November 9, 2011

"Cain aide wrongly insists they've 'confirmed' accuser's son works for Politico."

Writes Maggie Haberman in Politico:
"Her son works at POLITICO," [Mark] Block said of Karen Kraushaar, whose name POLITICO printed earlier today after other media outlets made her identity public.

"I've been hearing that all day - you've confirmed that now?" Hannity asked.

"We've confirmed that he does indeed work at POLITICO and that's his mother, yes," said Block.

Block appeared to be referring to former POLITICO reporter Josh Kraushaar, who left for another outlet, National Journal, in 2010.

Josh Kraushaar tweeted earlier in the day, apparently after getting questions, that he's in fact not related to Karen Kraushaar, and simply has the same last name.
Oh, but Mark Block is an outlaw. He takes a drag on that cigarette. He's a rebel. The rules don't apply to him.

Allahpundit predicts:

You’re going to see three camps quickly emerge on this story. Camp one: “I can’t believe Block threw that accusation out there without confirming it.” Camp two: “Maybe … Block was thinking of another reporter?” (Some Cainiacs are already tweeting this.) Camp three: “Josh Kraushaar is lying; he really is Karen’s son. Where’s the birth certificate?” Place your bets now, as Block’s sure to be forced to clarify tomorrow what he meant.
Well, that was written last night, so add to "Camp one": "I can't believe Block didn't immediately clarify what he meant." What an embarrassing screwup!

Were you/are you a Cain supporter?
I never was, but I've liked him, and I'm sorry to see him fail this badly.
I never was, and I'm glad his inexperience is showing up early to keep him from getting nominated.
No, but I'm sorry he's failing, because Obama would beat him.
I was, but I've given up on him.
I was, but I'm in the process of letting go.
I was and I still am. It's a difficult fight, but it's worth it.
I was and I am, even more so now. I'm invigorated to fight this high-tech lynching.
  
pollcode.com free polls 

176 comments:

madAsHell said...

Robert Bork
Sarah Palin
Herman Cain

Shouting Thomas said...

None of the above.

Get rid of sexual harassment laws.

Althouse, the workplace was a shitheap of oppression and S&M when I entered it 45 years ago.

Congratulations. You and your feminist sisters have made it even worse.

I didn't think it was possible, but you did it.

Thank God, I'm retired, and struggling to stay that way. Maybe I can get in 10 to 15 years of not having to put up with this bullshit.

EDH said...

"I can't believe Block didn't immediately clarify what he meant." What an embarrassing screwup!

Good grief, YOU BLOCKHEAD!

Psychedelic George said...

Such minutiae.

Europe is melting down. Here in the US government spending is up.

I woke up this morning thinking about Manassas/Bull Run. How everyone somehow thought that one battle might decide things. All the nice folks went out in their carriages to watch. And it was a horror show.

In 1932, I do not think the term "Great Depression" had been coined to describe what was happening. And no one knows how this is going to play out, either.

But these sex scandal stories sure are fun.

Scott M said...

Well, that looks awful, doesn't it?

On the other hand, judging by the current administration's record of unforced errors, the Cain candidacy is looking more and more presidential.

sorepaw said...

Cain should fire Block, now.

Even then, his campaign may be beyond repair.

Meanwhile, we're probably heading in the second dip.

If China tanks, there will be a third dip.

The Crack Emcee said...

This is probably a perfect example of how you went for Obama - you actually buy into the media narrative, true or not, and act like it's reality. I'm not a Cain supporter but my feelings about him haven't changed one iota because - gasp! - no one's provided compelling proof the man's done anything wrong. Why should I care how he responds to a non-issue?

You're a rube, Ann, just as Glenn Reynolds has been saying for years,...

edwardroyce said...

*shrug* old adage "better to keep one's mouth shut and be thought a fool than to speak and confirm it.".

Hagar said...

Herman Cain has quit speculating on what it is these women might be charging him with and has made a flat statement that Sharon Bialek is a liar.
That clears the field where Bialek is concerned at least, and we may now watch for some provable fact to come to light that shows us which one is the liar.

As for the others, we still only know that lawyer Bennet assures us that these charges are true and very bad, but he still will not tell us what they are.

Shouting Thomas said...

I don't give a fuck if Cain did everything he's alleged to have done.

Sexual harassment laws effectively criminalize being a normal, sensible male. Flirting and trying to score some pussy is just human behavior.

There should only be one actionable offense. If you demand that somebody screw as a requirement for a job, that's actionable.

Throw out the rest of this bullshit and quit trying to turn us all into fags.

Titus is right. Women are horrifying prudes.

Thank God, I've met a few sensible ones. The few sensible ones make up for all the hysterics.

What a nightmare you and your feminist sisters have created, Althouse.

edutcher said...

I've been saying for some time, Herman, Perry, and Bachman have been getting lousy advice.

If I were paranoid...

OTOH, Kraushaar, like Bialek, has cried, "Harassment", before.

Psychedelic George said...

Such minutiae.

Europe is melting down. Here in the US government spending is up.


And don't forget Red China. Real estate generally is in freefall, housing has lost 50% of its value in the last year, and consumer demand inside the country has dropped 50% (to say nothing of what world demand is like).

The only question about the crash is when, not if.

PS What masAsHell said.

ndspinelli said...

Saintshoutingthomas was not breast fed.

Shouting Thomas said...

The workplace is the right place for flirting and finding a mate.

At the workplace, you have an opportunity to see that a woman is responsible, gets up in the morning, doesn't have any major addiction problems, etc.

Criminalizing flirting and seeking a mate in the workplace is the stupidest idea in decades.

Shouting Thomas said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
pm317 said...

This hounding of Cain has all the fingerprints of Obama's campaign. May be you were right after all yesterday when you used the phrase left wing conspiracy. Cain without this would have been a fine VP candidate with all his popularity and that would have put a dent in Obama's run maybe even diverting many Black votes away from him. They would not have it. So what can be easier than 'bimbo eruption'to drum up against politicians and CEOs? I feel sorry for Cain because he seems blindsided by this and not know how to handle it and his aide is even more incompetent.
Maybe he should read this.

PETER V. BELLA said...

The questions no one is asking, and no one dares to ask, is who hired Gloria Allred, who is paying her fees and expenses, and where is the money coming from?

ndspinelli said...

Vegas has the odds @ 15-1 that saintshoutingthomas has been accused of sexual harassment.

edutcher said...

pm317 said...

This hounding of Cain has all the fingerprints of Obama's campaign. May be you were right after all yesterday when you used the phrase left wing conspiracy.

Think about how GodZero ran unopposed in all those Senate campaigns.

Shouting Thomas said...

So, for those of you who think that Cain is "failing" in this enterprise.

Tell me how anybody defends themselves against this systematic slander campaign obviously directed from the White House?

Here's your homework assignment.

Your opposition is paying one bimbo after another to make allegations against you that they have no intention of adjudicating in court.

As Althouse (who should know better) herself has said, the "accumulation" of these charges is the purported proof that "something happened."

Tell me how you defend yourself.

The tactics are those of the old Communist Party in the Soviet Union. It's a campaign of denunciation of "enemies of the people."

The dunning repetition of the accusations eventually becomes the proof.

The solution is to dump the sexual harassment laws that enable this type of extortion and denunciation campaign.

Shouting Thomas said...

Vegas has the odds @ 15-1 that saintshoutingthomas has been accused of sexual harassment.

ndspinelli a/k/a J continues to unwitting prove my point, even as he thinks he's undermining me.

You're superbly, almost unimageinably stupid, nd/J.

This bastard is a fount of absolutely unfounded accusations, isn't he? And the idiot thinks this proves I'm incorrect when I say that sexual harassment laws need to be discarded.

David said...

Crack: "I'm not a Cain supporter but my feelings about him haven't changed one iota because - gasp! - no one's provided compelling proof the man's done anything wrong."

I'm with Crack on this one. I actually watched Cain's press conference yesterday. He handled it very well. He even referred to his accusers as "ladies" when he spoke of them. In short he made a powerful denial without trashing the women accusing him.

How the hell are you supposed to respond to something like this? The accusations are super weak, and the accusers are just shadows. Cain has kept his dignity, which I find impressive.

I like Cain more because of how he has handled this.

ndspinelli said...

Peter V Bella is giving the sage advice of Deep Throat, "Follow the money." However, I have to believe this is either some kind of contingency fee[suit, book, etc.] or just a way to keep her in the public eye for future clients. However, I could be wrong

ndspinelli said...

And sexual predator/registration laws too, right saintshoutingthomas. Get those inconvenient laws off the books too.

Beta Rube said...

I like Herman Cain, and his free wheeling style and lack of poilitical experience is , to me, a plus.

But if you're going to aspire to the highest levels of any profession, be it law, sports, music, whatever, you have to bring your A Game every time. If Block is Herman's A Game, his campaign is fu**ed.

Shouting Thomas said...

And sexual predator/registration laws too, right saintshoutingthomas. Get those inconvenient laws off the books too.

You are absolutely vicious and corrupt.

If you ever did work in law enforcement (which I doubt) you must have planted a lot of evidence and cooked a lot of books.

You really are a lowlife.

You've now accused me, in two days, of being a pedophile, a sexual harasser and an enabler of molesters.

False accusation just comes naturally to you, doesn't it?

Worthless bastards like you are precisely the reason that sexual harassment laws must come off the books.

Thanks for proving my point again. Every time you post, you just enforce it.

Keep going, asshole.

Shouting Thomas said...

What other false accusation do you want to make, ndspinelli a/k/a J?

You really enjoy lying and slandering people, don't you?

Come on. Keep it up.

You are Exhibit A for the repeal of sexual harassment laws.

You're too stupid to get this, aren't you?

Allie said...

I told you all what Mark Block was all about a couple weeks ago, so can I say I told you so?

Shouting Thomas said...

I told you all what Mark Block was all about a couple weeks ago, so can I say I told you so?

What would you do, Allie, if you were the subject of this vicious campaign of lies being spread by purchased bimbos who refuse to even adjudicate their complaints in court?

This campaign is being orchestrated from the White House. The appearance of the scumbag, Allred, is all the proof I need.

Allie said...

Shouting, forget about the sexual harassment crap, what about Cain's judgement in picking a creature like Mark Block to run his campaign.

Shouting Thomas said...

Shouting, forget about the sexual harassment crap, what about Cain's judgement in picking a creature like Mark Block to run his campaign.

No, I won't forget about this denunciation campaign directed by the White House.

How would you defend yourself if you were the subject of such a coordinated attack, Allie.

Look at the son of a bitch, spinelli. He's solely motivated by political hatred, and he's willing to make any kind of vicious accusation.

The White House has unlimited financial resources to purchase bimbos.

Get rid of the sexual harassment laws.

Allie said...

Shouting , they haven't ruled out any adjudication yet, at least I haven't heard so. I say let's hear testimony under oath, go for it.

Shouting Thomas said...

Allie, slow down and forget the partisan shit.

Look at what this bastard spinelli is willing to do just to win an argument in a comments thread.

Multiply by the tens of thousands for wanting to win a presidential campaign.

Look long and hard at this bastard spinelli. Look what he is willing to do.

How would you defend yourself against this kind of viciousness and treachery?

Shouting Thomas said...

And, Allie, I don't really give a fuck who's president.

I like Cain, but I have no investment in him becoming president.

I don't delude myself into thinking that the government, or any particular candidate, is my salvation.

pm317 said...

Allie said...

Shouting, forget about the sexual harassment crap, what about Cain's judgement in picking a creature like Mark Block to run his campaign.
-----------

It seems to me that Cain was not that serious when he started his campaign and did not want to invest his time in raising money and spend on a competent and well networked staff. He could at least have changed that when his popularity started to rise. May he never wanted it to get this serious.

Allie said...

Shouting forget Spinelli, we all know you arent a pedophile, that's absurd. I read your tribute to your late wife, that told me all I need to know about you.

Shouting Thomas said...

It seems to me that Cain was not that serious when he started his campaign and did not want to invest his time in raising money and spend on a competent and well networked staff. He could at least have changed that when his popularity started to rise. May he never wanted it to get this serious.

Maybe he was taken by surprise by how much support he found when he entered the race.

Allie said...

Shouting , I would defend myself by taking it to court and trusting a jury of my peers.

Shouting Thomas said...

Shouting forget Spinelli, we all know you arent a pedophile, that's absurd. I read your tribute to your late wife, that told me all I need to know about you.

That's not the point, Allie.

I'm not worried about his accusations.

Look, instead, at how willing he is to make the most vile accusations, just to win a comments thread.

Imagine what people are willing to do when real money and power are at stake.

Shouting Thomas said...

Shouting , I would defend myself by taking it to court and trusting a jury of my peers.

Cain can't do that, Allie.

The slander laws in the U.S. make it virtually impossible for a public figure to win a slander suit.

Phil 3:14 said...

ST;
You've lost sight of the difference between urge/desire and behavior.

traditionalguy said...

Herman should have asked the Wizard of Rove whether he surrenders now or later.

But the Herman that I know has faith in people and in himself.

The question will soon become what will the Wizard do about it when Herman will not surrender.

edutcher said...

Allie said...

Shouting, forget about the sexual harassment crap, what about Cain's judgement in picking a creature like Mark Block to run his campaign.

As opposed to GodZero picking out a creature like Astroturf Axelrod?

Allie said...

Shouting forget Spinelli, we all know you arent a pedophile, that's absurd. I read your tribute to your late wife, that told me all I need to know about you.

That's not the point, Allie.

I'm not worried about his accusations.

Look, instead, at how willing he is to make the most vile accusations, just to win a comments thread.

Imagine what people are willing to do when real money and power are at stake.

11/9/11 12:00 PM
Yes I understand that , it happens it's vile, but what IF it's true? How much evidence would you need to convince you ? WHAT evidence would you need? Can we give EVERY allegation of sexual misconduct a pass because sometimes it's abused by unscrupulous people with an agenda?

ic said...

We should thank Politico for springing their October surprise a year early.

As they say: it's not the crime, it's the cover-up; it's not the grope, it's the response.

Shouting Thomas said...

I read your tribute to your late wife, that told me all I need to know about you.

Allie, my late wife, Myrna, was the most beautiful, sexiest woman who ever lived. Every man wanted her, and that includes every man she met in the workplace.

She handled the flirting and innuendoes and propositions with grace and humor. She never had to resort to legal action, because she didn't want to, and she knew how to react without inflaming the situation or hurting anybody's feelings.

She also understood that those men were simply motivated by the normal human desire for love and companionship and that there was nothing wrong with that. Reacting with compassion, as well as turning them down, was the answer.

Myrna thought the concept of sexual harassment was pretty much bullshit.

My standard is pretty simple, Allie. Throw out the sexual harassment laws. The only law that should be on the books is a law against quid pro quo harassment.

That is, make it actionable to demand sex in exchange for employment.

Andrea said...

"Can we give EVERY allegation of sexual misconduct a pass because sometimes it's abused by unscrupulous people with an agenda?"

Actually, yes. I'm with ST here -- it's time we got rid of the so-called laws that are supposed to prevent sexual harassment and started teaching women to take care of themselves again. These laws are so vague that they basically outlaw making a woman "uncomfortable." They are too easily misused by unscrupulous people -- and women can be just as underhanded, sometimes even more, than men. These laws are based on women never lying or doing anything for their own gain, something that is impossible in the real world.

So yeah. "He made me uncomfortable" is not something anyone should get a pass on. Women need to pick one: being respected as individuals who can take responsibilities for their own lives, or fragile baby dolls who need to be swaddled in soft, comfy laws from all upset. You can't have both.

Tyrone Slothrop said...

I was, and could still be. All the chips have yet to fall.

frank said...

good to know.

http://news.yahoo.com/ap-exclusive-accuser-filed-complaint-next-job-080946066.html

Accuser filed complaint in next job
By BRETT J. BLACKLEDGE and SUZANNE GAMBOA – Associated Press | AP – 1 min 48 secs ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — A woman who settled a sexual harassment complaint against GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain in 1999 complained three years later at her next job about unfair treatment, saying she should be allowed to work from home after a serious car accident and accusing a manager of circulating a sexually charged email, The Associated Press has learned.

cryptical said...

The thing that bothers me about this? All the "incidents" seem to have happened in the three year period he worked for the NRA.

As we learned from Bill Clinton, once a poonhound always a poonhound.

frank said...

Query: My previous post. If she is a cereal sexual complainer do I get to eat her? Would I want to?

Lem said...

I was and I am, even more so now. I'm invigorated to fight this high-tech lynching.

Thats the answer I liked.. the invigorated part.. Though I was never a Cain supporter.. the scandal has awaken me to the upcoming election.

Thank you Mr Cain.

Brennan said...

I'm not sure why Mark Block is still on the Cain team. The Curt Andersen accusation and now this is just embarrassing.

There are real questions about the credibility of Karen Kraushaar and Sharon Bialek, but the Cain campaign can gain any ground by taking on more water with Block.

Coketown said...

So sad. I guess America just wasn't ready for a completely black president. A sad commentary, to be sure. Shame.

/liberal

timmaguire42 said...

I'm missing something here. Nowhere in the Haberman story does anybody connected with Cain claim that Josh Kraushaar is Karen Kraushaar's son.

What's more believable?

That Block found someone at Politico with her last name and assumed based only on that that, not only is there a relation, but the exact nature of that relation?

OR

That Haberman knew a former staffer with Kraushaar's last name and assumed Block was talking about him?

Seriously, which of those is more likely?

Petunia said...

Gloria Allred is right up there with Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson in the media-whore department. Her appearance automatically reduces the credibility of the accuser.

Honkeys for Herman! :)

Lem said...

..the Cain campaign can gain any ground by taking on more water with Block.

I'm of another opinion.

Cigarette smoking Block is a genius.

ndspinelli said...

People who have known saintshoutingthomas longer than myself told me a couple days ago he would bring out his late wife. In his addled mind, that's his "get out of jail free card." He plays it when he can't bullshit or bully someone. And, I'm certain his wife was a lovely person and almost certainly saintly. I'm sure she's w/ God. I never pray for the dead for I believe they are @ peace w/ The Good Lord. I pray for family and friends. As I've said to you several times, saintshoutingthomas, I pray that you deal w/ your anger and other issues. That's what I was taught, and that is what I do.

Finally, It appears this thread has devolved into an Allie/saintshoutingthomas circle jerk. A welterweight circle jerk nonetheless.

edutcher said...

cryptical said...

The thing that bothers me about this? All the "incidents" seem to have happened in the three year period he worked for the NRA.

As we learned from Bill Clinton, once a poonhound always a poonhound.


If true.

Willie had a track record long before he ran for POTUS.

Herman didn't.

The NRA charges are the ones documented and, as Karl Rove noted, the best thing Herman can do is have them made public.

Shouting Thomas said...

Now, I'm going to throw another monkey wrench in the reliable interpretation of Cain's actions, were it true that he actually did the things these women say he did.

Cain, I discovered in listening to his interview last night, virtually lived on the road in hotel rooms during his tenure as CEO of the restaurant association.

Have any of you done this? I have. I worked for a law firm years ago that kept me (and an army of lawyers) on the road for months at a time.

It was routine for those lawyers to get divorced after about a year on the road.

Why? Because they got lonely and they wanted some love and companionship. They got tired of returning to their hotel rooms alone. Hell, they got tired of eating dinner alone.

So, let's assume Cain did try to reach out to women. This is just about the most normal human behavior possible. He was lonely. He wanted somebody to talk with, somebody to go back to his room with him and spend the night.

I saw this happen over and over with the smartest lawyers in the world.

Why do any of you find this behavior a surprise? It's normal.

Brennan said...

"Why do any of you find this behavior a surprise? It's normal."

Humans choose this path. Nothing forces them to make the actions that they take.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

Andrea said: These laws are so vague that they basically outlaw making a woman "uncomfortable." They are too easily misused by unscrupulous people -- and women can be just as underhanded, sometimes even more, than men. These laws are based on women never lying or doing anything for their own gain, something that is impossible in the real world.

That was probably true at some point, but, at least for the most part, that's changed. It's very hard now to pursue a case for sexual harassment (or just about any discrimination). There are a lot of very specific criteria that have to be met, and you're almost never going to get very far on strict "he said/she said." That, of course, doesn't mean that some people don't make accusations and get a quick payday to go away, just to avoid a fight, but it's much rarer than it was in the 90's, because the law just doesn't support it.

I completely agree that women need to defend themselves and should be able to laugh off jokes, but I doubt that you would agree with ShoutingT (we had this discussion on another thread, and this was his absurd position) that we don't need laws that allow action against an employer who, say, tells an employee he or she has to perform sex acts or let them touch that employee inapproporiately as a condition for keeping the job.

(This has nothing, really, to do with the Cain case, as there's no reason to believe that he did anything like that. I'm just saying that the suggestion that we should do away with all sexual harassment laws is absurd. Shouting Thomas is a cartoon.)

- Lyssa

Shouting Thomas said...

Humans choose this path. Nothing forces them to make the actions that they take.

No, you're right.

But, a very surprising percentage of people do fall victim to the loneliness and the desire for some companionship.

You'd be surprised how overwhelming the desire just to have somebody sit down with you at dinner becomes.

Shanna said...

I voted 2, but I'm a mix of 1&2. Cain wasn't my guy, so I do hope he doesn't get the nomination, but at the same time I certainly didn't have anything against the guy adn don't wish him ill.

Plus, this scandal is basically 'Herman tried to get a little play on a date' which is not the worst thing in the world. We'll see if anything else come out.

I don't love the way he's handled it, though. Mostly, we have real problems, we need to pick someone who can at the very least not make them worse. Let's move on to do that. We just have to accept that this election is going to be dirty and ignore it to stay on message.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

Why do any of you find this behavior a surprise? It's normal.

Normal is not in any way the same as OK.

ndspinelli said...

shoutingthomas, is saying lecherous male attorney behavior is normal. I too worked in a law firm and the big deal was to get your secretary under the desk doing a Lewinski. Your depravity is showing dude. Keep your "wisdom" coming.

I find all of the aforementioned behavior immoral. Of course, I find priest fucking boys, and coaches fucking 10 year olds, and people covering it all up immoral too. I guess I'm just not an enlightened saintshoutingthomas.

Shouting Thomas said...

Normal is not in any way the same as OK.

Have you ever had to deal with the situation I described?

As I said, I saw many of the smartest Harvard and Yale trained lawyers fall victim to this.

But, my real point is that, if Cain indeed did just about everything alleged, he's no different in that regard than the majority of humans.

Shouting Thomas said...

shoutingthomas, is saying lecherous male attorney behavior is normal.

Saw female attorneys do the same thing as the males.

Shouting Thomas said...

And, once again, our supreme idiot, spinelli, makes accusations that he can't possibly verify.

He's a font of malicious accusations, isn't he?

Just imagine the position Cain is in. He's facing an army of unscrupulous liars like spinelli.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

I was an early Cain supporter, then back off and got interested in Perry, but since Perry has bombed, I've floated back towards Cain or Romney (though I'm still open to Perry).

I'm ditching my support for Cain yet, but I'm wavering a little. I'm not believing any of the allegations, but, at this point, we've seen 2 accusations of being "behind" this that don't seem to have enough support. I really don't like that, and it speaks to how he might handle actual crisises while in office, as well as several other mis-speaks and backtracks. We'll see, but I'm starting to feel like I'm making a lot of excuses for the guy. (This is not in any way to suggest that he doesn't look fabulous compared to Obama.)

I'd like to know more about how he addressed crisises when he was in the business world. I still think Cain's amazing and I do hope he does something in the next administration.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

As I said, I saw many of the smartest Harvard and Yale trained lawyers fall victim to this.

But, my real point is that, if Cain indeed did just about everything alleged, he's no different in that regard than the majority of humans.


Smart's got nothing to do with it. The majority of humans do things that are wrong. If you are correct (and I doubt that you are) that the majority would cheat on their spouse in this situation, that doesn't change the fact that it is wrong one tiny bit.

Phil said...

"Tell me how anybody defends themselves against this systematic slander campaign."

1. Simply deny the charges without impugning the motives or character of the accuser. This just goes with the territory.

2. Whatever you do, don't accuse fellow Republicans of being behind it. That was a fool's gambit, and only a fool would do it, fall for it, or support it. I won't vote for Cain after that. He has no honor.

damikesc said...

I love that the word of an irresponsible harpy is considered "evidence" of anything. Anybody who declares bankruptcy twice in 10 years is not somebody I have much respect for.

Apparently, if only Cain shoved a cigar in her cooch and then told her to "kiss it" when he unzipped, he'd be lauded by the Left.

I'm thrilled Cain is fighting. This is rather blatantly a political weapon wielded against conservatives by an empty suit who has to explain how any moron in the country couldn't have conceivably done a worse job as President than he has the last 3 years...

Brennan said...

"You'd be surprised how overwhelming the desire just to have somebody sit down with you at dinner becomes"

Boo hoo. How hard is it for the road warrior to introduce themselves to any other person in the hotel? I can see the marriages breaking down. It's hard to be a husband, wife, or partner when you're not around half the time.

We make far too many excuses for people. The Mauryification of society can not last forever.

ndspinelli said...

What the fuck does the Ivy League or alleged intelligence have to do w/ morality, ethics, or empathy for the wife or husband you're fucking betraying. I guess you're confusing morality w/ intelligence and you're 0 for 2 in both. Keep digging dude..you'll reach China soon.

Pragmatist said...

How about this: quit blaming the press or the leaker for your bad behavior. I don't care if you are Slick Willy or Cain. Zip up, fess up and quit pointing fingers at "leakers" or the "media". You either did or did not do it. That is the only question. The media does not make you dumb nor does it make your "eye rove" nor does it make you do funny things with cigars. You do. Own it and quit whining.

ndspinelli said...

But, thanks for staying off the Paterno thread. Don't click on..you'll have a stroke.

damikesc said...

I don't care if you are Slick Willy or Cain. Zip up, fess up and quit pointing fingers at "leakers" or the "media". You either did or did not do it. That is the only question.

Why would anybody "fess up" if they didn't do it?

Cain has quite openly said he didn't do it.

Now, we can compare the accusers and him and see who looks better in the long run...

Shouting Thomas said...

spinelli,

You are a study in undirected, stupid malice.

One of the most worthless, inhuman sons-of-bitches I've encountered in a long time.

You have to be J.

That's really cute. That bit where you command me to do things.

Fat fucking chance, imbecile.

Shanna said...

Andrea said: These laws are so vague that they basically outlaw making a woman "uncomfortable."

You have quid pro quo and ‘hostile work environment’. It’s the later that is vague. Quid Pro Quo seems like it should stay on the books, if it can be proven.

The Crack Emcee said...

lyssalovelyredhead,

I completely agree that women need to defend themselves and should be able to laugh off jokes, but I doubt that you would agree with ShoutingT (we had this discussion on another thread, and this was his absurd position) that we don't need laws that allow action against an employer who, say, tells an employee he or she has to perform sex acts or let them touch that employee inapproporiately as a condition for keeping the job.

(This has nothing, really, to do with the Cain case, as there's no reason to believe that he did anything like that. I'm just saying that the suggestion that we should do away with all sexual harassment laws is absurd. Shouting Thomas is a cartoon.)


No, the cartoon is life with the laws you support. You don't like a job, you quit - simple as that, same as a man. I was sexually harassed on a job. I complained to the higher ups, but they couldn't do anything because she'd established their program and it couldn't run without her. I was let go. It sucked, but it wasn't a fucking federal case. But it would've been if our roles were reversed. That's the BS at the heart of the whole thing.

On the other hand, I don't have any respect for men who can't muster the personality to seduce women into sleeping with them. I do not consider the described behavior "normal," but disgusting and caddish. Fortunately, I've seen no evidence that's Herman Cain.

ST's style isn't mine, but I hear him loud-and-clear saying GROW UP.

Nobody will perish without a NewAge world.

AlphaLiberal said...

I don't think it ever occurred to the Cain campaign, part of the Koch-Cain connection, to tell the truth.

That's the pattern with them and Repubs generally.

And now Rush Limbaugh is bullying the 13 year old son of Ms Bialek. A school boy. A kid.

Pragmatist said...

It is almost breathtaking to see how some people write things that are so insanely retarded, and do it with a presumably straight face, and with no safety net but "Oh Yeah! You too!!" Some defenders of sexual harrassment and its perps sound like they could only hope someone would be desperate enough to sexually harrass them. Maybe it is time to lay down and take a nap. This isn't 1950 anymore. Get over it.

AlphaLiberal said...

It's appalling to see all the men and conservatives defending sexual harassment.

Real men don't sexually harass women, in the workplace or without. That's for oversexed creeps who won't grow up.

Are you Goofus or Gallant?

Pragmatist said...

"I did not have sex with that woman" oooppps! I meant I did not sexually harrass that woman. But I paid her off anyway. And all of the others..woman one, two, three, four (bar the door!)...are just making it up.

AlphaLiberal said...

Crack Emcee:

On the other hand, I don't have any respect for men who can't muster the personality to seduce women into sleeping with them.

Don't rule out the possibility that you are a blithering, conceited beyond all justification, narcissist. And idiot.

As a liberal, though, you make for a great representative of conservatives, I guess. So there's that upside.

damikesc said...

Real men don't sexually harass women, in the workplace or without. That's for oversexed creeps who won't grow up.

So Clinton was an oversexed creep? A Dem FINALLY admits it?

...and how can Cain sexually harass somebody who doesn't work for him?

Seven Machos said...

part of the Koch-Cain connection

Edutcher and Alpha can have a pissing contest about their goofy conspiracy theories now.

Go!

damikesc said...

After the Duke rape case --- a woman saying "He did it" just isn't enough proof any more.

I need, you know, ACTUAL proof.

EDH said...

lyssalovelyredhead said...

I completely agree that women need to defend themselves and should be able to laugh off jokes, but I doubt that you would agree with ShoutingT (we had this discussion on another thread, and this was his absurd position) that we don't need laws that allow action against an employer who, say, tells an employee he or she has to perform sex acts or let them touch that employee inapproporiately as a condition for keeping the job.

You could keep quid pro quo claims while curtailing hostile environment claims.

Brennan said...

"It's appalling to see all the men and conservatives defending sexual harassment"

How does the honest observer know it is "sexual harassment"?

This is basically the question that puts me in the camp with The Crack Emcee. It's basically no way out if you're a man that is the victim and if you're the man in charge. Heck, even if the person doesn't even work for you anymore but asks for help finding another job, any untoward comment is "sexual harassment".

My basic premise to avoid these situations is the same premise as the only way to win at Global Thermonuclear War in "War Games" - you don't play the game. To play is to lose because there are no winners. There are only winners right now that lose in the future.

Seven Machos said...

I need, you know, ACTUAL proof.

So it's a come-covered blue dress or nothing for you. Right?

So much for reasoned judgment. Don't read Arthur Conan Doyle, dude. You will be pissed.

edutcher said...

AlphaLiberal said...

I don't think it ever occurred to the Cain campaign, part of the Koch-Cain connection, to tell the truth.

That's the pattern with them and Repubs generally.


Ah did nawt have sex with that woman, Mizz Lewinsky

Just follow me around. You won't see anything.

Bill Ayers was just a guy in the neighborhood.

It's appalling to see all the men and conservatives defending sexual harassment.

Somebody tell Alpha that there's a difference between wanting to get to the truth and see some proof and defending sexual harassment.

Defending sexual harassment is what Demos do.

For 8 years at a clip, in some cases.

edutcher said...

Seven Machos said...

part of the Koch-Cain connection

Edutcher and Alpha can have a pissing contest about their goofy conspiracy theories now.


As opposed to Seven who says it's another Republican.

And he knows.

Because he knows all about politics.

Just ask him.

AlphaLiberal said...

. It's basically no way out if you're a man that is the victim and if you're the man in charge.

Yet most men go through life without facing these charges. There must be some way to live without forcing your libido on people who do not welcome it.

A tough concept, for some reason.

You guys will never get over Bill Clinton.

Scott M said...

You guys will never get over Bill Clinton.

If that's true, it's only because neither will you. The left trots his name out constantly, relevant or not.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

You have quid pro quo and ‘hostile work environment’. It’s the later that is vague.

Hostile work environment can be very vague, but you do still have some thing that obviously cross a line. For example, Bill Clinton exposing himself to Paula Jones.

DADvocate said...

That's for oversexed creeps who won't grow up.

I'm oversexed. But, because of my extreme good looks, sparkling personality, and killer bod, it's the women harassing me.

Sadly, Cain's toast. He may have been able to weather the accusations, especially if he switched parties. Getting rid of sexual harassment laws is a good idea too.

Women have a misconception of what work life is like for men. Now that more women are dying from heart attacks and other stress/work related maladies, some are catching on. It's like when the black man tells the white man, "You don't know what it's like to be black." Guess what, you don't know what it's like to be white (or a man if you're a woman) although you have all sorts of assumptions that you do know what it's like.

damikesc said...

So it's a come-covered blue dress or nothing for you. Right?

So, any yahoo who makes a claim is immediately credible? That's your standard?

"Well, she said it happened. I've never known women to lie about these things before..."

Can you provide me an ACTUAL reason she should be believed over Cain? Cain said he didn't do it. She said she did.

Cain turned around corporations and served in the military. She declared bankruptcy twice inside of ten years and has a history of making harassment claims --- in an era where harassment claims became a useful weapon right until Clinton got ensnared.

Brennan said...

"After the Duke rape case --- a woman saying "He did it" just isn't enough proof any more."

This is still BS. Even before the Duke case, you still need to prove it. Word of the accuser isn't enough. You still need actual evidence or witnesses.

damikesc said...

Yet most men go through life without facing these charges.

The number of men falsely accused of sexual misconduct by women is criminally large.

It is one of the many reasons, for example, male enrollment in colleges has dropped like a rock.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

EDH said: You could keep quid pro quo claims while curtailing hostile environment claims.


Not in Crack's or ShoutingT's worlds, you can't. The way they see it, if any employer wants any given employee to be his or her prostitute, the employee's should have a choice between a paycheck and providing sexual favors. And if women don't like it, well they just plain shouldn't be in the workforce.

(That is not in any way an exaggeration of what ShoutingT argued in an earlier thread.)

damikesc said...

This is still BS. Even before the Duke case, you still need to prove it. Word of the accuser isn't enough. You still need actual evidence or witnesses.

No argument. But before then, even I would assume "Well, something probably happened".

Then you see the case where LITERALLY nothing happened and the guys were STILL dragged through the mud.

You then notice how laughable sexual misconduct rules are in colleges nowadays and you begin to notice that stuff is a bit screwed up.

Look at what has happened to Cain --- these accusers have not provided any evidence outside of their claims. And people are BUYING it.

Seven Machos said...

Dam -- The point, which you are apparently irretrievably too unsophisticated to get, is that any allegation of misconduct must be judged on its own, according to its own circumstances.

Ed -- It was obviously a Republican opposition research hit. As I have said, Obama would love to run against Cain. Obama gains nothing if Cain drops out or becomes a non-factor in the Republican race. Republican candidates, on the other hand, have much to lose if Cain remains.

The fact that you see David Axelrod as some nefarious puller of strings is simply hilarious. It is tinfoil hat territory, right up there with conspiracies about Karl Rove and these giant Kochs and Lee Atwater.

Shouting Thomas said...

(That is not in any way an exaggeration of what ShoutingT argued in an earlier thread.)

It's actually completely untrue.

I've stated right in this thread that outright quid pro quo sexual harassment is the only behavior that should actually be addressed by law.

wv: swineoaf. That would be spinelli a/k/a/ J.

Carol_Herman said...

I don't think the deocraps had anything to do with unleashing this story.

Why would they want to remove the man most likely to lose to Obama, by scratching him from the race?

Maybe, the lesson is that if you want to come from nowhere, and become a household name ... you need to worry about what you've done ... that will get exposed. And, will make you feel bad?

Herman Cain certainly knew how blond working women, scared about losing their jobs, can be had for a "quicky."

I'm sure he's banged more than just the five women who've come along. Because most women probably said "yes." And, that's the fear they have about coming forward.

Sarah Palin remains viable.

Just as does Donald Trump.

They tend to talk about the real issues. And, they don't bore people by doing this every day.

And, right now, they're not spending money!

Right now the only involvement is coming from the religious right.

And, yesterday's results showed you that you can't even mess with Mississippi ... on the abortion rights issue.

Women getting propositioned? Happens every day of the week.

Women getting pregnant? Ditto.

Dictating to women about sex and its consequences? Here, it seems to have taken out Herman Cain.

Unexpected consequences to those who don't pay attention to consequences, in the first place.

Stephen said...

The readership of this blog is, on the evidence of the poll, extremely conservative.

Seven Machos said...

So Thomas, let's say a woman doesn't get a promotion because she's a woman at, just for instance, the Internal Revenue Service. There is smoking gun evidence.

That shouldn't be actionable?

lyssalovelyredhead said...

I've stated right in this thread that outright quid pro quo sexual harassment is the only behavior that should actually be addressed by law.

You're right; you did say that here, and I did miss it. However, when I gave you a quid pro quo hypothetical a day or two ago, you specifically responded that the woman in that case should simply quit the job, regardless of the market, but have no legal recourse.

So, I guess you're just confused. Nevertheless, if you've abandoned your cartoonish position from earlier, I'm glad to hear it and sorry that I didn't catch it earlier.

Scott M said...

The readership of this blog is, on the evidence of the poll, extremely conservative.

Please expand on that statement. Why do you think so and what evidence backs up that argument?

Seven Machos said...

Stephen -- It's not the readership, it's the commenters in various threads.

I liken it to reading the St. Louis Post-Dispatch online. Tony La Russa is by any standard a great baseball manager and he just won the World Series and did so once before as a Cardinal manager and had my beloved Cardinals in the playoffs year after blissful year.

But you read the comments on a typical day in the middle of any typical season. If you were to judge Cardinals fans based on those comments, you'd conclude that La Russa is a loser who couldn't manage his way out of a wet paper bag and should be fired immediately.

That's how commenting goes.

Titus said...

What's so bad about a man wanting to get pussy?

Seven Machos said...

Titus -- The underlying issue here is that Cain is married. Everybody knows that it's better to have, say, 30 new pussies once than the same pussy 1000 times. But we can't endorse that as a society, and would be nowhere as a society if we endorsed it.

ndspinelli said...

saintshoutingthomas just heard "ni hao ma" from the hole he's digging. You've reached China dude.

Now, as the boss in Cool Hand Luke would say.."Boy..what's your hole doing on the bossman's yard..fill it up boy..I mean now."

You can dig another one tomorrow. And, you really do need to get over to the paterno thread, there's nobody giving a pedophile perspective. It's all anti pedophile. However, you're doing a fine job here giving a woman hating, everybody fucks around on their spouses perspective. Did you fuck around on your deceased wife?

Shanna said...

I've stated right in this thread that outright quid pro quo sexual harassment is the only behavior that should actually be addressed by law.

Look at that so you did, but it was buried in your love letter to your wife, so maybe some people skipped it. You are aware that quid pro quo is part of the sexual harassment law, so when you say “ALL sexual harassment laws should be off the books” you are including that.

Lyssa, there are legitimate examples of hostile work environments, but that seems to be the most misused part of the law. I think it could be clarified to include things like exposure if you want to include that. (and outright assault should be covered under other laws already existing).

edwardroyce said...

@ lyssalovelyredhead

Hostile work environment can be very vague, but you do still have some thing that obviously cross a line. For example, Bill Clinton exposing himself to Paula Jones.

That isn't an example of a "hostile work environment". That is specifically a quid pro quo example because Bill Clinton made it clear that her future depended on "performing".

and to give you a second target; personally if every woman in the workforce were to leave it would not bother me that much and it would be very much a relief.

I've worked with a lot of great women over the years. But that whole "treat me like a man" is complete and utter bullshit. It lasts right up until she wants preferential treatment and then it's "how dare you treat me like one of the guys" all the way.

IMO that's pretty much one of the major reasons I prefer to telecommute rather than work in an office.

Jenny said...

"He made me uncomfortable" is not something anyone should get a pass on.

Frankly, this is a cop-out. Some women get uncomfortable by having the door held open for them. All I need to know about false accusations I learned from the Duke Lacrosse case.

Some women are capable of anything and some are incapable of handling anything for themselves.Guys who make unwanted,unwarranted physical/sexual advances should be told in no uncertain terms they will find themselves unable to walk the next time it happens and criminal charges will be brought.

Enough of these veiled accusations.

Don't Tread 2012 said...

Black Conservative = runaway slave

DADvocate said...

Kraushaar is an extremely unusual last name. Never heard of it in 60 years. I smell a skunk.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

That isn't an example of a "hostile work environment". That is specifically a quid pro quo example because Bill Clinton made it clear that her future depended on "performing".

That may have been clear to her, and I'm sure that was his intent, but it's awfully hard to prove. Also, there are a lot of people out there who just get off on being asses- exposing themselves to laugh at the reaction, yelling nasty things, that sort of thing. There's a point where it's too much.

and to give you a second target; personally if every woman in the workforce were to leave it would not bother me that much and it would be very much a relief.

Well, good for you. I'm pretty happy to have freedom to support myself and my family. I don't work with what bothers you and doesn't bother you in mind. I'm sure my husband would be bothered if I left the workforce, though.

- Lyssa

Shouting Thomas said...

ndspinelli, a/k/a/ J,

About the only crime you haven't yet accused me of is murder.

Why not let it all out?

As I said, you are Exhibit A in the need to get rid of sexual harassment laws.

You are a pathological liar. You've become so enraged at simple political disagreement, that you accused a person you've never met and you still do not know of just about every conceivable crime.

Folks, take a close look at this idiot. This malicious, stupid fool is precisely what Cain is facing.

damikesc said...

Seven, what you're not getting is the simple reality that an allegation is not evidence.

These women said Cain harassed them.

Grand.

He said he didn't.

The women who made the accusations have done a spectacular job of not providing evidence to back up their claims.

Why in the world would ANYBODY believe them?

Any allegation made with no proof behind it should be treated with total skepticism until evidence is presented to bolster it.

I could claim that Kim Kardashian is divorcing because she is banging me. And even if it is true, without evidence, it is something nobody should believe.

Seven Machos said...

Dam -- That's fine that you don't think there has been any bad judgment or wrong behavior on Cain's part. I think there has based on exactly the same evidence.

The trouble with your argument is that you are trying to make my judgment -- no different than yours -- somehow out of bounds because, you say, there is not enough proof.

This is politics. It's not a court of law.

edutcher said...

Anybody who isn't afraid of Zero's race (or lack of it) is somebody GodZero never wants to run against.

Anybody who can turn his political fortunes around the way Herman did as a result of his debate performance is somebody GodZero never wants to run against.

Herman vs POTUS - TOTUS?

No contest.

As always, Seven takes a position based on his reading of somebody's tea leaves and holds it until he beclowns himself.

QED.

Seven Machos said...

Ed -- Speaking of beclowning, why wasn't Herman Cain able to win even a Republican primary for the mere governor of a state? Why hasn't he won a single popular election ever?

I mean, if he's so awesome and all. If he's such an excellent debater.

Cain is an irritant to some Republican candidate -- most likely Romney or Perry.

Don't Tread 2012 said...

edutcher

Your thoughts today about John Kasich and the people of Ohio to say yes on #2 and no (not a surprise) to #3???

X said...

the Cain accusers are starting to look like Crystal Mangums. hold your judgements.

gadfly said...

"Karen Kraushaar works for Obama and she is ugly." sez Herman Cain PAC.

"Ew, gross! Who the hell does this ugly b1tch think she’s fooling?"

ndspinelli said...

I sort of like Cain and have said so previously. However, he's looking like a lecherous serial offendor. If a person can't keep the most important oath they take, being faithful to their spouse, then they're worthless in my eyes. I despised Clinton for that and many other reasons. We don't need another lech in the WH. I'm guessing you despised Clinton also but are more than willing to give your guy a pass. I'll watch and listen. I'm a trained observor of human behavior. That ability has literally saved my life. And you saintshoutingthomas are a tormented, paranoid, hypocritical narcissist who has anger issues among many others. I just said another prayer for you. I truly did. Are you really religious, or just a Catholic?

Scott M said...

I'm guessing you despised Clinton also but are more than willing to give your guy a pass.

Not at all. If there were blue-dress-stain-level proof that he's everything, even a quarter (meaning one of the four) what they're accusing him of being, he's already lost because what he's doing now would amount to nothing better than what Anthony Wiener tried to pull.

However, aside from significantly compelling evidence, which I have yet to see, I'm going to give the guy the benefit of the doubt because I generally like the cut of his gib.

Clinton, on the other hand, lied and got caught at it.

Hagar said...

I see that Ms. Kraushaar cited as an example of "sexually tinged" hostile workplace atmosphere at INS when she worked there that someone circulated a joke that women were like computers in that every mistake you make will be saved to memory and forever available for retrieval.

Seven Machos said...

The problem with Cain is that he has no experience governing, not that he may or may not be a serial adulterer.

I have no particular problem with serial adultery in politicians. These are politicians, not popes. Unto Caesar and all that.

edutcher said...

Seven Machos said...

Ed -- Speaking of beclowning, why wasn't Herman Cain able to win even a Republican primary for the mere governor of a state? Why hasn't he won a single popular election ever?

I mean, if he's so awesome and all. If he's such an excellent debater.


The same rap we heard from Seven about Miss Sarah.

Word for word.

When last I looked, a lot of good people have lost primaries especially if it's their first time running for elective office.

And his was for the Senate, not the Governor of GA, so Seven doesn't even know about the man.

He just likes to play the sophist. And sneer at everybody else

Don't Tread 2012 said...

edutcher

Your thoughts today about John Kasich and the people of Ohio to say yes on #2 and no (not a surprise) to #3???


Issue 2's wording was apparently dictated by the unions to make it as difficult to understand as possible. As I said, I don't doubt more than a few people voted "No" even though they supported Kasich.

Also, Pastafarian is probably right that the OH GOP should have fought to make the issue worded so a "No" would have supported Kasich.

There was very little money and effort put into supporting the measure and it hurt. I saw 1 sign pushing for a "Yes" vote.

Issue 3 was worded more clearly, although the nature of the measure was less well-known. And there wasn't the big push by the unions to defeat it.

Seven Machos said...

Ed -- You are correct that it was Senate. I have it on my mind that Cain should run for governor.

Please tell us the last person who was successful failing at running for the Senate -- or alderman, or dog catcher -- but successful then running for the presidency, with no governing experience whatsoever.

Please also find the post where I say that Palin never won a primary or a popular election.

I'll wait.

Carol_Herman said...

Okay.

Herman Cain became a darling of the conservatives. In a very lackluster field. Where ALL their favorites seem to crash. Just the way Michele Bachmann tumbled, as well.

But how did Cain become popular with this conservative group?

In the camplaint I read from "woman #5" ... who said he had been invited to give a talk in Egypt. And, he tried to get the women who had arranged this speech ... to go out into the audience ... and ask a woman. Who had asked a question. IF she'd like to meet Cain for dinner. (So he could answer her question better.)

And, they refused. It seems the few women from this group that put together this speech (for profit) ... that Cain was trying to use them to pick up this gal.

Instead, between the "back and forth" that followed, the women decided to ask Cain to dinner. And, he accepted.

At dinner, he ordered two bottles of $400 a bottle, of wine. And, then he "stiffed" the women who had to pay the dinner bill.

As "thanks" ... at Christmas ... Cain sent one of these women a CD of his "gospel recording."

It seems Cain addresses "a" church group ... for part of his livelihood. So you could call him a preacher.

The women, according to the article, felt slighted. Because they thought this was a "cheap gift."

But the album had a cover. On it Cain is dressed in his white sermon robes.

Perhaps, in this way, Cain has been a religious candidate, making a stealth appearance.

Does he want sex with blonds? Seems lots of heterosexual men like "loose" blonds.

And, sometimes, they guess wrong. And, approach a woman who gets offended.

Most of the time, though, they score.

And, Cain, IF he was judged to be the "right" flavor of "religion," a lot of conservatives went "all in."

The rest of the country, though, found this man a bore.

Until the scandals erupted.

At some point it's going to get obvious that when the religious right picks a candidate ... the automatic response across America will be to exit that audience.

And, it will be harder to attract voters.

Be angry. No one really seems to care.

The GOP is probably going to ride out 2012, anyway. Obama won't have to run. He'll be able to walk.

While politicians are going to look for "other" spots on the 2012 ticket. Where it takes access to money to run.

Scott M said...

Please tell us the last person who was successful failing at running for the Senate -- or alderman, or dog catcher -- but successful then running for the presidency, with no governing experience whatsoever.

Well, POTUS actually won a senate race (dubiously, to be sure, but certified nonetheless and by all accounts legal and legit), but basically phoned it in afterward. Is that the mark of someone that should then run for President?

sorepaw said...

As a liberal, though, you make for a great representative of conservatives, I guess. So there's that upside.

Hey, Alpha, if you were more widely known as a representative of "liberalism," its remaining support would quickly trend toward zero.

So make more appearances here. There will be an upside.

viator said...

"The worst thing anyone could do is falsely accuse someone of … working for Politico"

"So many conservative blogs and Twitterers are joining in the hysteria directed at the Cain campaign because campaign manager Mark Block erroneously stated last night that the son of accuser Sharon Kraushaar works at Politico."

Legal Insurrection

Carol_Herman said...

A majority of Americans didn't despise Bill Clinton!

Many, however, despised Hillary. And, thought being locked in the White House made it rough on Bill Clinton ... who just couldn't go out to pick someone up.

Monica found him!

Monica wanted him!

Not hard for Americans to understand the rules of the game.

Hidden from view, however, Cain is a big wig in his own church! And, this was kept hidden.

Until the 5th woman came forward with her story. "Out of Egypt."

And, the $400 bottles of wine.

And, then stiffing the women for the dinner tab.

And, in "reciprocity" ... the Christmas gift from Herman Cain ... to the woman who picked up the expensive dinner tab ... was a CD of Cain giving sermons at his church.

So, I guess this leaves Romney standing?

And, Romney will lose.

Seven Machos said...

Scott -- Obama is inexperienced and has been a failure. Cain is more inexperienced and will be a failure.

Politics is a job. Democracy is not the place to raise up Hegelian world-historical spirits. Just do the job.

donald said...

Seriously. Big time public allegations have been made by people of which every single one can/could easily be false.

Just in case, let's create a conspiracy (look it up) of sexual harrasement charges in which, federal sexual harassment laws don't apply but you know...whatever works.

Meanwhile, defend to the bitter end the various rapes and sexual assaults committed by democrat party stalwarts.

Bless your heart allie.

And everybody that plays those games I'm while I'm at it.

AlphaLiberal said...

There is a real crisis ni journalistic ethics over at Fox News. I am holding my breath waiting (or not) for Ann Althouse to pound our her outrage:

Over the summer, James Pinkerton was paid by Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann to write her new book. At the same time, Pinkerton was also paid by Fox News to offer commentary on the presidential campaign, without disclosing his role in the Bachmann campaign.

Making matters slightly worse, Fox News knew about this, and urged Pinkerton to hide the truth about his role from the public.


http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_11/a_new_case_study_in_fox_news_e033389.php

No doubt this will set off another round of attacks on Bill Clinton.

Fox Lies. But conservatives swallow it.

AlphaLiberal said...

A majority of Americans didn't despise Bill Clinton!

Absolutely not. He was ver popular throughout the scandal of impeachment over mutually consensual (if not mutual) oral sex.

The right wing accused Clinton of real estate scandal, drug running, murder, lying about a blow job, firing Republicans from his travel staff, etc, etc.

You guys have clearly never read the story about "The Boy Who Cried Wolf." You hurt your own crdibility with your zealotry.

I do no think the major reason most Republicans hate Obama is because he is African-American. It is because he is a Democrat and they think only one party should be in the Presidency. They really do want America to be a One Party State.

Seven Machos said...

Alpha -- It's a conspiracy! To, ummm, do something bad!! Really bad!

You should consider not watching Fox News. I think you are the only person here who does. But thanks for supporting advertisers who pay the way for conservative news slant. I guess.

vnjagvet said...

I like Herman Cain. He has always been a long shot and this carp doesn't make it any more likely than it was at the outset that he will emerge as the GOP candidate. But his demonstrated business leadership skills and straight talk make him a valuable voice in the GOP primary campaign. It would be a shame if these flimsy charges drove him from the field.

damikesc said...

The right wing accused Clinton of real estate scandal, drug running, murder, lying about a blow job, firing Republicans from his travel staff, etc, etc.

He did have a real estate scandal. That's not really a debatable point.

Who the heck accused him of drug running or murder?

He did lie about the sex. He was disbarred for a reason. Perjury is a crime.

He did fire the Travel Staff and have the FBI trump up charges against the head of the office --- which were dismissed by a jury in remarkably short order.

So, of the three things you listed that he was accused of doing...he actually did.

edutcher said...

Seven Machos said...

Ed -- You are correct that it was Senate. I have it on my mind that Cain should run for governor.

Please tell us the last person who was successful failing at running for the Senate -- or alderman, or dog catcher -- but successful then running for the presidency, with no governing experience whatsoever.


"Successful failing"?

It's getting old.

Please also find the post where I say that Palin never won a primary or a popular election.

I'll wait.


Seven can tell us all about how he didn't use the same sneer about how "awesome" Miss Sarah is.

I'll wait.

AlphaLiberal said...

A majority of Americans didn't despise Bill Clinton!

Absolutely not. He was ver popular throughout the scandal of impeachment over mutually consensual (if not mutual) oral sex.


Once again, moron, he was impeached for PERJURY.

Lying to a Federal judge under oath.

And, if he was so popular, how come he could win the popular vote for President?

I know Willie is Carol Herman's wet dream, but is he Alpha's, too?

Seven Machos said...

Who the heck accused him of drug running or murder?

There were plenty of stories on the hare-brained right about Clinton running a huge drug ring out of something called Mean Airport and about Clinton murdering some female law student while he was a professor at Arkansas.

Seven Machos said...

Ed -- It's getting old for you because you keep talking up Cain. You don't want to hear that it is completely possible that these allegations are true. You don't want to hear the obvious truth that a Republican planted the story, as you prefer instead to blame Democrats who, in fact, would love to run against a man who has never held political office. You don't want to hear about Cain's massive inexperience, which will lead to the same leadership vacuum in Washington that we have now.

Sorry you don't want to hear those things, pal. But I'm not going anywhere, and I'll keep saying them.

As for Palin, she agreed with me. I was right. Was I not?

Don't Tread 2012 said...

Alpha assumed

"Fox Lies. But conservatives swallow it."

Not so, Alpha. The conservatives-to-libertarians I know do not watch the MSM or cable 'products' as their sole source of reportage/opinion.

I know rabid liberals love the pap broadcasted by MSLSD but I do not believe ALL liberals/dems watch or parrot what they see and hear there.

Too simplistic.

Carol_Herman said...

Politicians fall in different ways.

Herman Cain has given himself self-inflicted wounds.

All he knows is how to attack. And, so he attacked the women accusing him of unwanted sexual pick up lines.

He didn't clear his name.

In fact, one attack backfired ... when he said the woman's son worked for Politico. And, DOES NTO!

A man with the same last name worked there back in 2010. But is NOT related to one of the ladies who filed a sexual harassment lawsuit. And, collected money.

Belittling women isn't a game Herman Cain can ever win.

Sure. He's gonna be angry.

So what?

He didn't have the voters in his pocket.

If you were at the track. And, this is the horse you bet your house on, you could start ripping up your ticket. Your horse isn't making it over the finish line, a winner.

But people will remember the story. Long after they can't even list all the 8 contendahs.

Carol_Herman said...

Bill Clinton won his re-election.

Bob Dole lost to him.

Typical of the stupid party to never work at understanding how they lose. They just name call.

By the way, I didn't know women have wet dreams.

I thought wet dreams start happening to little boys. Sometimes moms know. Because they launder the sheets.

Rarely do parents talk to their children about sex.

Politics on the other hand?

Kids grow up knowing whom their parents are choosing.

It's a much easier topic than sex education.

While, for Bill Clinton to WIN in 1996, he needed a majority of Americans to "pull the lever in his direction." A sexual reference?

Who gets wet dreams over politicians?

edutcher said...

Seven Machos said...

Ed -- It's getting old for you because you keep talking up Cain. You don't want to hear that it is completely possible that these allegations are true.

No, it's getting old because Seven makes it up as he goes along.

All I've said is that there ought to be a little proof to go with these accusations. What Seven apparently can't stand is that somebody admires anyone Seven doesn't like - it must be awful to go through life with such insecurity.

All I ever said was let's see some proof. Seven thinks that means a proclamation of innocence. Seven takes a lot on faith.

You don't want to hear the obvious truth that a Republican planted the story, as you prefer instead to blame Democrats who, in fact, would love to run against a man who has never held political office.

So obvious only Mark Block and a couple of Libertarian pundits have said so.

But Seven knows more than the rest of us combined. He knows his conspiracy theory is the right one.

Proof?

Of course he has none, but that's OK. He knows.

Seven Machos said...

Ed -- You are not the arbiter of proof here, or anywhere. Get over yourself.

From Inwood said...

Low-tech, low preparation approach to defending a high tech lynching produces low result

Don't Tread 2012 said...

The burden of proof is on the accuser.

Our down syndrome media is in no position to ask such things as 'who is paying your legal fees' and so on of these sketchy women. Doesn't fit their narrative.

The press failed the people long ago when they sold out to the democrat party.

They may still buy their ink by the barrel; they spilled much of it by also waving pom-poms. You can't fool everyone, all the time. Same goes for the fourth estate.

edutcher said...

Seven Machos said...

Ed -- You are not the arbiter of proof here, or anywhere. Get over yourself.

Seven apparently thinks he is. And he needs to get over a lot more than just himself.

Cymbalta will help.

Seven Machos said...

You obviously cannot stand it when people disagree with you, Ed. You must make it about matters of proof and allegiance.

Sad.

edutcher said...

Projection is an affliction that can be cured.

Although Seven needs to first recognize it.

Shanna said...

Mean Airport

It's Mena. Hair brained conspiracies probably exist for every candidate ever. I've certainly heard plenty of dumb ones about Bush.

Seven can tell us all about how he didn't use the same sneer about how "awesome" Miss Sarah is.

One of Seven's issues with Palin is that she has minimal experience. His issue with Cain is that he has no experience. These are pretty consistent and shared by a number of people, myself included.

new york said...

who in their right mind thinks that everyone with the same last name is related?

edutcher said...

Shanna, I have no problem with those who are wary of people with limited experience, although I think Mrs Palin's isn't as limited as some people would like to believe. She was Governor of one of the few "strong governor" states.

The objection to limited experience was voiced by a lot of us in regard to the current denizen of 1600 Pennsylvania.

The issue in Hernam's case would appear to be elective office; the man has plenty of experience. Some people, who like to bitch about professional politicians, nonetheless refuse to consider anyone who wants to come in from another walk of life - like Washington and Jefferson all those other unqualified guys did.

Those people seem to think that lack of, or sufficient, political experience,in their estimation, makes their ideas and viewpoints invalid and that's nonsense. I've said Herman's tax plan is interesting, although I've said before I'm a flat tax guy myself.

I've said I wish he'd hit the briefing book rather than wing it on issues other than the economy. He's a smart guy and can handle the material. Why he wants to be that unconventional, I can't say.

What I like about the man is his spirit, his insight, that he understands better than most people what this country is about, and his can-do attitude.

People like Seven don't like him for whatever reason and say he can't win the nomination as a justification for that dislike, mostly because of ego issues.

I've never said he'll go all the way, but I'd like to see him get his shot.

Maybe Newt will win it, or Perry, or we may all have to vote for Milton. All I want to see is the best person get the nod.

PS See, we can disagree without playing a lot of stupid games.

Don't Tread 2012 said...

Shanna said,

"One of Seven's issues with Palin is that she has minimal experience. His issue with Cain is that he has no experience. These are pretty consistent and shared by a number of people, myself included."

Fine. If we take literally what you might be suggesting, then we limit severely the number of possible candidates by imposing some kind of political 'experience' prerequisite.

Then, we have only to choose from the existing 'politicians'.
Is this your 'out-of-the-box' thinking?

I'm not sold.

Seven Machos said...

If we take literally what you might be suggesting

How would you take it not literally?

Thorley Winston said...

I voted 2, but I'm a mix of 1&2. Cain wasn't my guy, so I do hope he doesn't get the nomination, but at the same time I certainly didn't have anything against the guy adn don't wish him ill.


That’s close to my thoughts as well although I’d just add that it’s better – particularly for a relatively unknown candidate like Herman Cain – that these allegations come out in November 2011 than October 2012 if he were the nominee. He may in fact be a great guy and might make a wonderful president (if he is the Republican nominee, I would almost certainly vote for him) but if he and his team weren’t prepared for having these allegations come out on the campaign trail, then he shouldn’t be the nominee.

The Crack Emcee said...

lyssalovelyredhead,

In Crack's or ShoutingT's worlds, you can't. The way they see it, if any employer wants any given employee to be his or her prostitute, the employee's should have a choice between a paycheck and providing sexual favors. And if women don't like it, well they just plain shouldn't be in the workforce.

Not true. You do the same thing I do - which is the "choice" you left out, though I was quite explicit - you go to work somewhere else. Many American blacks won't work for certain white people because of perceived racism. But a Jamaican will, or a South African, or an Indian.

It's the mental framework - that your choices are limited to becoming a whore or a slave - that, in 2011, are idiotic.

You are an adult and free. Act like it.

Shanna said...

we limit severely the number of possible candidates by imposing some kind of political 'experience' prerequisite.

Yes. This is a feature, not a bug. We're not electing somebody to run the prom committee, here.

The objection to limited experience was voiced by a lot of us in regard to the current denizen of 1600 Pennsylvania.

What I don't understand is that people seem to be using that as an argument for electing someone with less experience, when as far as I can tell this 'half a senate term' guy is showing his inexperience every day. I don't want a repeat of that.

Thorley Winston said...

The objection to limited experience was voiced by a lot of us in regard to the current denizen of 1600 Pennsylvania.

That’s correct and I think that there are two things to take away from this:

1) Having a president without executive probably lead to a lot of unforced errors that have hurt our country and

2) In 2012 the Democratic nominee isn’t going to be half-term Senator Obama, it’s going to be full-term President Obama.

In other words, we need to focus on the next war (2012) not the last one (2008) and that means that making sure that the Republican nominee is someone with the experience to do the job and do it well. Because he or she needs to be able to make the case that they have a record to show that they can do a better job than the incumbent otherwise people might choose to stick with the devil* they know rather than take a chance with another inexperienced President.

* A figure of speech, not a reflection on Obama’s character.

The Crack Emcee said...

Don't Tread 2012,

Black Conservative = runaway slave

Nope. In America it means a battle with multiple fronts.

The Crack Emcee said...

Seven Machos,

This is politics. It's not a court of law.

Let's see,...ah, yes, there he is:

Seven Machos.

"Note: openly declared he has no ethics."

Good to know,...

Seven Machos said...

Shanna nails it. The argument goes:

1. Obama is a grossly inexperienced failure.

2. I'm unhappy about that.

3. So let's ourselves nominate a grossly inexperienced candidate.

The Crack Emcee said...

Seven Machos,

I have no particular problem with serial adultery in politicians. These are politicians, not popes. Unto Caesar and all that.

Let's see,...ah, yes, there he is:

Seven Machos.

"Note: nice enough guy, despicable character."

Good to know,...

sorepaw said...

They really do want America to be a One Party State.

Sounds like an accurate description of most "liberals" who post here.

Oh, you didn't mean a One Party State where the Democrats are the One Party...

Seven Machos said...

Crack -- I'm not sure what to make of your critique but all the best to you. I've always found you an intriguing, original thinker, even when I think you are wrong.

The Crack Emcee said...

Seven Machos,

Politics is a job. Democracy is not the place to raise up Hegelian world-historical spirits. Just do the job.

Let's see,...ah, yes, there he is:

Seven Machos.

"Note: put SM (S&M?) in touch with feminists who have workplace issues (lyssalovelyredhead, etc.) along with the metrosexuals who can't get a date - they've got a lot to discuss."

Don't Tread 2012 said...

Crack said

"Nope. In America it means a battle with multiple fronts."

Amen.

I am amazed that people let themselves be 'guided', in a sense, by any political party.

I was asked once to pledge a frat. It seemed OK at the time, until I saw what being a member entailed.

No need to buy friends. The best ones are priceless anyways.

I encourage independence whenever possible.

The Crack Emcee said...

AlphaLiberal,

Crack Emcee:

...I don't have any respect for men who can't muster the personality to seduce women into sleeping with them.

Don't rule out the possibility that you are a blithering, conceited beyond all justification, narcissist. And idiot.


I don't, but women like that in a man. That's why they'll sleep with me and not you. I got game. I can mack. You know that old saying a woman knows if she's going to have sex before she leaves the house? Not with me. And she also doesn't know if I'm going to lay her. I'm on my motherfuckin' clock, not hers - just like she is.

Y'all can lie all you want, but all this discussion is about is weakness. The women being the type to be sexually harassed (or to charge it) at work, the dudes resorting to juvenile tactics to get a blowjob, all of it reminds me of why I'm all for legalizing drugs, but not now:

You're barely mature enough to be on your own.

I keep telling you to address NewAge culture, where the majority of this crap flew from like Pandora's Box, but you keep relying on the homeopathic remedies they've designed for you, which work as well in politics as anywhere else. We have an American culture, it's properties pretty well defined despite geographic differences, and - this is the important part - there's nothing wrong with it. It doesn't need to be "transformed" but embraced. I see that so rarely.

I've never seen anything in a Human Resources office that I thought was American or a business couldn't do without. Go to work and act like adults and that whole level of administration, nation-wide, could be eliminated. get laid the old fashioned way:

Earn it.