
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJconservative) at November 03, 2011 04:27 AM (3vSLn)
Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at November 03, 2011 04:27 AM (ZDUD4)
Posted by: Beefy Meatball at November 03, 2011 04:28 AM (E5h0G)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 03, 2011 04:28 AM (PLvLS)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 03, 2011 04:28 AM (UlUS4)
Posted by: stace at November 03, 2011 04:30 AM (LLQEX)
I'm still not comfortable with Republicans blaming each other, though.
Posted by: Willy at November 03, 2011 04:31 AM (pDBCE)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at November 03, 2011 04:31 AM (UlUS4)
Posted by: Mittens! at November 03, 2011 04:31 AM (s7mIC)
Come on. I read the article. There's way more in it than 'NRA settled with a woman who accused Cain of sexual harassment out of court." The article clearly pushes the perspective that Cain is some kind of sex fiend with numerous 'unnamed' sources. Until those sources get names, it's bullshit.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 03, 2011 04:31 AM (FkKjr)
Mitt Romney - competent. Should be fun seeing a dog strapped to Air Force One.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 03, 2011 04:32 AM (FkKjr)
While we are talking about "smears". Lets not forget the Perry campaign smeared the Romney campaign by making false accusations based on nothing. Somehow Perry's handling of this kerfuffle gets no scrutiny.
Posted by: Winning at November 03, 2011 04:32 AM (80nuu)
I was pointing this out yesterday.
Can we please try to be the voice of sanity in the blogosphere and have some candidate-policy posts? There was a manufacturing forum in Iowa a couple of days ago at which Perry stood firm by his commitment to eliminate federal subsidies in the energy industry (and elsewhere, but the question was about ethanol) and at which iirc Santorum proposed a 0% corporate tax rate, but it was not covered here. There is another forum in honor Reagan this week, I think, which Mitt will be skipping because he has a speech planned Friday.
And there's the foreign policy debate coming up. Could we have posts hashing out the issues we'd expect each of them to be able to address before that debate?
Posted by: Y-not at November 03, 2011 04:33 AM (5H6zj)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at November 03, 2011 04:33 AM (vzFJV)
Posted by: Bob Dole! at November 03, 2011 04:33 AM (s7mIC)
Sex sells. Hermann Cain may or may not have had a sexual harassment problem in his past. I don't know the man, so I don't know what he may or may not have done. I do know that sexual harassment charges have been thrown about loosely over the past two decades (see Thomas, Clarence), with innocuous, if gross, behavior labeled as predatory. I also know that there's a double standard for behavior between Republicans and Democrats (see Kennedy, Ted; see Clinton, Bill).
That being said, what's really irritating about the Cain story is not the effect on a Republican candidate. It's that this mini-scandal, because of the media's obsession with sex, is distracting the media from investigating and reporting on real and important scandals in the Obama administration -- Solyndra, Fast and Furious, Corzine-gate (where exactly did $900 million go, the amount lost by MF Global, the investment firm run by the former New Jersey Senator and current Obama bundler?), not to mention the ongoing scandal of Obama's support for the increasingly criminal and dangerous Occupy Wall Street movement.
And, of course, it's distracting us from the real issues -- the financial meltdown in the Eurozone, our crushing national debt and runaway entitlement programs, the increasing danger of a nuclearized Iran, the fallout from the Arab Spring which is turning into an Islamist Winter. Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.
Posted by: The Regular Guy at November 03, 2011 04:35 AM (nov+8)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 03, 2011 08:20 AM (PLvLS)
I would have agree with you about Cain a few weeks ago, but he's doing his level best these days to convince me he's just as big an asshole as Romney is; he's just far less competent at being one.
Posted by: davidinvirginia at November 03, 2011 04:37 AM (haFNK)
Posted by: The Regular Guy at November 03, 2011 08:35 AM (nov+
The sad story here is that Cain by the way he managed it created doubt and thereby giving the story legs. So now the story walks around.
How could he not have a plan to kill this story , when he knew it was coming out?
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at November 03, 2011 04:40 AM (bAL0J)
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJconservative) at November 03, 2011 08:27 AM (3vSLn)
You're right. Why today?
He's a big developer who then ran for office. Pay to play baby. He does keep his mouth shut and is usually completely non controversial. 85% of virginia think they are still voting for John Warner.
Posted by: dagny at November 03, 2011 04:40 AM (cAVkv)
==================================
At the GOP debate Monday night, Rep. Michele Bachmann(R-Minn.) criticized Texas Gov. Rick Perry for issuing a mandate in his state requiring young girls to get the HPV vaccine Gardasil.
==================================
Is everyone on board with a Gov't mandate to issue "required" medications to your children?.. If you are, welcome to the left side of the spectrum.. You're crazier than she is.
==================================
She continued the attack Tuesday on the “Today” show, saying she had been approached by a mother who claimed her daughter suffered from mental retardation from complications due to the vaccine.
==================================
Read that carefully.. Read it twice, if need be.. Don't even begin putting words in Michele Bachmann's mouth.. If you do, you're goofier than she is.
Posted by: franksalterego at November 03, 2011 04:41 AM (9XykO)
Posted by: David Axelrod at November 03, 2011 04:42 AM (rJVPU)
You mean Mitt "Perry Scheme" Romney? Yeah, he gets no sympathy.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 03, 2011 04:44 AM (FkKjr)
==================================
She continued the attack Tuesday on the “Today” show, saying she had been approached by a mother who claimed her daughter suffered from mental retardation from complications due to the vaccine.
==================================
Read that carefully.. Read it twice, if need be.. Don't even begin putting words in Michele Bachmann's mouth.. If you do, you're goofier than she is.
Posted by: franksalterego at November 03, 2011 08:41 AM (9XykO)
What are you trying to say , that Bachmann wasn't pimping crazy tardasil rumors, she was just "asking questions".
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at November 03, 2011 04:45 AM (bAL0J)
Not a smear - NRA settled out of court with a woman who accused Cain of sexual harassment.
Smear - Cain had a long history of sexually harassing women based on our numerous unnamed sources, including a woman who sued Cain and received a settlement.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 03, 2011 04:46 AM (FkKjr)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at November 03, 2011 04:47 AM (i6RpT)
>> but I'd think I'd remember a bit of details if I were ever accused of sexual harassment.
You would, unless there were more than one complaint to recall, and you didn't know which event was being used against you.
It's not so much "remembering details" as it is "knowing which set of details you have to refute".
Posted by: Dave in Texas at November 03, 2011 04:47 AM (WvXvd)
The thought of Obama, unfettered by a 2016 election campaign, and with one to three SCOTUS appointments up in the 2013-2017 term scares me even more than Oromney. I can barely recognize my country today, and I know I won't recognize it at all in 2017 if Hussein Obama is re-elected!
Posted by: Hrothgar at November 03, 2011 04:47 AM (i3+c5)
Posted by: Hrothgar at November 03, 2011 08:47 AM (i3+c5)
Scotus is the main reason to lose Obama.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at November 03, 2011 04:50 AM (bAL0J)
So Gabe, it's all very well to criticize but who do you suggest the non-Romneyites get behind? According to your analysis there isn't a candidate without issues of some kind. Why is everyone running from one to another? Maybe just maybe because it's a lousy field? Where the heck are all the GOP's brightest and best? These people are the best we can do? Now that is sad. I'm going to vote for ABO, but damn it I shouldn't have to!
And don't forget the media is controlling the message whether we like it or not. Oh sure we claim we are astute researchers uncovering all kinds of stuff but in reality we let the media do the work most of the time. Look how Ace, and he's not alone, has relied on stories from the LSM about all off this. Then as more comes out like in the Perry stone debacle or the Cain China comment bloggers have to backtrack and correct. So what do we do? Depend on your analysis?
Posted by: Deanna at November 03, 2011 04:50 AM (DkE0N)
Posted by: Village Idiot at November 03, 2011 04:50 AM (utXSy)
Even the SCOAMF had a competent campaign. Granted, he had a lot of help from the media, but even at that, he never gave the impression that he was flailing around.
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 03, 2011 04:51 AM (PLvLS)
What are you trying to say , that Bachmann wasn't pimping crazy tardasil rumors, she was just "asking questions".
========================================
What will you say, when the gov't wants to give your kids psychotropic tranquilizers?.. You know.. For their own good.
Posted by: franksalterego at November 03, 2011 04:51 AM (9XykO)
>>Rick Perry may be the best fellow available to be president. But I can't imagine him winning debates against the current TOTUS. Which is too bad.
Why is that? All the things(policy) that are considered weaknesses in the primaries are strengths in the generals.
Is Obama going to run as a immigration hawk? Can Obama attack Perry on Tarisil?
Unlike the meida, i've been watching videos and live streams of these candidates at events.
Perry does very well in one on one discussions. More women have donated to him than any other candidate in the race. He's good looking, has an alpha male persona and comes across as friendly.
Compare that to the petty and whiny Obama.
I think Perry will do just fine in a head to head race against, Obama, especially considering the economy isn't going ot get better next year. In fact, there is a distinct possibility that it will be worse given what is happeneing in europe.
Posted by: Ben at November 03, 2011 04:52 AM (wuv1c)
hell, anybody heard from Rick Santorum?
Huh? The socon guy from Pennsylvania? He is running for potus? How is that supposed to work? Wasnt he crushed in 2006 by some ridiculous double digit margin?
Posted by: pompous bellman at November 03, 2011 04:52 AM (P/F96)
Is everyone on board with a Gov't mandate to issue "required" medications to your children?.. If you are, welcome to the left side of the spectrum.. You're crazier than she is.
I'd need more information. Many vaccinations are mandatory in order to attend school unless you get an exception. This plan had an opt out (so not really required). The required vaccinations never occured so it's a non-issue. How is that any different than the MMR?
Also, I do want the government strongly encouraging vaccinations because of the retards and illegals. I don't want my kids going to school with Typhoid Mary. We can't control public health as in epidemics and plagues unless we use some relatively strong coersions to get people their shots. Hell, you can't get a dog license unless Fido has had his rabies shot. I do NOT consider making sure that the retards have had their children vaccinated against DPT, MMR, Meningitis, Hib, Polio, etc.
How the fuck do you think we eradicated Polio and smallpox? It wasn't by suggesting that everyone wander by the doctor sometime in their lives and get a shot? I remember being lined up at school and being given shots in the 60sand 70s. Stalinesque? Maybe a little but smallpox is no longer a threat and I'd rather live in that world.
People without reason became offended at the Tardisil vaccine because it prevents a sexually transmitted disease. It's nice that they think their virgin daughters will stay that way till they marry the virgin guy but since now mose oral cancers are caused by the Pap virus instead of tobacco it's not a realistic position. Idiots. They need to protect their kid and if they can show me a 13 year old girl who suddently became retarded then maybe I'll rethink it but I haven't seen her.
Posted by: dagny at November 03, 2011 04:52 AM (cAVkv)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 03, 2011 04:53 AM (PLvLS)
This.
We can all love Cain and his anti-establishment tone without losing sight of the uncomfortable reality that HE DOESN'T KNOW WHAT HE IS DOING!
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJconservative) at November 03, 2011 04:53 AM (3vSLn)
Cain and/or his people are basing the tie to Perry on a former Cain staffer who joined Perry's campaign a couple of weeks ago but one of Ace's many posts yesterday said he (Ace) was getting rumors of the harassment story several weeks before that. Seems like a weak link to me.
Posted by: Retread at November 03, 2011 04:53 AM (zR8O8)
Questioning Cain on this matter is not a smear. This is a smear:
"... Perry communications director Ray Sullivan then suggested to CBS News and National Journal reporter Rebecca Kaplan that Mitt Romney's campaign is behind the allegations.
"I wouldn't put it past them," he said, stating that blog posts have noted that Cain's successor at the Restaurant Association "is a big Romney donor."
"There are much closer connections between the Restaurant Association, Cain and the Romney camp than there are with us," he said."
Posted by: Winning at November 03, 2011 04:53 AM (80nuu)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at November 03, 2011 04:54 AM (i6RpT)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 03, 2011 08:51 AM (PLvLS)
Media was/is part of his campaign team, and he could trust that. But everyone knows that conservatives dont have that , and should never count on support from media.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at November 03, 2011 04:54 AM (bAL0J)
Rubber baby Bieber buggy bumpers.
Rubber baby Bieber buggy bumpers.
The Cain claim plainly explains the GOPain.
The Cain claim plainly explains the GOPain.
The Cain claim plainly explains the GOPain.
Posted by: Say it 3 X fast at November 03, 2011 04:55 AM (AYfIs)
Posted by: dagny at November 03, 2011 04:55 AM (cAVkv)
Worse, by a Democrat who's such a drooling moron the party wouldn't even let him debate with Santorum. Granted, 2006 was a bad year for Republicans. Santorum was actually a rather good senator. He pissed off teh gheys when he said that state legislatures had the same right to outlaw sodomy as they did to outlaw bestiality. This got transmuted into 'Santorum says gays have sex with dogs' once it got processed through the MFM Nonsense Machine.
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 03, 2011 04:56 AM (PLvLS)
That has been the major thing about this entire damn primary campaign. We get to the so-called debates what do they talk about? GD racist rocks that we painted over in the 80s. Does anybody ask Romney about his current stance on AGW and how that jives with his past stance? Does anyone ask Perry about the trans TX highway and his current stance on taking private property? Does anyone ask Newt about his stance on the crap and tax bill with Nancy Pelosi?
No, we hear nothing but BS hit jobs from assholes like Kommie Kris. In 2008 it was fking fire in the belly on Fred, this year it started with are you a flake on Bachmann and continued with every dam candidate EXCEPT RINO Romney.
People, turn OFF the damn MFM.
Posted by: Vic at November 03, 2011 04:56 AM (YdQQY)
But conservatives should anticipate the MFM will be their biggest adversary and plan accordingly. Newt did this. Cain did not.
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 03, 2011 04:57 AM (PLvLS)
...
Film at 11, Gen. Eric Republican fumbles wife beating question from esteemed reporter!111!
Posted by: Hrothgar, MFM Hack Wannabe at November 03, 2011 04:58 AM (i3+c5)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 03, 2011 08:16 AM (PLvLS)
So you are a purist then? Not bi-sexual? Bi-curious, etc.?
Posted by: RioBravo at November 03, 2011 04:59 AM (eEfYn)
Ding!
Posted by: rockhead at November 03, 2011 05:00 AM (ZMHGo)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 03, 2011 05:00 AM (PLvLS)
You couldn't even explain 9-9-9. And now this, which you knew you had wrapped around you, under your clothes. You for sure cannot explain this.
Posted by: I'm in a New York state of mind at November 03, 2011 05:00 AM (4sQwu)
Since you asked, before I settled down I was actively bisexual. But I had no interest in this particular bimbo whatsoever. So, I used my "Get Out of Jail Free" Card.
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 03, 2011 05:02 AM (PLvLS)
Posted by: Turd Sandwich at November 03, 2011 05:03 AM (fYOZx)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 03, 2011 08:57 AM (PLvLS)
Exactly.
I dont really understand what Cain is doing. The way he manage this is as if there's something more and he's trying to buy time. Jumping on Perry is also irrational , if he's not linked to Mitt..
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at November 03, 2011 05:03 AM (bAL0J)
Wasnt he crushed in 2006 by some ridiculous double digit margin?
>>>>Worse, by a Democrat who's such a drooling moron the party wouldn't even let him debate with Santorum. Granted, 2006 was a bad year for Republicans. Santorum was actually a rather good senator. He pissed off teh gheys when he said that state legislatures had the same right to outlaw sodomy as they did to outlaw bestiality. This got transmuted into 'Santorum says gays have sex with dogs' once it got processed through the MFM Nonsense Machine.
He lost his race in 2006 by 19%. It was a wave year, but 19% people. That's massive.
His opponent is the son of a really popular Governor Bob Casey Sr. So Bob Casey Jr. really had name recognition going for him.
But you have to understand that Santorum lost, in part, by alienating Republicans in this state. By all accounts he's a big a douchebag in everyday life as he is in debates. In 2004 he and George Bush endorsed Arlen Specter in the 2004 primaries when the conservatives in PA(like myself) were trying to get Pat Toomey elected. Toomey lost by 17,000 freaking votes.
That was the last straw for conservative in Pennsylvania. He would have lost by 5-6 percent in 2008 had we all turned out for him.
He also voted for all the shit that made conservatives hate Republicans between 2002-2006.
Posted by: Ben at November 03, 2011 05:03 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: dagny at November 03, 2011 05:04 AM (cAVkv)
Since you asked, before I settled down I was actively bisexual.
Really? How was that? Why the indecision?
Posted by: dagny at November 03, 2011 05:06 AM (cAVkv)
>>>>Is everyone on board with a Gov't mandate to issue "required" medications to your children?.. If you are, welcome to the left side of the spectrum.. You're crazier than she is.
I would agree with medications, but vaccines aren't medications. There is a big difference.
When did anti-vaccination become conservative? I must have missed that memo.
I support vaccinations. If I had kids, I would be getting them vaccinations.
Posted by: Ben at November 03, 2011 05:06 AM (wuv1c)
Or even little bits of the original organism -- just enough to elicit an immune response.
People are terrified of vaccines, and I just don't understand why. A typical granola-eating idiot liberal mother in Park Slope Brooklyn, or the Upper West Side of Manhattan will happily take incredibly powerful and dangerous drugs without blinking an eye, but will run screaming from an incredibly safe vaccine.
Fools.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJconservative) at November 03, 2011 05:06 AM (3vSLn)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 03, 2011 05:08 AM (PLvLS)
Posted by: dagny at November 03, 2011 08:52 AM (cAVkv)
I can show you a 55 year old congresswoman from Minnesota!
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJconservative) at November 03, 2011 05:09 AM (3vSLn)
=========================================
There are contraindications for some patients.. It says so, on their own site.
Posted by: franksalterego at November 03, 2011 05:10 AM (9XykO)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at November 03, 2011 05:10 AM (l9zgN)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 03, 2011 09:08 AM (PLvLS)
Then don't talk about it.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJconservative) at November 03, 2011 05:11 AM (3vSLn)
Sure they can. If politico ran a story saying Laura Bush was a serial killer because she was involved in a fatal car accident, that's a smear.
All we know for certain is that one woman settled out of court with the NRA. Everything else is based on innuendo.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 03, 2011 05:11 AM (FkKjr)
Then don't talk about it.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJconservative) at November 03, 2011 09:11 AM (3vSLn)
+10,000.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 03, 2011 05:12 AM (FkKjr)
Forgot about that. Yeah, the GOP really boned itself in 2006. Liz Dole (Chairman of the Republican Senate Campaign Committee) spent millions to help out Lincoln Chaffee in his primary against a conservative, then didn't have any money to help out Jim Talent in Missouri or Macaca in Virginia or that RINO up in Montana who insulted the firemen. Three close-but-winnable races lost because the RNC was determined to back a loser in a primary.
Lefties have no idea that conservatives hate Karl Rove as much as they do.
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 03, 2011 05:12 AM (PLvLS)
I didn't want to. I just wanted to share a personal anecdote about the frivolity of sexual harassment accusations.
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 03, 2011 05:14 AM (PLvLS)
If Romney gets the nod in the Primaries, you can expect the media to begin a long, slow, death-by-a-thousand-cuts expose' of Mormonism. All the weird, ugly, racist, tin-foil stuff that defines Mormonism will find its' way onto the news. Romney will be asked questions about what he plans to name his future-planet, and if any "dark-skinned" people will be allowed in his Cabinet.
Do not think for a second that they will not "go there".
http://www.inplainsite.org/html/mormonism.html
Posted by: TXMarko at November 03, 2011 05:16 AM (0oNdW)
Posted by: Your Papers Please at November 03, 2011 05:17 AM (EL+OC)
This. So much this.
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at November 03, 2011 05:17 AM (XVaFd)
You're mixing apples with weiners.
Posted by: The Pirates Your Mom Feared at November 03, 2011 05:17 AM (lpWVn)
Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at November 03, 2011 05:18 AM (ZDUD4)
Posted by: marine43 at November 03, 2011 05:19 AM (t8f+x)
Here's my take and I do like Cain.
BUT...he has a hard on for Perry. I don't know why but he does. He jumped on the rock (non) story to paint Perry as a racist.
Strike number one.
Perry has said nothing but nice things about him, even considering him for VP and Cain has said he would never support him.
Strike number two.
Cain's past problems come up and he immediately blames Perry without any evidence whatsoever.
Strike number three.
I think Cain knows (or figures) that Romney will be the nominee. He wants the VP slot imo.
Any other explanations for his obvious and unfounded hatred of Rick Perry?
Posted by: TypicalWhitey at November 03, 2011 05:20 AM (xeVap)
I only heard 1 settlement, 2 claims (numerous incidents) in the original politico story. Where did you hear about the second settlement?
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 03, 2011 05:20 AM (FkKjr)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff, bozack-deep in a jar of apple sauce at November 03, 2011 05:20 AM (vzFJV)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 03, 2011 09:12 AM (PLvLS)
Lefties have no idea of a lot of things. That's what having the MFM shilling for you will do to your intellectual acumen. The only value Rove ever had for me was how batshit crazy he made the libs. Other than that he's a pudgy turd who barely learned a fucking thing from Lee Atwater, the last decent strategist the GOP had, and is about as trustworthy as McCain.
Posted by: Captain Hate at November 03, 2011 05:20 AM (G6SvX)
Posted by: Chilling the most for perry at November 03, 2011 05:21 AM (6IV8T)
Kinda where I'm at. I don't think he should step down, necessarily, but if he doesn't step up and demonstrate a better command of the issues and an ability to project competence... I'm ready to move on to another 'Not Romney.'
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 03, 2011 05:21 AM (PLvLS)
You really think the woman would come forward and say Cain didn't do anything to her? I'm sure she'd spin quite the tale.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 03, 2011 05:22 AM (FkKjr)
Agreed. He was the "mastermind" behind the Prescription Drug Entitlement and Bush's Amnesty push. I'll never forget how he said we needed mass immigration to spare his children the indignity of menial labor.
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 03, 2011 05:23 AM (PLvLS)
A third party challenge will guarantee an Obama victory.
How fucking stupid are we that we are even considering this possibility?
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJconservative) at November 03, 2011 05:23 AM (3vSLn)
Your doctor or health care professional will help you decide if you or your child should get the vaccine.
Funny,
I don't see anything about contacting Rick Perry there,
do you?
Posted by: franksalterego at November 03, 2011 05:23 AM (9XykO)
BS. Anderson ran third party in 1980 and Reagan still won. (Well, on second thought...)
Posted by: RioBravo at November 03, 2011 05:25 AM (eEfYn)
Posted by: The Pirates Your Mom Feared at November 03, 2011 05:26 AM (lpWVn)
Ignorance is a terrible thing.
Read a bit about the whole Gardasil affair before you spout.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJconservative) at November 03, 2011 05:26 AM (3vSLn)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff, bozack-deep in a jar of apple sauce at November 03, 2011 05:26 AM (vzFJV)
All we know for certain is that one woman settled out of court with the NRA. Everything else is based on innuendo.
Why do you keep saying one? It was two with a third who decided against filing the charges.
This isn't going away and the media WILL find people who witnessed it and at least one will talk on the record.
Write it down.
Posted by: TypicalWhitey at November 03, 2011 05:27 AM (xeVap)
I can show you a 55 year old congresswoman from Minnesota!
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJconservative) at November 03, 2011 09:09 AM (3vSLn)
Nothin sudden about that....
Posted by: pompous bellman at November 03, 2011 05:27 AM (P/F96)
Anderson pulled votes from both sides.
How many Obama supporters are going to look at Ron Paul -- the craziest fucking national politician around -- and think, "sure, he's an excellent alternative to my sugar-daddy Barack!"
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJconservative) at November 03, 2011 05:28 AM (3vSLn)
Posted by: taylork at November 03, 2011 05:29 AM (5wsU9)
How fucking stupid are we to let a subject such as Sex divide us? That bar was passed when Clinton took blowjobs in the Oval Office from a girl young enough to be his daughter.
Sex does not matter to the Left. We are the only ones defining spur-of-the-moment Purity Tests to assail our own Candidates.
Posted by: TXMarko at November 03, 2011 05:30 AM (0oNdW)
"The most important aspect of our task over the next two days is to resolve the financial crisis here in Europe," Obama said, according to the pool. "I agree with him that the EU has made some important steps towards a comprehensive solution ... but here at the G-20, we're gonna have to flesh out details about how the plan will be fully and decisively implemented." And, "We also discussed the situation in Greece and how we can work to resolve that situation as well."
(The pool adds a quote Obama made about the lovely Carla Bruni: "Finally, POTUS mentioned the newborn Giulia Sarkozy and congratulated the French presidential couple. He quipped that told Sarkozy that he was confident that the baby 'inherited her mother's looks rather than her father's, which I think is an excellent thing!' Sarkozy smiled broadly but frankly, laughters in the room were on the muted side.")
Posted by: ian cormac at November 03, 2011 05:30 AM (JU0xh)
How fucking stupid are we that we are even considering this possibility?
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJconservative) at November 03, 2011 09:23 AM (3vSLn)
I saw a news article saying some group has gathered up 22million to fund a third party candidate, an 'independent centrist', from what I gathered it was online and no names are evident yet. Now we know where the Dems slush fund is going
Posted by: Red Shirt at November 03, 2011 05:30 AM (FIDMq)
Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at November 03, 2011 09:27 AM (OWjjx)
Full cynic , get out first with a solid story , any story just as long as it's solid.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at November 03, 2011 05:30 AM (bAL0J)
The NDA makes this difficult. I think they're hoping that if they just continue to "ignore it" it will go away. But if the NDA is voided and faces and names get put to the charges, that this will stay in the news cycle until January, which it probably would.
Posted by: taylork at November 03, 2011 05:31 AM (5wsU9)
If there no witnesses it is generally is difficult to sort out the truth. That is the problem with these types of allegations. That's also why settlements are made.
So in Cain's situation perhaps he can point out that he was c-char of the Gay/Lesbian Restaurant Association prior to going to NRA. We have some evidence that would work.
Posted by: RioBravo at November 03, 2011 05:32 AM (eEfYn)
Posted by: taylork at November 03, 2011 09:31 AM (5wsU9)
The NDA is just about money , so oppo candidates and media will pitch in to get the story out, but drip drip to maximize gain .
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at November 03, 2011 05:35 AM (bAL0J)
Posted by: ian cormac at November 03, 2011 05:36 AM (JU0xh)
I'm ready to move on to another 'Not Romney.'
How fucking stupid are we that we are even considering this possibility?
Ultimatums?
Posted by: The Pirates Your Mom Feared at November 03, 2011 05:38 AM (lpWVn)
"the Perry stone debacle "
You mean the Washington Post's hit job that Cain got involved in without the facts being known?
Cain, he likes the race card. Has a hand full of them to play.
Posted by: Dick Nixon at November 03, 2011 05:38 AM (kaOJx)
That's what the idiots tried to do with Anderson during the Reagan-Carter run. It backfired because the Republicans still went with the "conservative" and Anderson took votes from Carter.
It is likely the same thing would happen now.
Posted by: Vic at November 03, 2011 05:38 AM (YdQQY)
Hillary touting Rush's '08 qualified endorsement?
Posted by: The Pirates Your Mom Feared at November 03, 2011 05:40 AM (lpWVn)
Posted by: Laura Castellano at November 03, 2011 05:40 AM (fuw6p)
Just in case Palin does reconsider and jumps into the race, hereÂ’s something to think aboutÂ…
This kerfuffle with Cain is just the tip of the iceberg and is being directed at him because he happens to be up in the polls. If Perry or Santorum or anyone else was in the lead, the press would be discovering something “terrible” about them.
And it will continue. Right up until the election.
The fact that Palin underwent the most extensive vetting ever was her biggest strength. Not only did the opposition, the press and even some on our own side investigate and bring up every possible subject, but they made the mistake of going over the top on a number of items. These exaggerations and mischaracterizations are like a hammer that could be used to pound the MSM during a campaign, placing them on the defensive and making them gun shy about bringing up anything new.
We can either spend the next year defending every real or perceived flaw in our candidate or spend it focusing on the Miserable Failure that is Obama. Palin is the only potential nominee who would have the luxury of having every revelation about her classified as “old news”.
Posted by: jwest at November 03, 2011 05:43 AM (qeYI9)
Newt can argue most clearly, but might be more interested in the DC/NY cocktail party than the tea party. He needs to explain why he was on that bench making out with Pelosi over cap and tax, on an issue promoted by activist leftists.
Posted by: Illini bill at November 03, 2011 05:43 AM (qYIxi)
Posted by: taylork at November 03, 2011 05:46 AM (5wsU9)
Posted by: Chilling the most for perry at November 03, 2011 05:47 AM (6IV8T)
Mallamutt,
Are you hiding the perfect candidate in your pocket? Care to fill us in on whoÂ’s the right pick?
Posted by: jwest at November 03, 2011 05:47 AM (qeYI9)
----
When Perry was in the lead they discovered the racist rock and the cocaine airplane. They've also continually tried to spin - unsuccessfully, in terms of any substantive charges - that Perry is the dirtiest politician ever spawned, with his hand in the till and payola around every corner. And, of course, people have been doing a whisper campaign that he is teh ghey from day 1.
I think the thing with the Cain allegations is that they speak directly to his primary "qualification" as POTUS - his record as an executive - and there is some foundation in terms of formal complaints from two women and some sort of settlement.
Posted by: Y-not desperately trying to talk about something other than Cain at November 03, 2011 05:48 AM (5H6zj)
Just in case Palin does reconsider and jumps into the race, hereÂ’s something to think aboutÂ…
Posted by: jwest at November 03, 2011 09:43 AM (qeYI9)
I may be wrong, but I think the South Carolina filing deadline was November 1
Posted by: Red Shirt at November 03, 2011 05:50 AM (FIDMq)
Has St Sarah the Spineless gotten that desperately needed spine transplant yet? If not, she isn't running. She had her chance and didn't get in the race.
Besides, campaigning would take away from her next book "Going Rogue 2: How I Almost Ran for President" that you rubes need to buy to support her and Todd.
Posted by: Dick Nixon at November 03, 2011 05:50 AM (kaOJx)
Posted by: Jimmuy at November 03, 2011 05:51 AM (hROVJ)
"the Perry stone debacle "
You mean the Washington Post's hit job that Cain got involved in without the facts being known?
Cain, he likes the race card. Has a hand full of them to play.
This ^
Cain hates Perry and I have no idea why.
If he were a true Conservative, wouldn't he like Perry more than Romney?
Yesterday I saw something very telling about Cain. When the press was asking him about these allegations, he said very loudly and rudely...EXCUSE ME... as if he were still a CEO talking to underlings. That isn't going to work with the press.
If you take out the debate performances....Perry to me is the best candidate. I have been watching his interviews and he is smart, knows what he is talking about and is able to articulate it very well and he is very personable. He needs to keep doing interviews. He also, sometimes chuckles and admits that he is just not the greatest debater out there. Says he is not "slick". It's working imo.
Posted by: TypicalWhitey at November 03, 2011 05:51 AM (xeVap)
Posted by: The Chap in the Deerstalker Cap at November 03, 2011 05:52 AM (qndXR)
Posted by: ian cormac at November 03, 2011 05:54 AM (JU0xh)
and Florida was October 31 but those "pesky" requirements don't apply to Sarah or her followers.
Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at November 03, 2011 09:54 AM (OWjjx)
Write in! Just like Cokecowski!!11!!
Posted by: Red Shirt at November 03, 2011 05:55 AM (FIDMq)
yes, Nov 1 is the filing deadline for SC (and a lot of other States as well).
Posted by: Vic at November 03, 2011 05:56 AM (YdQQY)
Y-not,
It doesnÂ’t matter who goes ahead in the polls, the accusations will keep coming. They are all fresh meat to the opposition and the press, so itÂ’s a target rich environment.
Red Shirt,
Filing deadlines don’t mean anything. If Palin (or Jeb or anyone else) jumped in, the nomination could be won with the other states. These early primaries are only necessary for candidates seeking “momentum”. Plus, the primaries are run by the individual state parties, who can change the rules at will.
Posted by: jwest at November 03, 2011 05:57 AM (qeYI9)
Bottom Line - we're fucked. No one is going to cut spending. No one is going to accomplish meaningful entitlement reform. No one is going to repeal Obamacare. No one is going to stop the slow motion collapse of the U.S..
So it's time to climb up on top of that nuke, grab your cowboy hat and vote Obama so we can go ahead and wipe this bad boy out and start over.
Did we quit when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Who's with me??
Posted by: Burn the Witch at November 03, 2011 05:58 AM (zLCZu)
Posted by: jwest at November 03, 2011 09:57 AM (qeYI9)
What are these 'rules' you speak of?
Posted by: SCOAMF at November 03, 2011 06:00 AM (FIDMq)
Cain thing, but fine 'off with their heads'
Posted by: ian cormac at November 03, 2011 06:00 AM (JU0xh)
Posted by: polynikes - Texan for Romney at November 03, 2011 06:01 AM (IqM9e)
Depends on what the crisis is. First rule of managing being accused of murder is to lawyer up, even if you are innocent. Letting the girl go on the talk show circuit and describe her 'harrowing' experience wouldn't help Cain. If he released her from an NDA to do that, we'd call him a bonehead.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at November 03, 2011 06:02 AM (FkKjr)
He ignored Condi's advice not to play it. It isn't simply divisive. WE'RE SICK OF IT.
Cain said first day the story broke that he and his wife agree in preference that she stay out of the public eye keeping home life a private retreat. Given that, along with the public skepticism when a politician trots his wife out to deny allegations of spousal misconduct, it is a MAJOR MISTAKE leading Mrs. Cain onto national television on the Sunday morning news circuit. Very poor form if what Herman claimed was his decision to protect his wife from the fray. Mrs. Cain, beware how Sarah Palin was treated on her national debut.
If Cain didn't want his campaign derailed, he should have made one statement, stuck to promoting his agenda, and left the story fight for his managers and attorneys to handle. Maybe Cain is great with numeric computer analysis. But having the talk show host "gift for gab" doesn't mean his impulsive conversations are wise.
It isn't that Cain can't lie well. It's his choice of lies, not based on fact, suffering the same malleable syndrome as Obama's evolution of reports exposing a complete series of the Osama death story transformations. Incredible.
Cain hijacked the '12 potus campaign stuck on "uncomforable" harassment. Leave him to sort out his own "presidential" mess. It's his campaign.
Meanwhile, the show must go on...festivus for the rest of us.
Posted by: The Pirates Your Mom Feared at November 03, 2011 06:04 AM (lpWVn)
I can see Romney winning the general election. I cannot see Gingrich winning the general. I cannot see Perry winning the general. Bachman? no way. Santorum? please. Perry again - it might be close, if he could show up with his A-game, but I just can't see it. I know it hurts. We need someone who can win over the precious middle. I think right now, Romney is our best chance.
Posted by: Lemon Kitten at November 03, 2011 06:04 AM (O7ksG)
“What are these 'rules' you speak of?”
In politics, the “rules” are whatever suits the situation at the time.
Posted by: jwest at November 03, 2011 06:04 AM (qeYI9)
Posted by: Lemon Kitten at November 03, 2011 06:05 AM (O7ksG)
Cain, he likes the race card. Has a hand full of them to play.
This ^
Cain hates Perry and I have no idea why.
If he were a true Conservative, wouldn't he like Perry more than Romney?
---
Yeah, I seriously doubt Cain's conservative bona fides. But, then again, I have never equated "pro business" with "conservative."
I have no idea why Cain hates Perry, but it's clearly personal so I honestly don't even care any more. Cain is aligned with Romney, ideologically. I just hope the folks who support Cain really reflect on what their priorities are if and when he drops out of the race and endorses Romney.
Now, I don't actually think his campaign is dead or even necessarily fatally-wounded, but I don't think he ever thought he would be a top contender, so I simply doubt his commitment to following through to win. I think the fact that his wife is side-lined in the campaign for reasons of 'tranquil home life' telegraphs that this is not a serious run, because she will not have the luxury of maintaining a tranquil home life if she is FLOTUS. Nor should she.
Posted by: Y-not desperately trying to talk about something other than Cain at November 03, 2011 06:05 AM (5H6zj)
A payoff of no less than 1 farthing but no greater than 100 million farthings may or may not have been given.
The terms that were agreed upon by the double-decker, super secret non-disclosure agreement, state that neither side can acknowledge said accusation. Violation of said agreement that may, or may not, exist would result in a penalty of 5 billion hay pennies.
The source shall forever remain anonymous, but will have a lawyer speak for her/him.
Posted by: taylork at November 03, 2011 06:05 AM (5wsU9)
In the beginning, I wasn't supporting anyone. I was just listening to see where I might go. Cain looked promising. I had been talking with his supporters asking why they liked him, etc. I found the reasons to be the same as people liked Obama, great speaker, let's em have it, etc. but they couldn't give me any substance, nor was Cain.
My first inkling something wasn't right with Herman Cain was when he said he wouldn't support Perry but would Romney and played the race card on Perry.I hated that. He even said he didn't know the story and then went on to bash Perry over it, not just openly but with innuendo and dog whistles. I thought he was going to be a conservative, not an African American playing the same old game or a conservative supporting the more Liberal. As a matter of fact, that's one of the reasons why I liked him.
Doubts were mounting. So I started researching him and I hated what I found.
Although claiming he was a Republican in 1994, Cain supported Democrat Peter Hoagland.
In 1997, Cain backed Democrat Brenda Council's challenge to Omaha Republican Mayor Hal Daub. The Gop once again questioned his conservatism and loyalty.
In 1998 the GOP wanted him to run for NE Senate, he said no due his Liberal stances on social issues (below) and supported the Democrat Ben Nelson instead. Yes, that Ben Nelson. The one that was the deciding vote on Obamacare.
From the December 14, 1998 edition of the Omaha World Herald:
"As far as me not running for Senate [in Nebraska], it's a final decision," Cain said Sunday. "But I am giving some consideration to running for the presidency [in 2000]. I probably will make my mind up by the middle of next year."
In 1998: From the October 5, 1998 edition of Nation's Restaurant News,truly remarkable statements by Cain:
"The notion [to run for U.S. Senate in Nebraska] is a rush," Cain admitted. 'It's a very prestigious thing to conceive. But my motivation for running for Senate was not for the stature of being a senator, but because I wanted to make a difference on issues I feel passionate about.'
"After meeting with political consultants and past and present senators, Cain said he had determined that while he has very strong and distinct opinions about business-related matters, he is less clear-cut in his stances on social issues and was not ready to appease voters by taking stands on those issues.
"'Too many people in the electorate are single-issue voters,' he commented, 'and to try and cater to the single-issue voters and the single-issue pockets out there felt like I was compromising my beliefs. As an example, with the pro-life and pro-abortion debate, the most vocal people are on the ends. I am pro-life with exceptions, and people want you to be all or nothing.'
[Cain added] "I am not a social-issue crusader. I am a free-enterprise crusader."
In 1999, however he said he may run for President (It was a rush to run for a Senate seat but not for President?) but he stated he was not going to fall in to the "GOP mythical platforms" such as on school vouchers and affirmative action. He refused to give his stance on abortion. he announced a run for President a short time later.
Cain ran for President in 2000. He dropped out. When questioned about his sincerity to actually win, Cain stated he "was in it to make political statements, not to win the nomination." He said Bush was too conservative so not only did he support the more Liberal candidate, he went to work for him as his co-chair against Bush.
Cain then ran for GA Senate in 2004. There were two others in the race. Cain bashed the more Liberal opponent with the same exceptions to abortion he had. When his own liberal views on social issues came out including against school choice/vouchers, Pro-abortion, Pro-affirmative action, Pro race quotas and Pro-Federal intervention in the workplace, he didn't have a chance in the race. Cain even stated he would reauthorize the Voting Rights Act. The third person was a staunch conservative with an actual record where he had to make the tough decisions and he stood for his principles: 100% pro-life record and a 100% conservative record. Cain stayed in the race anyway saying he did so to talk about things he believed in. He split the conservative vote allowing the more liberal candidate to win.
In 2006, the GOP asked him to run for LT. Gov of GA. They wanted him to gain visibility, name recognition and a record that conservatives could look back on. He said no, he wanted a higher office such as Governor or President. He said he would take his followers and build a network to do this.
In 2008, Cain was asked if he could support Obama for President. He said he could envision doing just that if he would agree to work across the aisle. Really, now. With all we knew about Obama, would any of us have even gave this any thought? Yet a conservative who was intending on running for President would. I hear his supporters say he was proud a black man was going to be President. What happened to "I'm not a black man." "I'm not an African American". "I'm a conservative."
Now in this race, he said he supports Romney. And all indications are that he is doing just that.
Now, I have no problem with someone supporting a Democrat especially back then as most Republicans were Democrats at one time. The problem I have is someone saying they are a Republican, a Conservative at that, supporting a Democrat or Liberal against their own party and party candidates.
Also, of course, because he has no record, I only have his own words and actions of which to make my decision and he has years of words, stances and actions that I could not accept in my candidate. I even thought if he comes out and says this is what I used to believe but I've evolved and convince me, I might. But what he did instead is hide who he is and come out and give a pro-conservative message saying he's always believed this way. Don't lie to me. Don't pander. Tell me who you are. Stay true to your beliefs and principles. Let me decide if I'm willing to accept it.
His biggest slogan is "I'm a problem solver." Well, I sure don't like how he's mishandled, lied and obfuscated with the first big problem he's been handed. He knew well in advance this was coming. Now that he's handled it so poorly, his next tactic to attack someone else and blaming others with no evidence whatsoever. Shame, he has to take others down with him further leaving a Romney win.
Posted by: Tricia at November 03, 2011 06:06 AM (gqG91)
I'm with ya. We might as well do something extraordinarily pointless and stupid, as we are already circling the drain as a Nation anyway.
All this talk of 'votes' makes me wonder if people here actually think they have a say in the matter. Between ACORN, the dead vote, and outright electronic voter fraud, our votes have become a pointless exercise meant to appease us and keep us on the plantation to be milked and shorn for another 4 years.
Posted by: TXMarko at November 03, 2011 06:06 AM (0oNdW)
Posted by: Red Shirt at November 03, 2011 06:09 AM (FIDMq)
The reason Cain never anticipated the revelation of the sexual harassment allegations, never formulated a serious strategy for dealing with them when they inevitably came out, never thought through a position on abortion, and never developed his policy positions beyond the 9-9-9 slogan is because he never expected to be a serious candidate. Maybe this whole campaign started out as an exercise in self-promotion, and he expected to bump along in single digits, and eventually step aside for a gig as a television pundit. Maybe becoming the front-runner took him completely by surprise because that event --- and the media scrutiny that came with it --- was never part of the plan.
It would explain a hell of a lot, wouldn't it?
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 03, 2011 06:10 AM (PLvLS)
Posted by: polynikes - Texan for Romney at November 03, 2011 06:10 AM (IqM9e)
polynikes - Texan for Romney at November 03, 2011 10:01 AM
So the Romney camp is now admitting that Perry is a Republican. Took ya'll long enough.
Perry is more conservative than Romney. I hate it for you. Romney is also not Ronald Reagan. Double hate it for you. Or is that Straw that compares Romney to Reagan? All you mittbots sound alike to me.
Posted by: Dick Nixon at November 03, 2011 06:10 AM (kaOJx)
Posted by: jwest at November 03, 2011 09:57 AM (qeYI9)
Not really. The deadline for filing with the Party for the primaries was Nov 1. The deadline for filing with the State election commission is March 2012.
The actual dates and rules for the primaries and the general election are set by law, not the Parties.
Posted by: Vic at November 03, 2011 06:11 AM (YdQQY)
175- The media will attack any R canadidate with whatever they can find. That's baked into the cake.
Posted by: Lemon Kitten at November 03, 2011 06:12 AM (O7ksG)
There is ... another.
Posted by: mrp at November 03, 2011 06:14 AM (HjPtV)
Shit. I missed the Straw Poll. ....I would've voted for Perry. Dunno how I missed it yesterday when I was here for a bit, but it's my own damn fault for not spotting it.
I take no pleasure in watching Cain's campaign self destructing. ....My own problems with him have had to do with his policies, not this latest scandal.
It's disappointing to see his people blaming Perry for 'leaking' this harrassment story....especially since the leaking began a couple of months ago. Cain has known these allegations were out there, so he should have thrown them out there himself and diffused them a long time ago.
While I like the idea of a president with business experience....the problem with a corporate background is that it is fertile ground for scandal-mining, because things are routinely done in corporate world that do not play well in the political arena. .....So I was expecting some Cain toads to start popping up.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at November 03, 2011 06:15 AM (qqn3x)
I'm not a full throated Palinista Caininite, but this looks like a Romneybot or Perrybot post.
Posted by: taylork at November 03, 2011 06:16 AM (5wsU9)
Posted by: Old Man In A Cave at November 03, 2011 06:18 AM (KqwSL)
By Clay Waters, NewsBusters
So what if Maureen Dowd kicks Cain's ant hill? No surprise if she gets bit. This media frenzy is totally predictable. It won't stop. We each deal with "news" in our own ways.
Posted by: The Pirates Your Mom Feared at November 03, 2011 06:19 AM (lpWVn)
Mornomism is weird. There I said it. But I don't care! Mormonism is harmless. We need to remind voters of how f*ing weird Obama's freak church was... the hate-filled freak church that he attended for 20 YEARS.
Posted by: Lemon Kitten at November 03, 2011 06:21 AM (O7ksG)
Check out Bob Torricelli if you want to know what is possible with the “rules” for elections. For primaries, it’s even easier to change whatever you want.
“Politics” is the art of doing whatever the hell you want.
Posted by: jwest at November 03, 2011 06:22 AM (qeYI9)
"For a candidate and campaign that claim to be the victims of unfounded and unproven accusations, they are awfully quick to hurl unfounded accusations themselves," Perry campaign spokesman Ray Sullivan said in email. "Contrary to the Cain campaign's false accusations, there is not one shred of evidence that any member of the Perry team had anything to do with the recent stories regarding Herman Cain -- because it isn't true."
These accusations will hurt Cain unless he comes up with some evidence. This could be his "Gardacil" moment.
Posted by: Vic at November 03, 2011 06:26 AM (YdQQY)
Nice cut-n-paste.
Now move on to the next blog, ya locust.
Posted by: mpurinTexas, Evil Conservanatrix, supports Rick getyourpawsofoffmeyoudamndirtyape Perry at November 03, 2011 06:26 AM (K7Gb2)
Posted by: Elize Nayden at November 03, 2011 06:26 AM (P/F96)
Evangelicals and non-mainstream Christians alike will run from Romney when the LSM points out all the cultist dirty laundry that defines Mormonism.
They might as well run Jim Jones for President.
Posted by: TXMarko at November 03, 2011 06:30 AM (0oNdW)
" Jim Jones "
Yeah, Jones was a mainstream denominational Christian.
Sexual Harrassment is a violation of someone's rights. Maybe that has more to do with it than the Jesus Card you are playing.
Lying about your past turns off more than Christians.
Posted by: Dick Nixon at November 03, 2011 06:33 AM (kaOJx)
The reason Cain never anticipated the revelation of the sexual harassment allegations, never formulated a serious strategy for dealing with them when they inevitably came out, never thought through a position on abortion, and never developed his policy positions beyond the 9-9-9 slogan is because he never expected to be a serious candidate. Maybe this whole campaign started out as an exercise in self-promotion, and he expected to bump along in single digits, and eventually step aside for a gig as a television pundit. Maybe becoming the front-runner took him completely by surprise because that event --- and the media scrutiny that came with it --- was never part of the plan.
It would explain a hell of a lot, wouldn't it?
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 03, 2011 10:10 AM (PLvLS)
Yes, sadly, it does. And now he's liking the attention, and thinks he has a real shot at being someone's VP pick (cough...Romney...cough), so he's helping tear down Romney's strongest competition, Perry (who, despite his miserable campaign start, is still the guy Romney's campaign seems most worried about).
Funny (or would be if getting Obama out of office wasn't so important) how the guy who is constantly praised as the non-politician in the group ends up showing all the attributes of the worst of career politicians when things go wrong for him.
Posted by: davidinvirginia at November 03, 2011 06:33 AM (haFNK)
I see a lot of "If my guy (or gal) can't win, then burn it all down" - in here.
Not me. I will support who ever wins. Cane. Perry. Gingrich. Romney. etc. Shit - even Huntsman would have my full support. Whoever wins, I will support.
Posted by: Lemon Kitten at November 03, 2011 06:35 AM (O7ksG)
The Right fails to do the same in return, and pays a heavy price for it.
Anytime any Lefty mentions harassment, infidelity, etc, WJ Clinton needs to be thrown right back in their faces.
Have we forgotten how many times we heard "It's Just SEX !!" regarding Clintons behavior?
As an aside, didn't Cain's supposed transgressions occur before the Clinton debacle? Does that make it moot?
Posted by: TXMarko at November 03, 2011 06:35 AM (0oNdW)
Mornomism is weird. There I said it. But I don't care! Mormonism is harmless. We need to remind voters of how f*ing weird Obama's freak church was... the hate-filled freak church that he attended for 20 YEARS.
Well yeah....you'd think so.
But that won't stop the media narrative against Mormonism, if Romney is the nominee. ....Too much fertile ground there for them to resist. It's even got other planets and a celestial component to exploit. It's no accident that there have been all those TV shows on Mormonism in recent years....they've been laying the ground work to destroy Romney with.
They will also vilify him for being an 'evil corporate millionaire' who has worked as a corporate raider, killing jobs and shipping them overseas.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at November 03, 2011 06:36 AM (qqn3x)
Mallamutt,
ItÂ’s just like GhostbustersÂ… Who ya gonna call?
And speaking of fantasies, donÂ’t you realize that there are still some people so divorced from reality that they still believe Cain could get the nomination? How about those who ignore all the polls and think the bottom-dwelling Perry can rise up to be a factor in this race?
IÂ’m voting for Mitt if Palin doesnÂ’t enter the race, because heÂ’s the only one with a chance. Without someone who could generate excitement, the squish is the candidate of choice.
Posted by: jwest at November 03, 2011 06:37 AM (qeYI9)
Never said he was.
But he was a lot closer to mainstream than Romney is. Do some homework.
Posted by: TXMarko at November 03, 2011 06:38 AM (0oNdW)
Posted by: Dick Nixon at November 03, 2011 06:38 AM (kaOJx)
Posted by: Vic at November 03, 2011 10:26 AM (YdQQY)
But with Cain, there are so many Gardicil moments to choose from. :-) What we haven't had yet is one of them to actually stick and do damage to his poll numbers.
I wonder what Venn diagrams of supporters of Romney '12/McCain '08, Cain '12/Huckabee '08 and Perry '12/Thompson? '08 would look like. I bet there would be a lot of overlap in the first 2 at least. The way Cain supporters are defending him makes me think of Huckabee followers in '08; that's why I stuck that in there.
Posted by: davidinvirginia at November 03, 2011 06:40 AM (haFNK)
Sarah Palin will be speaking at the Florida GOP Victory Dinner tonight. I'm sure she'll shoot down the latest rumor that she's reconsidering her decision. Then again, perhaps she won't. Time will tell.
Posted by: mrp at November 03, 2011 06:41 AM (HjPtV)
Not me. I will support who ever wins. Cane. Perry. Gingrich. Romney. etc. Shit - even Huntsman would have my full support. Whoever wins, I will support.
Posted by: Lemon Kitten at November 03, 2011 10:35 AM (O7ksG)
Amen. I will just be a lot more grumpy about having to vote for some of them than for others.
Posted by: davidinvirginia at November 03, 2011 06:41 AM (haFNK)
Posted by: Chilling the most for perry at November 03, 2011 06:42 AM (6IV8T)
"But he was a lot closer to mainstream than Romney is."
I missed the mass suicide chapter in the Book of Mormon. Or Christ exhalting the faithful to murder a US Congressman then kill themselves.
Posted by: Dick Nixon at November 03, 2011 06:42 AM (kaOJx)
Go ahead and put up your best Candidate. No one is safe. No one.
If there is not dirt to be found, there will be dirt manufactured.
Trying to take the 'My candidate is holier than theirs' path nets you absolutely nothing. We are busy eating our own young while SCOAMF and crew are laughing all the way to Socialist paradise.
But by all means, keep looking for that perfect candidate. I am sure He/She is out there somewhere....
Posted by: TXMarko at November 03, 2011 06:43 AM (0oNdW)
281 I'll take Mormonism over that racist hate filled nutjob Jeremiah Wright and his pagan Black naitonalism he spewed for 20 years to Barak Obama.
Oh hell yes. ....But that won't stop the media dickheads from portraying Mormons as 'crazy'. ....They don't even try to hide their shameless hypocrisy any more.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at November 03, 2011 06:43 AM (qqn3x)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 03, 2011 10:10 AM (PLvLS)
I think Mitt had a helping hand in getting Cain into the race to.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at November 03, 2011 06:46 AM (bAL0J)
Posted by: ian cormac at November 03, 2011 06:49 AM (JU0xh)
How about that lovely Mountain Meadows Massacre in which the Mormons brutally murdered an innocent wagon train of settlers, of over one hundred men, women, and most of the children, traveling through Utah?
Posted by: TXMarko at November 03, 2011 06:50 AM (0oNdW)
282....I wonder what Venn diagrams of supporters of Romney '12/McCain '08, Cain '12/Huckabee '08 and Perry '12/Thompson? '08 would look like. I bet there would be a lot of overlap in the first 2 at least. The way Cain supporters are defending him makes me think of Huckabee followers in '08; that's why I stuck that in there.
Both Cain and Huckabee are ordained Baptist preachers. So your comparison of them is valid for several reasons.
I take issue with comparing Thompson and Perry though. ....I would compare Perry's current position in the primaries to Obama's position back at this time in 2007. [The similarities end there, though] ....And Perry is not a lawyer like Thompson, and has never worked in the entertainment industry, or been a member of a union.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at November 03, 2011 06:51 AM (qqn3x)
Gabriel might as retitle the post from "State of the Race" to something more accurate like "How I would like the state of the race to be and I'll keep posting attack after attack on anyone who dares poll so high as to threaten the Republican establishment's chosen candidate."
Since this post was meant to be a follow-up to the poll as Gabriel says, I would assume we use the poll to figure out the state of the race. When Rick Perry first wanted to run most of the not-Mitt vote went to Perry. Not only that but also some of the Mitt vote went to him.
As of this point in time, after all the incessant attacks on Cain, the state of the race is thus:
Most of the not-Mitt vote is going to Cain and/or Gingrich rather than Perry. The Mitt vote that was going to Perry is now going back to Mitt.
Most of the not-Mitt vote will NOT go back to Perry. Unless a new candidate enters the race they will stay with Cain or migrate slowly towards Gingrich. If Gingrich gets above 20% in a significant national poll then Cain's support will go back to single digits and Gingrich will bump up into the high 30's. Mitt will stay with 25% nationally, if there are only two other candidates in double digits by the time the primaries are here, then Mitt will not be the nominee.
Posted by: doug at November 03, 2011 06:51 AM (gUGI6)
Posted by: ian cormac at November 03, 2011 06:51 AM (JU0xh)
Maybe not but that's exactly what they need to hear. Farm animals have better manners and decorum than the press.
I'm a Romney voter, and the worst thing I can say about Cain is he's a political rookie. I don't expect him to win but I like his contributions on assorted issues. Mysterious allegations from anonymous women don't bother me: I am a woman, I have been sexually harassed and made "uncomfortable", handled it, never received a dime, and somehow survived anyway. I've worked with other women who are sue-happy and prone to take offense to anything. No idea what Cain's problems stem from; I do know that I expected sexual allegations to be made against the guy, nothing but a gut feeling, and they arrived right on schedule at the height of his popularity.
If this is the deal-breaker for his supporters, then the supporters look to be frantically out-whoring the candidates these days, and I wonder for the thousandth time why the notion of a candidate who is i) correctly conservative, ii) flawless, who iii) actually wants to be a public servant at this time, even exists.
Posted by: Tee at November 03, 2011 06:53 AM (ZmP2v)
In the heat of the Missouri “Mormon War” of 1838, Joseph Smith made the following claim,
“I will be to this generation a second Mohammed, whose motto in treating for peace was ‘the Alcoran [Koran] or the Sword.’ So shall it eventually be with us—‘Joseph Smith or the Sword!’ ”Lovely. Islam and Mormonism actually share a lot of similarities....
Posted by: TXMarko at November 03, 2011 06:54 AM (0oNdW)
Ok, I know Perry has sucked at the debates, but remind me again why everyone jumped off his bandwagon?
The guardasil thing should be a non-issue - his implementation was stupid; he said so. But even then, his reasoning wasn't totally bad; the reason for the mandate was so insurance companies would pay for it, which they wouldn't do for an optional vaccine.
His stance on the border: stop illegals from coming across, with a fence where useful, and manpower/technology where a fence wouldn't be useful. I know this isn't the "true conservative double barbed wire fence with landmines and machine gun nests" position, but it actually sounds politically and financially possible.
Those are his negatives. His positives are 10 f***ing years running one of the largest states in America with a dang solid conservative record. Pro-growth, low regulation, great economy in Texas under his watch; fighting the EPA and other federal government agencies; balancing his state budget through actual budget cuts in tough times, despite the crying from the left; etc.
In an election where we ought to be ONLY focusing on repealing obamacare and fixing the economy, I don't understand why everyone abandoned Perry. Did everyone just focus on his admittedly not strong debate performance and completely ignore his record of actually getting shit done?
Somebody put me some f'ing knowledge here, cause I don't get it.
Posted by: OSUsux at November 03, 2011 06:55 AM (DFXmi)
Mallamutt,
The difference between us is that you are basing your decisions on emotion, where I use logic and reason to arrive at the best choice.
My sole mission is the replace Obama with a republican in 2012. With the economy as it is, the right track/wrong track and Obama’s “deserves reelection” numbers where they are, this election is ours to lose. The only thing the democrats can do to save themselves and Obama is to demonize our candidate. Once the amateurs on our side realize and comprehend this fact, they will focus on what attributes are important for our nominee.
People who continue to use their one-issue purity test to pick a candidate are unhelpful in achieving the goal.
Posted by: jwest at November 03, 2011 06:59 AM (qeYI9)
TXMarko at November 03, 2011 10:54 AM
Wait, are you saying that Mormons and muslims are the same?
What fucked up part of hell do you live in?
Posted by: Dick Nixon at November 03, 2011 07:00 AM (kaOJx)
Posted by: Chilling the most for perry at November 03, 2011 07:02 AM (6IV8T)
Ok, I know Perry has sucked at the debates, but remind me again why everyone jumped off his bandwagon?
Because the media has conditioned us to think that the debates are the only thing that matters. .....That performing in front of cameras is the only criteria that we should use to determine who our leaders should be.
There are about five times the amount of debates this cycle than we've ever seen. ....These dumbass debates are nothing more than media generated bullshit. ....They are not really 'debates', they are firing squads for dueling with soundbites.
Perry has the best record. Hands down. ....Which is why I am sticking with him.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at November 03, 2011 07:03 AM (qqn3x)
I posit the GOP 'handles it properly' just like the Left does; By IGNORING it !
We somehow feel the need to try and explain away every tiny question that they manage come up with, and again, we are playing by their rules! Why?
Condoleeza Rice was interviewed the other day, and she was asked no less than 10 times if she would consider entering the race as President or VP. Why do they ask so many times? Because if she answered in a squishy way to any of those, the news cycle would churn out that Condi "Didn't rule out" the possibility of being back in Office.
Posted by: TXMarko at November 03, 2011 07:04 AM (0oNdW)
Eileen Wellstone (Oxford) – rape
Elizabeth Ward Gracen – rape – post incident intimidation
Kathleen Willey (WH) – sexual assault, intimidations, threats
Sandra Allen James (DC) – sexual assault
22 Year Old 1972 (Yale) – sexual assault
Cristy Zercher – unwelcomed sexual advance, intimidations
Paula Jones (AR) – unwelcomed sexual advance, exposure, bordering on sexual assault
Carolyn Moffet -unwelcomed sexual advance, exposure, bordering on sexual assault
1974 student at University of Arkansas – unwelcomed physical contact
1978-1980 – seven complaints per Arkansas state troopers
Monica Lewinsky – post incident character assault
Gennifer Flowers – post incident character assault
Cain's in the wrong party.
Dolly Kyle Browning – post incident character assault
Sally Perdue – post incident threats
Betty Dalton – rebuffed his advances, married to one of his supporters
Posted by: LC LaWedgie at November 03, 2011 07:05 AM (m8ARs)
A big pussy.
Posted by: JB
This. +100
Posted by: mpfs at November 03, 2011 07:06 AM (iYbLN)
Posted by: Aurvant at November 03, 2011 07:06 AM (D0slu)
"We're not going to win in 2012 as it is."
At least you can hang your hat on Obama's one term. Pretty big achievement getting a empty suit elected POTUS.
Posted by: Dick Nixon at November 03, 2011 07:08 AM (kaOJx)
I take issue with comparing Thompson and Perry though. ....I would compare Perry's current position in the primaries to Obama's position back at this time in 2007. [The similarities end there, though] ....And Perry is not a lawyer like Thompson, and has never worked in the entertainment industry, or been a member of a union.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at November 03, 2011 10:51 AM (qqn3x)
No, I didn't mean of the candidates themselves so much as the groups of people who are supporting/supported them. I was a Fred backer in '08 (well, while he was still running or at least pretending to) and am for Perry this time around (at least so far). It seems to me that any criticism of Cain this time around, fact-based or not, gets a very similar response to what any sort of criticism of Huckabee got from his followers last time around, so I was wondering if it was a lot of the same people both times. Romney and McCain I lumped together because, well, it just seemed appropriate for some reason.
Posted by: davidinvirginia at November 03, 2011 07:16 AM (haFNK)
The Cain supporters are fucking nuts. Worse than the Ron Paul supporters IMO.
Posted by: Your Papers Please at November 03, 2011 07:21 AM (EL+OC)
311 Davidinvirginia,
Yeah, I was a Thompson supporter too. ....I think he stood a better chance of beating Obama or Hillary in the general, than any of the others. I really hate the way our primaries are structured.
It is outrageous that a few smaller states, with tiny amounts of electoral votes, are allowed to have so much power over the rest of us.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at November 03, 2011 07:24 AM (qqn3x)
Obama is a stuttering...well, you know. None of the GOP nominees carry the negatives Obama does. There is not one positive thing I can say about this man's presidency. Not one. Clinton signed welfare reform. Carter began the process of deregulation. Obama? I can't think of...one...single...thing.
All of the major candidates have flaws, but all of them would be a major step up from Obama.
Posted by: Mike at November 03, 2011 07:28 AM (NH9Y5)
People are coming around to Newt because of his stellar performances in the debates.
He's been so excellent in those debates that people start visiting his website, looking into his policy proposals -- and then they really are impressed, because Newt's proposals are light-years ahead of any of the other candidates.
There are dozens of issues where Newt steals the show, but if I had to pick only three, they would be shari'a, the judiciary and the U.N.
If you doubt that this man can go up against Obama and clobber him - and start this country moving back toward its founding principles - take a look at this speech from 2009 that is every bit as timely today:
http://tinyurl.com/yzqryw9
Posted by: Kathy from Kansas at November 03, 2011 07:29 AM (F0o5k)
Nope. I'm saying that Mormons share more philosophical ideologies with Islam than they do with Christianity.
Posted by: TXMarko at November 03, 2011 07:29 AM (0oNdW)
Posted by: Southern Baptist Convention at November 03, 2011 07:36 AM (wqVen)
I don't want to lose. I would love for that SCOAMF to be booted out of office, but this primary has completely fractured our party.
We're essentially trying to push an empty suit out of office while replacing him with an empty suit of our own (Romney). Who is, by and large, just going to end up being McCain 2.0. He is not a candidate who will rally the party, and will most likely fracture it even further.
Moving from that? We have no real hope. Every other candidate that sits in the race has been utterly destroyed. Not by our actual opponents, oh no, but by ourselves. We are the worlds BEST at shooting ourselves in the foot. Never have I seen a party making such huge strides so ready to stub our own feet in to the biggest, sharpest rock in our path.
The GOP is pushing for Romney because they believe he is "electable". Yeah, they said that about McCain too. We got SCOAMF instead. The party is telling us that we must suck it up and deal with what we are given, but people can only be told that for so long until they just give up.
Posted by: Aurvant at November 03, 2011 07:43 AM (D0slu)
Posted by: Chilling the most for perry at November 03, 2011 10:42 AM (6IV8T)
Thank you. I don't know any information on why Cain is supporting Romney. I know he did so in 2008, as well but have not looked into it.
The only thing I can think of is that Romney is closer to his ideological views, as were the other Democrats and Liberals he supported in the past. We tend to usually stay close to those that hold the views we believe in. Additionally, why I say this is think about how many times Cain has said "I'm in it to make political statements." "I'm in it to talk about things I care about", etc.
I think the most telling is : "I'm not going to appease voters on social issues as I would be giving up my principles." He's flip flopped over social issues over and over again, many times in the same interview or situation. His fiscal issues also coincide with a Liberal agenda with his empowerment zones, which he developed when he worked for Jack Kemp. He also doesn't understand that social issues are directly linked to fiscal issues. But when in unchallenged, news friendly venues he's all 100% conservative talking. Honestly, these are the shows/venues most conservatives are watching. Most are not looking at watching Liberal shows where he takes the opposite view. Most people aren't in tune like we are.
Posted by: Tricia at November 03, 2011 07:45 AM (gqG91)
He strikes me as a grow-in-office type.
Why, shucks, he might even grow so tall that the earth-bound lines become
hazy, then lost to his vision altogether.
His head will be up amongst the pinnacles.
Where the MSM editorials are posted . . .
Posted by: James Robinson Justice at November 03, 2011 07:47 AM (uZRi3)
Empire of Jeff @45:
Romney's a whore. But he's agreed to be OUR whore.
True. Still, with our country at its most critical turning point since the Civil War, it's mind-boggling if all we can come up with is a whore.
We are living in extraordinary times, and most Americans are just plain ignorant of our history and the huge, deep principles that make this country exceptional. I think America faces numerous threats to its continued existence and I by golly want someone who knows what those threats are and will deal with them - and will fire up the American people to get on board with the effort.
That man is Newt Gingrich.
Posted by: Kathy from Kansas at November 03, 2011 07:48 AM (F0o5k)
Posted by: Tricia at November 03, 2011 10:06 AM (gqG91)
Wow. After that, it sure seems as thought nothing that Cain says about himself is true. Shocker. Multiple stands on issues, multiple failed runs for office--complete with a suicide run that allowed the more liberal candidate to win!! No wonder Romney likes Cain so much and Cain loves him some Romney.
The Cain supporters need to realize, he ain't a conservative, he just talks like one when he needs to. He is the David Souter; and if he got the Presidency, he'd throw every liberal wish list at us and tell us we're racist if we don't support him. He's already pulled the race card twice and we haven't even had on vote yet.
And Cain will--WILL--endorse Romney by March 31, 2012. Cain will never endorse any other candidate no matter who wins.
Posted by: Jimmuy at November 03, 2011 07:51 AM (hROVJ)
Posted by: Dave at November 03, 2011 07:51 AM (Xm1aB)
Posted by: The Chap in the Deerstalker Cap at November 03, 2011 08:01 AM (qndXR)
TXMarko @316:
Thanks for the link. It backs up what I've been saying for years.
It also helps to explain why Romney is so totally LAME on fighting the creeping shari'a in this country.
He cannot help but see everything through the prism of "religious freedom" - which inclines him toward defending the sharia-ists. But in fact, Islam is not a religion but rather a totalitarian political ideology like Nazism or Communism dressed up in the trappings of a religion. If we are to save this country we need a candidate who gets that. The only ones who do are Santorum, Cain and Gingrich. But Cain totally blew it by backtracking and apologizing (i.e. rolling over and sucking up) to the Muslim Brotherhood!!
http://tinyurl.com/3v67rh4
Gingrich, on the other hand, is exceptionally knowledgeable about "the war within" being waged on the U.S. by Muslim Brotherhood fronts such as ISNA and CAIR; and is very determined to vanquish them.
http://tinyurl.com/3yprjwc
Posted by: Kathy from Kansas at November 03, 2011 08:17 AM (F0o5k)
I'm a fool?
Don't care; not letting the leftist media pick Romney as the Republican candidate. Sorry; no sale.
Posted by: Evan3457 at November 03, 2011 08:20 AM (3Qe6r)
Remind you of why many jumped off the Perry bandwagon?
About the time he called opponents of his dream act "heartless."
Posted by: Dave at November 03, 2011 11:51 AM (Xm1aB)
Anyone who bailed on the best conservative record of all of the candidates over *that* is a petulant bitch that completely lacks a sense of proportion.
Posted by: grognard at November 03, 2011 08:29 AM (NS2Mo)
Posted by: Dave at November 03, 2011 08:30 AM (Xm1aB)
BUT. I keep running up against this nagging reality:
The Obama2012 Machine is going to make '08 look like a kindergarten picnic by comparison. Doesn't anyone here remember '08? Voter registration fraud, ballot fraud, intimidation, vandalism, slanders, illegal campaign contributions, credit card fraud, on and on and on. Dirty tricks to surpass LBJ and Clinton put together and tripled.
We'll be looking at even worse from them next year, guaranteed.
To win against that kind of onslaught, the GOP will have to win by at least 20 percentage points in reality in order to show an official win by 5 percentage points.
And that will require a GetOutTheVote effort such as we've never seen before from the GOP. We will need many millions of man-hours from volunteers walking precincts, making phone calls, drumming up donations, etc. Who does that stuff? The base.
And the base hates Romney.
This is why I cannot see any way Romney beats Obama in the general.
Posted by: Kathy from Kansas at November 03, 2011 08:34 AM (F0o5k)
Posted by: tasker at November 03, 2011 08:39 AM (rJVPU)
Posted by: tasker at November 03, 2011 08:41 AM (rJVPU)
Ok, Perry called you heartless. Can you not get over it? Personally, I agree with him, but I can be heartless about my own pet issues as well. For example, unions. I have no sympathy for lost jobs that have gone overseas. Deal with it, learn to flip burgers or whatever.
But this largely irrational fear/anger over illegal Mexicans? Makes no sense to me, and I can't understand why anyone would derail an otherwise excellent candidate over such a minor (relatively speaking) issue.
Posted by: Burt TC at November 03, 2011 08:41 AM (TOk1P)
Pajama's Media has this new article on the Cain Sexual Harrassment issue. I'm sure Rick Perry personally wrote the article.
Posted by: Dick Nixon at November 03, 2011 08:42 AM (kaOJx)
Posted by: tasker at November 03, 2011 08:43 AM (rJVPU)
Posted by: Dave at November 03, 2011 08:44 AM (Xm1aB)
Posted by: tasker at November 03, 2011 08:46 AM (rJVPU)
Posted by: tasker at November 03, 2011 08:46 AM (rJVPU)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at November 03, 2011 08:47 AM (PLvLS)
Posted by: Burt TC at November 03, 2011 08:48 AM (TOk1P)
Posted by: Dave at November 03, 2011 08:48 AM (Xm1aB)
They look...pretty bad. At least in terms of optics.
http://tinyurl.com/5vmd25h
Gotta laugh at Rush's hapless attempts at spin this afternoon. You stupid fuck, you shouldn't have leapt to the defense of a guy who could easily have been guilty at the time you swooped to his defense.
Posted by: Jeff B. at November 03, 2011 08:49 AM (bbxN5)
Posted by: Dave at November 03, 2011 08:50 AM (Xm1aB)
"By the way, don't you need to go stick your nose up ace's ass and try to get me banned? "
So you are the vagina that compared Ace to Charles Johnson? Yes, I said if I owned this site whoever said that would be gone permanently. And yes, you go on your knees for mittens whenever his shitty record is brought up.
You don't likey, tough shitty.
Posted by: Dick Nixon at November 03, 2011 08:51 AM (kaOJx)
Posted by: Dave at November 03, 2011 08:52 AM (Xm1aB)
Posted by: Burt TC at November 03, 2011 08:53 AM (TOk1P)
Dave at November 03, 2011 12:52 PM
Make sure you wipe your chin when you finish with mittens. He probably doesn't like drips on his pants.
Posted by: Dick Nixon at November 03, 2011 08:53 AM (kaOJx)
Posted by: Dave at November 03, 2011 08:54 AM (Xm1aB)
Posted by: tasker at November 03, 2011 08:55 AM (rJVPU)
Posted by: LizLem at November 03, 2011 08:55 AM (db8vO)
Posted by: tasker at November 03, 2011 08:58 AM (rJVPU)
If the SCOAMF can mystically unseal Ryan's divorce records (and take no heat for it) and keep his own records buttoned up tight, just wait and see what lies ahead for any of the Republican nominees.
This play on Cain wasn't hardball, it wasn't even a softball. It was a whiffle ball compared to what's coming in the general election.
Posted by: Advo at November 03, 2011 09:01 AM (7vbG1)
Ok, Dave, I'll be clear. I (me, not Rick Perry) think you are heartless when it comes to the subject of illegal Mexicans. I'm not talking about any legislative acts, I'm talking about you and your irrational fear/anger regarding illegal Mexicans.
I'm suggesting you get over it. I'm requesting you support Rick Perry for President REGARDLESS of whether you agree or disagree in part or in whole with him regarding the issue of illegal Mexicans, because it is not that big an issue for this race and this election. I realize that means you'll have to get over whatever hurt you feel at being called "heartless." Can you do that? It might be good for both your heart AND your soul if you can.
Posted by: Burt TC at November 03, 2011 09:02 AM (TOk1P)
It is outrageous that a few smaller states, with tiny amounts of electoral votes, are allowed to have so much power over the rest of us.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at November 03, 2011 11:24 AM (qqn3x)
And not just small states, but small states with such...ahem...quirky...ahem electorates. Outlawing open primaries would help a lot, too, as if the GOP establishment would ever do that.
By the time things rolled around to Georgia in 2008, I actually ended up voting for Romney - gack! - because he was the only not-McCain, not-Huckabee left by then. That truly sucked.
Posted by: davidinvirginia at November 03, 2011 09:06 AM (haFNK)
Posted by: Dave at November 03, 2011 09:20 AM (Xm1aB)
Posted by: Vic at November 03, 2011 09:22 AM (YdQQY)
TheRegularGuy @ 114:
what's really irritating about the Cain story is not the effect on a Republican candidate. It's that this mini-scandal, because of the media's obsession with sex, is distracting the media from investigating and reporting on real and important scandals in the Obama administration -- Solyndra, Fast and Furious, Corzine-gate (where exactly did $900 million go, the amount lost by MF Global, the investment firm run by the former New Jersey Senator and current Obama bundler?), not to mention the ongoing scandal of Obama's support for the increasingly criminal and dangerous Occupy Wall Street movement.
AND GUNWALKER (which is so more than just Fast&Furious, as horrible as that is - we're now up to ten gunwalking operations in five states).
Posted by: Kathy from Kansas at November 03, 2011 09:22 AM (F0o5k)
LizLem @ 351:
Hey I don't disagree with you that Republicans will vote for Romney. The problem is, the Dems are going to be manufacturing millions of votes out of thin air, and we have to sway enough independents and turn out enough additional millions of voters to counteract all the fraudulent votes manufactured by the Dems.
GOP turnout will have to be unprecedented. It will require heroic efforts. And I just can't see the all-important base - which does the all-importnat volunteering in the months leading up to the election - making heroic efforts for Romney.
Posted by: Kathy from Kansas at November 03, 2011 09:29 AM (F0o5k)
davidinvirginia@355:
Outlawing open primaries would help a lot, too, as if the GOP establishment would ever do that.
Why won't they? I don't get it. I never have.
Someone with more political savvy than me want to explain it?
Posted by: Kathy from Kansas at November 03, 2011 09:46 AM (F0o5k)
Perry's "heartless" gaffe wasn't devastating just because people got all butthurt about it; it was devastating because, in that moment... we saw W all over again. It was Bush fatigue, not mere personal umbrage, that slapped Perry out of the frontrunner position.
That said, I'm taking another look at Perry now. With ALL the other candidates (and the party establishment) continuing to gang up on him... despite his current polling in single digits... while letting the, you know, <i>current frontrunners</i> coast, I think it's easy to see who's the real non-insider in this crowd.
Posted by: Prothonotary Warbler at November 03, 2011 09:49 AM (bRdb3)
Posted by: Hidajunshin at November 03, 2011 09:57 AM (MVVJU)
"And in the meantime, Obama will continue to rack up populist cred by bashing Republicans in Congress. In the meantime, when we could have been gaining ground on Republican issues---cramming them down the throats of the reluctant MSM---we're going to be talking about stupid harassment allegations instead. "
My thoughts exactly.
Posted by: jeremiadbullfrog at November 03, 2011 09:58 AM (Y5I9o)
63 And no, Newt is not the damn answer. He is evil personified.
Evil personified? Huh? He's been an intelligent advocate for conservatism for over thirty years. He more than any other single person was responsible for ending 40 years of uninterrupted control of the House of Representatives?
The things that I hear people complain about when it comes to Newt are such petty bullshit compared to the good things he has done and supported.
Posted by: Reggie1971 at November 03, 2011 10:15 AM (b68Df)
@143 and others:
Santorum got beaten in 2006 by Bob Casey, Jr., because enough gullible Pennsylvanians believed Casey Jr's shtick that he was a "pro-life Democrat" like his dad. (Bob Casey, SR., you may recall, was supposed to be the keynote speaker at the Dems' nominating convention for Bill Clinton (I forget whether '92 or '96) and got canned at the last minute because the pro-abort fanatics threw a screaming fit.)
Casey SR. was one of the most popular governors in PA history. Casey JR was happy to ride on his coattails, and enough PA voters were stupid enough to let him.
It was a bad year for the GOP, and PA is a notoriously fickle and Dem-leaning state. Pennsylvanians always want to vote for the Dem -- but Santorum had been able to win there in part because he is so passionately pro-life. (Lots of pro-life Catholics in PA) When Casey Jr told them he would be pro-life, it gave them an excuse to vote for the Dem.
Posted by: Kathy from Kansas at November 03, 2011 10:21 AM (F0o5k)
He must know, after seeing what they did to Sarah. Plus, he's probably experienced the hate plenty of times (hell, my sister-in-law only had 4 kids, and random strangers used to give her dirty looks and make rude comments). And yet, he's running, even knowing what will happen. The man's got major cojones. And his wife must be as tough as she is sweet!
Posted by: Kathy from Kansas at November 03, 2011 10:30 AM (F0o5k)
The left is so frightened about Cain that they are going full Palin on him. They haven't attempted to dig up any dirt on Romney because Romney is a waffling flip flopping RINO who has proven through his actions that he is ineffective. Thus the dems like him.
As far as accusations of sexual harassment, I so just don't care. Slick Willy Klintoon set the bar on that with several rapes and no one kicked and screamed. Thus in politics it means nothing. I apply democrat ethics to such things. As their people have done so in the past, it is not an issue. Move on.
Posted by: USMC Steve at November 03, 2011 10:32 AM (zZae2)
@147
But conservatives should anticipate the MFM will be their biggest adversary and plan accordingly. Newt did this. Cain did not.
THIS, THIS, THIS, THIS, THIS!!!
Newt is the only one who understands what every fricking conservative should know by now -- the basic truth that Andrew Breitbart lays out so well all the time: Our opponent is just as much the media as the Democrat party. You cannot win, as a GOP candidate, unless you take on the media.
Newt is the only one -- the ONLY one -- who is doing this.
That all by itself is evidence that he has the kind of practical, insightful street smarts that we need! (Because after all, it's not like the media will suddenly quit attacking the Republican after he wins the Presidency! See: Reagan, Ronald; Bush, George W.)
Posted by: Kathy from Kansas at November 03, 2011 10:45 AM (F0o5k)
Ben @158:
In 2004 Santorum and George Bush endorsed Arlen Specter in the 2004 primaries when the conservatives in PA(like myself) were trying to get Pat Toomey elected.
Santorum was worried (rightly, I think) that Toomey would not be able to win in the general election. Santorum was laser-focused on keeping the GOP in the majority in the Senate because there was at least 1 Supreme Court nomination coming up for grabs in the next session. Santorum didn't want to take a chance on PA sending a Dem to the Senate and throwing the majority to the Dems. In addition, Specter, RINO though he was, was head of the Judiciary Committee. IIRC, he and Santorum had an understanding that if Santorum didn't back Specter's challenger, Toomey, Specter would not block Bush's (conservative) judicial nominee.
You might say that Santorum fell on his sword so that we could have Justice Samuel Alito. I for one appreciate that!!
Posted by: Kathy from Kansas at November 03, 2011 10:58 AM (F0o5k)
@277 and others:
Thank you for pointing this out.
It is not anti-Mormon bigotry to point out the plain fact that the DemocratMediaComplex will go all-out wild with anti-Mormon propaganda if Romney gets the nomination.
Didn't Republicans learn anything from the McCain debacle in '08? The MSM was all nice and fuzzy with McCain -- until he became the nominee! Then it got ugly as all get-out.
Well, the stakes are even higher this time, and the hill even higher for the Dems to climb this time around. Consequently, what they do to Romney will make what they did to McCain look like kid-glove treatment by comparison!!
Posted by: Kathy from Kansas at November 03, 2011 11:42 AM (F0o5k)
They really hate Mormons. Look at the aftermath of Prop. 8 in California. It was largely Mormons and Black evangelicals who put the "Yes" vote over the top. The Dems sure weren't going to punish/scapegoat the Blacks -- so they went after the Mormons in revenge. It was ugly. Boycotts, vandalism, and IIRC, attempted arson and death threats.
Regardless of Mitt's own stances one way or another, Mormonism has now been smeared with the label of "anti-gay." Since politically active leftist gays now OWN the Dem party (and the MSM), they will attack Mormonism. You can count on it.
Posted by: Kathy from Kansas at November 03, 2011 11:52 AM (F0o5k)
Posted by: Insert Clever Name Here at November 03, 2011 01:20 PM (XMX7O)
Posted by: steevy at November 03, 2011 01:40 PM (fyOgS)
Posted by: Android eBook Downloads at November 03, 2011 04:20 PM (O7tie)
That is useful information and its quite easy to come a croper if you are not vigilant.
Posted by: Download audiobook unabridged at November 03, 2011 04:37 PM (O7tie)
Posted by: EPub Format eBook for Tablet at November 03, 2011 04:58 PM (EHpNf)
It's a smear campaign
No. It's not. Cain has admitted that there were two accusations and at least one settlement. That's not a smear. (Notably, that's all that Politico reported to get this ball rolling.)
--
James Taranto: "Who Smeared Herman Cain?"
http://tinyurl.com/3aqmkqk
Posted by: The Black Republican at November 03, 2011 06:30 PM (aF97q)
Posted by: The Garner Files ePub at November 03, 2011 06:35 PM (SfO00)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.3598 seconds, 485 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Malicious Gerbil is correct. Cain has proven so ham-fistedly bad at damage control, it's almost impossible to continue to support him at this point.
36 hours ago, I was his biggest supporter. But he keeps getting stupider and stupider.
Posted by: Truman North at November 03, 2011 03:36 AM (I2LwF)