October 31, 2011

The Details of the Charges... From Herman Cain
— Ace

Some people are citing this as proof this is a Nothing To See Here, Folks, Move On situation.

After all, it was just some completely-innocent gesture:

Van Susteren asked what Cain did that led to the accusation. There were reportedly more than one accusations in the complaint, but Cain said he recalled just one incident. "She was in my office one day, and I made a gesture saying -- and I was standing close to her -- and I made a gesture saying you are the same height as my wife. And I brought my hand up to my chin saying, 'My wife comes up to my chin.'" At that point, Cain gestured with his flattened palm near his chin. "And that was put in there [the complaint] as something that made her uncomfortable," Cain said, "something that was in the sexual harassment charge."

Bear in mind, though, that's Cain's narration of what happened, of the nature of the complaint, and further, only his narration of one of several incidents.

Although I do generally think "where there's smoke there's fire," that's only a rule of thumb, and not something I'd bet money on. It's perfectly possible he's innocent of almost everything except a misunderstanding.

On the other hand, let's not just go Reverse Clinton here and start acting as any of this is impossible, either, or that we know about things we weren't witness to.


By the Way: Cain was asked by the moderator to close the National Press Club event with a song. Cain apparently had closed some previous event with that song, and obliged the host.

As I noted in an update to the last post (see below), given that context, with Cain not deciding himself, sua sponte, it was time for a Christian hymn, it's not nearly as kooky seeming as I first thought.

Posted by: Ace at 11:30 AM | Comments (761)
Post contains 321 words, total size 2 kb.

1 This is what primaries are for. Better to flush it all out now instead of in October, 2013.

Posted by: Dave at October 31, 2011 11:32 AM (Xm1aB)

2 2012, excuse me

Posted by: Dave at October 31, 2011 11:32 AM (Xm1aB)

3 What does this have to do with Barack Obama being a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure?

Posted by: fluffy at October 31, 2011 11:32 AM (4pSIn)

4 This is what primaries are for. Yep. I assumed Cain would eventually implode, I just didn't think it would happen this quickly.

Posted by: joncelli at October 31, 2011 11:33 AM (RD7QR)

5
Here are some thoughts about Herman Cain's character and this story.

http://tinyurl.com/3c72hbb

Posted by: arhooley at October 31, 2011 11:33 AM (oL8WZ)

6 Oh boy, another Cain flame war! Didn't I already say that?

Posted by: Vic at October 31, 2011 11:34 AM (YdQQY)

7 It's perfectly possible he's innocent of almost everything except a misunderstanding.

I assume ALL SH charges are BS until proven true.

Posted by: Vic at October 31, 2011 11:35 AM (YdQQY)

8 First off, I support Cain. Secondly, the media (and the regime) will do anything to destroy Cain. Thirdly, they will do everything to get Romney the nomination, and then destroy him. The regime is the media is the regime. They are scared of Cain. Any questions?

Posted by: EROWMER at October 31, 2011 11:35 AM (/ZKDI)

9 Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure.He's an amazing disgrace.

Posted by: steevy at October 31, 2011 11:35 AM (fyOgS)

10 I don't believe that Cain is a womanizer or what have you. I do think this is all just a smear job, and it will get worse as we go along.

Sharpton and Jackson are probably lining up some womyns to inflict on Cain if he wins the nom.

Posted by: KG at October 31, 2011 11:35 AM (LD21B)

11 Guys like Karl Rove take a lot of abuse on this site, despite having been heroes just a few years before (Rove, you magnificent bastard).  Isn't it possible that his aversion to people like Perry and Cain doesn't stem from  their politics  or his desire to maintain power and influence, but from his knowledge of how risky it is to run untested, unvetted, and often undisciplined people as the face of the party?  IOW, he is more risk-averse because he knows the costs of choosing poorly. 

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 11:35 AM (6TB1Z)

12 What does this have to do with Barack Obama being a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure?

Something to do with an election, I believe.

Glad to help...

Posted by: Additional Blond Agent at October 31, 2011 11:35 AM (PMGbu)

13 And I'm sure the MBM is hard at work researching the women's past  to see what kind of record they have.  You know - how many complaints they've filed against whom .  .  .  Stuff like that which might have a bearing on how seriously we take this.

Oh - wait; Politico won't even disclose their identities due to "privacy" considerations.

Isn't that special?

Posted by: Roger at October 31, 2011 11:36 AM (tAwhy)

14 I once told a woman,"my balls would look good on your chin.".Was that wrong??

Posted by: steevy at October 31, 2011 11:36 AM (fyOgS)

15 The regime is the media is the regime.

I don't know what you mean by the regime.

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 11:37 AM (6TB1Z)

16

Bitch set him up!

Posted by: Marion Barry at October 31, 2011 11:37 AM (xy9wk)

17 Isn't it possible that his aversion to people like Perry and Cain doesn't stem from  their politics  or his desire to maintain power and influence, but from his knowledge of how risky it is to run untested, unvetted, and often undisciplined people as the face of the party?  IOW, he is more risk-averse because he knows the costs of choosing poorly. 

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 04:35 PM (6TB1Z)

You call Perry untested and unvetted?? A 10 year Governor, untested and unvetted??

My brain....

Posted by: KG at October 31, 2011 11:37 AM (LD21B)

18
Is the Reverse Clinton like a Full Nelson or an Alabama Hot Pocket?

Posted by: Dr. Varno at October 31, 2011 11:37 AM (QMtmy)

19 I think I have the vapors.  The shocking display of sexual harrassment is just shocking.

Posted by: David Frum at October 31, 2011 11:38 AM (zgHLA)

20

On the other hand, let's not just go Reverse Clinton here and start acting as any of this is impossible, either...

Only Rick Perry gets the benefit of the doubt, right? He can open the borders, 'Tard up the little whores in Texas and send their bastard children to school for free and we'll overlook all that because, well, because fuck you.

Cain, however, was named in a dime-a-dozen suit that settled in 5 figures and, well, we better assume he did something. Because he's not Rick Perry and fuck you.

Posted by: spongeworthy at October 31, 2011 11:38 AM (puy4B)

21 I once told a woman,"my balls would look good on your chin.".Was that wrong?? ---------------------------------- At least you have balls. Romney has to ask if he can rest his deflated ball sack on his staffer's chins.

Posted by: MJ at October 31, 2011 11:39 AM (BKOsZ)

22

What does this have to do with Barack Obama being a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure?

Something to do with an election, I believe.

Glad to help...

If you were truly happy to help, you would type "Barack Obama is stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure"

Posted by: fluffy at October 31, 2011 11:39 AM (4pSIn)

23 Barack Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at October 31, 2011 11:40 AM (8y9MW)

24 Can't wait until these friggin' primaries are over. Too much friendly fire.

Posted by: joncelli at October 31, 2011 11:40 AM (RD7QR)

25 What does this have to do with Barack Obama being a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure?

Until he's not in office anymore, EVERYTHING has to do with Barack Obama being a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at October 31, 2011 11:40 AM (8y9MW)

26

 Alabama Hot Pocket

Is that the same as a Birmingham Booty Call?

Posted by: fluffy at October 31, 2011 11:40 AM (4pSIn)

27 Better to clear this all out now before the Tea Party removes Osama from office in 2016.

Posted by: FlaviusJulius at October 31, 2011 11:40 AM (ieDPL)

28

Alabama Hot Pocket

I just learned what that was like a week ago over a drunken night of Mad Libs with roller derby people.

Posted by: LibertarianJim at October 31, 2011 11:40 AM (PReJ3)

29 This led to a five figure lawsuit?

Bullfuckingshit.

Yes, it was settled and they wanted it to go away as quickly and as quietly as possible. But what in this description of his events even would lead to a reprimand in normal circumstances?

This does not add up.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at October 31, 2011 11:41 AM (pLTLS)

30 24 Can't wait until these friggin' primaries are over. Too much friendly fire.

Posted by: joncelli at October 31, 2011 04:40 PM (RD7QR)

Honestly, I feel like we are gonna miss the good old days of the primaries, before the Democrats truly unloaded all the bullshit on us.

Posted by: KG at October 31, 2011 11:41 AM (LD21B)

31 If you were truly happy to help, you would type "Barack Obama is stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure"

I read without moving my lips.  Thanks.

Posted by: Additional Blond Agent at October 31, 2011 11:41 AM (PMGbu)

32 Given the media track record - especially the WaPo hit job on Rubio, I don't believe a word of what they write.  When they can come up with an actual woman who is willing to press charges, then I might be interested in what they have to say but until then I'm assuming it's either fabricated in whole or grossly blown up.

Posted by: rabidfox at October 31, 2011 11:41 AM (/jkZB)

33 "Friendly-fire." Reminds me of my marriage.

Posted by: Dave at October 31, 2011 11:41 AM (Xm1aB)

34 You call Perry untested and unvetted?? A 10 year Governor, untested and unvetted??

I can't help you with your brain, but as to your comment about vetting, in the context of a national campaign, I certainly do call him unvetted.  Like it or not, debates have become an integral and indispensable part of the politicking.  I remember that before Perry announced, we were all told what an awesome campaigner he was.  Nobody, including you, said that he couldn't debate his way out of a wet paper bag, and that he would look like a fool on stage with other candidates.  Based on that criterion, would you say that he was vetted?  I wouldn't. 

Likewise, would you actually suggest that Herman Cain is tested and vetted? 

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 11:42 AM (6TB1Z)

35 before the Democrats truly unloaded all their bullshit on us.

Posted by: KG at October 31, 2011 04:41 PM (LD21B)


Posted by: KG at October 31, 2011 11:42 AM (LD21B)

36 Damn, I just made the mistake of "Binging" that phrase. Wish I had not. NEED.BRAIN.BLEACH


Posted by: Vic at October 31, 2011 11:42 AM (YdQQY)

37 This stuff doesn't matter for me, but it's important for him?

Posted by: Bill Clinton at October 31, 2011 11:43 AM (ieDPL)

38

If Paul Ryan or "Fatso" Christie were running for the nomination, there would be dirt dug up on them, even though Ryan is not even 40 and appears clean as the driven snow.

This is the way these things are done now. Innuendo, character assasination, etc. Both parties TRY to do it, but the Democrats have most of the major media on their side, pushing their story.  It's not like any of these guys sat in Jeremiah Wright's church for 20 years of Sunday Sermons, or have a history of underhanded political moves, like getting Jack Ryan's sealed divorce decree publicized to win a US Senate race.  Or politically bartered the appointment to replace Senator Obama.   I mean really.

It's no wonder that Christie and Ryan DON'T want to run.  As for Rove, he's had his day in the sun, and he should take his money and move on to something else.

Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes..... at October 31, 2011 11:43 AM (RFeQD)

39 "She was in my office one day, and I made a gesture saying -- and I was standing close to her -- and I made a gesture saying you are the same height as my wife. And I brought my hand up to my chin saying, 'My wife comes up to my chin.'"

Hand to God, the line about a woman's height is a pretty standard come on that I've had used on me twice (in the context of being the perfect height for kissing).  It's all about context.  1000% about context. 

If she brought it up in the course of some work issue - like I can't reach the copier paper, Boss and Boss replies, gee my wife can and you're the same height as my wife - that's one thing.  But it is an odd detail that he makes a point of mentioning that they were standing close to each other and that he doesn't provide the context or set up for the situation. 

And, guys, wean this term from your lexicon in work situations:

"I turned it over to my general counsel and one of the ladies that worked for me, the woman in charge of human resources."

Posted by: Y-not at October 31, 2011 11:43 AM (5H6zj)

40

"Friendly-fire."

Reminds me of my marriage.

At least yours is friendly.

Posted by: LibertarianJim at October 31, 2011 11:43 AM (PReJ3)

41 Wait....there are 2 sides to this story?  Really?

Posted by: Duke Lacrosse Team at October 31, 2011 11:43 AM (JYheX)

42 >>>Only Rick Perry gets the benefit of the doubt, right? I aired the claims that he was gay, you know. Lot of little bitches on this blog. But in Cain's case, several women actually filed against him. You think that number is "2." We'll see if that number is in fact 2. >>>Cain, however, was named in a dime-a-dozen suit that settled in 5 figures and, well, we better assume he did something. Says who it settled in 5 figures? Like I said, Little Bitches, you can grind on me all you like but I assure you that does nothing to stop the NYT and WaPo from contacting these women. All your screaming at me is childish.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 11:43 AM (nj1bB)

43 Seems the same folks who couldn't stand Palin can't stand the idea of Herman Cain.
I guess they prefer being lied to and rump ridden by a pack of professional politicians rather than let someone with real world and real job experience take a shot at straightening out the mess the liars and rump riders have made of this country.
Keep doing what you've been doing and keep getting what you've been getting.
Lets just elect another compassionate conservative and take the country leftard ho a little slower than the real Marxist.
Yeeehaaw!

Posted by: Concealed Kerry or Submit at October 31, 2011 11:44 AM (vXqv3)

44 Likewise, would you actually suggest that Herman Cain is tested and vetted? 

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 04:42 PM (6TB1Z)

Nope, but calling a governor untested and unvetted boggles the mind. And I don't consider the debates anything more than a sideshow. His record matters far more.

Posted by: KG at October 31, 2011 11:44 AM (LD21B)

45 33 "Friendly-fire." Reminds me of my marriage. Posted by: Dave at October 31, 2011 04:41 PM (Xm1aB) Are you sure it was friendly? [Ducks, runs]

Posted by: joncelli at October 31, 2011 11:44 AM (RD7QR)

46

We find the defendant guilty of gratuitous spiritualizing and aggravated haberdashery.

Posted by: dick cheese at October 31, 2011 11:44 AM (IfkGz)

47 Have the prostitutes who accused him come forward yet?

Posted by: FlaviusJulius at October 31, 2011 11:44 AM (ieDPL)

48 When I heard Rush say "5 figure settlement" on the radio I immediately went "BOOM, sounds some white bread liberal females were not comfortable with a black man in a few settings". Rather than pay lawyers big money to point out the problem was with the racist complainers the NRA settles for a small amount. Big whoop. Rush also reminded that the MarxSpewMedia is always "nothing to see here move along" when a Democrat politician behaves in a genuinely sexually harassing way.

Posted by: palerider at October 31, 2011 11:45 AM (dkExz)

49 Let's see: Bill Clinton: proven serial sexual harasser and possible suicide assistant (Vince Foster). Ted Kennedy: Definite sexual harasser, half the bread on numerous waitress sammiches (with Chris Dodd) and murderer. Jon Edwards: cheated on his dying wife and had a bastard child. Anthony Weiner: Twitted his Weiner in public. Robert Byrd: Klansman Jimmy Carter: Klansman LBJ: Regularly shagged Doris Kearns Goodwin in the Lincoln Bedroom. AND HERMAN CAIN DID, WHAT??????? If Obamacare were not coming up before SCOTUS, I would love to see a Clarence Thomas-Herman Cain ticket. This is a lynching. Period.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 11:45 AM (UlUS4)

50 I really don't see what all the fuss is about.  I just offered her a bottle of Tentacle Grape.

Posted by: Herman Cain at October 31, 2011 11:46 AM (xy9wk)

51 So "ladies" is out now??? I knew "girls" was forbidden but I guess since I retired I have got behind the times.

Posted by: Vic at October 31, 2011 11:46 AM (YdQQY)

52

Says who it settled in 5 figures?

The Politico story said that. I am afraid this isn't going to turn out well for Herm. The media wants him out so they can go back to their regularly scheduled Race Pimping.


Posted by: robtr at October 31, 2011 11:46 AM (MtwBb)

53

Winning a general election takes skill.  One needs to be able to make a point, have the crowd love them and leave a few quarts of the opponent’s blood on the floor – all at the same time.

 

Palin had that ability.  She could slide in a stiletto while making a point with a voice too high and run-on sentences, pump up the masses and with a wink and a “you betcha” sever the vein.

 

Newt has that ability.  Like Hannibal Lector, he hands his opponent a piece of broken glass.  By nailing every subject with geometric precision, Newt convinces the opponent to carve their own face off to the delight of the audience.  The trouble is, like Lector, Newt creeps some people out.

 

Perry doesn’t have it.  Not only is he clumsy wielding a meat cleaver, his wild swings make the crowd hate him in the process. 

 

Cain has been in knife fights before, but with a whole different crowd.  People like him, but he’s used to different rules.  Herman thinks he’s doing well judging from the amount of blood on the floor, but he doesn’t realize that it’s mostly his.

 

Mitt is someone you don’t see coming.  He has the finesse to handle the blade, but no one knows if he’s really there to fight. 

Posted by: jwest at October 31, 2011 11:47 AM (qeYI9)

54 >>>Seems the same folks who couldn't stand Palin can't stand the idea of Herman Cain. Seems like the Fire Breathing Palinistas found another horse to ride to death.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 11:47 AM (nj1bB)

55

Have the prostitutes who accused him come forward yet?

There are solutions for that.

Posted by: Serial Killers at October 31, 2011 11:47 AM (PReJ3)

56 @45 I guess I should have been more careful and just said the "fire" part reminds me of my marriage.

Posted by: Dave at October 31, 2011 11:47 AM (Xm1aB)

57 "Isn't it possible that his aversion to people like Perry and Cain doesn't stem from  their politics  or his desire to maintain power and influence, but from his knowledge of how risky it is to run untested, unvetted, and often undisciplined people as the face of the party?  IOW, he is more risk-averse because he knows the costs of choosing poorly. "

No. Because Rove strikes before, during, and after the primary.  He came down on O'Connell after she was THE Republican in that race.  That didn't help her improve, or weaken the Democrat. It helped Karl Rove and his faction.

Posted by: Chris Balsz at October 31, 2011 11:47 AM (3GtyG)

58 So "ladies" is out now??? I knew "girls" was forbidden but I guess since I retired I have got behind the times.

I guess we're supposed to call them "protoplasmic sacks" or somesuch.  Who knows anymore?

Posted by: Additional Blond Agent at October 31, 2011 11:47 AM (PMGbu)

59 This was before my time here, but why can't people talk about V era B aker?

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at October 31, 2011 11:47 AM (JYheX)

60 Jimmy Carter: Klansman

As much as I don't like Jimmy Peanut, he was never a member of the KKK.

Posted by: Vic at October 31, 2011 11:48 AM (YdQQY)

61 @51
I would avoid it. 

Ladies and gentlemen... fine. 

But in his statement he refers to General Counsel (genderless - my bet would be a man) and then instead of Director of Human Resources or our HR Department "one of the ladies," then self-corrects to woman in human resources.  So, yeah, bad habit. 

Posted by: Y-not at October 31, 2011 11:48 AM (5H6zj)

62 I think the PC term is cupcakes.

Posted by: FlaviusJulius at October 31, 2011 11:48 AM (ieDPL)

63 Anyone else notice Ace and Frum never post on the same thread?

Posted by: Beefy Meatball at October 31, 2011 11:48 AM (bZ8J6)

64 And I don't consider the debates anything more than a sideshow. His record matters far more.

I believe you.  The problem is that you are not the typical voter, as proven by your presence here.  The typical voter doesn't follow things closely, and so only sees someone who doesn't appear to be very bright or in command of the facts.  It may not be fair, but that doesn't change his political viability. 

Nope, but calling a governor untested and unvetted boggles the mind.

Charlie Crist and Mark Sanford: QED

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 11:48 AM (6TB1Z)

65 you know, if we're going to go into Pants-Shitting Hysterics everytime the MFM portrays a conservative candidate in a less than ideal light, then we might as well stipulate to Obama's re-election right here and now.

Posted by: mongo78 at October 31, 2011 11:48 AM (2b46R)

66 Screw that, I will call a Lady a Lady.  Screw political correctness, its a commie plot.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at October 31, 2011 11:49 AM (JYheX)

67 Herman Cain is a non-serious candidate who rocketed to the top because the "serious" candidate who was going to Save Us All turned out to be unable to find his big-hearted ass with both hands.  Even though Cain isn't going to get the nomination, as he'd probably be the first to tell you, right now he's polling at the head of the pack and seriously screwing up somebody's mojo in the process.

Therefore, Herman Cain must be personally destroyed from within by the kind of smear campaign that would have us screaming bloody murder under ordinary circumstances, such as Supreme Court confirmation hearings.

See how this works?

Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at October 31, 2011 11:49 AM (Xnw5y)

68 Hand to the chin?  Better be safe and run it as sexual harassment.  Obviously if had sex with an underage female or left her at the bottom of a lake or forced himself on her spooged on her dress then threatened her.... well those things are understandable mistakes.  We are just trying to protect our integrity as objective observers who are certainly not the kind of jerks who should be the first against the wall when the revolution comes.  (hitchhikers guide reference)

Posted by: FraudStreamMedia at October 31, 2011 11:49 AM (I9fXA)

69 60 Jimmy Carter: Klansman As much as I don't like Jimmy Peanut, he was never a member of the KKK. Posted by: Vic at October 31, 2011 04:48 PM (YdQQY) Considering his conduct in local Georgia politics well before he became president, he came about as close as you can get without actually putting on the sheet.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 11:50 AM (UlUS4)

70 Seems like the Fire Breathing Palinistas found another horse to ride to death.

Given Perry's poll numbers, who's really the Palinistas in this scenario?

Posted by: Ian S. at October 31, 2011 11:50 AM (tqwMN)

71 We are so boned.

Oh well.

Posted by: Y-not at October 31, 2011 11:50 AM (5H6zj)

72 65 you know, if we're going to go into Pants-Shitting Hysterics everytime the MFM portrays a conservative candidate in a less than ideal light, then we might as well stipulate to Obama's re-election right here and now. Posted by: mongo78 at October 31, 2011 04:48 PM (2b46R) We go into pants-shitting hysterics over everything. It's a good excuse to drink and curse, which makes it AoS lifestyle-friendly.

Posted by: joncelli at October 31, 2011 11:50 AM (RD7QR)

73 This reminds me of the NY Times hitjob on McCain during the campaign. It's possible there's more to it, and I'm sure we'll find out if there is, but right now it's faint smoke and nothing more.

Posted by: Dave at October 31, 2011 11:50 AM (Xm1aB)

74 The best way to stop these sexual harassment lawsuits is to not hire women.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at October 31, 2011 11:51 AM (JYheX)

75

Wait - ace jumped on a conservative with the same kinds of criticisms that the Left would throw? 

When did this start? 

Posted by: blaster at October 31, 2011 11:51 AM (7vSU0)

76 One time I told this chick,"this is the perfect height for a woman."I held my hand,palm down at waste height.Was that wrong?

Posted by: steevy at October 31, 2011 11:51 AM (fyOgS)

77 "who's really the Palinistas in this scenario?"

About 70% of the Cain supporters.

Posted by: Dick Nixon at October 31, 2011 11:51 AM (8O4/a)

78

Without waiting to get the whole story, I mean.

 

Posted by: blaster at October 31, 2011 11:51 AM (7vSU0)

79 66 Screw that, I will call a Lady a Lady. Screw political correctness, its a commie plot. Posted by: Guy Mohawk at October 31, 2011 04:49 PM (JYheX) Exactly. That's why I loved the ad with his manager smoking. Political correctness stifles free speech. You don't like what I have to say, FUCK YOU. Oh yeah, I forgot to add Jesse Jackson and his son who both had bastard children. Bastards beget bastards.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 11:51 AM (UlUS4)

80 Interesting that Obama has never had sexual allegations made against him. Proof of nothing more than that he's a eunuch.

Posted by: LGoPs at October 31, 2011 11:52 AM (lHn6+)

81

 at waste height

 

that's hot.

Posted by: Barney Frank at October 31, 2011 11:52 AM (5eVSI)

82 The best way to stop these sexual harassment lawsuits is to not hire women.

Ensure they're Muslim and I'll make that happen!

Posted by: Herb Cain at October 31, 2011 11:52 AM (pLTLS)

83 >>>This led to a five figure lawsuit? If there was substance there it would have been much more that 5 figures.

Posted by: 1/1027th of a Janitor at October 31, 2011 11:52 AM (tazG1)

84 All I'm saying is that if this is true, THEN IT WOULD BE THE FIRST TIME IN HISTORY THAT A BLACK MAN MADE INAPPROPRIATE SEXUAL ADVANCES TOWARDS A WOMAN.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at October 31, 2011 11:53 AM (vzFJV)

85 No. Because Rove strikes before, during, and after the primary.  He came down on O'Connell after she was THE Republican in that race.  That didn't help her improve, or weaken the Democrat. It helped Karl Rove and his faction.

How?  In light of how the race turned out, Rove probably just wanted to reinforce the lesson about the foolishness of running political dilettantes, and make sure that he got the credit for being the sensei.  I don't see anything wrong with that. 

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 11:53 AM (6TB1Z)

86

So starting in 2013, in the White House there will be a RINO R-of-convenience-who-stands-for-nothing, the Senate will switch to R and its majority leader will be a different querulous old turkey-neck (it's his turn), and the House will continue to have an R majority which will be ram-rodded by a weeping orange boner who 'understands the frustration' of the indolent communists at OWS.

Have I got it right -- are these the players waiting to manage our decline? Or will there be a coup inside the GOP?

Posted by: Wm T Sherman at October 31, 2011 11:53 AM (w41GQ)

87 Ace, what's the word on the street?

Posted by: Dr Spank at October 31, 2011 11:53 AM (Sh42X)

88 By the way, and to all of you crying that we're boned, remember that this October surprise is 12 months early. Don't go all wobbly. Buck up, fight back and defeat Romney in the primaries.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 11:53 AM (UlUS4)

89 Elect Cain - He's Got a Good Line of BS!

Posted by: jeanne! at October 31, 2011 11:53 AM (GdalM)

90

Interesting that Obama has never had sexual allegations made against him. 

Bottom Bitches don't file complaints.

Posted by: garrett at October 31, 2011 11:53 AM (5eVSI)

91 81 LOL

Posted by: steevy at October 31, 2011 11:53 AM (fyOgS)

92 80 Interesting that Obama has never had sexual allegations made against him. Proof of nothing more than that he's a eunuch the MSM's mocha savior. Posted by: LGoPs at October 31, 2011 04:52 PM (lHn6+) FIFY.

Posted by: joncelli at October 31, 2011 11:53 AM (RD7QR)

93 "Sua Sponte" That's what I called my goldfish when I was 6! He used to do this trick where he'd swim on his back. Well, OK- he mostly just floated and he only did it once; but, he got a contract and moved to Hollywood early the next morning! Pretty cool, huh.

Posted by: Little Tommy at October 31, 2011 11:54 AM (bZ8J6)

94 92 He's on the down low.

Posted by: FlaviusJulius at October 31, 2011 11:54 AM (ieDPL)

95 Reverend Jeremiah Wright told me that behavior like that would be wrong.

Posted by: The fantastic Barry O. at October 31, 2011 11:55 AM (MMC8r)

96

All your screaming at me is childish.

Are you serious? This is maybe the second time I have mentioned this and the other time was weeks ago. That is not a lot of screaming.

And yes, Rick Perry is Gay was covered here. Something that outlandish and unsubstantiated can't hurt your candidate, so why not cover it? Hell, you should do a post on Perry being a space alien, that's being even-handed, isn't it?

Screw it, far be it from me to fuck with the narrative. Go, Cowboy!

Posted by: spongeworthy at October 31, 2011 11:55 AM (puy4B)

97 >>>Wait - ace jumped on a conservative with the same kinds of criticisms that the Left would throw? Oh, Jumping Jehosephat. Let me just clear this up: Unlike some of you, I do not have a new religious faith in Cain (transferrence from the previous religious faith in Palin). That means I am willing to *contemplate* the *possibility* that no, the "Left" didn't invent a time-machine and travel back to the 1990s just to plant smear charges against the New Palin. BTW why isn't his wife campaigning for him? Oh right it's because she provides calm and tranquility.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 11:55 AM (nj1bB)

98

@62: "I think the PC term is cupcakes."

Just don't confuse them with Kuntz from accounting.

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at October 31, 2011 11:55 AM (xy9wk)

99 80 Interesting that Obama has never had sexual allegations made against him. Proof of nothing more than that he's a eunuch. Posted by: LGoPs at October 31, 2011 04:52 PM (lHn6+) Interesting that no one from his personal life has ever come forward since he came into the spotlight. No friends, no classmates, no girl- or boyfriends, no colleagues - NO ONE. Yet, Herman Cain is evil. I HATE THE MEDIA. I HATE LIBERALS.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 11:55 AM (UlUS4)

100
I call shenanigans.

Posted by: Dr. Varno at October 31, 2011 11:55 AM (QMtmy)

101 Hmmmm.  Reminds me of Clarence Thomas' confirmation hearings.  Rush to judgment.  High tech lynching indeed.


So, if Herman is toast, who does this help?  Perry of course, assuming that Cain and Perry are sharing the anti-Romney vote.

Posted by: Jimbo at October 31, 2011 11:55 AM (O3R/2)

102 Pretty sure the event was the Godfather's annual meeting:

http://tinyurl.com/66ho7lu

parody of John Lennon.

Posted by: Wolfman Jack at October 31, 2011 11:56 AM (m8ARs)

103

I read without moving my lips.  Thanks.

So? You wanna cookie?

Posted by: fluffy at October 31, 2011 11:56 AM (4pSIn)

104 >> One time I told this chick,"this is the perfect height for a woman."I held my hand,palm down at waste height.Was that wrong? Only if you also told her if she had a flat head it would make a perfect place to rest you beer.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2011 11:56 AM (TMB3S)

105

My wife calls me 'studmuffin'...she even had it embroidered on my Santa hat.

I'd hit her with an harassment charge, but...

On second thought.

Posted by: Minuteman (aka trainer) until Juggy is Gone at October 31, 2011 11:56 AM (Rojyk)

106 90

Interesting that Obama has never had sexual allegations made against him. 

Bottom Bitches Murdered former gay lovers don't file complaints.

Posted by: garrett at October 31, 2011 04:53 PM (5eVSI)

They were dropping like flies in '08.

Posted by: Wm T Sherman at October 31, 2011 11:56 AM (w41GQ)

107 88 By the way, and to all of you crying that we're boned, remember that this October surprise is 12 months early.

Not for the primary.  The timing is fine for the primary if the goal is to elect the unassailable Romney.  That's not an accusation about who leaked this story, it's just an acknowledgment of the situation. 

Posted by: Y-not at October 31, 2011 11:56 AM (5H6zj)

108 87Ace, what's the word on the street?

Posted by: Dr Spank at October 31, 2011 04:53 PM (Sh42X)

Merge left.

Posted by: Construction Zone at October 31, 2011 11:57 AM (bZ8J6)

109 It depends on what the definition of "settlement" is.

Posted by: William Jefferson at October 31, 2011 11:57 AM (rj5Ii)

110 83 >>>This led to a five figure lawsuit? If there was substance there it would have been much more that 5 figures. Posted by: 1/1027th of a Janitor at October 31, 2011 04:52 PM (tazG1) And probably at the low end, say $10,000. If it were in the high 5-figure range, the propagandists would be trumpeting it.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 11:57 AM (UlUS4)

111 Has the little green turd gotten off his bicycle to explained what all this means yet?

Posted by: USA at October 31, 2011 11:57 AM (6Cjut)

112 88 By the way, and to all of you crying that we're boned, remember that this October surprise is 12 months early.

Indeed it is.  If the White House was sitting on this info, it would have made a hell of a lot more sense for them to wait to spring it until Cain either got the nomination or secured a place on the ticket (a much more likely scenario).

Kinda makes you wonder.

Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at October 31, 2011 11:57 AM (Xnw5y)

113 Cain just flipped and admitted there was a settlement and he knew some of the details. Over at TepidAir.

Posted by: Dick Nixon at October 31, 2011 11:57 AM (8O4/a)

114 You know, now that I think about it, why isn't Cain's wife campaigning with him? Has she appeared with him at any events?

Posted by: Dave at October 31, 2011 11:57 AM (Xm1aB)

115 So? You wanna cookie?

A beer will suffice.

Posted by: Additional Blond Agent at October 31, 2011 11:57 AM (PMGbu)

116 90 They are willing to not report fucking RAPE because it hurts their cause.Those people are really mentally ill or evil or both.

Posted by: steevy at October 31, 2011 11:57 AM (fyOgS)

117 obviously his wife is mad at him about the '90's//     omg.....the '90's have a 9 in them.............omg!!!!!!!

Posted by: phoenixgirl at work ready to drink perry flavor aid at October 31, 2011 11:58 AM (s+J9D)

118 If sexually harassing a woman while banging a meat lovers pizza is wrong, I don't wanna be right.

Posted by: Herman Cain at October 31, 2011 11:58 AM (Sh42X)

119

@62: "I think the PC term is cupcakes."

We will also accept "sweetpea."

Posted by: EEOC Judges at October 31, 2011 11:58 AM (4q5tP)

120 The horror! Did she notice whether his hand was circumcised?

Posted by: USA at October 31, 2011 11:59 AM (6Cjut)

121 The timing is fine for the primary if the goal is to elect the unassailable Romney Ricardo Peré.  That's not an accusation about who leaked this story, it's just an acknowledgment of the situation.

Fixed that for ya.

Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at October 31, 2011 11:59 AM (Xnw5y)

122 you that does nothing to stop the NYT and WaPo from contacting these women.

and then what? The story rolls on and on and on...mission accomplished!!! Another Conservative bites the dust and a BLACK one at that...Hello Mitt sorry u lost to a SCOAMF

Posted by: NfromNC at October 31, 2011 11:59 AM (MbeEN)

123 Considering his conduct in local Georgia politics well before he became president, he came about as close as you can get without actually putting on the sheet.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 04:50 PM (UlUS4)

His campaign for Governor was the typical racist spewing crap. But, after being elected he went hard to the left AND he embraced blacks fully as governor. He effectively ended racial segregation in GA government that he had any control over. 

His record on racial stuff in GA is actually commendable.

Posted by: Vic at October 31, 2011 11:59 AM (YdQQY)

124 Posted by: EEOC Judges at October 31, 2011 04:58 PM (4q5tP) How about "sugar-tits?" But first, you will blow me.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 11:59 AM (UlUS4)

125

BTW why isn't his wife campaigning for him?

Oh right it's because she provides calm and tranquility.

 

Again, you set a standard for his behavior that he fails to meet. 

But really, what is bothersome is joining with the Left in their tropes.  Conservative women?  Crazy and stupid.  Conservative blacks?  Sex crazed and stupid. 

 

 

 

Posted by: blaster at October 31, 2011 11:59 AM (7vSU0)

126 88 By the way, and to all of you crying that we're boned, remember that this October surprise is 12 months early. The MSM is tapping its feet and glancing at its watch while it waits for the nominee to be chosen. Then next October the NYT will come out with its hit piece about the GOP nominee. But the only reason it will come out in October is because they want to make sure it's completely accurate. That's the ticket.

Posted by: joncelli at October 31, 2011 11:59 AM (RD7QR)

127 117obviously his wife is mad at him about the '90's// omg.....the '90's have a 9 in them.............omg!!!!!!!

Posted by: phoenixgirl at work ready to drink perry flavor aid at October 31, 2011 04:58 PM (s+J9D)

You've said too much already.

Posted by: Upside down 666 at October 31, 2011 12:00 PM (bZ8J6)

128 121 The timing is fine for the primary if the goal is to elect the unassailable Romney Ricardo Peré.
----
Yeah, pretending he's open borders is really helping me take you seriously.

Honestly, I don't think this helps Perry as much as it helps Romney. 

Posted by: Y-not at October 31, 2011 12:00 PM (5H6zj)

129 His record on racial stuff in GA is actually commendable. Posted by: Vic at October 31, 2011 04:59 PM (YdQQY) I guess he's making up for it now by heavy Joo-baiting.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 12:00 PM (UlUS4)

130

"@62: "I think the PC term is cupcakes."

Just don't confuse them with Kuntz from accounting."

That reminds me of Steve Martin in the mid-80's with "What. I. Believe."

"I believe that it's not right to call a woman's breasts 'juggs', 'boobs', 'hooters' or 'winnebagos'.

You should only refer to them as 'Golden Bozos'".

Posted by: Additional Blond Agent at October 31, 2011 12:00 PM (PMGbu)

131 "That means I am willing to *contemplate* the *possibility* that no, the "Left" didn't invent a time-machine and travel back to the 1990s just to plant smear charges against the New Palin." Prove you're not a child molestor. NO--I am not going to provide evidence you are. I'm not going to accuse you. I'm not even going to bring out somebody who does accuse you. I'm just going to raise the serious issue, and judge you by how you defend yourself against the general possibility that you're guilty. Go.

Posted by: Chris at October 31, 2011 12:00 PM (3GtyG)

132 Sexual harassment lawsuits, phhhhhh. Been sued dozens of times. I can't understand why all these Cupcakes and Honeys who work for me always end up suing my sorry ass.

Posted by: Archie at October 31, 2011 12:00 PM (Xm1aB)

133

You know, now that I think about it, why isn't Cain's wife campaigning with him?

Has she appeared with him at any events?

According to Cain, it was a mutual decision to keep her from the campaign because they  prefered a more stable home life.

Bluntly, this is one of the few things about Cain I like. Lets just agree to keep the spouses out of the campaign process.

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at October 31, 2011 12:00 PM (OWjjx)

134 How?  In light of how the race turned out, Rove probably just wanted to reinforce the lesson about the foolishness of running political dilettantes, and make sure that he got the credit for being the sensei.  I don't see anything wrong with that.

So ... you don't believe that the party should fall in line behind the nominee, then?

Posted by: Meiczyslaw at October 31, 2011 12:01 PM (bjRNS)

135 I like Cain. If he turns out not to be the right guy for the job, so be it, but the red diaper media is going to have to do better than this. I still remember the "vetting" they gave to Sarah Palin and Joe the Plumber. And the vetting they DIDN'T give to the SCOAMF. They can kiss every individual hair on my ass. P.S. Anyone But Obamney!

Posted by: The Chap in the Deerstalker Cap at October 31, 2011 12:01 PM (qndXR)

136 The MSM is tapping its feet and glancing at its watch while it waits for the nominee to be chosen.

I choose the StayPuft marshmallow man.

Posted by: Ray at October 31, 2011 12:01 PM (6TB1Z)

137 130 I was always partial to "fun bags".

Posted by: steevy at October 31, 2011 12:01 PM (fyOgS)

138 His record on racial stuff in GA is actually commendable. Posted by: Vic at October 31, 2011 04:59 PM (YdQQY) And besides, if he were a Republican, he would never have heard the end of it, if he even would have gotten that far in politics to do so!

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 12:01 PM (UlUS4)

139

Wow, a hand to the chin to show relative height? That's sexual harassment if I heard of it. How sexist and, um, heightist of him. The nerve...

It's a good thing none of the Three Stooges are still alive, with all that waving of the hands in front of the faces and all. They'd be in court too much to ever film anything.

We've progressed so much as a nation.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy at October 31, 2011 12:02 PM (d0Tfm)

140 Cain had to know this would come out, so what gives?

Posted by: Dr Spank at October 31, 2011 12:02 PM (Sh42X)

141 They're no way I'll ever be alleged to have harrassed a woman. I've been shavin' my balls for years.

Posted by: Rick Scary at October 31, 2011 12:02 PM (bZ8J6)

142 @126: They probably have stories ready to go about at least the top 3 possible candidates, sort of like how they have canned obits for everyone you might have in a dead pool.

Posted by: Ian S. at October 31, 2011 12:02 PM (tqwMN)

143 Honestly, I don't think this helps Perry as much as it helps Romney.

How does it help Romney for the guy who's keeping Perry at bay for him (to the extent Perry isn't keeping himself at bay) to take a potentially huge hit?

Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at October 31, 2011 12:02 PM (Xnw5y)

144 Come on - anyone who decides to run for POTUS surely has sat and thought about what the MSM could dredge up.  Which is why I was floored that Rick Perry hadn't better prepared to defend himself against the Tardisil and the in-state tuituion.  Surely Cain must have known that this stuff would come out.  In Presidential politics nothing is hidden.  Why did GW Bush think that his DUI would not be fair game?  If you are a Republican, you'd better be ready to go back all the way to childhood to make sure if you've done something that the media can use, you better get it out there before they do.  So, who wants to bet that the MSM has a whole dossier on the practices of Mormons that they plan on dropping on Mittens? 

Posted by: Old Texas Chick at October 31, 2011 12:02 PM (lLXZV)

145 I have sexually harassed my share of women in 38 years. But I still had time to read a fucking newspaper to find out what "Right of Return" means. Trying to get Little Spermin' Herman wet is not what upsets me. It's that he's 65 years old, has a fucking talk radio show and yet seems to know fuckity-fuck-all about how our country or the rest of the world works. He's an Outsider. Zip-a-dee-fuckin-doodah. I'm an outsider. Cap'n Frank, the wino pissing himself under the overpass is an outsider. It's not the C.V. I'm looking for.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at October 31, 2011 12:03 PM (0yt4x)

146 >>>But really, what is bothersome is joining with the Left in their tropes. Conservative women? Crazy and stupid. Conservative blacks? Sex crazed and stupid. You do realize that absolutely nothing you say to mau-mau this story away is going to stop the 20 NYT reporters already on this, right? But keep *lobbying* me to agree to say "Oh I'm sure it's all made up." Because if you can get *me* to say that, the story disappears.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 12:03 PM (nj1bB)

147 Well, we're glad that you guys are doing all the dirt on Romney, Cain, Perry, Bachmann, and whomever else is the flavor of the day.  Saves us a lot of time and money, and our friends in the media appreciate this too

Huntsman is the designated GOP crash dummy, you're getting him whether you like him or not

Posted by: Axelrod and Pouffle at October 31, 2011 12:03 PM (Y+DPZ)

148

On a happier note Perry 46 Obama 42 in WI.

 

Posted by: robtr at October 31, 2011 12:03 PM (MtwBb)

149 On the other hand, let's not just go Reverse Clinton here and start acting as any of this is impossible

That's reasonable

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at October 31, 2011 12:03 PM (0q2P7)

150 @133 Interesting. He, and she, must know that if he does get the nomination, that arrangement will have to change.

Posted by: Dave at October 31, 2011 12:03 PM (Xm1aB)

151 BREAKING: Did Pizza Man Play Hide the Pepperoni?

Posted by: USA at October 31, 2011 12:03 PM (6Cjut)

152 Looks like Honest Herm has some explaining to do.

Earlier today he knew nothing about any settlement.

Now...

Cain also offered new information about the settlement of the case.  Politico, which broke the sexual harassment allegation story, said that the woman received a money settlement "in the five-figure range."  When van Susteren asked about that, Cain said, "My general counsel said this started out where she and her lawyer were demanding a huge financial settlement…I don't remember a number…But then he said because there was no basis for this, we ended up settling for what would have been a termination settlement."  When van Susteren asked how much money was involved, Cain said.  "Maybe three months' salary.  I don't remember.  It might have been two months.  I do remember my general counsel saying we didn't pay all of the money they demanded."



Posted by: DrewM. at October 31, 2011 12:04 PM (plesI)

153 I heard he held his hands apart about 8 inches and said something about "It's this long" and then he painted it on a rock at his house.

Posted by: Rick Perry at October 31, 2011 12:04 PM (7cXE7)

154 I take great offense at being equated to the JEF. He is far worse than I am.

Posted by: A Stuttering Clusterfuck of a Miserable Failure at October 31, 2011 12:04 PM (zaVyn)

155


He's an Outsider. Zip-a-dee-fuckin-doodah. I'm an outsider. Cap'n Frank, the wino pissing himself under the overpass is an outsider. It's not the C.V. I'm looking for.

You just watch, Cap'n Frank will soon be surging in the polls................

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at October 31, 2011 12:04 PM (OWjjx)

156 145 Agreed.I still don't like the personal attacks.

Posted by: steevy at October 31, 2011 12:04 PM (fyOgS)

157

Just got back.  I guess Ace is going to give credence to every rumor the MFM floats about any of our candidates.  You know, that old dem meme, "the seriousness of the charge.....".  It's going to be a long year.

 

Posted by: Soona - Mayan liaison at October 31, 2011 12:04 PM (coN0Z)

158 Ace, stop calling me, I'm not running!

Get that blonde cougar out of my driveway too!

Posted by: Chris Christie at October 31, 2011 12:04 PM (Y+DPZ)

159 Excuse me for being dense, Ace, but are you saying that Cain's wife isn't supporting him because of the "long and numerous" sexual harassment complaints against her husband? I can't see why you'd repeat her not being involved otherwise.

Posted by: andycanuck at October 31, 2011 12:05 PM (OKhgI)

160 So ... you don't believe that the party should fall in line behind the nominee, then?

As a general rule, I do.  That's why I have already committed to vote for whomever the nominee is (possible excepting Ron Paul, who is just crazy).  But there are limits.  When the nominee is so clearly flawed that they simply have no chance of winning, and by running they diminish the credibility of the party, then I won't support them.  Think David Duke or Alvin Greene.  COD fell in that category.

Posted by: Ray at October 31, 2011 12:05 PM (6TB1Z)

161

141They're There’s no way I'll ever be alleged to have harrassed a woman. I've been shavin' my balls for years.

Posted by: Rick Scary at October 31, 2011 05:02 PM (bZ8J6)

FIFMy dumb Texas ass

Posted by: Rick Scary at October 31, 2011 12:05 PM (bZ8J6)

162 There are exactly the same number of names for boobs are there are for our Creator.  Coincidence?  I think not.

Posted by: Count de Monet at October 31, 2011 12:05 PM (4q5tP)

163 I think some people think like the left, that everything is spin, and everything is media control, and all that bullshit. I don't believe that. I think a stupid fact beats clever spin 99 times out of 100. I do not know what is going on here. Apart from vague rumors and a general understanding that this sort of thing was coming, I never knew anything about this. I know what's in Politico. That's all anyone knows. But this nonsense that we're all supposed to line up and *swear upon a Bible to facts we did not witness* is insane. For what possible purpose? If enough of us sign up to swear to these facts -- "This is all a smear" -- does this mean it becomes a smear?

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 12:06 PM (nj1bB)

164 Psssst.

michele bachmann's never been accused of sexually harassing anyone.

Don't tell anyone.

Posted by: franksalterego at October 31, 2011 12:06 PM (9XykO)

165 As with any similar situation, trying to make sense of this while all the rumors are still swirling is headache-inducing. JMO.

Posted by: Miss'80s at October 31, 2011 12:06 PM (d6QMz)

166 With Ace, Frum, and Politico on the same side of what is no more then gossip, this is only going to help Cain. Hell if he raised 2 million off a smoking ad, I've gotta believe at least 5 million are coming in the next week over a trumped up, no proof, no source accusation. But I think Ace knows that and is only trying to help Cain consolidate the base so Romney doesn't lose this damn election for us.

Posted by: James at October 31, 2011 12:06 PM (Y5Ri0)

167

@136: "I choose the StayPuft marshmallow man."

Typical reichwing knucklehead - always nominating a fat old white guy.

Posted by: 99% Mainstream Guy at October 31, 2011 12:06 PM (xy9wk)

168 Ace:  Although I do generally think "where there's smoke there's fire," that's only a rule of thumb, and not something I'd bet money on. It's perfectly possible he's innocent of almost everything except a misunderstanding.

On the other hand, let's not just go Reverse Clinton here and start acting as any of this is impossible, either, or that we know about things we weren't witness to.

*****

Pretty much agreed.  Although I'd add the caveat that, since Cain is one of ours (right winger), I'm leaving it to the left to do the heavy lifting in this case.  They make a charge?  It's up to them to prove it, not me.  But I will work to defend him, up until the evidence gathered against him is strong enough, and the charge is serious enough, to make him unsupportable.

 

Posted by: ed at October 31, 2011 12:07 PM (Y2WVW)

169 We are the new accepted authorities on the facts regarding your candidates, wingerz.

Betcha didn't see that one coming, did you.

Posted by: 20 NYT Reporters at October 31, 2011 12:07 PM (Xnw5y)

170 >>>Excuse me for being dense, Ace, but are you saying that Cain's wife isn't supporting him because of the "long and numerous" sexual harassment complaints against her husband? Yes, that's my suspicion, that she told him "You're on your own, Jerome."

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 12:07 PM (nj1bB)

171 "where there's smoke there's"... mirrors, most of the time.

Posted by: Ran at October 31, 2011 12:07 PM (xSeWe)

172 i haven't purchased any halloween candy yet........

Posted by: phoenixgirl at work ready to drink perry flavor aid at October 31, 2011 12:07 PM (s+J9D)

173

Have I got it right -- are these the players waiting to manage our decline? Or will there be a coup inside the GOP?

Posted by: Wm T Sherman at October 31, 2011 04:53 PM

We'll have four extra years of Osama Obama to deal with while trying to rebuild what's left of the Repub party. If anyone cares to.

Ace will be busy telling everyone Mutt Romney should have won.

Posted by: MrScribbler at October 31, 2011 12:07 PM (YjjrR)

174 Cain does talk kinda funny. Is he a little deaf or something?

Posted by: FlaviusJulius at October 31, 2011 12:07 PM (ieDPL)

175

This story is old news. Why do you think the hippies in Wisconsin where fapping?

Posted by: #OccupyRosyPalmer at October 31, 2011 12:07 PM (bZ8J6)

176
You're gonna need a bigger pizza.

Posted by: Dr. Varno at October 31, 2011 12:08 PM (QMtmy)

177 Ace when you mea-culpa like that it takes some of the fun out of typing Raaaaacccciiissstttt!!!!!!111!!!!eleventy!!! Not all of it, just some. "it's not nearly as kooky seeming as I first thought." David Frum hardest hit!

Posted by: Iblis at October 31, 2011 12:08 PM (f3hP+)

178 jerome?  i think she said herman..........

Posted by: phoenixgirl at work ready to drink perry flavor aid at October 31, 2011 12:08 PM (s+J9D)

179
If the White House was sitting on this info, it would have made a hell of a lot more sense for them to wait to spring it until Cain either got the nomination or secured a place on the ticket (a much more likely scenario).
Kinda makes you wonder.
Posted by: The War Between the Undead States




Cui bono

If this was an Obama action, then yes, it seems early.

If it was a Romney or other Republican action, Iowa is just two months away. Time to break Cain's momentum.

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at October 31, 2011 12:09 PM (oBrVT)

180 Cain is great because simple is good. Just look at the mess we are in from Obama, when you think too long and too hard about things. Reagen, Bush, now Cain, all simple thinkers, and it worked.

Posted by: Cain Lover at October 31, 2011 12:09 PM (dBxzn)

181 I guess Ace is going to give credence to every rumor the MFM floats about any of our candidates.

So you would prefer to let them linger until the MFM can use them against the candidate during the general?

Posted by: Ray at October 31, 2011 12:09 PM (6TB1Z)

182 143 Honestly, I don't think this helps Perry as much as it helps Romney.

How does it help Romney for the guy who's keeping Perry at bay for him (to the extent Perry isn't keeping himself at bay) to take a potentially huge hit?

Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at October 31, 2011 05:02 PM (Xnw5y)

You mean how could it help Romney by the way that this could potentially knock Cain out of the 20%+ polling range, so that Romney would end up being the only guy with support at that level?  Hell even if Cain loses 10 points from this its unlikely for Perry to pick up all of those supporters to put him back up to a respectable level.

Yeah it really wouldn't help Romney at all to make this a Mitt Romney and everybody else instead of Mitt Romney, Herman Cain and everybody else like it is now.

Posted by: buzzion at October 31, 2011 12:09 PM (GULKT)

183 How does it help Romney for the guy who's keeping Perry at bay for him (to the extent Perry isn't keeping himself at bay) to take a potentially huge hit?
------

Because it's on the same day that Perry was drunk or on drugs story was spun out. 

Because people are test-driving the non-Romney candidates and they're getting sick of it soon and going to just pick a candidate that they think is electable and all of the non-Romneys have been disqualified. 

Because for some people this accusation against Cain is a badge of friggin' honor so they'll stick with him until he drops out and endorses Romney, but for the cooler heads prevail type it will be a sign that he is not electable. 

Because Perry has already been sexualized via whisper campaigns so people will suspect he's capable of this, as has Newt (deservedly so in his case), so only the ball-less automaton Romney remains as the boss who would never pinch a bottom or take a drink. 


Which reminds me, I applaud heartily Huntsman's use of the term "lubricated" to describe Romney's weathervane behavior.  Masterful to inject a little bit of implied intoxication into that characterization of Mitt and something only a fellow Mormon could do.  *golf clap*  The guy's a prick, but he does have his moments. 

Posted by: Y-not at October 31, 2011 12:09 PM (5H6zj)

184 ed, I'm not doing any lifting to help the left on anything. I just don't want to be yelled at for not joining some kind of Cain Drum Circle where if we just pound the drums hard enough we drown the story out. Either there's something here or there's nothing here. I suppose there's also the middle case of "something but not a lot." But the point is, NO ONE SCREAMING AT EACH OTHER IN A BLOG'S COMMENTS AREA DOES ANYTHING WHATSOEVER TO SHIFT THE LIKELIHOOD THAT THE STORY WINDS UP IN THE "NOTHING HERE" COLUMN. These are facts and circumstances beyond our control. Stop behaving as if we all just "root hard enough" we can will this to be "nothing here."

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 12:09 PM (nj1bB)

185

@145: "Zip-a-dee-fuckin-doodah."

Fuckin' racist.

Posted by: Uncle Remus, stuck in the Disney vaults at October 31, 2011 12:09 PM (xy9wk)

186 @170 Well, if that's true, then he shouldn't have run. I mean, that's not really a surmountable problem in a campaign for president. I can't believe this is true, because then I have to believe Cain would be stupid enough to run under such circumstances.

Posted by: Dave at October 31, 2011 12:10 PM (Xm1aB)

187 "Amazing Grace" is the best song any of You Bitches ever heard, in your lives

Posted by: RonJon at October 31, 2011 12:10 PM (UqKQV)

188 Yeah, Ace! Definitely, "where there's smoke, there's fire"! This TEA Party crap, and its errant leadership needs to stamped out before it becomes a thorn in the side of real conservatives like Perry and Romney. Keep hammering this meme.

Posted by: K Rove at October 31, 2011 12:10 PM (gvW6C)

189 >>> If it was a Romney or other Republican action, Iowa is just two months away. Time to break Cain's momentum. Everyone who knows any kind of political operative has known about this for at least 90 days.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 12:10 PM (nj1bB)

190 I guess he's making up for it now by heavy Joo-baiting.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 05:00 PM (UlUS4)

Now that is a different story all together.

Posted by: Vic at October 31, 2011 12:10 PM (YdQQY)

191 153 I heard he held his hands apart about 8 inches and said something about "It's this long" and then he painted it on a rock at his house.
Posted by: Rick Perry at October 31, 2011 05:04 PM (7cXE7)

No, you idiot!  He painted that on a rock at MY house just to screw things up for me!  I mean, at my huntin' camp!  I mean.... oh gimme a sec; I've had a few this afternoon.

Posted by: Rick Perry at October 31, 2011 12:10 PM (Xnw5y)

192 OT but I can't believe people are actually offended that Rafi Torres (an NHLer) dressed up as Jay-Z and his wife as Beyonce.  Thank good ness his agent (who is the only black agent in the NHL) is defending him well.

Meanwhile, a white dude is trying to explain why blackface is offensive in the USA even though it has not connotations in Canada (where Torres grew up).

Taranto is exactly right on issues like this: No one under the age of 40 (maybe even older) should even know WTF blackface is, but the usual racialist troublemakers keep on reminding us and nothing can ever be innocent harmless fun.  I still remember a classmate in fifth grade putting smudgy makeup on his face because we had to dress up as the subject of book reports about biographies, and he did Willie Mays.  Nothing racist, just acknowledging that Mays is black but he was white.

Good grief.

Posted by: logprof at October 31, 2011 12:10 PM (QaKuj)

193 >>All your screaming at me is childish.
Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 04:43 PM (nj1bB)

Actually I use big boy words but I type so damn slow it sounds more like a leaf blower

Posted by: ontherocks at October 31, 2011 12:10 PM (HBqDo)

194 You keep assuming that someone "had to plant this." Fucking people have been chattering about it.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 12:10 PM (nj1bB)

195

Since Herman Cain is responsible for everything, he must have been in charge of these arsonists who burned down this pizza joint?

Posted by: Doctor Fish at October 31, 2011 12:10 PM (Lt/Za)

196 so was He saying her height would make a perfect beer table? ()

Posted by: willow at October 31, 2011 12:11 PM (h+qn8)

197

Cui bono

If this was an Obama action, then yes, it seems early.

If it was a Romney or other Republican action, Iowa is just two months away. Time to break Cain's momentum.

Or....it could just be that these rumors or what not were out there for a while and never seemed relevant because Cain was going nowhere. But now that he is leading some polls and is the "hot" candidate...well, yea, you go with it now.

I know a lot of crap about my neighbor. But, besides me and a few of his friends/family, no one cares about my neighbor. So, there is no interest in my neighbor. Same with Herman Cain., Until recently, he was relatively unknown outside of political junkies. But now that he is getting  a lot of attention, its a good time to go with it.

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at October 31, 2011 12:11 PM (OWjjx)

198
"She was in my office one day, and I made a gesture saying -- and I was standing close to her -- and I made a gesture saying you are the same height as my wife. And I brought my hand up to my chin saying, 'My wife comes up to my chin.'"
-------------

Trust me -- the "chin" was the one under his second head.

Posted by: Anita Hill at October 31, 2011 12:12 PM (7+pP9)

199

In 2008 there were rumors that Obama sat in a church with a hate-spewing racist pastor for 20 years, travelled to Pakistan at a time when it was illegal, associated himself with communists and domestic terrorists, had a history of disappearing whenever difficult decisions had to made, and never ran anything but his mouth.

But there was just no proof. No stories in the newpaper, nothing.

 

Posted by: Wm T Sherman at October 31, 2011 12:12 PM (w41GQ)

200 Look, let me lay out how these settlements work.

The Powers That Be determine the likely cost of litigation, successful or not.

They then see what the potential plaintiff will settle for.

If the second number is smaller than the first, guess what?  They settle.  It's all about the numbers.  No principle but what earns interest.

Now I have no idea if the charges are legit or not, but just playing the numbers?  I'm not thinking it likely.  Because guess what, most of these charges are shakedowns, pure and simple.

Not saying I know.  Just that, well, it isn't likely.

Posted by: DarkLord for Prez! at October 31, 2011 12:12 PM (GBXon)

201 By the way, Ace: I notice that Tepid Air has five stories running aboiut Bad Herman and his Eeeeeevil Sexcapapdes.

You guys runnin' a right-wing Journolist here? I haven't seen so much synchronized outraged outrage -- unfounded, to boot -- since the Birfers floated the idea that the stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure was born in Kenya.

Sorry, Ace, but my respect for you has gone way down since you got on the Perry-and-Cain-Must-be-Destroyed kick. I hope you cool off a bit and pay more attention to the real enemies of what you believe in.

Posted by: MrScribbler at October 31, 2011 12:12 PM (YjjrR)

202 We don't need the TEA Baggers mussing up the political landscape for compassionate conservatives. Cain is just a paper tiger, and the only real change is going to come from unity of leadership amongst the learned senior statesmen like Boehner and McConnel.

Posted by: K Rove at October 31, 2011 12:12 PM (gvW6C)

203

Have I got it right -- are these the players waiting to manage our decline? Or will there be a coup inside the GOP?

Posted by: Wm T Sherman at October 31, 2011 04:53 PM (w41GQ)


Sadly looks like you may be right as the compassionate conservatives and RINO herd is all in for tea Party hides.

Gotta have games as usual else the Roves and Bushies won't have a spot for Jeb the numero uno son some day.


Seen any Impeachment papers yet from the RINo herd in the House? Didn't we win something there, cutting the budget, stopping spending ? Boner indeed.

Posted by: Concealed Kerry or Submit at October 31, 2011 12:12 PM (vXqv3)

204 A HAND GESTURE??? OF HEIGHT???? Wow, this is serious stuff! I thought it might be something completely unnewsworthy -- like allegations of cocaine and blow jobs with another guy he just met in a limousine. But a hand gesture of height? I'm speechless!

Posted by: USA at October 31, 2011 12:14 PM (6Cjut)

205
But this nonsense that we're all supposed to line up and *swear upon a Bible to facts we did not witness* is insane.

For what possible purpose? If enough of us sign up to swear to these facts -- "This is all a smear" -- does this mean it becomes a smear?

No and no.

We say Cain has responded, (and what those responses are if we can remember them) and say until we have better evidence that the incidents were a lot more then I'm moving on.

Personally I'm thrilled the reporters are drilling for oil on this one. I want to know the truth before January when we have to make a real call.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at October 31, 2011 12:14 PM (0q2P7)

206

First, Herman says today that he "doesn't know anything about a settlement".

Then, he does an interview with Greta and describes the event that he was accused later of as sexual harrassment?

Ehboy. .....That's not clearing it up. That's injecting confusion into it.

This whole thing just really really sucks.

But it is illustrating the basic difference in a Corporate Background versus a background in Elected Office. .....Corporate lawyers always want to settle a 'nuisance suit' rather than fight it out and prove it wrong. ....Whereas a political counsel would advise to do the opposite.

It will come down to whether people are willing to buy the reasoning behind paying off these two women whom Cain is saying "made unfounded accusations".

Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at October 31, 2011 12:14 PM (XkwIi)

207

Look Ace has stated over and over that the media has been looking into this for awhile.

I am more troubled by the fact that he said he knew of no settlement and now he is saying he did.

I think he is lying. It's never the crime....it's ALWAYS the coverup.

 

Posted by: TypicalWhitey at October 31, 2011 12:14 PM (xeVap)

208 Fucking people have been chattering about it.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 05:10 PM

Name names, Ace. Otherwise, it's bullshit.

Cain deserves the right to know who his accusers are. In fact, those of us who want to assess Cain as a candidate and as a man deserve the same.

If these "chatterers" are real, let 'em stand up for what they claim.

Posted by: MrScribbler at October 31, 2011 12:14 PM (YjjrR)

209 I still don't understand why Cain would run knowing this was going to come out, eventually. Either he didn't think he had a chance and would never be seriously vetted or he thinks he can explain it away.

Posted by: Dr Spank at October 31, 2011 12:15 PM (Sh42X)

210
Has Big Herman confessed about the antics of Little Herman?  Of course Big Herman is not responsible for the actions of the little guy.  We need Herman to give us a heads up on the details.

Posted by: Doctor Fish at October 31, 2011 12:15 PM (Lt/Za)

211 Ace if I ask you how long ago you heard about this would you answer that question?

Posted by: Dick Nixon at October 31, 2011 12:15 PM (8O4/a)

212 I really sympathize with the <sob> OWS'ers...<sob>...they just want a job so they can become part of society...WAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!

Posted by: BONER! at October 31, 2011 12:15 PM (R3k3C)

213 No one under the age of 40 (maybe even older) should even know WTF blackface is, but the usual racialist troublemakers keep on reminding us and nothing can ever be innocent harmless fun.

Those who hate any hint of religiosity in the public sphere are always the first to point to original sin.  I'm white.  I'm guilty.

Posted by: Ray at October 31, 2011 12:15 PM (6TB1Z)

214 Down goes Cain....Down goes Cain!!

Posted by: zombie Howard Cosell at October 31, 2011 12:15 PM (yd08d)

215 He was probably flirting a bit with her, and shouldn't have. She'll get over it. I. Do. Not. Care. About. This. Shit.

Posted by: CoolCzech at October 31, 2011 12:16 PM (niZvt)

216 So Cain totally changes his story about what he knew about a settlement but we're supposed to take his word for everything else that happened?

Why exactly?

Posted by: DrewM. at October 31, 2011 12:16 PM (plesI)

217
wait

Rick Perry is gay?

Posted by: soothsayer at October 31, 2011 12:16 PM (sqkOB)

218 This is not a made up rumor,a woman was paid SOMETHING.The fact is that this kind of trollling for easy payouts happens to all men with money and power.How many executives or politicians(and athletes) have NOT been at least accused of sexual harassment?Cain is not my idea of a nominee,but I'd be willing to bet these were bullshit charges.

Posted by: steevy at October 31, 2011 12:16 PM (fyOgS)

219 it's not nearly as kooky seeming as I first thought - ace

You on the other hand are becoming twice as quirky as I once thought.  So I guess it's a wash.

Posted by: mama winger at October 31, 2011 12:16 PM (R9bQ9)

220 214 No one under the age of 40 (maybe even older) should even know WTF blackface is, but the usual racialist troublemakers keep on reminding us and nothing can ever be innocent harmless fun.

Why hello dere!

Posted by: Amos and Andy at October 31, 2011 12:16 PM (R3k3C)

221 >>> By the way, Ace: I notice that Tepid Air has five stories running aboiut Bad Herman and his Eeeeeevil Sexcapapdes. You guys runnin' a right-wing Journolist here? Posted by: MrScribbler at October 31, 2011 05:12 PM (YjjrR) Someone explain to this guy how the internet works.

Posted by: Paul at October 31, 2011 12:16 PM (DsHk0)

222 Try electing Stephen Hawking Douchebags.

Posted by: FlaviusJulius at October 31, 2011 12:16 PM (ieDPL)

223 216 Exactly.This kind of litigious shit has ruined the fucking country.In previous decades women were "harassed",they dealt with it.

Posted by: steevy at October 31, 2011 12:17 PM (fyOgS)

224 >>>Sorry, Ace, but my respect for you has gone way down since you got on the Perry-and-Cain-Must-be-Destroyed kick. I hope you cool off a bit and pay more attention to the real enemies of what you believe in. Another fucking retard who thinks the Weatherman controls the weather.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 12:17 PM (nj1bB)

225 Who is Stephen Hawking Douchebags? Never heard of him.

Posted by: Dave at October 31, 2011 12:17 PM (Xm1aB)

226 Rick Perry is gay? Posted by: soothsayer at October 31, 2011 05:16 PM (sqkOB) If the Electorate were comprised of nothing but comely young hot blonde maidens... at this point, he might as well be.

Posted by: CoolCzech at October 31, 2011 12:17 PM (niZvt)

227

Someone explain to this guy how the internet works.

Al Gore invented it so you could find out that the book and movie Love Story was based on him and Tipper.....even though Tipper is still alive.

Oh, and you can use it to find pron.

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at October 31, 2011 12:17 PM (OWjjx)

228 Pfft. Unless he was rubbing one out when he changed his story on this, I couldn't care less.

Posted by: USA at October 31, 2011 12:17 PM (6Cjut)

229
It's not "Big" Herman.  It's "Venti" Herman.

Posted by: Dr. Varno at October 31, 2011 12:17 PM (QMtmy)

230
You keep assuming that someone "had to plant this."

Fucking people have been chattering about it.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 05:10 PM (nj1bB)

Oh fucking great. Ace has become a member of "the chattering class".

It's only a matter of time before he can report daily upon the salinity of David Frum's testicles.

Posted by: Anita Hill at October 31, 2011 12:17 PM (7+pP9)

231
Why do I have the feeling we're about to hear "Herman Cain" and "joke" and "deez nuts" as more comes out about this?

Posted by: soothsayer at October 31, 2011 12:18 PM (sqkOB)

232 Sock off.

Posted by: Ed Anger - Certified Kos Kid at October 31, 2011 12:18 PM (7+pP9)

233 I don't care if Cain was accused of slapping his meat in front of the secretarial pool, the SH industry is bullshit to it's very core.  It's another form of PC to destroy anyone who dares speak out against the leftist propaganda.  It's just sad that it has so permeated this society, that any charge of SH, however trivial, whether true or not, will destroy an individual (almost always a man).

Posted by: Soona - Mayan liaison at October 31, 2011 12:19 PM (coN0Z)

234 If you turn up the heat all that chattering will cease.

Posted by: FlaviusJulius at October 31, 2011 12:19 PM (ieDPL)

235

Unless he was rubbing one out when he changed his story on this, I couldn't care less.

Really...........so, its o.k. to go from "I don't know anything about it" to "well, here are the details".

How Clintonian we have become.

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at October 31, 2011 12:19 PM (OWjjx)

236 "Cain deserves the right to know who his accusers are."

He settled with two of them. Are you saying he didn't know who the women were?

Posted by: Dick Nixon at October 31, 2011 12:19 PM (8O4/a)

237 The only person who knows who fed this story to who when is Politico's Jonathan Martin.

Posted by: Miss'80s at October 31, 2011 12:19 PM (d6QMz)

238 234 Yep but never a Democrat or man of the left.

Posted by: steevy at October 31, 2011 12:20 PM (fyOgS)

239 210 I still don't understand why Cain would run knowing this was going to come out, eventually. Either he didn't think he had a chance

Yes.

...or he thinks he can explain it away.

And yes.

It is patently obvious from Cain's story that there was more to it - some sort of context that led to this being a near-lawsuit.  He doesn't provide why she's in the office (he implies he barely knew her - so apparently they didn't work together, she just had an office on his floor) or say why they were standing close to each other or explain why he was comparing her to his wife.  A lot of people do not know where the lines of behavior are at work and a lot of CEOs, in particular, do not pay attention to HR rules.  It's not the same as even a VP or something.  These folks, men and women in my experience, do what they want with personnel issues and other folks clean up after them. 

Cain probably doesn't think he did anything wrong, but it sounds like he did have a behavior problem at work. 

This is the guy who said he would never appoint a Muslim, for pity's sake.  I have no difficulty believing he doesn't have any judgment on these sorts of issues. 

Posted by: Y-not at October 31, 2011 12:20 PM (5H6zj)

240 Sadly looks like you may be right as the compassionate conservatives and RINO herd is all in for tea Party hides.

It's all a conspiracy.  A deeeeeeeep, dark conspiracy.  Boooooooooooo.

Ehboy. .....That's not clearing it up. That's injecting confusion into it.

Confusion don't enter into it.  Look, if you're innocent, your story makes sense and doesn't change.  I reject the MFM storyline until such time as the accusee can't answer the charges coherently.  Cain fails. 

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 12:20 PM (6TB1Z)

241 What three gay guys from Obamas church that were mysteriously and separately murdered the month Obama entered the race?

Posted by: FraudStreamMedia at October 31, 2011 12:20 PM (I9fXA)

242 >>>Ace if I ask you how long ago you heard about this would you answer that question? I think like a month, maybe 40 days at most, but when I say that, I did not have details. I knew there were issues coming up about Cain being "fresh" with women. I guessed that other people have known for 90 days on the theory that I probably hear things *late.* But I heard this beginning of October/end of September, from someone plugged in to the whole professional political world.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 12:20 PM (nj1bB)

243

Name names, Ace. Otherwise, it's bullshit.

Cain deserves the right to know who his accusers are. In fact, those of us who want to assess Cain as a candidate and as a man deserve the same.

If these "chatterers" are real, let 'em stand up for what they claim.

Posted by: MrScribbler at October 31, 2011 05:14 PM (YjjrR)

Yeah ace tell everyone who you've been talking to so they are outed and potentially lose their jobs and get yourself branded so that no one ever talks to you again.  Sounds awesome!

Posted by: buzzion at October 31, 2011 12:20 PM (GULKT)

244 Has Obama stopped engaging in sex acts with men in his limo?

Posted by: FlaviusJulius at October 31, 2011 12:21 PM (ieDPL)

245 Doesn't a five figure law suit mean, "we paid because it was cheaper than going to court?"

Posted by: MJ at October 31, 2011 12:21 PM (BKOsZ)

246 Thanks Ace.

Posted by: Dick Nixon at October 31, 2011 12:21 PM (8O4/a)

247 The ol' "you're as tall as my wife" bit, eh? Herman is definitely old school. You know what comes next right? Either Herman described his wife's favorite sexual position or he detailed what his wife will no longer do sexually. It's the normal progression. It's in the handbook.

Posted by: Spiked at October 31, 2011 12:22 PM (dagTu)

248

This is another point or ten in favor of the "Cain is-- or at least was-- running to sell books and boost his profile and speaking fees but not to actually, you know, win" hypothesis. 

Last I heard, he's still makng paid speeches...

Posted by: Lance McCormick at October 31, 2011 12:22 PM (zgHLA)

249 Once again I think the issue is that Cain and his campaign were not prepared to respond if this information was ever to come out. The Bush campaign was aware of the DUI and chose not to leak it early. Once it came out they had a coherent and consistent response. This is what campaign staff and war rooms are for. To make plans for anticipated attacks. It's hurt both Perry and Cain as they seemed suprised by the attacks and defended themselves off the cuff.

Posted by: polynikes - Texan for Romney at October 31, 2011 12:22 PM (IqM9e)

250 >>>Oh fucking great. Ace has become a member of "the chattering class". >>>It's only a matter of time before he can report daily upon the salinity of David Frum's testicles. Sorry I heard something in advance. I apologize.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 12:22 PM (nj1bB)

251 I think a stupid fact beats clever spin 99 times out of 100.

Name an issue, name the MSM spin and the fact that totally refutes the spin and then tell me which wins...the spin every damn time because our guys can't explain their ways out of a wet paper bag. Want one: "the rich don't pay their fair share"how's the fact working for you there???

Posted by: NfromNC at October 31, 2011 12:23 PM (MbeEN)

252 149 He gives them a ride and stops short.

Posted by: steevy at October 31, 2011 12:23 PM (fyOgS)

253

Where's sexual harrassment panda when you need him

http://tinyurl.com/mja9s

Posted by: Eric Cartman at October 31, 2011 12:23 PM (VxqUc)

254 How Clintonian we have become. Really, I don't remember Clinton throwing elections over bullshit litmus, purity tests.

Posted by: USA at October 31, 2011 12:23 PM (6Cjut)

255 39 And, guys, wean this term from your lexicon in work situations:

"I turned it over to my general counsel and one of the ladies that worked for me, the woman in charge of human resources."
_________

I try, but my wife hits me whenever I say "wench".

Posted by: Anachronda at October 31, 2011 12:24 PM (IrbU4)

256 Because it's on the same day that Perry was drunk or on drugs story was spun out.

What "spun out"?  I just watched VIDEO of Perry acting as though he were drunk.


Because people are test-driving the non-Romney candidates and they're getting sick of it soon and going to just pick a candidate that they think is electable and all of the non-Romneys have been disqualified.

If all the non-Romneys have been disqualified, why would Romney need to put out a hit against Cain?


Because for some people this accusation against Cain is a badge of friggin' honor so they'll stick with him until he drops out and endorses Romney, but for the cooler heads prevail type it will be a sign that he is not electable.

Again, why does that translate into his supporters flocking to Romney?


Because Perry has already been sexualized via whisper campaigns so people will suspect he's capable of this, as has Newt (deservedly so in his case), so only the ball-less automaton Romney remains as the boss who would never pinch a bottom or take a drink. 

Ah, so it's a grand conspiracy on the part of Romney to make all the other candidates look like perverts.  Okay.

Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at October 31, 2011 12:24 PM (1linH)

257 After careful review of Herman Cains pants crease, I can not in good faith say that I trust his side of the story.

Posted by: David Brooks at October 31, 2011 12:24 PM (I9fXA)

258 This has already been a really shitty Monday and I have 3 hours on the road with my wife ahead of me. Ugh. Anybody got anything good?

Posted by: Dave at October 31, 2011 12:24 PM (Xm1aB)

259 I heard Obama was SCoaMF.

Posted by: FlaviusJulius Errant Member of the Chattering Classes at October 31, 2011 12:24 PM (ieDPL)

260

@237: "Really...........so, its o.k. to go from "I don't know anything about it" to "well, here are the details"."

Sooooo....he can't talk to his attorneys, get a recap on the events, and then make a statement?

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at October 31, 2011 12:25 PM (xy9wk)

261 Have some butter, Dave.  Or something fried.

Posted by: David Frum at October 31, 2011 12:25 PM (zgHLA)

262 It's in the handbook. Revealing the handbook is an automatic man-card suspension, buddy.

Posted by: USA at October 31, 2011 12:25 PM (6Cjut)

263

Doesn't a five figure law suit mean, "we paid because it was cheaper than going to court?"

Well.........and you are not the first person to say this.......maybe and maybe not.

Sexual Harrassment suits are largely about economic damages. There is some "mental anguish" element to it, but for the most part it is about the money you lost as a result you quit your job or were denied a promotion cause you didn't put out.

If Plaintiff A quit her job and it took her 3 months to find a new job, then the bulk of her claim would be for that 3 months of lost salary. If that is the situation (and I am not saying it is) then yea, a 5 figure settlement could be one of those "we are flipping a coin on this one, so lets split the difference" and resolve it.

On the otherhand, we have no idea. So saying that the settlement was for something that was of merit or was a nuisance settlement is nothing more than mere conjecture.

 

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at October 31, 2011 12:25 PM (OWjjx)

264 Maybe I asked someone to paint my rocks...

Posted by: Herman Cain at October 31, 2011 12:25 PM (rJVPU)

265 I'm not going to be dragged into the fight.I'll criticize but not attack the possible R nominees.I just want to beat Obama.

Posted by: steevy at October 31, 2011 12:26 PM (fyOgS)

266 What "spun out"?  I just watched VIDEO of Perry acting as though he were drunk

Perry's made many appearances in the past week, but this one was chosen as the one to be highlighted by MSNBC this morning with a heavily edited video and commentary/speculation about him being drunk and/or on drugs.  I'm not sure I've seen a video of any of Romney's appearances. 

Posted by: Y-not at October 31, 2011 12:26 PM (5H6zj)

267 Music- 

"Obama and Larry Sinclair had a steamy love affair"

Obama!  You long legged mackdaddy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSyGsdKS8j4

Posted by: Shiggz undecided - weighing pros-cons-balls at October 31, 2011 12:26 PM (I9fXA)

268 Anybody got anything good?

Well, I got new gutters on my house, and they shouldn't clog up with leaves, so I won't have to climb a ladder anymore.  How's that?

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 12:26 PM (6TB1Z)

269

260....Anybody got anything good?

Leave the gun...take the canolli.

Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at October 31, 2011 12:26 PM (XkwIi)

270 5 figures is a lot of shoes.

Posted by: Dr Spank at October 31, 2011 12:26 PM (Sh42X)

271 Could it be his initial statement about this was his understanding that he could not talk about it per the settlement?    And his subsequent statement is because he got legal clarification on what he could say?


Posted by: Tami at October 31, 2011 12:26 PM (X6akg)

272

"...... and I made a gesture saying you are the same height as my wife. And I brought my hand up to my chin ........"

Are you kidding me?  We are supposed to believe that is all it was?  My BSmeter is going off big time.

Advice to Dear Herman  from this former supporter, quit digging, you are embarrassing yourself.  No one with any common sense is going to believe this.  The more you talk, the less you remain credible.

Posted by: Heather at October 31, 2011 12:27 PM (9+TLu)

273 "Sorry I heard something in advance. I apologize."


A lot of people hear a lot of shit, but it doesn't make it fact or anything more than gossip. Shit I heard Jonathan Martin makes the rounds of the Union Station Men's bathrooms, but  because I heard it in advance doesn't mean anything.

Posted by: PeeWee Herman at October 31, 2011 12:27 PM (Y5Ri0)

274 @270 Sorry, that's not working for me, but happy about your new gutters.

Posted by: Dave at October 31, 2011 12:27 PM (Xm1aB)

275

I wonder how many people who would like us not to support Cain because of the sexual harrassment charge not only supportd, but voted for, Bill Clinton?

Actually, even if Can is guilty, and it came down to a choice between him and "Il Dufe," I would rather have someone guilty of sexual harrassment, but would mostly leave me alone and hold down the legalized looting, in the White House over the Red Diaper Baby or some other statist swine.

Posted by: Bilwick at October 31, 2011 12:27 PM (KZcFn)

276 I'm wondering about something.  Which states so far have their Primary dates before the "Proportional Distribution" date, and which states are after.  And who's leading in those at the moment?  I mean Romney may be leading in a state like Florida but with their primary date he's not going to get all the delegates like McCain did to help him secure the nomination early. 

Posted by: buzzion at October 31, 2011 12:27 PM (GULKT)

277 At least he isn't Romney.

Posted by: FlaviusJulius Errant Member of the Chattering Classes at October 31, 2011 12:28 PM (ieDPL)

278  If all the non-Romneys have been disqualified, why would Romney need to put out a hit against Cain?

I specifically made a point of not accusing Romney or any one of the candidates of putting this out.

If you can't even bother to keep that straight, what is the point? 

Posted by: Y-not at October 31, 2011 12:28 PM (5H6zj)

279 Palin for president. She's the GOPs greatest hope as God likes her.

Posted by: Palin Lover at October 31, 2011 12:28 PM (dBxzn)

280 Y-not at October 31, 2011 05:20 PM (5H6zj) You're a hoot. You accuse Romney and his bots of being devious and nasty but you applaud anyone who tries to kneecap Romney, even the slimy Huntsman, and you are one of the most relentless in attacking Cain. You're not doing a great job of making the case that this was a Romney hit. From your actions, looks like Perry supporters are a lot more happy about it.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2011 12:28 PM (TMB3S)

281 If anyone wants to do a piece spinning/arguing this for Cain, fine, let me know, I'll let you. I have to tell you I'm not doing that myself because I suspect that whatever spin is offered is going to look rather dumb rather quickly. But if a stalwart like Truman North wants to post his argument on this, fine, contact me by email.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 12:28 PM (nj1bB)

282
Nuisance complaints are routinely settled to not only eliminate the problem but rid the company of a divisive influence.  Part of the settlement is resignation, and sworn agreement to never discuss the settlement or event in question. 

I have participated in EEOC complaints, and they are a monumental problem for a company.  With the number of complainants in today's society, many companies are very selective with their hiring practices. 

Translated, this means those most routinely involved in these actions are denied employment.  And you wonder why certain categories have higher unemployment rates?  

Posted by: Doctor Fish at October 31, 2011 12:28 PM (Lt/Za)

283 I'm not sure I've seen a video of any of Romney's appearances.

Well, appearances by a sober candidate can be pretty dull.

Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at October 31, 2011 12:28 PM (1linH)

284 Posted by: Heather at October 31, 2011 05:27 PM (9+TLu)

You don't know much about sexual harassment cases, do you.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJconservative) at October 31, 2011 12:29 PM (3vSLn)

285

Hand to God, the line about a woman's height is a pretty standard come on that I've had used on me twice (in the context of being the perfect height for kissing).  It's all about context.  1000% about context. 

At my last mandatory brainwashing sensitivty training, we were told to never comment on a woman's appearance.  I guess height counts.

My former boss who was my boss up until he was arrested just over a year ago pleaded guilty last week regarding incidents of physical sexual harassment.  He was the elected DA.  He will be sentenced next motnh in a deal that could get him twelve years.  He was always more than fair to me.  I had absolutley no idea.  There were at least three victims.

Posted by: WalrusRex at October 31, 2011 12:29 PM (jUZRg)

286

"Another fucking retard who thinks the Weatherman controls the weather."

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 05:17 PM (nj1bB) <<

 

That bit about him lying about his wife not appearing with him, and his wife really not appearing because she believes he's dirty, was that also in your Top Secret Background Brief, Mr. VIP Political Operative?  Or did you just make that up and then blame the climate for the bad atmosphere?

The yelling at you to clean up your act has been about YOU, not making it all go away for Cain.  But it's clear you're not just careless, you really belong in the gutter. 

Posted by: Chris Balsz at October 31, 2011 12:29 PM (3GtyG)

287 201 ...Bad Herman and his Eeeeeevil Sexcapapdes. Posted by: MrScribbler at October 31, 2011 05:12 PM (YjjrR) Sexcapapdes. Is he any relation to Michael Dukakakis?

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 12:29 PM (UlUS4)

288 23 Barack Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) says 'No' to RINO Romney at October 31, 2011 04:40 PM (8y9MW)

======

fuck the corporate media.

Posted by: jc at October 31, 2011 12:30 PM (i8c5b)

289 >>>That bit about him lying about his wife not appearing with him, and his wife really not appearing because she believes he's dirty, was that also in your Top Secret Background Brief, Mr. VIP Political Operative? Or did you just make that up and then blame the climate for the bad atmosphere? I said that was a suspicion, not a fact, idiot. Hey dude maybe if you just HOPE REALLY HARD this will go away!!!

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 12:30 PM (nj1bB)

290 Chris, You are old enough and mature enough to realize that just because you emotionally really want something, or want something to be true, that really has no bearing on the situation, right?

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 12:31 PM (nj1bB)

291 Perry and Romney supporters best not gloat.Next they will dig up some "accusers" against them."Governor Perry told me he carries a gun while jogging.I knew he was referring to his penis and was uncomfortable."

Posted by: steevy at October 31, 2011 12:31 PM (fyOgS)

292

@260: "This has already been a really shitty Monday and I have 3 hours on the road with my wife ahead of me.

Ugh.

Anybody got anything good?"

I have a shovel, grass seed, and some quicklime that you can have.  Meet me at Exit 16B.   Bring $200, and I can get a hooker who will testify that you spent all day with her.

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at October 31, 2011 12:32 PM (xy9wk)

293 I specifically made a point of not accusing Romney or any one of the candidates of putting this out.

Ah, but of course not.  And I've pointedly done the same.  After all, there are no accusations about who leaked this story, just acknowledgments of the situation.  Right? 

Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at October 31, 2011 12:32 PM (1linH)

294 @287 Wow! That's a mind-bender.

Posted by: Dave at October 31, 2011 12:32 PM (Xm1aB)

295 Hey dude maybe if you just HOPE REALLY HARD this will go away!!!


There's no place like home.  There's no place like home.  Clack. Clack.

Posted by: Dorothy at October 31, 2011 12:32 PM (6TB1Z)

296 While all of you are bitching about this "hit job" on Cain, are none of you concerned about the things that Cain actually says?! He. Is. Not. Ready. For. This. Shit. I would embarass the party less and I guarantee someone would find pictures of me at an LSU tailgate "hanging brains" while "raising the roof."

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at October 31, 2011 12:32 PM (XE2Oo)

297 can i just say, for crying out loud.

Posted by: willow at October 31, 2011 12:33 PM (h+qn8)

298

SEXECUTIONER

...bring on the limitless sex-objects...

Posted by: GWAR at October 31, 2011 12:33 PM (5eVSI)

299 For the record, she did put me on the Coke can. That bitch crazy.

Posted by: Anita Hill's Pubic Hair at October 31, 2011 12:33 PM (znT2j)

300 85 I'm not sure I've seen a video of any of Romney's appearances.

>>Well, appearances by a sober candidate can be pretty dull.


That's Romney's problem, being drunk is not an excuse.

Posted by: Dr Spank at October 31, 2011 12:33 PM (Sh42X)

301 You're a hoot. You accuse Romney and his bots of being devious and nasty but you applaud anyone who tries to kneecap Romney, even the slimy Huntsman, and you are one of the most relentless in attacking Cain.

I gleefully applaud Huntsman for taking a cheap shot at Romney, particularly if the use of word "lubricated" was intended as I think it may be been.  Yes.  I fully admit it.  Huntsman is the only Republican who could make that dig.  It was a thing of beauty. 

I voted for Romney last time.

I defended him into the primary season this time.

I now loathe the man. 

That's on him and on his supporters who do a really poor job advancing the case for Mitt's candidacy based on his achievements and policies as opposed to against everyone else. 

Posted by: Y-not at October 31, 2011 12:33 PM (5H6zj)

302 What you or I BELIEVE, Chris, has no bearing whatsoever on what facts will ultimately prove. You know that, right? You realize that me "rooting" or believing has no effect on anything? You do realize that all that matters is what happened in the 1990s and more importantly what can be established to have happened in the 1990s, today, in 2011, right? I can't take all the BELIEVE. BELIEVE In Herman! Why? I have no idea, Chris. AND NEITHER DO YOU. But man are your all hell-fired-up with your BELIEFS about Cain.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 12:33 PM (nj1bB)

303 @294 Oh, thank you! Thank you man, that made me laugh. I'm sure she'll be wondering why I'm chuckling to myself driving down the highway.

Posted by: Dave at October 31, 2011 12:33 PM (Xm1aB)

304 Could it be his initial statement about this was his understanding that he could not talk about it per the settlement?    And his subsequent statement is because he got legal clarification on what he could say?
Posted by: Tami at October 31, 2011 05:26 PM (X6akg)

It could be that but he didn't say that this morning.

If he had said, "There was an incident. I did nothing wrong but I'm legally unable to say anything more" that would be ok.

If you are legally prohibited from saying something, that doesn't give you license to lie.

Posted by: DrewM. at October 31, 2011 12:34 PM (plesI)

305

Good grief, I have had men flirt/joke with me at every job I ever had and never sued one of them, these women need to put on the big girl pants, or stay home and bake cookies..

Lightweights.

Posted by: lous a girl at October 31, 2011 12:34 PM (R21xD)

306

Circular firing squads are not meeting the published standards around here.  You are to stand exactly 2.73 ft to the left of the person on your right.  Everyone is to fire on the count of 3, not before the count.

Come on people, let's get this right.

Posted by: jc at October 31, 2011 12:34 PM (i8c5b)

307 Perry and Romney supporters best not gloat.Next they will dig up some "accusers" against them.

No doubt, but I have real difficulty imagining a credible accusation that Mitt Romney is a playa.  The accuser will just look like an idiot.  Now, blood libels..........

Posted by: Dorothy at October 31, 2011 12:34 PM (6TB1Z)

308 Earlier today he knew nothing about any settlement.

Now...

Cain also offered new information about the settlement of the case. Politico, which broke the sexual harassment allegation story, said that the woman received a money settlement "in the five-figure range." When van Susteren asked about that, Cain said, "My general counsel said this started out where she and her lawyer were demanding a huge financial settlement…I don't remember a number…But then he said because there was no basis for this, we ended up settling for what would have been a termination settlement." When van Susteren asked how much money was involved, Cain said. "Maybe three months' salary. I don't remember. It might have been two months. I do remember my general counsel saying we didn't pay all of the money they demanded."

Posted by: DrewM. at October 31, 2011 05:04 PM (plesI)

Totally plausible story.  Happened to me when I was laid off by a major national trade association when I was 7 1/2 months pregnant.  I made some noise and threatened to sue them for sex discrimination (every person laid off my my group was a woman, and a highly paid one at that) and they gave me an extra 6 months' salary.  It was definitely a "five-figure settlement." 

Posted by: rockmom at October 31, 2011 12:34 PM (A0UFZ)

309 You must be THIS tall to bake pizza. Jeez, mystery solved. Now, can we go back to attacking the jug-eard fuckstick commie rat bastard who has no past and no paper trail, hates Joos and America?

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 12:34 PM (UlUS4)

310

...my respect for you has gone way down since you got on the Perry-and-Cain-Must-be-Destroyed kick.

McScribbler, one of us needs his head examined.

I got called a "little bitch", though and you only got "fucking retard".

Posted by: spongeworthy at October 31, 2011 12:34 PM (puy4B)

311 Did these claims come after the Anita Hill shit?   sexual harrassment lawsuits were the goin' thing back then. Couldn't lose - raise a stink, get a settlement, atty gets 33-40%, win-win!

Posted by: jeanne! at October 31, 2011 12:35 PM (GdalM)

312 He will be sentenced next motnh in a deal that could get him twelve years. That right there is the most fucked up part of this shit: It sometimes really happens, but that has no bearing on the number of times people pull accusations wholesale from their asses.

Posted by: FRONT TOWARD LEFT at October 31, 2011 12:35 PM (p7SSh)

313 Posted by: buzzion at October 31, 2011 05:20 PM

So you prefer that we give credence to unnamed "plugged in" people, who can say any friggin' thing they want to say without being held accountable?

If Ace is using this "sources" shit to pile more dung on Cain's head, the spreaders-of-rumors need to be outed.

I guess taking responsibility is an outdated concept....

Posted by: MrScribbler at October 31, 2011 12:36 PM (YjjrR)

314 Mark Steyn's take in the Corner is exactly how I feel about this:

What ought to make America “uncomfortable” is that it’s broke and it’s heading for collapse. But, judging from the preoccupations of our media, very few Americans are discomforted by that. On the other hand, even if we were solvent, I very much doubt that a society made up of social arbiters with Brokaw and Schieffer’s tender sensitivities and with millions of its citizens ever more ready to be discomforted by an ever wider of ever more inappropriate if entirely non-sexual gestures would be likely to survive. Or even remain capable of basic social interaction.

Let’s hear what these gestures were. Then we can mandate sensitivity training to eliminate them. Which will stimulate the vital sensitivity-training sector of the economy.


Posted by: logprof at October 31, 2011 12:36 PM (QaKuj)

315 Posted by: buzzion at October 31, 2011 05:27 PM (GULKT)

Wiki has the updated schedule


Everything in front of Mar 1 is proportional delegate.

Posted by: Vic at October 31, 2011 12:36 PM (YdQQY)

316 I'm just loving people like Mr. Scribbler and spongeworthy who think if this doesn't appear on Ace of Spades, *IT ACTUALLY DEMATERIALIZES FROM REALITY.* Or wait -- do you have to scream at all other bloggers to embargo the story? Is it just this conservative blog, or all of them? What are the rules?

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 12:36 PM (nj1bB)

317 Harrassment?  bull, her ass meant nothing to me, I liked her tits.

Posted by: Bill Clinton at October 31, 2011 12:36 PM (JYheX)

318 Nothing here. There is a rumor of a story. The polls will sort this out. 2 candidates can raise money. The Republican Central has already chosen 2012's version of president McCain to run.

Posted by: FlaviusJulius Errant Member of the Chattering Classes at October 31, 2011 12:36 PM (ieDPL)

319 "You are old enough and mature enough to realize that just because you emotionally really want something, or want something to be true, that really has no bearing on the situation, right?"

You talking about God watching over us all, except the heathen libs?

Posted by: Palin Lover at October 31, 2011 12:36 PM (dBxzn)

320 let's not just go Reverse Clinton

That's my favorite position LOL!

Posted by: Monica at October 31, 2011 12:37 PM (4136b)

321

@298: "I would embarass the party less and I guarantee someone would find pictures of me at an LSU tailgate "hanging brains" while "raising the roof.""

Yeah, but you're white, not some uppity buck.

Posted by: The MSM at October 31, 2011 12:37 PM (xy9wk)

322 Posted by: rockmom at October 31, 2011 05:34 PM (A0UFZ)

I'm not saying it's not plausible. What I'm saying is it's 180 degrees from what he said 5 hours before. He's got to square those two statements.



Posted by: DrewM. at October 31, 2011 12:37 PM (plesI)

323

if 'someguy' was here he'd be telling us to quit punching down.

Posted by: garrett at October 31, 2011 12:37 PM (5eVSI)

324
He settled with two of them. Are you saying he didn't know who the women were?

Posted by: Dick Nixon at October 31, 2011 05:19 PM (8O4/a)

Yep -- because counsel at the Restaurant Assoc. settled with them decades ago. It's probably coming back to him as vague memories as he tracks down the accusations.

Thanks for playing, sacklapper.

Posted by: Ed Anger - Certified Kos Kid at October 31, 2011 12:38 PM (7+pP9)

325 I have participated in EEOC complaints, and they are a monumental problem for a company.  With the number of complainants in today's society, many companies are very selective with their hiring practices. 

Translated, this means those most routinely involved in these actions are denied employment.  And you wonder why certain categories have higher unemployment rates?  

Posted by: Doctor Fish at October 31, 2011 05:28 PM (Lt/Za)

 

Like I said in a previous thread, I was brought up on SH charges a few years ago.  The only thing that I could make out of it was that I disagreed with a woman and then gave her an angry look.

I have no idea what happened to the case, as no one has informed me of it's dispensation.  I've also kept my mouth shut about it too.  I understand Cain's silence on this issue.

Posted by: Soona - Mayan liaison at October 31, 2011 12:38 PM (coN0Z)

326 The Republican Central has already chosen 2012's version of president McCain to run.

Oh, dear God, give it a rest.  Or go occupy. 

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 12:39 PM (6TB1Z)

327 >>That's on him and on his supporters who do a really poor job advancing the case for Mitt's candidacy based on his achievements and policies as opposed to against everyone else. Yes, an awful job. Romney's wining. So what do you think about Perry's Texas Emerging Technology boondoggle that was shut down with the help of a Tea Party rep who thought it was "immoral and arrogant". You good with that?

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2011 12:39 PM (TMB3S)

328

I got called a "little bitch", though and you only got "fucking retard".

Posted by: spongeworthy at October 31, 2011 05:34 PM

Easier than actually responding, isn't it?

I'm sure I'll climb the ladder if I continue to ask for Cain's -- and Perry's -- attackers to actually stand up like men and put their names to the accusations.

Nice to have a higher bar to look up at, spongeworthy!

Posted by: MrScribbler at October 31, 2011 12:39 PM (YjjrR)

329 Posted by: jeanne! at October 31, 2011 05:35 PM (GdalM) I believe this alleged non-incident incident happened post Anita Hill. Just a thought. Coke will now be in white cans. WHITE CANS! Wow, I just got that!

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 12:39 PM (UlUS4)

330 Posted by: DrewM. at October 31, 2011 05:04 PM (plesI)

Sure.

He panicked a bit, didn't know how to react, and became defensive. Then, when cooler heads prevailed he explained the situation (which sounds perfectly plausible), and is hoping to move on.

This doesn't reflect badly on his attitudes toward women; it reflects badly on his ability to remain calm, analyze a novel situation, and NOT SAY STUPID SHIT!

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJconservative) at October 31, 2011 12:39 PM (3vSLn)

331 Posted by: Ed Anger - Certified Kos Kid at October 31, 2011 05:38 PM (7+pP9)

You do know that Politico went to the campaign for comment TEN DAYS ago, right?

Let's not pretend the first Cain heard of this was late last night or early this morning. He's had more than a week to jog his memory or get any records he needs.

Posted by: DrewM. at October 31, 2011 12:40 PM (plesI)

332 It sometimes really happens, but that has no bearing on the number of times people pull accusations wholesale from their asses.

True, and exactly why it doesn't matter about the accusation, it matters how you answer it.  Cain answers poorly. 

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 12:40 PM (6TB1Z)

333 328 Fuck You.

Posted by: FlaviusJulius Errant Member of the Chattering Classes at October 31, 2011 12:40 PM (ieDPL)

334 Ed Anger - Certified Kos Kid at October 31, 2011 05:38 PM

Sure thing Redneck. I guess we should believe that Cain doesn't remember the names of two women who accused him of sexual harrassment. Maybe you can explain his five hour flip flop he pulled off today.

Have fun boning the family cow in whatever backwoods hell hole you dwell in.

Posted by: Dick Nixon at October 31, 2011 12:41 PM (8O4/a)

335

311 You must be THIS tall to bake pizza.

Or....You must be THIS tall to get on this ride.

Which is, um.....an old joke that I have heard guys make to women.

Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at October 31, 2011 12:41 PM (XkwIi)

336

Two problems with Herman Cain and the sexual harassment issue.  Yesterday he said he couldn't comment as if he didn't know what they were talking about.  The reporter gave him one of the names right there and instead of denial, said wouldn't comment and then smartly asked him if he'd ever been accused of sexual harassment.  He and his campaign most certainly did know about this for some tome too, as they have been notified many times throughout the past 10 days and refused to address it.  Now, today he "remembers"?  He remembered only one woman. 

He went to a friendly venue to give his side unchallenged.  He could have avoided this whole thing if he had responded to the questions prior to the story coming out. 

Before you mention the non-disclosure agreement, as an excuse why he didn't comment yesterday, it was on the women not Cain.  But let's say it was on Cain too just to be safe as we don't really know. So, if he didn't answer the questions yesterday because of it, then why did he respond today?  You can't have it both ways.

And to say the only incident that he remembers is that he just touched his chin adn said the woman was the same height as his wife wouldn't justify a settlement, let alone a five-figure one.  She'd be laughed out of court. 

Rush talked about it today giving only some of the accusations, he conveniently forgot the biggest one where the woman says Cain asked her up to his suite.

The second problem I find with it: There is no way the President of the National Restaurant Association didn't know about the settlement, not just one but multiple settlements. This defies logic and truth. Mr. Cain, although the accusedm was the President.  He was on Fox today and said he wasn't aware of a settlement.

The other thing that concerns me is when he said on Fox that you'll probably hear of other women and accusations but don't believe them.  Why would you say that?

Oh Oh, just found the lie, actually two. Cain later today told Greta he knew about the settlement and recalls the 2nd woman.

Oops, found another lie too. Cain said the National Restaurant Association’s general counsel and the Human Resources Department conducted an investigation into allegations about his conduct in the late-90s and found it to be baseless.  But the head of the Human Resources Dept says there was no investigation and didn't even know about any allegations against Cain.

When she was called after he repeated this at his National Press Club speech, she replied "He did not say that." When the quote was recited for her, she hung up.

Also I listened to the Politico reporter today on radio and there is more coming. 

The allegations may indeed be false, but the cover-up and lies are what's doing Cain in.  He just today got caught in 3 lies. Now, he's going to tout out his wife?  Please don't make a wife have to listen to and defend this. 

 

Posted by: Tricia at October 31, 2011 12:42 PM (gqG91)

337 Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJconservative) at October 31, 2011 05:39 PM (3vSLn)

He panicked about something he knew about 10 days ago?

That's worrying.

Of course, I don't believe that's what happened. He thought he'd brazen it out and then like every other fuck up he's had, he starts changing his story. Based on past behavior, I'm guessing this isn't the last version of the story we hear.

Posted by: DrewM. at October 31, 2011 12:42 PM (plesI)

338

ace at October 31, 2011 05:09 PM (nj1bB)

*****

No problem.  And by the way, I'm not yelling at you over this.  Cover the story.  It is out there.

Posted by: ed at October 31, 2011 12:42 PM (Y2WVW)

339 In my one and only foray into management after leaving the Army, I made the mistake of telling two pieces of shit that their every breath was a waste of my oxygen. One of these pieces of shit was not a caucasian. Somehow, according to my company's HR department, "waste of oxygen" was a racial slur.

Posted by: FRONT TOWARD LEFT at October 31, 2011 12:42 PM (p7SSh)

340 Cains gone

Posted by: Palin Lover at October 31, 2011 12:42 PM (dBxzn)

341 What are the rules?

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 05:36 PM

There is only one rule, Ace: If someone accuses another of a criminal or socially unacceptable act, said person needs to stand behind what they claim and put their name to it. Better still if they can offer proof.

Don't get all butthurt about that. You'd want the same if someone was accusing you.

Posted by: MrScribbler at October 31, 2011 12:42 PM (YjjrR)

342 not nearly as kooky seeming as I first thought.

And we all wonder why you presume nuttiness and wrong every time Cain comes up.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at October 31, 2011 12:43 PM (r4wIV)

343 335 328 F*** You.

yawn

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 12:43 PM (6TB1Z)

344

I have decided that the GOP is in no way going to do anything to pull the country out of its present downward spiral (completely unserious about that, and prefer navel gazing and choosing who will be the class popular kid to lead the dodgeball team)...praying for divine intervention is perhaps a more sure route...

Congratulations, I'll say it again: in an election that was theirs to lose, where it seemed almost impossible for the GOP/conservatives to screw up, you did not disappoint.  In fact, the Republicans went above and beyond the call of duty this time; a tip of my hat, this has to be one of the finest examples of dedication I've ever seen.

Posted by: you know at October 31, 2011 12:43 PM (yN6cl)

345 I was once wrongly accused of harrassment by a gal who was a serial accuser.  She eventually lost her job.  I guess she accused too many people.

A relative of mine was accused of racial harrassment and reprimanded for turning the phrase "older than a coon's age".

People are nucking futz.

Posted by: Rex Harrison's Hat at October 31, 2011 12:43 PM (4136b)

346 Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at October 31, 2011 05:41 PM (XkwIi) I was going for the humor, but it must have failed. Oh well. Luckily, this is October of 2011. That said, I'm sure Romney and Perry won't exactly be jumping to Herm's defense.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 12:44 PM (UlUS4)

347 ace sent me an inappropriate email once

Posted by: Marco Rubio's Trashcan at October 31, 2011 12:44 PM (5eVSI)

348 Well, McScribbler, as someone else said, *I'm pretty sure Cain knows his accusers' names." Further, they did go on the record, in as much they filed a complaint at the Restaurant Association's HR department. Now, do I have possession of the Restaurant Association's HR and legal records? Oddly enough, *I do not.*

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 12:44 PM (nj1bB)

349 I remember when Ed Zorinsky used to do the "Dancing Senator" routine at National Press Club shows, that went down pretty big. I just think the goofiness factor has been too big w/ our side lately, though maybe it's just the media overemphasizing it.

Posted by: norrin radd at October 31, 2011 12:44 PM (HprDl)

350 "Don't get all butthurt about that. You'd want the same if someone was accusing you."

Sounds as if you are sexually harassing Ace.

Posted by: Palin Lover at October 31, 2011 12:44 PM (dBxzn)

351 Straw you forgot your Romney Reagan comparison in your last post. You're slipping.

Posted by: Dick Nixon at October 31, 2011 12:44 PM (8O4/a)

352 346 It must be difficult to talk with Romney's cock in your mouth you fuckheaded retard.

Posted by: FlaviusJulius at October 31, 2011 12:45 PM (ieDPL)

353 let's not just go Reverse Clinton

Is that where the guy is on his knees?

Posted by: WalrusRex at October 31, 2011 12:45 PM (jUZRg)

354 342 LOL.Sorry,that must have been a bitch to deal with but it is funny.You can't even insult certain protected groups anymore.And they keep adding newprotected groups.Women,blacks,"latinos",GBLT,muslims,atheists etc etc ad infinitum.Except plain white guys who are christians.

Posted by: steevy at October 31, 2011 12:45 PM (fyOgS)

355 Well, I have to admit that Cain and his staff had to know this would surface when he decided to jump in. They were totally unprepared, as they have been on other occasions during interviews about foreign policy and such. I hope he's made of Teflon.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 12:47 PM (UlUS4)

356 They are even giving this story air time on the local news stations around here in SC. Of course they are all owned and operated by Democrats so it is no wonder. They are completely in the tank for Obama and Romney.

Posted by: Vic at October 31, 2011 12:47 PM (YdQQY)

357 You know, I am all for scrapping among ourselves during the primary season, but let us remember that we are actually on the same side, more or less, and be careful not to offend each other too badly.

Posted by: Grey Fox at October 31, 2011 12:47 PM (MSCON)

358 You know how much I care whether Herman Cain made suggestive remarks to women years ago? 

Zip. Zero. Nada.

I had a kid fly out on his third deployment last night.  He has a Son of a Bitch for a CIC who would sell out the troops for  a deep fried Twinkie on a Stick.   All I care about is getting that commie son of a bitch out of office.  All. I. Care. About.

For the love of all that is good and holy would you please stop killing all our candidates on the basis of rumors and speculation.

I'm sorry.  I am just exhausted by all the stupid.

Posted by: mama winger at October 31, 2011 12:47 PM (R9bQ9)

359 -its obviously an unsourced hit job, that wouldn't pass an 8th grade journalism class.

At this point I am at "Plausible,"  wouldn't be surprised either way the story goes.  I think in a few days we will know a lot more.  What if Politico is trying a Breitbart and leaking some info waiting for the denials and then dropping the rest in a few days.  I still don't think Cain is ready for primetime, but like I explained earlier I see no point in rushing him out of the race.  Let him rise or fall in his own time no need to rush him out.

Considering the private ceasefire Cain and Romney have had this entire time and even recently as being neck and neck in the polls, I highly doubt Romneys people leaked this story.   After reading 1000's of comments it does seem the Perry peeps are the most excited for this to KO Cain.  They probably are right this is probably his best and last chance to stage a comeback.   Now, if the herd starts abandoning Cain and heads to Gingrinch instead of Perry....

Posted by: Shiggz undecided - weighing pros-cons-balls at October 31, 2011 12:47 PM (I9fXA)

360 I can just feel all the goodwill rushing back towards my candidacy because of this!

Posted by: Rick Perry at October 31, 2011 12:47 PM (1linH)

361 Tricia, If you just believe hard enough it will all go away.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 12:47 PM (nj1bB)

362 Posted by: Dick Nixon at October 31, 2011 05:41 PM (8O4/a)

February, 2000. I was accused (by her shop steward and business agent) of grabbing the breast of an employee. Of course it was crap, just so they could have something opposite my firing her for failing to work as instructed.

I have no fucking idea what her name was. Not a clue.

But according to you I am lying.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJconservative) at October 31, 2011 12:47 PM (3vSLn)

363 #342 FRONT TL. according to my previous employer stating that you believe Tiger Woods sold his soul to the devil was a racial slur. To be fair they just played the game by addressing it with me because of a complaint that was made.

Posted by: polynikes - Texan for Romney at October 31, 2011 12:47 PM (IqM9e)

364 Don't soil your temple garments ass face.

Posted by: FlaviusJulius at October 31, 2011 12:47 PM (ieDPL)

365

It's the lies that will catch him.

Cain not only knew about the settlement, he knew how much she asked for and the amount "WE ended up settling for".  He told Greta this today after lying that he didn't even know there was a settlement this morning. He also "recalled" the 2nd woman after denying it this morning.

 

Posted by: Tricia at October 31, 2011 12:47 PM (gqG91)

366

You want to know why I think this should go away? Because it settled out of court for 5 figures. As others have said, and I know this to be true, that's not what good SH cases settle for.

So even if all of this is true, and there was a SH case against Cain, it was far, far more likely to have been a nuisance suit. What's more, the defendant in a settled nuisance suit is supposed to get one thing assured him in return for passing the opportunity to clear his name, and that is a bulletproof confidentiality clause. Once these are violated, no one will ever settle these suits. And it isn't anything like fair to the accused.

No, it won't go away and I'm not saying our Host shouldn't cover it. But to do so without recognizing the really awful state of SH law as practiced is tellingly one-sided.

 

Posted by: spongeworthy at October 31, 2011 12:48 PM (puy4B)

367 Looks like it will be over by early March.

Posted by: FlaviusJulius at October 31, 2011 12:48 PM (ieDPL)

368 361 This.We need to beat Obama.

Posted by: steevy at October 31, 2011 12:48 PM (fyOgS)

369 >>>There is only one rule, Ace: If someone accuses another of a criminal or socially unacceptable act, said person needs to stand behind what they claim and put their name to it. Better still if they can offer proof. Uh, they did put their names to it. That's how the Restaurant Association KNEW WHOSE NAMES TO WRITE THE CHECKS OUT TO. But let's just keep pretending these are some phantoms dreamed up entirely by Politico.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 12:48 PM (nj1bB)

370 Posted by: steevy at October 31, 2011 05:45 PM (fyOgS) It's always open season on the Joos, a.k.a. east coast bankers, Wall Street brokers and fat-cats.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 12:49 PM (UlUS4)

371


Hey Herman, I have some advise, please call me at the earliest.

Posted by: Newt Gingrich at October 31, 2011 12:49 PM (Lt/Za)

372 Now, do I have possession of the Restaurant Association's HR and legal records?

Oddly enough, *I do not.*

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 05:44 PM

In that case, you are making assumptions, Ace. Guesses. Projections. You may even be wishcasting, I don't know.

But whatever it is, a little less of that and a little more reasoned judgment -- based on you saying you *do not* have the records would be better.

Posted by: MrScribbler at October 31, 2011 12:49 PM (YjjrR)

373 Dick- I know this is a difficult concept for you so let me try to explain using small words. I'm not comparing Romney to Reagan. I'm comparing the irrational nonsense some of you spew about what conservatism mean while siting Reagan as you conservative hero. Reagan did many things that would put him well outside the boundaries of conservatism by the way some of you define it today including raising taxes, supporting cap and trade legislation, gun control, stimulus spending and on and on. Stating you support conservative principles when they seem to shift in the wind depending on who you choose to support makes those principles meaningless.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2011 12:49 PM (TMB3S)

374 I do not believe anything in the MFM until there are enough facts.  Full stop.  Especially when it comes to republicans and their protection of OdipO.

If actual facts come about, fine, but I am not throwing the guy overboard before then based on rumours.  We just recently had a story of how the ny times works by James O'Keefe.  Why should Cain have to prove innocence, screw that.  Before you answer because the media will make him, I still say screw that.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at October 31, 2011 12:49 PM (JYheX)

375 BTW if say Fox news ran unsubstantiated sexual advances smear story against a black democrat.... It would be SCARY BLACK MAN JIM CROW RACE RACE RACE on every leftist fraud rags headline.

Posted by: Shiggz undecided - weighing pros-cons-balls at October 31, 2011 12:49 PM (I9fXA)

376 I really don't think you guys have to argue about these two cases. Either there will be more, or this is it. If this is it, fine, no problem.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 12:49 PM (nj1bB)

377 Posted by: mama winger at October 31, 2011 05:47 PM (R9bQ9) THIS x 10,000 G-d bless you and your son.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 12:50 PM (UlUS4)

378 Yeah, but you're white, not some uppity buck No white politicians have had same accusations? Did McCain pay anyone off when it was claimed he fucked a staffer? Or did he call bullshit? When your balls are smaller than Maverick's, it's time to go away.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at October 31, 2011 12:50 PM (vzFJV)

379 Posted by: DrewM. at October 31, 2011 05:42 PM (plesI)

That "sure," was not snark. I am agreeing with you.

I realize that it happens so rarely around here that you don't recognize when one of the commenters actually supports your position.

DrewM, do I really have to put a smiley face emoticon at the end of this?

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJconservative) at October 31, 2011 12:50 PM (3vSLn)

380  Cains gone

Posted by: Palin Lover at October 31, 2011 05:42 PM (dBxzn)

 

Cain will be fine.  He'll be made or broken on policy, not rumors of SH.  Many Americans, including myself, are getting really tired of the MFM's tricks of personal destruction.  And this is all it is, because the left doesn't have anything Americans want.

Posted by: Soona - Mayan liaison at October 31, 2011 12:50 PM (coN0Z)

381 McScribbler, I guess Cain is in on the conspiracy, now, in as much as he confesses the existence of two women and two checks.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 12:50 PM (nj1bB)

382 Thank you J. J. Sefton.  God has, indeed.  Two tours, not a scratch on him.  Third time around, I'm putting him in the same Hands.

Posted by: mama winger at October 31, 2011 12:51 PM (R9bQ9)

383 Uh, they did put their names to it. That's how the Restaurant Association KNEW WHOSE NAMES TO WRITE THE CHECKS OUT TO.

But let's just keep pretending these are some phantoms dreamed up entirely by Politico. Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 05:48 PM

Assumptions.

If you feel the need to destroy Cain's public career, I still believe names and details must be printed.

It's shitty and un-American to throw anyone to the wolves based on innuendo, hearsay and "undisclosed sources."

Posted by: MrScribbler at October 31, 2011 12:51 PM (YjjrR)

384 (((((mamawinger))))))))

Posted by: phoenixgirl at October 31, 2011 12:52 PM (Yc68p)

385 Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 05:49 PM (nj1bB) There may very well be more, Ace. But unless there is some major smoking gun, then all the MFMers have is the gesture, which they will beat to death until they see movement in the polls in favor of Romney.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 12:52 PM (UlUS4)

386

Caine should tell the Rest. Assoc to dig up the legal files with the names of his accusers. Let the media dissect their stories. Cain needs to get the truth out and be done with it. 

Posted by: snowcrash at October 31, 2011 12:52 PM (w3YD7)

387 "If you just believe hard enough it will all go away."

I think Ace is ready to convert, like the little green football guy. Reality has finally reared its ugly head.

Posted by: Palin Lover at October 31, 2011 12:53 PM (dBxzn)

388 >>>If you feel the need to destroy Cain's public career, I still believe names and details must be printed. Oh, I'm destroying his public career? Oh okay.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 12:53 PM (nj1bB)

389 361 You know how much I care whether Herman Cain made suggestive remarks to women years ago? 

Zip. Zero. Nada.

I had a kid fly out on his third deployment last night.  He has a Son of a Bitch for a CIC who would sell out the troops for  a deep fried Twinkie on a Stick.   All I care about is getting that commie son of a bitch out of office.  All. I. Care. About.

For the love of all that is good and holy would you please stop killing all our candidates on the basis of rumors and speculation.

I'm sorry.  I am just exhausted by all the stupid.

Posted by: mama winger at October 31, 2011 05:47 PM (R9bQ9)

THREAD WINNER

But the muslim call to prayer is the most beautiful sound in the world.  And he's the only thing between you and the pitchforks.

Mutherfuckers.

Posted by: Truman North swoops in, calls "thread winner," and leaves to take his kids trick or treating at October 31, 2011 12:53 PM (I2LwF)

390
Caine should tell the Rest. Assoc to dig up the legal files with the names of his accusers.

Posted by: snowcrash at October 31, 2011 05:52 PM (w3YD7)

I would suggest the documents are sealed.

Posted by: Doctor Fish at October 31, 2011 12:53 PM (Lt/Za)

391 it does highlight something in our legal system, we need loser pays.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at October 31, 2011 12:53 PM (JYheX)

392 Hey there phoenixgirl

Posted by: mama winger at October 31, 2011 12:54 PM (R9bQ9)

393 >>>It must be difficult to talk with Romney's cock in your mouth you fuckheaded retard.

Shouldn't you go back about how you want to put all Mormons into death camps or something?  That's more your bailiwick, really.

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 31, 2011 12:54 PM (hIWe1)

394 315 Posted by: buzzion at October 31, 2011 05:20 PM

So you prefer that we give credence to unnamed "plugged in" people, who can say any friggin' thing they want to say without being held accountable?

If Ace is using this "sources" shit to pile more dung on Cain's head, the spreaders-of-rumors need to be outed.

I guess taking responsibility is an outdated concept....

Posted by: MrScribbler at October 31, 2011 05:36 PM (YjjrR)

Uh why?  Its not like ace wrote a post on this 30 days ago when he first heard about this?  Were you demanding Ace tell you who told him Perry would be entering the presidential race before it was announce?  Afterall they were unnamed "plugged in" people as well.  How is it piling on more  by ace saying "yeah I've heard about this a few weeks ago."  Because he indicates there might be more? 

As for the spreaders-of-rumors, I believe their website is politico.com

Posted by: buzzion at October 31, 2011 12:54 PM (GULKT)

395

Uh, they did put their names to it.

What are their names?

Posted by: spongeworthy at October 31, 2011 12:54 PM (puy4B)

396 In that case, you are making assumptions, Ace. Guesses. Projections. You may even be wishcasting, I don't know He's reporting what is public record and what Cain himself has publicly stated, ya fuckin' pissy simpleton. Where did ace draw a conclusion from what is publicly available? Fuck, you're annoying.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at October 31, 2011 12:54 PM (vzFJV)

397 I still don't know what to think about Herman Cain. His biography is impressive. Turned around two companies, and co-workers have nothing but great things to say...yet, he often sounds incompetent when talking about policy....yet, guys that turn around failing companies are usually really smart. Who knows about the latest stuff...

Posted by: Spike at October 31, 2011 12:55 PM (g/arr)

398 Well, looks like time to pass out the goodies. Got to go folks.

Posted by: Vic at October 31, 2011 12:55 PM (YdQQY)

399 Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 05:53 PM (nj1bB)

Remember to use your power wisely and only for good.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJconservative) at October 31, 2011 12:55 PM (3vSLn)

400 >>>They are even giving this story air time on the local news stations around here in SC. Of course they are all owned and operated by Democrats so it is no wonder. They are completely in the tank for Obama and Romney.

Yeah, not like's major national news or anything.  In case you hadn't noticed, Herman Cain is currently the GOP frontrunner.  This is a big fucking deal, not a conspiracy against your personal political predilections.

Jesus catfucking Christ.

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 31, 2011 12:55 PM (hIWe1)

401

You know, mama winger, when you sit at the keyboard like that your genitals are at the same height as my face and that makes me very uncomfortable.

Why are you crawling about on all fours in mama winger's office?

Posted by: fluffy at October 31, 2011 12:56 PM (4pSIn)

402 Getting dusky here in Central NC, 2 big bags of mixed candy by the door, awaiting the trickle of treat-or-treaters I expect to start soon. Last year it was about this time that the little ones started showing up. They'll get a good haul, mini-Butterfingers, Nestle Crunch, Nerds, Laffy Taffy, Sweet Tarts, a few other standards.

Posted by: Lincolntf at October 31, 2011 12:56 PM (Qjh0I)

403 This is why we can't have anything nice

Posted by: phoenixgirl at October 31, 2011 12:56 PM (Yc68p)

404

excuse me but for the record...

US PALINISTAS DON'T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT CAIN, PERRY, OR THAT JAGOFF ROMNEY!!!!

we are still hoping she changes her mind and runs

Posted by: navycopjoe getting ready to pawn on BF3 at October 31, 2011 12:56 PM (R7NIt)

405 Meanwhile, for what it's worth, Rasmussen has Perry beating SCOAMF in Wisconsin of all places.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 12:56 PM (UlUS4)

406

379....Either there will be more, or this is it.

If this is it, fine, no problem.

Ace, I think there will be more.

Why? Because corporations have small armies of corporate lawyers whose job it is to make things go away and stay out of the public eye....at that time. But would not stand up to the vetting that goes on during a presidential campaign.

Also, because there are a lot of things that happen in Business that are okay in Businness....but they are not okay in politics.

Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at October 31, 2011 12:57 PM (XkwIi)

407 I have to tell you I'm not doing that myself because I suspect that whatever spin is offered is going to look rather dumb rather quickly.

Probably true to point, and ultimately it is the responsibility of HC to respond and "spin" this if spinning can be done. We'll likely know within a week what the accusations were.

Hey dude maybe if you just HOPE REALLY HARD this will go away!!!

I'm just hoping really hard that Romney doesn't get the nom, and this isn't helping. If this does turn out to be a real skeleton in the closet, maybe I can convince some folks Perry is worth another look. But there isn't enough evidence yet to toss him. But Herman, if their is something you haven't yet told us, be prepared to be hurled far.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at October 31, 2011 12:58 PM (0q2P7)

408 403 Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 05:53 PM (nj1bB)

Remember to use your power wisely and only for good.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJconservative) at October 31, 2011 05:55 PM (3vSLn)

Or else Dum Dum might cry.

Posted by: buzzion at October 31, 2011 12:58 PM (GULKT)

409 Halloween trick for treat, Betty Boop style. "Good Night, Betty."

Posted by: Dollar Value at October 31, 2011 12:58 PM (lpWVn)

410

Okay.  Let me go at this from another angle.

Why is it that we're considering the validity of these claims?  Why are we not immediately finding these women and destroying them forever?  And making sure Politico goes out of business?  And the reporters who worked on this story are unable to purchase a haircut from a public hairdresser within 125 miles of Washington, DC?  That's how our enemy rolls.  That's what they do.  That's how they hold on to their political territory.  They go to FUCKING WAR on this shit.

We've stopped to put our guy on trial based on a fucking hit piece from the enemy!

Dude.  That's how this war is fought.  That's the fucking scorched earth we need to be laying down from moment one:  kill the bunny.  Don't play nice, don't play fair.  Kill.  The.  Bunny.

Who are these women?  What skeletons have they got?  Who are these "journalists"?  Why are they not in front of Congress right the fuck now for this fucking loose shit?

We are so fucking dead already.  Either we pull our heads out of our ass and make the other rat bastards die for their country... Or else we're already fucking toast in the general.

Posted by: Truman North at October 31, 2011 12:58 PM (I2LwF)

411 This thread is now threadbare. I think they are trying to lynch Cain with something that is two yawns and a sigh above an eyebrow-raise. If he's smart, he'll pull all the files out and show the world what happened an silence these bastards. Now. Let us save the country.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 12:59 PM (UlUS4)

412 I wished away global warming and the science was settled!

Posted by: phoenixgirl at October 31, 2011 12:59 PM (Yc68p)

413

Musty, wet pelts
Glistening in the blue.

Posted by: garrett at October 31, 2011 12:59 PM (5eVSI)

414 I'm with mama winger.   And if it's true, vive le Cain..

( I  never wanted Clinton impeached either. )


Posted by: jeanne! at October 31, 2011 12:59 PM (GdalM)

415 409 Meanwhile, for what it's worth, Rasmussen has Perry beating SCOAMF in Wisconsin of all places. Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 05:56 PM **** Man I've seen people refer to that all day... I wish Rasmussen didn't make you pay to see his internals.

Posted by: tasker at October 31, 2011 12:59 PM (rJVPU)

416
You do know that Politico went to the campaign for comment TEN DAYS ago, right?

Let's not pretend the first Cain heard of this was late last night or early this morning. He's had more than a week to jog his memory or get any records he needs.

Posted by: DrewM. at October 31, 2011 05:40 PM (plesI)

I did not know that.

Responding to cases where parties vowed silence and then reneged upon their vows to a major news organization is rather difficult.

Shooting from the hip in such circumstances is like letting a five year-old stretch out the fly paper (not like you or any of your city brethren like Dick Nixon could understand the analogy).

Cain did it right -- got the decades-old accusations -- reviewed them -- and properly dismissed them as sour grapes.

Live with it.

Posted by: Ed Anger - Certified Kos Kid at October 31, 2011 01:00 PM (7+pP9)

417 11 Guys like Karl Rove take a lot of abuse on this site, despite having been heroes just a few years before (Rove, you magnificent bastard).  Isn't it possible that his aversion to people like Perry and Cain doesn't stem from  their politics  or his desire to maintain power and influence, but from his knowledge of how risky it is to run untested, unvetted, and often undisciplined people as the face of the party?  IOW, he is more risk-averse because he knows the costs of choosing poorly. 

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 04:35 PM (6TB1Z)

I agree - Bush did a bang-up job of shrinking the Federal Government and removing it's influence in our daily lives.


Posted by: blindside at October 31, 2011 01:00 PM (3Uns6)

418 Rasmussen is some kind of internal polling slut.

Posted by: tasker at October 31, 2011 01:00 PM (rJVPU)

419 To be fair they just played the game by addressing it with me because of a complaint that was made. Thanks, polynikes, but it stopped bothering me almost immediately. First, it taught me that I needed to stay technical and shun the management track, leading me to go the self-employment route a few years later. Second, the accuser pulled the same stunt a few more times with the same company and was eventually let go. About three years later (I was with another company and about to go independent), one of my friends from that first company called to tell me that the accuser was found dead of gunshot wounds at a crime scene in PG county, Maryland. I cannot find a reference to it on the web. I told my friend, "Damn. This probably isn't right, but I feel nothing." His answer: Judging by folks around here, you aren't the only one. A really funny thing was that this guy was effeminate and wore way too much Brut. A few of the other non-caucasian employees used to call him "brutal" or "smellvin" as a play on his name. This was not behind his back.

Posted by: FRONT TOWARD LEFT at October 31, 2011 01:00 PM (p7SSh)

420 A hand to the chin before today: nothing whatsover.

A hand to the chin today and forever after: quintessential sexual harassment.

It's macaca 2.0.

Posted by: Kensington at October 31, 2011 01:00 PM (znT2j)

421 >>>Caine should tell the Rest. Assoc to dig up the legal files with the names of his accusers. exactly, he should definitely do exactly that, if he is a wronged man.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 01:00 PM (nj1bB)

422 This will be an interesting week.  IF this is true then he is toast.  If not then he has to come out loud and clear denying it like he did today.  Go on offense.  If he was stupid enough to think this wouldn't come out then well...he's stupid.  Don't get me wrong, I like the guy but don't step on your dick (no pun intended.)

Posted by: mpfs at October 31, 2011 01:00 PM (iYbLN)

423

we are still hoping she changes her mind and runs

 

I'd settle for a few jumping jacks in a sports bra.

 

 

Posted by: garrett at October 31, 2011 01:01 PM (5eVSI)

424 So they paid one woman off because of the incident Cain described?  What about the other one?  And what Cain described seemed justifiable to someone to warrant a 5 figure payoff?  This doesn't add up so far.

Posted by: Havedash at October 31, 2011 01:01 PM (JfvbF)

425 Might as well turn on Levin and listen to his head explode over this.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 01:01 PM (UlUS4)

426

416  oh yeah?

i wished away global warming and right now it's warm and sunny, around 85 degrees!!

you want more down-twinkles?  yeah, thats what i thought

Posted by: navycopjoe getting ready to pawn on BF3 at October 31, 2011 01:01 PM (R7NIt)

427 I am shocked at how cavalierly all of you dismiss what very probably was a vicious assault on two women. It happened to me once and I will never, ever get over the fear and shock of being lusted after by my boss. I knew that he wanted me in that way, and I was powerless to do anything about it. All of you are horrible for not defending your sisters in need.

Posted by: A Former Cain Girl at October 31, 2011 01:01 PM (KaAC5)

428 @Mamma winger its sad that those least responsible usually suffer the most.  I hope the military knows which side of this culture war has their backs.  Hell at this point I would be willing to vote for anyone.

Please everyone remember, with how executive power now is, the Presidents czars and judges will matter as much or more then who gets elected.  If the Romney people want to assuage the base they could start by reassuring us through on what to expect of these appointees.

Honestly Perry and Romney appointees are going to be as similar as Clintons appointees would have been to Obamas.  90%+.  Most of Obamas appointees were all Clinton retreads anyway.  Seriously a lot of Bush retreads are going to reappear in the next admin regardless of if its Palin-Romney.  That's just the reality of DC Politics.  Only so many Robert Gates,  Petraus, Tenet types.  Just give that a good long think and stop hyperventilating.

Posted by: Shiggz undecided - weighing pros-cons-balls at October 31, 2011 01:02 PM (I9fXA)

429 It's macaca 2.0. Posted by: Kensington at October 31, 2011 06:00 PM (znT2j) Isn't Daniel Macaca a Hawaiian senator? Sheesh! (sarc)

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 01:02 PM (UlUS4)

430 >>>Why is it that we're considering the validity of these claims? Why are we not immediately finding these women and destroying them forever? Because 1, I don't love Cain and 2, I don't, like you, have a perfect certitude that these are lying harlots who deserve to be destroyed?

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 01:02 PM (nj1bB)

431 So the Cain campaign's response has gone from "No comment" to "I don't remember, I was only the CEO" to "Totally baseless" to "But this might be the gesture they're talking about."

This is a weak attempt at a smear, but astonishingly, once again there is more foolishness and unprofessionalism from the Cain campaign.

 Still not ready for prime time.

Posted by: Arms Merchant at October 31, 2011 01:02 PM (hW3KZ)

432 BTW, in the 90s everyone was suing for sexual harassment. It was just like a full time job for some women.  They were the group that was perpetually offended by everything.

Posted by: mpfs at October 31, 2011 01:02 PM (iYbLN)

433

427  I'd settle for a few jumping jacks in a sports bra.

and to my bunk i go...

Posted by: navycopjoe getting ready to pawn on BF3 at October 31, 2011 01:02 PM (R7NIt)

434 vc f

(Makes more sense than 99.44% of you)

Posted by: Ed Anger's Cat at October 31, 2011 01:03 PM (7+pP9)

435 431 I am shocked at how cavalierly all of you dismiss what very probably was a vicious assault on two women. It happened to me once and I will never, ever get over the fear and shock of being lusted after by my boss. I knew that he wanted me in that way, and I was powerless to do anything about it. All of you are horrible for not defending your sisters in need.
Posted by: A Former Cain Girl at October 31, 2011 06:01 PM (KaAC5)

Uh huh.

Now show us your tits, or GTFO.

Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at October 31, 2011 01:03 PM (1linH)

436 I wish Rasmussen didn't make you pay to see his internals.

Posted by: tasker at October 31, 2011 05:59 PM (rJVPU)

I'll show you mine for free!

Posted by: Lindsey Lohan at October 31, 2011 01:03 PM (3vSLn)

437 Posted by: garrett at October 31, 2011 05:59 PM (5eVSI) I will CUT A MOTHERFUCKER If you start that crunchy fig bullshit.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at October 31, 2011 01:04 PM (0yt4x)

438 Better to get this out now than as an October '12 surprise. Someone out there has to be dying to leak the names of the accusers. Information wants to be free blah blah blah. 

Posted by: snowcrash at October 31, 2011 01:04 PM (w3YD7)

439 >>>If you feel the need to destroy Cain's public career, I still believe names and details must be printed.


Journalistic sources, where secret don't appear in print despite what your "you have a right to face your accuser" ideas may be. Cain has a choice, if he is pissed about the facts as reported he can sue for Libel, and if the truth isn't there then he can compel revealing the sources. That's his remedy.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at October 31, 2011 01:04 PM (0q2P7)

440 Pizza Pizza, toots.

Posted by: FlaviusJulius at October 31, 2011 01:04 PM (ieDPL)

441

@381: "No white politicians have had same accusations?"

We were merely stating that you would embarass the GOP less because you are white, not an *obvious Uncle Tom token who is being supported by racists* black guy.  In our unbiased eyes, however, you are both evil, corrupt, idiot counter-revolutionaries who are overdue for an appointment with Mme. Guillotine.  We regret any error in comprehension on your part.

Posted by: The MSM at October 31, 2011 01:04 PM (xy9wk)

442 439  awesome right there

Posted by: navycopjoe getting ready to pawn on BF3 at October 31, 2011 01:04 PM (R7NIt)

443 Going to war and DESTROYING people we aren't even sure are lying?!?!? What the Eff? What the eff? I see I was wrong to criticize the left. What we were meant to be doing was emulating them, it seems.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 01:04 PM (nj1bB)

444 Posted by: Truman North at October 31, 2011 05:58 PM (I2LwF)

Well, first of all we don't know what he did or didn't do. What if he did something worse than a misunderstood gesture? He may not have but we don't know, do we?

Why would we want to destroy women who may actually have been victimized?

How about we wait for some facts before we destroy people? Liberals don't do that but we're better than them. I'd like to keep it that way.

As for Politico...knock yourself out. They are scum.

And Cain isn't "our guy". He might be your guy but that's not the same. I don't want Cain to be the nominee but I want him to lose based on his failings, not a trumped up scandal (if that's what this is) but that doesn't mean we all have to run to the battlements without knowing all the facts. And given Cain's already changing stories, I'm not interested in vouching for the guy until we know the whole deal.

YMMV.

Posted by: DrewM. at October 31, 2011 01:05 PM (plesI)

445 88 here navyjoe I'm freezing

Posted by: phoenixgirl at October 31, 2011 01:05 PM (Yc68p)

446

I will CUT A MOTHERFUCKER If you start that crunchy fig bullshit.

You don't find poetry relaxing, do you?

Posted by: garrett at October 31, 2011 01:06 PM (5eVSI)

447 Okay, here is what irks me.  It won't go away, ever until next Nov.  Not for Cain, not for Perry, or Romney, or Newt or Bachmann.  The MFM is evil, I will not help them out and I will call them liars if they print the words "the", "and" or "a".  They are evil incarnate. There will be false accusations and rumors of every repub candidate, prez, vp, senate, rep, mayor, guv, dogcatcher.  Some may turn out to be true, but 99.9% will not.  They will turn every innocent phrase, every mis-step, every sibling, every child, every wife into an attack.  They are the left most wing of the dem party.  They are evil.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at October 31, 2011 01:06 PM (JYheX)

448 Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 06:02 PM (nj1bB) Here's where I'm getting a bit perturbed. A man has been accused in public and, whatever you think of the explanation and how it was explained, explained it and denied that it was harassment. So, where do we go from here? Shouldn't the accusers come forward, for if they don't then it's just unnamed sources and we only get one side of the story. And for all intents and purposes, the MFM will not be mollified. Cain I think has to open the files, unless the settlement stipulates that he must remain silent? I hate this shit.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 01:06 PM (UlUS4)

449 When I said I was unaware of any settlements I thought the reporter was asking me if I ever played Settlers of Catan.

Posted by: Herman Cain for America at October 31, 2011 01:06 PM (Jl3Mu)

450 Well shit-twinkles, what next?

Posted by: mpfs at October 31, 2011 01:07 PM (iYbLN)

451 I'll show you mine for free! Listen, Lindsey I hear your crotch is too firey. At leas that's what Paris Hilton says.

Posted by: tasker at October 31, 2011 01:07 PM (rJVPU)

452 445 Pizza Pizza, toots. Posted by: FlaviusJulius at October 31, 2011 06:04 PM (ieDPL) THREAD WINNER, in the comedy category. (still chuckling)

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 01:08 PM (UlUS4)

453 Responding to cases where parties vowed silence and then reneged upon their vows to a major news organization is rather difficult.
Posted by: Ed Anger - Certified Kos Kid at October 31, 2011 06:00 PM (7+pP9)

We don't know who leaked it. It could have been the women, it could have been someone at the association who doesn't like Cain.

There's a lot we don't know so running off half cocked isn't a great plan.

Cain did it right -- got the decades-old accusations -- reviewed them -- and properly dismissed them as sour grapes.

You don't know that's what happened, do you? And again, why wait till this afternoon to review the accusations when you didn't get around to doing it in the last 10 days?

Posted by: DrewM. at October 31, 2011 01:08 PM (plesI)

454 I don't care if the man went to work every third Tuesday wearing his maiden aunt's pantyhose. Name one man on this blog who hasn't.

Posted by: mama winger at October 31, 2011 01:08 PM (R9bQ9)

455 Seems like a hit piece...  But, sure, I guess we should continue carrying the water for the Left.  We're hand-wringing over ancient allegations and a "settlement" that sounds more like "severance".

I remember a time when the Left had their Chief Executive fellated in the Oval Office by an intern.  Good times...  Good times...

Posted by: Brock O'Bama at October 31, 2011 01:08 PM (n1JN0)

456

exactly, he should definitely do exactly that,

Any lawyers still here? Wouldn't Cain be held in contempt for opening a sealed file?

Just because one party seemingly violates the confidentiality clause does not enable the other to do so.

Posted by: spongeworthy at October 31, 2011 01:08 PM (puy4B)

457

Ace and Allah are in a feeding frenzy, to them this is just another opportunity to take out someone they personally don't want to get the nomination, more than happy to play along with the progressive chorus.... truth be damned.

 

Posted by: shoey at October 31, 2011 01:08 PM (Y7jCH)

458 unless the settlement stipulates that he must remain silent? Well haven't the "unnamed" sources breeched that-*if* it was part of the settlement?

Posted by: tasker at October 31, 2011 01:09 PM (rJVPU)

459  BTW, in the 90s everyone was suing for sexual harassment. It was just like a full time job for some women.  They were the group that was perpetually offended by everything.

Posted by: mpfs at October 31, 2011 06:02 PM (iYbLN)

 

And from my own experience and observation, they still are. 

Posted by: Soona - Mayan liaison at October 31, 2011 01:09 PM (coN0Z)

460 And, guys, wean this term from your lexicon in work situations:

"I turned it over to my general counsel and one of the ladies that worked for me, the woman in charge of human resources."

Posted by: Y-not at October 31, 2011 04:43 PM (5H6zj)

I agree. Most women today are NOT 'ladies'.

Posted by: blindside at October 31, 2011 01:10 PM (3Uns6)

461 BTW WTF is Ace's beef with Cain?  I must have missed something in all the IH8CAIN posts...

Posted by: Brock O'Bama at October 31, 2011 01:11 PM (n1JN0)

462

God knows what this thread is about by this point, but consider a stupid auto accident.  Other party (not my insured) sues for some not particularly serious injury.  Claims department gives her $75,000 to shut up and go away.  I said, what on earth are you doing?  The response was, "the maximum damage award in the court she filed suit in is $75,000.  If we fight it, we will have to pay some damages plus defense costs which is likely to end up being more than $75,000."  So there's a five figure settlement that was completely outrageous.

An insurance company would have settled these claims as fast as they could just to make them go away cheap.  Not everyone bought coverage for sexual harassment back when this happened to Mr. Cain, but it's highly likely that a board of directors would think in this case just like an insurance company since any uninsured damages are going to come straight out of the organization's budget.  Settle it, settle it now, make it disappear for as little as possible.

Where there's smoke, there could be fire.  It could be a 100,000 acre forest fire or it could be a Bic lighter.

Posted by: Tonestaple at October 31, 2011 01:11 PM (V+wqJ)

463 'Lady' is my default greeting for the wimmins as I am terrible with names.

Posted by: garrett at October 31, 2011 01:12 PM (5eVSI)

464 Well haven't the "unnamed" sources breeched that-*if* it was part of the settlement?

I've seen lots of confidentiality clauses in settlement agreements and I've never seen one that prohibits any mention that a settlement occurred.  Often the parties are given some superficial spiel they can say about the litigation being resolved "to the mutual consent of the parties" or blather like that.

Anyway, the fact of a dismissal of a lawsuit is of public record, and a dismissal strongly implies that a settlement was reached.

Posted by: al-Cicero, Tea Party Jihadist at October 31, 2011 01:13 PM (QKKT0)

465 The moral to this sordid mess is that if you ever get accused of sexual harrassment and you didn't do it, fight it. Don't settle.

Posted by: robtr at October 31, 2011 01:13 PM (MtwBb)

466

...if he is pissed about the facts as reported he can sue for Libel, and if the truth isn't there then he can compel revealing the sources. That's his remedy.

I'm pretty sure he can go back to the judge who signed off on this settlement and have his accusers held in contempt for violating the confidintiality clause, or at least try.

I have actually forgotten how this works. It has been a long time since I was accused of SH.

Posted by: spongeworthy at October 31, 2011 01:13 PM (puy4B)

467 Democrat Punishment of Black Conservative Herman Cain for Daring to Run for POTUS Enters Second Day

Posted by: sifty at October 31, 2011 01:13 PM (4CSeG)

468 I don't remember seeing or hearing about Herman Cain's wife. Odd that.

Posted by: Barbarian at October 31, 2011 01:13 PM (EL+OC)

469 BTW WTF is Ace's beef with Cain?

He's an unprepared amateur who acts like he can't be bothered with the troublesome tasks of getting prepared, even after he gets a good chunk of support. QED Not being ready to respond to allegations of harassment. C'mon that's politikin 101.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at October 31, 2011 01:13 PM (0q2P7)

470 467 BTW WTF is Ace's beef with Cain? I must have missed something in all the IH8CAIN posts...

Posted by: Brock O'Bama at October 31, 2011 06:11 PM (n1JN0)

Gaffe prone. Doesn't agree with 9-9-9 plan.  I don't think he really cares for Cain not knowing some of even the most basic things presidential candidates are asked.  So he doesn't consider him to be a serious candidate.

Posted by: buzzion at October 31, 2011 01:14 PM (GULKT)

471 200 and others:

My experience with sexual harassment claims is in my capacity as a mid-level sales manager for a large medical device manufacturer.

Let me tell you in no uncertain terms that guilt or innocence in these matters has no bearing on what action the corporation ultimately decides to take.  The guiding principle in those decisions is very simple:  what a jury might conceivably make of the claim.

Have no illusions either about the presumption of sanity among jurors.  Without exception, damage control attorneys in these situations assume an irrational jury, likely to take sympathy on a pathetic crying woman over a big impersonal corporation.  "That company has PLENTY of money" will probably be the jury's point of view, regardless of the merits of the complaint.  Make no mistake:  most companies pay very close attention to decisions such as was made in the OJ Simpson murder trial.

While I have not myself been accused, I have been involved in the investigation of several of my direct reports.  In all cases, the claims were patently obvious extortion attempts (made by non-performing sales people), and in every case my company chose to pay them to go away.

Posted by: Wodeshed at October 31, 2011 01:14 PM (LEcV+)

472  unless the settlement stipulates that he must remain silent?

Well haven't the "unnamed" sources breeched that-*if* it was part of the settlement?

Posted by: tasker at October 31, 2011 06:09 PM (rJVPU)

 

It's sort of like national security classified information.  Even if you read about it in the newspaper, it doesn't give you permission to discuss it with the general public.

Posted by: Soona - Mayan liaison at October 31, 2011 01:14 PM (coN0Z)

473 461....Any lawyers still here? Wouldn't Cain be held in contempt for opening a sealed file?

Just because one party seemingly violates the confidentiality clause does not enable the other to do so.

It would depend on what was set forth in the settlement document. ....I am not aware of any 'one size fits all' type of law pertaining to confidentiality. It is whatever is agreed upon and put in the closing documents.

I am not a lawyer though. But I have read a lot of contracts with differently worded clauses in them covering confidentiality.

Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at October 31, 2011 01:14 PM (XkwIi)

474 I meant,

"to the mutual consent satisfaction of the parties" or blather like that.

Posted by: al-Cicero, Tea Party Jihadist at October 31, 2011 01:14 PM (QKKT0)

475 Leftist hit piece, from Politico, a leftist house organ. No more than that.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 01:15 PM (UlUS4)

476 Heeeeyyyy Lady?!!!

Posted by: Jerry Lewis at October 31, 2011 01:15 PM (JYheX)

477 469 'Lady' is my default greeting for the wimmins as I am terrible with names.

Posted by: garrett at October 31, 2011 06:12 PM (5eVSI)

What's up Jerry Lewis?

Posted by: buzzion at October 31, 2011 01:15 PM (GULKT)

478 >>>Why is it that we're considering the validity of these claims?  Why are we not immediately finding these women and destroying them forever?

I seriously hope this is parody.  Because if you actually think this is what we should be doing, irrespective of the truth of these claims then -- no kidding -- your political obsessions have authentically turned you into an amoral monster.

And no, that's not too harsh, because you specifically said you didn't care whether the allegations were true or not -- even if they were, we should still find these women and  "destroy them forever."  For what reason?  For getting sexually harassed by Herman Cain a decade ago and then being unfortunate enough to get caught in the crossfire when someone else (not them, remember) brings it up during a Presidential campaign much later?

Seriously: tell me you were kidding, otherwise what kind of asshole are you?

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 31, 2011 01:16 PM (hIWe1)

479 The more folks screw with Cain, the more I like him. Weird. Given what we have now in the WH, I can forgive the Republican nominee A LOT. In other words, I don't care if he was getting a few slices on the side.

Posted by: USA at October 31, 2011 01:16 PM (6Cjut)

480 The moral to this sordid mess is that if you ever get accused of sexual harrassment and you didn't do it, fight it. Don't settle.

The company that actually got sued will settle it for you, no choice.

Posted by: Jerry Lewis at October 31, 2011 01:17 PM (JYheX)

481 So he doesn't consider him to be a serious candidate. Posted by: buzzion at October 31, 2011 06:14 PM (GULKT) Well, considering his standing so far in the polls and his general appeal, I would say that, if not a serious candidate, he's a serious contender.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 01:17 PM (UlUS4)

482

What's up Jerry Lewis?

 

Not me...I just call them cuz.

Posted by: Jerry Lee Lewis at October 31, 2011 01:17 PM (5eVSI)

483

Ace and Allah are in a feeding frenzy, to them this is just another opportunity to take out someone they personally don't want to get the nomination, more than happy to play along with the progressive chorus.... truth be damned.

 

Posted by: shoey at October 31, 2011 06:08 PM (Y7jCH)

You got dat right.

Posted by: Ed Anger's Cat at October 31, 2011 01:18 PM (7+pP9)

484

I'm pretty sure he can go back to the judge who signed off on this settlement and have his accusers held in contempt for violating the confidintiality clause, or at least try.

I have actually forgotten how this works. It has been a long time since I was accused of SH.

Posted by: spongeworthy at October 31, 2011 06:13 PM (puy4B)

Wouldn't you need evidence that it was one or both of the women that leaked this story?  What if it was someone else that was involved and really doesn't like Cain?  You would need to get Politico to reveal their sources to the judge before you could go after them?  I mean wouldn't it be really shitty to release these women's names and then have it revealed that niether were the source?

Posted by: buzzion at October 31, 2011 01:19 PM (GULKT)

485 486

Dead right.

Posted by: Wodeshed at October 31, 2011 01:19 PM (LEcV+)

486 Ace says: it's not nearly as kooky seeming as I first thought. Oh. Not *nearly* as kooky seeming as you first thought? So what are you thinking now? That it is: - Only somewhat kooky seeming? - Or still very kooky seeming, just not as hyperbolically kooky-seeming? - Or merely kind of kooky seeming? Your slip is still showing.

Posted by: Mike Devx at October 31, 2011 01:19 PM (n3Eag)

487

Did Cain's camp know about this story 10 days ago?

If so, why were they not prepped to go on offense and explain this immediately? 

Why is Cain changing his story within the scope of hours?  He didn't know about any settlement this morning, then told Greta that he knew how much the accusers were asking for and how much they settled for?

He may be completely innocent, but he's sure not helping himself any.  Shouldn't he have learned to keep flammables away from pizza ovens?

 

Posted by: Havedash at October 31, 2011 01:19 PM (JfvbF)

488 Why is Cain changing his story within the scope of hours?

Because this is what he does well?

Posted by: Barbarian at October 31, 2011 01:20 PM (EL+OC)

489 It's probably a nuisance suit that Cain felt he should just settle quickly. That does not imply an admission of guilt. Ever wonder why trial lawyers are so fucking rich and powerful? Why don't the aggrieved parties come forward? If they are so cheesed off, then you'd think they'd make an appearance to rip Cain. Again, I call much ado about very very very little.

Posted by: J.J. Sefton at October 31, 2011 01:21 PM (UlUS4)

490 Any lawyers still here? Wouldn't Cain be held in contempt for opening a sealed file?

A court docket isn't sealed.  Individual documents can be sealed if the judge approves but the court records are generally supposed to be available to the public.  The idea is that there can be no Star Chambers-type proceedings and that kind of shit.

On talking about the settlement, there is no contempt exposure unless a stipulated injunction was entered as part of the settlement.  Which, I've never seen in my experience.  (I think there would be serious Prior Restraint issues when you're enjoining someone from talking about a certain topic.)

A breach of the confidentiality provision would be a mere breach of contract.

Posted by: al-Cicero, Tea Party Jihadist at October 31, 2011 01:21 PM (QKKT0)

491 I once told a woman at work, "Your breasts are as high as my wife's!," and held my hand first from my chest, then under her boobs. Was I wrong?

Posted by: CoolCzech at October 31, 2011 01:21 PM (niZvt)

492 488

What's up Jerry Lewis?

Not me...I just call them cuz.

Posted by: Jerry Lee Lewis at October 31, 2011 06:17 PM (5eVSI)

Jerry Lewis.  Not Jerry Lee Lewis.  You know, the guy that always does the Labor Day Telethon and is considered a comic genius in France.

Posted by: buzzion at October 31, 2011 01:22 PM (GULKT)

493 Cain now saying on PBS that he "doesn't recall" whether he asked a woman to come back to his hotel room with him, as per one of the apparent allegations.

Great.  "Doesn't recall?" 

Erm...is it so hard to say "HELL NO"?

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 31, 2011 01:23 PM (hIWe1)

494

and then being unfortunate enough to get caught in the crossfire when someone else (not them, remember) brings it up during a Presidential campaign much later.

How do you know they didn't come forward? Do you know this?

If they did, they can be held in contempt, I'm almost certain. If not, then they can certaily be sued for breach.

Sure, if someone dug up the file and sought them out, then they didn't come forward. But they cannot discuss the claims or terms of the settlement (unless the Association had some shit attorneys.)

Posted by: spongeworthy at October 31, 2011 01:23 PM (puy4B)

495 (Got that off of Ace's twitter feed, btw.)

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 31, 2011 01:23 PM (hIWe1)

496

@460: "I remember a time when the Left had their Chief Executive fellated in the Oval Office by an intern. "

Fuck you, pal.  I was an Associate Director in the White House Office of Public Engagement, not an intern!

Posted by: Kal Penn at October 31, 2011 01:23 PM (xy9wk)

497 I don't want Cain to be the nominee but I want him to lose based on his failings, not a trumped up scandal (if that's what this is) but that doesn't mean we all have to run to the battlements without knowing all the facts. And given Cain's already changing stories, I'm not interested in vouching for the guy until we know the whole deal.

YMMV.

Posted by: DrewM. at October 31, 2011 06:05 PM (plesI)

I call bullshit.

Posted by: Ed Anger's Cat at October 31, 2011 01:24 PM (7+pP9)

498 Gofddamn Amerikkka! I overheated my coffee.

Posted by: steevy at October 31, 2011 01:24 PM (fyOgS)

499
I really have no idea whether he was guilty or not.  I just know that in this day and age, a harassment claim is like a claim of molestation; it's a cloud that will follow you forever, regardless of your guilt or innocence.

I also believe that while there are many legitimate claims of harassment, there are probably many more invented ones made by cynical hypersensitive women who know how to work the system.

Posted by: Wodeshed at October 31, 2011 01:24 PM (LEcV+)

500 498 Yes.You should have cupped them and guessed her bra cup size.They like that.

Posted by: steevy at October 31, 2011 01:25 PM (fyOgS)

501

"I remember a time when the Left had their Chief Executive fellated in the Oval Office by an intern. "

 

I'm not a fucking intern!

...and I pitch.  I don't catch.

Posted by: Reggie Love at October 31, 2011 01:25 PM (5eVSI)

502

490...Wouldn't you need evidence that it was one or both of the women that leaked this story? What if it was someone else that was involved and really doesn't like Cain? You would need to get Politico to reveal their sources to the judge before you could go after them? I mean wouldn't it be really shitty to release these women's names and then have it revealed that niether were the source?

Buzzion,

Yeah, and we don't know yet if the "two women" were party to the same case, as in, were both there at the time of the alleged 'harrassment'....or if they were separate cases.

We don't know a lot of details yet.

But if they are not a part of the same case.....then, that would suggest that whoever leaked this had inside information about the legal files of the National Restaurant Assn. Which could be an SEIU source, since they hate Cain.

Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at October 31, 2011 01:26 PM (XkwIi)

503 .>.Not *nearly* as kooky seeming as you first thought? So what are you thinking now? That it is: - Only somewhat kooky seeming? - Or still very kooky seeming, just not as hyperbolically kooky-seeming? - Or merely kind of kooky seeming? Your slip is still showing. Yeah, you caught me, asshole. as I've said sixty three thousand fucking times, I'm not a practicing believing Christian and am in fact agnostic. So, shocker, not sharing your religion, I also don't share your religion. You caught me man! No go toddle off to some site where everyone believes exactly what you do so we don't have to get this fucking sneering conspiratorial bullshit from you. "Caught you thinking something DIFFERENT than me!" Yup, you caught me, man. I really do think you need to find someplace where all your little thoughts are universally shared, so you don't have that discomfiting sense that someone you know, even online, might disagree with you.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 01:26 PM (nj1bB)

504 I once banged my secretary in my office while on a conference call with my ex-fiance and her mother to plan our wedding.

Was I wrong?

#askpolitico

Posted by: sifty at October 31, 2011 01:26 PM (4CSeG)

505

Remember that part where Herman Cain said he was unaware of a settlement? As many of you are no doubt now aware:

“I do remember my general counsel saying we didn’t pay all of the money they demanded.” -- Herman Cain

... so that part is no longer operative.

Herman Cain, the (initially, until he got more information at the age of 70 during the middle of an election campaign) pro-choice, anti-US-Constitution candidate that you can trust.

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 01:27 PM (YiE0S)

506 If this story does turn out to be false then the left really isn't doing well with this list.

   The Ten Commandments
(Exodus 20:2-17 NKJV) 1 shall have no other gods before Me. 2 do not worship false idols
3 shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain,4 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
5 “Honor your father and your mother 6 “You shall not murder. 7 “You shall not commit adultery. 8 “You shall not steal. 9 “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. 10 “You shall not covet your neighbor's _____

Posted by: Shiggz undecided - weighing pros-cons-balls at October 31, 2011 01:28 PM (I9fXA)

507 ...and I pitch.  I don't catch.

Oh really?

Wikipedia:  He also played
wide receiver for the Duke football team on a football scholarship,

Posted by: Wodeshed at October 31, 2011 01:28 PM (LEcV+)

508 I have no idea or, frankly, could I care less. The salient issue, in the middle of the Great Depression II, and the urgent need to oust Obama, is, Just how hot were these women, and can we see pics?

Posted by: CoolCzech at October 31, 2011 01:29 PM (niZvt)

509 My bitch about this is that too many people are writing about this as though it were fact.  What's wrong with waiting until some actual "facts" emerge.  You know, any actual fact.  We know no more about what really happened, than before it came out in Politico.   

Posted by: Soona - Mayan liaison at October 31, 2011 01:29 PM (coN0Z)

510

471, robtr, the "accused" most likely has no say in the matter.  The employer, being the deep pocket, is who is actually sued.  The individual is just a bystander at worse, at best a witness.  The employer or the employer's insurance company is the one who makes all the decisions.  The accused person has no say at all.

I was sexually harrassed by a co-worker back before it was trendy, before the Clarence Thomas hearings.  I went to my boss and he went to the head of the office.  The head of the office had a little chat with the harasser who never bothered me again.  This is how it should work if it is a real complaint.  We don't know exactly what the chain of events was at the National Restaurant Assn but if the supposed victims went straight to an attorney, that tells me that they are damned liars who were in it for money.  If they went through appropriate channels first, there might be something that happened.  Whether or not it was sexual harassment, we'll probably never know.

Posted by: Tonestaple at October 31, 2011 01:29 PM (V+wqJ)

511

Posted by: Wodeshed at October 31, 2011 06:28 PM (LEcV+)

 

Oh, I'm a force to contend with in the slot and in the showers.

Posted by: Reggie Love at October 31, 2011 01:30 PM (5eVSI)

512 Posted by: mama winger at October 31, 2011 05:47 PM (R9bQ9)

--Amen

Posted by: logprof at October 31, 2011 01:30 PM (QaKuj)

513
You don't know that's what happened, do you? And again, why wait till this afternoon to review the accusations when you didn't get around to doing it in the last 10 days?

Posted by: DrewM. at October 31, 2011 06:08 PM (plesI)

You don't, either.

Lawyering takes time. Even dunces like you should understand that.

Posted by: Ed Anger's Cat at October 31, 2011 01:30 PM (7+pP9)

514

If this story does turn out to be false then the left really isn't doing well with this list.

   The Ten Commandments
(Exodus 20:2-17 NKJV) 1 shall have no other gods before Me. 2 do not worship false idols
3 shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain,4 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
5 “Honor your father and your mother 6 “You shall not murder. 7 “You shall not commit adultery. 8 “You shall not steal. 9 “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. 10 “You shall not covet your neighbor's _____

Posted by: Shiggz undecided - weighing pros-cons-balls at October 31, 2011 06:28 PM (I9fXA)

See, you are such a nut.

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 01:33 PM (YiE0S)

515 Posted by: Ed Anger's Cat at October 31, 2011 06:24 PM (7+pP9)

Care to elaborate?

Posted by: DrewM. at October 31, 2011 01:33 PM (plesI)

516

@515: "Oh really?

Wikipedia:  He also played
wide receiver for the Duke football team on a football scholarship"

That would tend to at least confirm that he couldn't catch; Duke being a national football powerhouse and all....

Posted by: Everyone in the State of North Carolina at October 31, 2011 01:33 PM (xy9wk)

517 >>I don't want Cain to be the nominee but I want him to lose based on his failings, not a trumped up scandal (if that's what this is) but that doesn't mean we all have to run to the battlements without knowing all the facts. Well that is interesting, Drew. You have repeatedly said you aren't backing Perry as your nominee and you have made it quite clear that you don't like Romney so just who are you supporting, Bachmann, Santorum, Paul?

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2011 01:34 PM (TMB3S)

518 475 & 476 Thanks. So, a candidate with a conservative platform and a pro-business attitude must be excluded from consideration because he makes mistakes in basic political message control. Mind you... He's not a career politician so some of these things should be expected.

Posted by: Brock O'bama at October 31, 2011 01:34 PM (3ob7O)

519 Posted by: Ed Anger's Cat at October 31, 2011 06:30 PM (7+pP9)

Here's what I do know....Cain told two mutually exclusive stories about this within about 5 hours.

That doesn't actually scream credibility.


Posted by: DrewM. at October 31, 2011 01:35 PM (plesI)

520

Ace,

Like you I am not in favor of nominating Cain to the top of the Republican ticket for president. Unlike you, that does not wholly bias me against Cain.

You're warning us not to do a "Reverse Clinton"?? Excuse me, Ace, but in candidate Clinton's case there several women coming forward and giving multiple interviews (you know, where their claims can be scrutinized by questioners) regarding Clinton's sexual misconduct. You might call those women witnesses. In the case of Cain, all we have are vague reports of vague claims written down somewhere nearly two decades ago that the public has yet been given to read. There are good reasons why judges will almost never admit written statements like construction estimates into evidence in a court of law. - Because those statements are hearsay, and there is no way for a lawyer to cross examine a piece of paper. In this situation, we don't even have a piece of paper to read that accuses Cain. Think about that.

There's no "Reverse Clinton" going on here, Ace. Because there are as yet no witnesses coming forward making public accusations against Cain. (Unlike in candidate Clinton's case.)

You slammed Cain with heavy innuendo, and you should not have.

You finally said that maybe Cain is only guilty of a misunderstanding. Let me give you a new angle to consider, Ace. Maybe the women who (supposedly) cashed in on their allegations decades ago were just in it for the money. Ever think of that. What kind of misunderstanding would Cain be guilty of then, Ace?

Check your bias, dude.    Really.



Posted by: Dave at October 31, 2011 01:35 PM (SV650)

521 Why is everybody bringing up old shit, anyway?

Posted by: Herman Cain's Crocs at October 31, 2011 01:35 PM (5eVSI)

522 I once turned down the temp in the office so we  could see the more endowed chicka's headlights come on. Was that wrong?

Posted by: Barbarian at October 31, 2011 01:36 PM (EL+OC)

523 DrewM. at October 31, 2011 06:35

I have trademarked the phrase "Five Hour Flip Flop".

Posted by: Dick Nixon at October 31, 2011 01:36 PM (8O4/a)

524 Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2011 06:34 PM (TMB3S)

Right now, I'd vote for Newt as a protest vote.

There's a lot I like about him but he's not temperamentally suited to be President.

Essentially, I'm not supporting anyone.


Posted by: DrewM. at October 31, 2011 01:37 PM (plesI)

525 Dave, I didn't slam him with "innuendo." For God's sakes, grow the fuck up and check the source of that story -- it's Poliico.com, not "Ace writing in the comments." A lot of people seem to think that our RIGHTEOUS DUTY is just to go into full-on spin/make-shit-up mode whenever one of our candidates is maligned. Fine. How about this: Count me out. Spin all you want. I have a feeling I know which way this train is headed. You can do WHATEVER THE FUCK YOU LIKE, and rant and rave about media bias and "what about clinton" and all the rest of the plays in your playbook. I don't care if you do or you don't. Please respect my fucking decision to sit this one the fuck out.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 01:38 PM (nj1bB)

526 Thanks. So, a candidate with a conservative platform and a pro-business attitude must be excluded from consideration because he makes mistakes in basic political message control. Mind you... He's not a career politician so some of these things should be expected.

Posted by: Brock O'bama at October 31, 2011 06:34 PM (3ob7O)

 

Even though I'll probably vote for Perry in the primary, I do find Cain quite refreshing.  It's early yet.  I may change my mind.

Posted by: Soona - Mayan liaison at October 31, 2011 01:38 PM (coN0Z)

527

My bitch about this is that too many people are writing about this as though it were fact.  What's wrong with waiting until some actual "facts" emerge.

We know these as facts. Cain denied he knew the company settled. Then the following day said he remembered his General Counsel settled it for less than "all of the money they demanded".

My bitch about this is the same one that caused Ace to scratch his eyeballs out that a candidate whose initial impulses are pro-choice, pro-right-of-return, anti-freedom of religion, and anti-no-religious-test for office (in other words, anti-US Constitution), who hardly espouses any recognizably conservative positions, is annointed the "conservative"candidate ... because he flashes a nice smile or something.

It had nothing to do with rational inputs.

And you, sir, are IGNORING the new rational inputs in front of you, as are his defenders.

If he said a rude thing or made a rude gesture in front of a woman at some point in his life, I don't think that disqualifies him as POTUS. But he lied to us about his knowledge of it, and he seems neither all that conservative nor prepared.

Charisma, sure, but no way he's ready to either win the general election NOR lead the country.

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 01:38 PM (YiE0S)

528 OT: "The biggest bond gains in almost a decade have pushed returns on Treasuries above stocks over the past 30 years, the first time that’s happened since before the Civil War."

Posted by: Miss'80s at October 31, 2011 01:39 PM (d6QMz)

529

Hey, just a thought for a halloween costume. Go as the  Obama MSM and just wear clothes that have "look over there" written on them hundreds of times. Perfect.

Posted by: lous a girl at October 31, 2011 01:39 PM (R21xD)

530 I have trademarked the phrase "Five Hour Flip Flop".

Posted by: Dick Nixon at October 31, 2011 06:36 PM (8O4/a)


Haha. You make big funny right there. We steal now.


Posted by: China at October 31, 2011 01:39 PM (EL+OC)

531 >>>Right now, I'd vote for Newt as a protest vote.

>>>There's a lot I like about him but he's not temperamentally suited to be President.

>>>Essentially, I'm not supporting anyone.

SOON.

Posted by: The Mitt Romney Borg Cube Ominously Hovering Over This Blog at October 31, 2011 01:40 PM (hIWe1)

532 And yeah, I'm telling you maybe you shouldn't get too fucking silly with Clinton Apologist type make-it-up Scenarios of Innocence. But you know what? You want to, go for it, champ. If you want to become exactly what the Clinton defenders were, swearing on a pack of BibleS "This can't be true!" before you know DiCK about the claims, fine. if that's who you are, that's who you are. Go for it. Like I said: Leave me out of it.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 01:40 PM (nj1bB)

533 Essentially, I'm not supporting anyone.


Posted by: DrewM. at October 31, 2011 06:37 PM (plesI)

Is there a number where I can send you my complimentary informational DVD, So You Can't Decide On A GOP Nominee?

Posted by: Huntsman at October 31, 2011 01:41 PM (QKKT0)

534 Look, for everyone who "KNOWS" nothing happened here: Sorry, I'm not as perceptive as you are. I don't know shit about what happened in a place I wasn't with people I don't know. Excuse my ignorance. I don't have the powerful psychic abilities some here do.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 01:44 PM (nj1bB)

535

Thanks. So, a candidate with a conservative platform and a pro-business attitude must be excluded from consideration because he makes mistakes in basic political message control. Mind you... He's not a career politician so some of these things should be expected.

Posted by: Brock O'bama at October 31, 2011 06:34 PM (3ob7O)

Ok, well see since he is running for office he has become a politician.  And if he were not polished that would be one thing, but he comes off as not prepared.  I mean even if you're running for dog catcher you should know about the basics.  Its really isn't a confidence builder to hear a guy give an answer to something that has been part of the presidential race for over 40 years, and then have him clarify, and then clarify some more.  And then 3 days later "after having researched more this is now my final opinion." 

Why should I have confidence in someone like that?

Posted by: buzzion at October 31, 2011 01:44 PM (GULKT)

536 >>>And yeah, I'm telling you maybe you shouldn't get too fucking silly with Clinton Apologist type make-it-up Scenarios of Innocence.

>>>But you know what? You want to, go for it, champ.

Let the behavior of the Daily Kos Kidz during Weinergate be a lesson to people.  Remember all the BRILLIANT conspiracy theories they came up with about hacked yFrog accounts, image manipulation, etc. etc. to explain how Weiner was obviously the victim of a Breitbart hoax?  Go back and check out some of those threads -- they're INCREDIBLE in the mass delirium of people who simply would go to any length to be convinced that the blazingly obvious was somehow false. 

Let's not be those people.

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 31, 2011 01:44 PM (hIWe1)

537 503 Past tense, Kal. Good luck with that 3rd movie. #2 really sucked imho.

Posted by: Brock O'bama at October 31, 2011 01:45 PM (3ob7O)

538

Is there a number where I can send you my complimentary informational DVD, So You Can't Decide On A GOP Nominee?

Posted by: Huntsman at October 31, 2011 06:41 PM (QKKT0)

 

Fuck you.  I saw him first.  I'm offering him a free night with a hooker at the Best Western in Borger, TX.  Top that! 

Posted by: Ron Paul at October 31, 2011 01:45 PM (coN0Z)

539 >>Right now, I'd vote for Newt as a protest vote. Ah, so Obama then. And you guys call us Romney supporters nuts.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2011 01:45 PM (TMB3S)

540

I have been, as far as I'm concerned, accused of sexual harrasment by the most trumped up, utterly stupid charges, at least once. I'm down with the idea that some women are really oversensitive (to something that had not a damn thing to do with her, as it happens) or to even a normal expression of interest, and a willingness to drop it quickly if unrequited.

Some women are brainwashed by feminism to an extreme degree, and even pre-feminism, it's not like some women weren't shitty liars. It happens. No offense to women here intended.

So the accusations in a career as long and as high-profile as his don't make me lose much sleep; unless there are specifics, corrobation, and some serious misbehavior, as opposed to whatever some chicky-poo didn't like or even thought she could make a buck off of.

BUT.

There's the matter of Cain pretending he didn't know about a settlement when he did. It was stupid of him to think he could maintain that line and dishonest of him to try.

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 01:46 PM (YiE0S)

541 GD, Ace sounds depressed

Posted by: Palin Lover at October 31, 2011 01:47 PM (dBxzn)

542 548 >>Right now, I'd vote for Newt as a protest vote.

Ah, so Obama then.

And you guys call us Romney supporters nuts.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2011 06:45 PM (TMB3S)

Wait Obama is running in the Republican Primary?  I thought Romney was the only Democrat that got in.

Posted by: buzzion at October 31, 2011 01:47 PM (GULKT)

543 Dave, I didn't slam him with "innuendo."

I know you don't read the site, but you don't even read your own posts?

Because the impression you've given, right there on the front page of your own website there, is that you're aware, and have long been aware—you're not telling us, just letting us know you're the kind of person who has Deep Inside Shit—of, oh, thousands or so survivors of Cain's penis-y predations.

You can read it at ace.mu.nu. Front page. Today.

Posted by: oblig. at October 31, 2011 01:49 PM (cePv8)

544 "And you guys call us Romney supporters nuts."

Nah. Just misguided socialist want to be's.

Posted by: Dick Nixon at October 31, 2011 01:51 PM (6qElU)

545 Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2011 06:45 PM (TMB3S)

A vote for Newt in the GOP primary is a vote for Obama?

How exactly does that one work?

Posted by: DrewM. at October 31, 2011 01:51 PM (plesI)

546 Let's not be those people.

Most sensible thing you've said recently.

GD, Ace sounds depressed

We either nominate the unprepared, or a known squish and panderer. If you are upbeat can you give me the name of your doctor? I want whatever antidepressant you're taking.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at October 31, 2011 01:51 PM (0q2P7)

547 DrewM. at October 31, 2011 06:51 PM

He's a mittens fan you have to cut them some slack.

Posted by: Dick Nixon at October 31, 2011 01:54 PM (6qElU)

548

 

Please respect my fucking decision to sit this one the fuck out.

Okay, ket's say you have decided to "sit this one the fuck out" then. So explain this statement:

It's perfectly possible he's innocent of almost everything except a misunderstanding.

It's also perfectly possible--actually it is far more than just "likely"--he settled a nuisance suit for what amounts to severance pay. That is by far the most likely scenario. So where is that in your post?

I don't expect you to know all there is to know about SH law, but I do expect any right-leaning blogger to be suspect of civil suits that just happen to emerge during a campaign.

My entire bitch is that you didn't approach this with the same level of doubt you would have afforded your preferred candidate, that numbskull from Texas any of us would have given the BOTD.

Posted by: spongeworthy at October 31, 2011 01:56 PM (puy4B)

549 544 I hear ya', Buzz. Not to nit, but he's not a politician. He's trying to become one. Shouldn't we be trying more to support him vs trying to eliminate him. Isn't he, aside from a few gaffes, a viable candidate? If this sticks so be it. He's toast. But we haven't even started the primaries. Isn't it a little early for self-immolation? Let's not do the left's dirty work.

Posted by: Brock O'bama at October 31, 2011 01:57 PM (3ob7O)

550 This is nothing new, folks, so why all the hubbub?   A little birdie told me his exact words were, "You're gonna love my 9-9-9, Babycakes."

Posted by: Fritz at October 31, 2011 01:57 PM (FabC8)

551 I once tried tuning in Tokyo using a surprised female co-worker's perky nipples. Was I wrong?

Posted by: CoolCzech at October 31, 2011 01:58 PM (niZvt)

552 oblig., sorry you're butthurt, but I did know, not "deep insiderey shit' but that the harassment/infidelity allegations were on the way. Sorry I heard something you didn't. I realize it's wrong of me to say so. Or perhaps I should have mentioned when I heard...? Yeah, I'm sure that would have gone over well.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 01:58 PM (nj1bB)

553 >>A vote for Newt in the GOP primary is a vote for Obama? >>How exactly does that one work? As you well know, Newt would get absolutley destroyed in the general against Obama. He is only marginally better as a general candidate than Santorum, and I do mean marginally. If you have no intention of supporting one of the people who has a shot at winning, Perry or Romney, then you aren't helping the cause. You're just angry that there isn't a better candidate. So what? Who isn't. This is who we have. Pick one and help them win. We can always pressure them once they get into office to do what we want. That seemed to work pretty damn well when Bush wanted his immigration bullshit with Graham and McCain.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2011 01:59 PM (TMB3S)

554 "560 I once tried tuning in Tokyo using a surprised female co-worker's perky nipples.

Was I wrong? "

I say you are a pervert and God will soon punish you.

Posted by: Palin Lover at October 31, 2011 02:00 PM (dBxzn)

555 >>>If you have no intention of supporting one of the people who has a shot at winning, Perry or Romney, then you aren't helping the cause. You're just angry that there isn't a better candidate.

Nah, gotta call bullshit on this one.  A protest vote in the primary election is harmless.  Doing that in the general election is a problem, but nobody should feel compelled to vote in a primary for anyone except who they support the most.

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 31, 2011 02:02 PM (hIWe1)

556 That seemed to work pretty damn well when Bush wanted his immigration bullshit

*Ahem*

Posted by: Medicare Part D at October 31, 2011 02:02 PM (0q2P7)

557 >>>My entire bitch is that you didn't approach this with the same level of doubt you would have afforded your preferred candidate, that numbskull from Texas any of us would have given BOTD eh, spongeworthy, see if you can understand this simple sentence: I don't doubt it. And so I don't really feel like joining the rest of the True Believer Suicide Squad in this particular spinnapalooza. You are completely to offer up your silly shit spin, if you like. I'll print it on the front page. But I'm not doing it. Oh right I'm supposed to fall in line and regurgitate whatever the Committee of True Conservative Heroes decides is the proper spin. By the way, Champ: Did you miss the part where it was 2 women, and this is more than rumored? That is, the accusations were made, on paper, contemporaneously? What should I do to spin that? Just say they're lying whores?

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 02:03 PM (nj1bB)

558 @559: OK, threadwinner!

Posted by: CoolCzech at October 31, 2011 02:03 PM (niZvt)

559 Sorry I heard something you didn't.

Your extremely cool demeanor on the issue convinces me you've heard even more I haven't on the subject and are still holding back some. Maybe I'm paranoid.

Posted by: Medicare Part D at October 31, 2011 02:04 PM (0q2P7)

560 Oh F* you sock!

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at October 31, 2011 02:05 PM (0q2P7)

561 As I said, we will know in a week, but sure, let's just quibble and parse based on incomplete information, and start declaring some people off the team and so on. The rest of the bag of the tricks that the True Believers' Heresy Detection and Punishment Squad employs in every situation, I mean.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 02:07 PM (nj1bB)

562 You're just angry that there isn't a better candidate.
Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2011 06:59 PM (TMB3S)

You're damn right I'm angry there isn't a better candidate. We have an historic opportunity to make some big inroads against 80 years of leftward drift and these are our choice?

I can't believe there are people who aren't angry.

If I have to vote for another turd in the general, I'm going to vote my conscience in the primary. Maybe it'll help was away the stink later.

Posted by: DrewM. at October 31, 2011 02:08 PM (plesI)

563

500 Cain now saying on PBS that he "doesn't recall" whether he asked a woman to come back to his hotel room with him, as per one of the apparent allegations.

Great.  "Doesn't recall?" 

If this is true, it's game over man, game over.

Posted by: Havedash at October 31, 2011 02:09 PM (JfvbF)

564 >>Nah, gotta call bullshit on this one. A protest vote in the primary election is harmless. Doing that in the general election is a problem, but nobody should feel compelled to vote in a primary for anyone except who they support the most. For a commenter, maybe. For one of the leading bloggers on a conservative site, no. Sorry, you get held to a different, higher standard when you are supposed to be an influencer. Drew puts up post after post criticizing every candidate. If you don't like any of the candidates then don't post anything. Tearing down all of them, or just a couple of them, is not kosher.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2011 02:10 PM (TMB3S)

565 For me, the real isdue is: so let's say it's true, and two decades ago Cain indeed hit on these gals. So WHAT? Freaking Clinton probably RAPED Anita Broderick, abused an intern, and honked a WH staff member's boob. And that was OK. Cain hit on two chicks 20 years ago, and what... We are therefore going to allow Obama to further socialize America? I don't prefer Cain for his lack of knowledge and his gaffs. But I'll be damned if I allow the MSM to make me care about this crap. They'll do the same to Romney or Perry or Newt.

Posted by: CoolCzech at October 31, 2011 02:11 PM (niZvt)

566

What should I do to spin that? Just say they're lying whores?

There are women who perceive harrassment where none, by a reasonable definition, exists.

Let me just give you an example. I asked a woman out at work one time, was accused of sexual harrassment by her, had to go speak to HR, etc. All because I asked if she'd like to get together some time, she said no, and I dropped it. In a workplace with like 1000 employees. I was not her supervisor.

It all came to nothing, but the accusation was made, on paper, contemporaneously.

Posted by: Ron Paul at October 31, 2011 02:11 PM (YiE0S)

567

You know what? I say this as a guy who has supported this blog since practically Day Fucking One. If you actually believe that pointing out that Herman Cain may be the victim of nuisance suits is "siily shit spin", you're the one who's slipped a cog.

You're either belligerently ignorant to SH law, completely and shamelessly in the bag for another candidate or flat barmy. If there's another possibility I'd love to hear it.

Posted by: spongeworthy at October 31, 2011 02:12 PM (puy4B)

568 *Ron Paul = Random

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 02:12 PM (YiE0S)

569 The rest of the bag of the tricks that the True Believers' Heresy Detection and Punishment Squad employs in every situation, I mean.

Hey; I put away my heresy stake and torches after the singing thread. There is no good in burying the truth of this now and staking our credibility on it, only to have to fess to it in the general when 16 regiments of reporters are assigned to defend Obama. I just want all the facts as quickly as possible.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at October 31, 2011 02:12 PM (0q2P7)

570 Imagine that (link to the Daily Caller):
If the sexual harassment allegations against former pizza mogul Herman Cain turn out to be credible — or simply refuse to fade away — polling suggests that former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney stands the most to gain

Posted by: Y-not at October 31, 2011 02:13 PM (5H6zj)

571

We can always pressure them once they get into office to do what we want.

No No No, Jack, you frikkin' dolt! The plan is to make the guy get elected without any of our support so he owes us nothing!

Geez, Dude. Get with the program here.

Posted by: spongeworthy at October 31, 2011 02:13 PM (puy4B)

572 Canes gone, write me in come November, and remember to spell my name correctly.

Posted by: Palin Lover at October 31, 2011 02:14 PM (dBxzn)

573

Ace, I agree with you often, and I'm actually believe Herman Cain didn't come clean on whether he knew there was a settlement, plus he's an unfit candidate, plus he reduced the quality of Godfather's pizza, but ...

You're either belligerently ignorant to SH law, completely and shamelessly in the bag for another candidate or flat barmy

Posted by: spongeworthy at October 31, 2011 07:12 PM (puy4B)

I have to agree with that, unless you know A LOT more than you're saying. Sexual harrassment allegations are made for trivial as well as serious reasons, and sometimes because the women in question are essentially lying whores out for a buck or revenge.

That doesn't mean he didn't do something wrong, but ... if you think sexual harrassment allegations aren't frequently baseless, put down that crack pipe.

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 02:16 PM (YiE0S)

574 That dumb snowbilly from Alaska; the one with all that politcal and personal garbage who's totally unelectable, is starting to not look so bad, huh?  One thing I think is safe to say about Palin is she must be squeeky clean after the "vetting" she was given. 

Posted by: Havedash at October 31, 2011 02:18 PM (JfvbF)

575 I love this idea that if you don't get on board with a guy who has been running for 6 years and can't crack 25% support, you're not really part of the team.

You Romney supporters are really overestimating how awesome your guy is.

Posted by: DrewM. at October 31, 2011 02:18 PM (plesI)

576 "569 Oh F* you sock!'

I say that's sexual harassment.

Posted by: Palin Lover at October 31, 2011 02:18 PM (dBxzn)

577 I've seen lots of confidentiality clauses in settlement agreements and I've never seen one that prohibits any mention that a settlement occurred. Thanks, al-Cicero.

Posted by: tasker at October 31, 2011 02:18 PM (rJVPU)

578 "One thing I think is safe to say about Palin is she must be squeeky clean after the "vetting" she was given. "

Thanks, and yes I douche thrice daily.

Posted by: Palin Lover at October 31, 2011 02:19 PM (dBxzn)

579

Cain and his campaign has known about this for TEN days. 

Two problems with Herman Cain and the sexual harassment issue.  Yesterday he said he couldn't comment as if he didn't know what they were talking about.  The reporter gave him one of the names right there and instead of denial, said wouldn't comment and then smartly asked him if he'd ever been accused of sexual harassment.  He and his campaign most certainly did know about this for some time too, as they have been notified many times throughout the past 10 days and refused to address it.  Now, today he "remembers"?  He remembered only one woman. 

He went to a friendly venue to give his side unchallenged.  He could have avoided this whole thing if he had responded to the questions prior to the story coming out. 

Before you mention the non-disclosure agreement, as an excuse why he didn't comment yesterday, it was on the women not Cain.  But let's say it was on Cain too just to be safe as we don't really know. So, if he didn't answer the questions yesterday because of it, then why did he respond today?  You can't have it both ways.  Also, he knew about it for TEN days. Ten days is a lot of time to clear things up or find information.

And to say the only incident that he remembers is that he just touched his chin and said the woman was the same height as his wife wouldn't justify a settlement. 

Rush talked about it today giving only some of the accusations, he conveniently forgot the biggest one where the woman says Cain asked her up to his suite.

The second problem I find with it: There is no way the President of the National Restaurant Association didn't know about the settlement, not just one but multiple settlements. This defies logic and truth. Mr. Cain, although the accused, was the President.  He was on Fox today and said he wasn't aware of a settlement.

And why did he make the comment that we probably would hear about more women and more accusations. Why even say that?  That just serves to put more doubt out there about how many others and doubt in that he's telling the truth.

Oh Oh, just found the lie, actually two. Cain later today told Greta he knew about the settlement and recalls the 2nd woman. Cain not only knew about the settlement, he knew how much she asked for and the amount "WE ended up settling for".  He told Greta this today after lying that he didn't even know there was a settlement this morning. He also "recalled" the 2nd woman after denying it this morning.

Oops, found another lie too. Cain said the National Restaurant Association’s general counsel and the Human Resources Department conducted an investigation into allegations about his conduct in the late-90s and found it to be baseless.  But the head of the Human Resources Dept says there was no investigation and didn't even know about any allegations against Cain.

When she was called after he repeated this at his National Press Club speech, she replied "He did not say that." When the quote was recited for her, she hung up.

Also I listened to the Politico reporter today on radio and there is more coming. 

The allegations may indeed be false, but the cover-up and lies are what's doing Cain in.  He just today got caught in 3 lies. Now, he's going to tout out his wife?  Please don't make a wife have to listen to and defend this. 

It's the lies that will catch him.

Posted by: Tricia at October 31, 2011 02:20 PM (gqG91)

580 >>>If you actually believe that pointing out that Herman Cain may be the victim of nuisance suits is "siily shit spin", you're the one who's slipped a cog. I have to say that? I have to write the obvious statement, "IT is possible these suits are not based in fact"? Really? You need that kind of reassurance? Like I said already -- what if I sort of think this happened and there's more to come? Should I start ginning up the "You know, lots of people get accused of sexual harassment nine times" spin? Am I allowed at any point to say what I really happen to believe (or, in this case, refrain from saying things I think will likely be proven false in about a week) or do I always have to clear my statements with the Group Mind Collectivist Strategy Committee? Is there any fucking allowance for free thought permitted in THIS GODDAMNED INCREASINGLY LEFTIST/CONFORMIST CULT ANYMORE? Goddamn it to hell I am sick of this BELIEVE WHAT I BELIEVE, SAY WHAT I WOULD SAY bullshit.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 02:20 PM (nj1bB)

581 584 If she isn't squeaky clean I would like to bather her until she is.After I dirty her up a bit.

Posted by: steevy at October 31, 2011 02:20 PM (fyOgS)

582 So WHAT?  Freaking Clinton probably RAPED Anita Broderick, abused an intern, and honked a WH staff member's boob. And that was OK.

No it wasn't okay, but we hold Republicans to a higher standard then Democrats expect of their people.  If a dog licks his genitals in front of company, nobody gets upset.  If I do it, well, let's just say my wife can overreact at times. 

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 02:21 PM (6TB1Z)

583

That doesn't mean he didn't do something wrong, but ... if you think sexual harrassment allegations aren't frequently baseless, put down that crack pipe.

See, it is too late. He's backed himself into a corner. To admit that Yes, perhaps it would have been fair to note that these sort of claims are often filed as a means of extracting severance pay, well, let's just say that ship has sailed. To back off now would mean eating all that "pissy" and "little bitches" stuff.

Not gonna happen.

Posted by: spongeworthy at October 31, 2011 02:22 PM (puy4B)

584 >>You Romney supporters are really overestimating how awesome your guy is. Make you a deal. You put up one post, just one, highlighting Perry's well documented corruption and I won't keep insisting you're a closet Perry supporter. You've done enough criticizing Romney, 1 post shouldn't be too much to ask.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2011 02:22 PM (TMB3S)

585 No one even tries to convince me. They don't care if I agree with them -- they just want me to say it, to proclaim my adherence to their belief, whether I believe it or not. They could give a shit if I'm actually persuaded. the only important thing is that I sing the loyalty song.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 02:22 PM (nj1bB)

586 Drew doesn't support Perry. I know because he told me a month ago, "I can't support Perry, he's awful." But anyway.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 02:24 PM (nj1bB)

587

You Romney supporters are really overestimating how awesome your guy is.

Posted by: DrewM. at October 31, 2011 07:18 PM (plesI)

How can they?  They act like he's perfect.  How can you overestimate perfection?

Posted by: buzzion at October 31, 2011 02:24 PM (GULKT)

588 >> What you or I BELIEVE, Chris, has no bearing whatsoever on what facts will ultimately prove. You know that, right? You realize that me "rooting" or believing has no effect on anything? << Wrong, it settles your reputation. You're a jackass who welcomes third-party accusations of vague impropriety and then demands the accused come up with a defense that satisfies all speculation. I'm proud to be a "fucking retard" who insists on an accuser and a specifc allegation.

Posted by: Chris Balsz at October 31, 2011 02:24 PM (3GtyG)

589

Oh come on, JackStraw. I'm with you on supporting the GOP nominee in the general, and I sort of agree that it's bad to support a weak candidate during the primary, since victory = defeat.

Be that as it may, this is silly:

For a commenter, maybe. For one of the leading bloggers on a conservative site, no.

The fact of putting your thoughts into writing and publishing them in a country established on this practice is not some kind of super-duper-responsibility demanding absolute, down-the-line, lock-step thinking and political strategy during primary elections.

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 02:24 PM (YiE0S)

590 "They could give a shit if I'm actually persuaded. the only important thing is that I sing the loyalty song. "

Ace is getting ready to make a big announcement.

Posted by: Palin Lover at October 31, 2011 02:24 PM (dBxzn)

591 >>>I'm proud to be a "fucking retard" who insists on an accuser and a specifc allegation. Ask Cain for their names, idiot. He knows EXACTLY who his company had to pay off.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 02:25 PM (nj1bB)

592 No it wasn't okay, but we hold Republicans to a higher standard then Democrats expect of their people.  If a dog licks his genitals in front of company, nobody gets upset.  If I do it, well, let's just say my wife can overreact at times. 

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 07:21 PM (6TB1Z)

But we arent the media blaring it on 30 stations five thousand times a day..

They hold we the reublicans to a higher standard, and let dems slide on everything, dont forget that..

Posted by: lous a girl at October 31, 2011 02:25 PM (R21xD)

593 >>>:Ace is getting ready to make a big announcement. Yeah, my announcement is the same as I've made a hundred times: I'm not really psyched about the Leftism of the Right, either.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 02:26 PM (nj1bB)

594 You're a jackass who welcomes third-party accusations of vague impropriety and then demands the accused come up with a defense that satisfies all speculation.

Simple competence at refuting the charges would be welcome. 

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 02:26 PM (6TB1Z)

595 Since Herman Cain has been going there for years to hunt, I think it shows a lack of sensitivity for a long time for not taking that sexual harassment off that rock. It’s just basically a case of insensitivity.

Posted by: Rick Perry's Rock at October 31, 2011 02:27 PM (kBxk7)

596 Am I allowed at any point to say what I really happen to believe (or, in this case, refrain from saying things I think will likely be proven false in about a week) or do I always have to clear my statements with the Group Mind Collectivist Strategy Committee?

Depends.  Do you plan to have drums?

Posted by: The Group Mind Collectivist Committee at October 31, 2011 02:28 PM (QKKT0)

597 Sua Sponte!

RLTW!

Posted by: JasonF at October 31, 2011 02:28 PM (i4hDn)

598 They hold we the reublicans to a higher standard, and let dems slide on everything, dont forget that.

Not forgotten.  It should be part of the DNA of any GOP candidate by now that they will have to deal with this.  When it isn't, they don't have a chance.

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 02:28 PM (6TB1Z)

599 Also, anyone who doesn't support Herman Cain is RACIST!!!!

Posted by: Rick Perry's Rock at October 31, 2011 02:28 PM (kBxk7)

600 >>>Is there any fucking allowance for free thought permitted in THIS GODDAMNED INCREASINGLY LEFTIST/CONFORMIST CULT ANYMORE?

>>>Goddamn it to hell I am sick of this BELIEVE WHAT I BELIEVE, SAY WHAT I WOULD SAY bullshit.

You know, it's a good thing that Ace is writing these sorts of comments, because lord knows I could never get away with it.

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 31, 2011 02:29 PM (hIWe1)

601 " I'm not really psyched about the Leftism of the Right, either."

Yes, I agree, Ron Paul sucks as he wants to cut the military and the war on drugs, anathema to any delusional conservative.

Posted by: Palin Lover at October 31, 2011 02:29 PM (dBxzn)

602

Posted by: Tricia at October 31, 2011 07:20 PM (gqG91)

Tricia, your comment nailed it. Everyone should read it and think about it. Your position is my position entirely, just more thoroughly researched.

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 02:30 PM (YiE0S)

603 and what's this crap about me "welcoming" shit? I don't "welcome" anything. This is all conspiracy theory bullshit. If something bad happens, you have to start looking for the Cigarette Smoking Men who MADE it happen, and start throwing hate at them. Tiny little minds incapable of just dealing with reality. Always need to compose a childish narrative with White Hats and Black Hats controlling things. What does "welcoming" have to do with it? It is what it is. It is either true or not. You must be an X-Palinista, because the hardest core there were big on the "You have to BELIEVE!" sort of thing, too. That people had to just BELIEVE hard enough and it would will it into being. Cain is either in trouble, or he's not. There's really no point getting mad at me over your butthurt. I didn't butthurt you. I've got nothing to do with this, except to say "I don't really want to go into heavy spin mode because I have a hunch this isn't going away." But whatever, rant and rave because I'm not singning from your hymnbook loud enough.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 02:30 PM (nj1bB)

604

I would like to summarize what I have larned from this thread and I want to be fair, so I will present both sides.

1. Ace sucks

2. Ace does not suck

3. Cain is all that and then some

4. Cain sucks

5. Perry is all that and then some

6. Perry sucks.

7. Romney sucks

8. Romney sucks

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at October 31, 2011 02:31 PM (OWjjx)

605

I have to say that? I have to write the obvious statement, "IT is possible these suits are not based in fact"?

Goddamnit, Mr. Psychotic Break, yes, you do have to say it. Y'know why?

Because IT (no, I will not stoop to ALL CAPS) is the most likely scenario. No other reason.

Jesus, I would not vote for Cain no matter what. I know he'll damage the brand. I don't just worry about it. I'm certain.

But this is almost by definition an attack from the Left using the Left's stupid rules. Rules they make for us but not for themselves.

I'll say it, no problem. Cain is not the guy. He's doesn't have the chops and if there were any proof needed, look how he fumbled the ball here. But out criticism needs to come from conservative thought, from our principles, not the same bullshit they pulled on Clarence Thomas. Frankly, I am appalled you would buy into this without noting, "Hey, this could very well be the same kind of Leftist bullshit that's been killing business for years."

 

 

Posted by: spongeworthy at October 31, 2011 02:31 PM (puy4B)

606 No one even tries to convince me. They don't care if I agree with them -- they just want me to say it, to proclaim my adherence to their belief, whether I believe it or not.

They could give a shit if I'm actually persuaded. the only important thing is that I sing the loyalty song.

Don't take it personal. It's political paranoia I think. That you might have a serious iron in the fire for the primary and take advantage of a situation like this. A lot of speculation about who is behind the push on this. I know you like to make fun of the 'question the timing' crowd. But, allegations true or false, there is something to be suspected in these situations, it's not called an October surprise for nothing. And someone will benefit from this. Right now, to the Cain emotional supporters, enemies lurk behind every tree.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at October 31, 2011 02:32 PM (0q2P7)

607 Anyone ever hear the expression "agree to disagree"? Is that not copacetic any longer? Do we now all always have to sing the same creepy cult morale chant?

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 02:32 PM (nj1bB)

608 There's really no point getting mad at me over your butthurt. I didn't butthurt you.

I'll take "what are phrases I wish never to hear again" for $400, Alex. 

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 02:32 PM (6TB1Z)

609 I agree with Random: everybody should go read Tricia's #589.  It's long, but it's smart and very hard to argue with.

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 31, 2011 02:32 PM (hIWe1)

610 I won't keep insisting you're a closet Perry supporter.
Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2011 07:22 PM (TMB3S)

You overestimate how much of a carrot that is.

If this blog and my ability to post here were as influential as you think, wouldn't I, you know, openly support Perry?

It might make sense to be a closet supporter so I could knife others if Perry (my supposed guy) were the front runner. The problem with that theory is Perry is somewhere around 6%, which is down from around 30% at one point. He doesn't need closet supporters or other candidates to fall, he needs to convince people, myself included, that he's a reasonable option.

Posted by: DrewM. at October 31, 2011 02:33 PM (plesI)

611 "Tiny little minds incapable of just dealing with reality. Always need to compose a childish narrative with White Hats and Black Hats controlling things.

What does "welcoming" have to do with it? It is what it is. It is either true or not.

You must be an X-Palinista, because the hardest core there were big on the "You have to BELIEVE!" sort of thing, too. That people had to just BELIEVE hard enough and it would will it into being. "

Its a comin, I can feel it. I knew he wasn't really that dumb... Couple more drinks ace, get it out, come out of the closet, the truth will set you free.

Posted by: Palin Lover at October 31, 2011 02:33 PM (dBxzn)

612

7. Romney sucks

8. Romney sucks

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at October 31, 2011 07:31 PM (OWjjx)


Also, Romney sucks.

Posted by: The Guy Who Thinks Romney Sucks But Doesn't Read The Comments Carefully at October 31, 2011 02:34 PM (QKKT0)

613 620 I agree with Random: everybody should go read Tricia's #589.  It's long, but it's smart and very hard to argue with.

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 31, 2011 07:32 PM (hIWe1)

Agreed.  Tricia nailed the facts as they stand right now.  I think that's the starting position for any further discussion on this.

Posted by: Havedash at October 31, 2011 02:34 PM (JfvbF)

614 >>> lot of speculation about who is behind the push on this. I know you like to make fun of the 'question the timing' crowd. But, allegations true or false, there is something to be suspected in these situations, When would you expect Cain to start being vetted? When he was at 2%? It doesn't matter. If Cain did this -- and if he did this more than a couple of times-- then that's the way it is. You can sit here whining and looking for a Black Hat but if that's the case -- that he did something objectionable -- then the real Black Hat is his own past behavior. What, you think the liberal media maybe would keep silent about this as President Cain was sworn into office, replacing Obama?

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 02:34 PM (nj1bB)

615 >>The fact of putting your thoughts into writing and publishing them in a country established on this practice is not some kind of super-duper-responsibility demanding absolute, down-the-line, lock-step thinking and political strategy during primary elections. Well, I'm going to have to disagree with you. Most conservative blogs are loath to put up anything to critical of Perry. Hell, Redstate is totally in the tank for Perry and helped him with his campaign rollout. They ban people for criticizing him. Blogs are a source of opinion shaping for a part of the electorate and this is one of the leading sites on the right. There is no shortage of criticism of all candidates not named Perry. Hell, rdbrewer even felt the need to recycle a two day old smack down of Romney today to demonstrate just how much he hates him, as if that was in doubt. To aces credit, he posted the video on Perry that is being played all over the msm today and show Perry in a less than stellar light. But there is so much out there on Perry that people on the right just refuse to post. Why? It's ok to hammer the fuck out of Romney and others on a daily basis, why does Perry get a pass? Perry is not the great conservative hope that he gets portrayed as on the conservative blogs. He's an old time pay to play politician who will do just about anything for a buck. ace got all mad at me because Romney was hammering Perry for what Perry actually wrote and said. Where is the outrage for all the hammering Perry has done or does he get a pass because he is mostly inept at doing it? If people are really interested in finding out about all candidates, not just the True Conservatives, why is it a bad thing to hold them all to the same standard?

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2011 02:35 PM (TMB3S)

616 I haven't seen Ace's woman post in this blog. She must know he's guilty.

Posted by: Chris Balsz at October 31, 2011 02:35 PM (3GtyG)

617 "Bear in mind, though, that's Cain's narration of what happened, of the nature of the complaint, and further, only his narration of one of several incidents." Uhhhhhh...Cain responded that there was only **1** incident that he cd in any way recall...And there is no evidence of any incidents more than...1. BTW, that 1 incident sounds like the lamest, most pathetic, most innocuous "sexual misconduct" I cd ever imagine...Which is what I expected. Not even a bawdy joke!! Cripes, two whole days of anti-Cain media flames sucking up 100% of the GOP oxygen...Well, maybe 99%, Perry's relaaaaaaxed speech got a little play today. And BTW, that's ANOTHER silly dilly hyped up NON-story.

Posted by: JewishOdysseus at October 31, 2011 02:35 PM (PYxvn)

618

Is there any fucking allowance for free thought permitted in THIS GODDAMNED INCREASINGLY LEFTIST/CONFORMIST CULT ANYMORE?

Goddamn it to hell I am sick of this BELIEVE WHAT I BELIEVE, SAY WHAT I WOULD SAY bullshit.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 07:20 PM (nj1bB)

I'm on your side with that -- entirely so. But with the caveat, from personal experience and observation, that there are a lot of false sexual harrassment accusations. Lots of true ones too, I'm sure. But lots of false ones, intentionally or otherwise, and you're the one who's thinking irrationally if you don't think so.

People make up whole fake rape accusations, like Duke, and sexual harrassment is so much more nuanced and subject to perception and personal belief systems. Even without malice, people sometimes make false allegations, and then there's complete misunderstandings -- not really a factor in false rape accusations, of which there are also many. Women are capable of real malice.

Now IF you have reasons to believe these accusations, which were settled for small sums apparently, are particularly egregious, or that others were, you could share.

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 02:35 PM (YiE0S)

619 >>>Because IT (no, I will not stoop to ALL CAPS) is the most likely scenario. No other reason.

But you seem to be missing the point that, as far as Ace is concerned, it doesn't seem to be the most likely scenario at all.  It in fact provides a certain amount of confirmation to rumors he'd been hearing about for months now.  And Cain's handling of it so far (see Tricia's #589 detailing several flat-out lies Cain told just today about this) has done exactly nothing to increase our confidence in that regard.

Now maybe you think it's the most likely scenario.  But he doesn't, and he's given his reasons for that.  Can you gainsay him at this point?

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 31, 2011 02:36 PM (hIWe1)

620 >>>Because IT (no, I will not stoop to ALL CAPS) is the most likely scenario. No other reason. Tell you what buddy, why don't you take me up on my much suggested offer to wait to see what the week holds, huh?

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 02:36 PM (nj1bB)

621 Reality is refreshing

Posted by: Palin Lover at October 31, 2011 02:37 PM (dBxzn)

622

Anyone ever hear the expression "agree to disagree"?

That is the funniest thing I have heard here. Okay, Ace, you are "pissy " and a "little bitch".

Okay, now it is okay to disagree. I just had some stuff I had to, you know, get off my chest. We're even. no hard feelings an' shit.

We'll just agree to disagree, now that disagreeing is allowed.

An' shit.

Posted by: spongeworthy at October 31, 2011 02:39 PM (puy4B)

623 Shouldn't raykon be out stealing candy or something?

Posted by: toby928 at October 31, 2011 02:40 PM (GTbGH)

624 @ Ace >>Everyone who knows any kind of political operative has known about this for at least 90 days.

Indeed, Sir, but timing is everything, isn't it?

Posted by: jem at October 31, 2011 02:41 PM (spEu4)

625 "It doesn't matter. If Cain did this -- and if he did this more than a couple of times-- then that's the way it is. You can sit here whining and looking for a Black Hat but if that's the case -- that he did something objectionable -- then the real Black Hat is his own past behavior." I totally agree with that, but there's just no evidence whatsoever that he did anything objectionable. OTOH, as Arhooley linked above, the guy has a...looooooong...~40 years...record of having people offer nothing but praise for him. But, hey, let's not give the man the benefit of the doubt, right? BTW, where was Ace when those "GWBush was doing blow" rumors were swirling?

Posted by: JewishOdysseus at October 31, 2011 02:41 PM (PYxvn)

626 Look, I've told everyone, down here in the comments where I'm not "alerting the media," why I think what I think. A month ago I heard a LOT of sexual-harassment/etc. type stuff was coming. I just put that in the category of "rumor." Fine. Whatever. Now there's this. Two, it seems like. So right now I'm giving that original rumor more credence because so far, at least, the general outlines of it were confirmed. At any rate, I don't care if any of you believe in anything. Believe this, don't... I don't know this as a fact so I don't care if you believe it. It's not a "fact." It's hunch. It's a rule of thumb. AND THAT'S ALL IT IS. I would not push my hunch on anyone since it's just a hunch, just a step away from a wild guess. But nevertheless, that's what I think, so I'm not doing what the 99.9% rest of the conservative media is doing and going into "THIS COULDN'T POSSIBLY BE TRUE, WHAT A TERRIBLE SMEAR" mode. okay? Simple agreement: You can believe what you like if I'm entitled to believe what I like (and permitted, further, to act in accordance with those beliefs). You can defend Cain all you like. That's fine. I'm not knocking down people's efforts to defend him. I did try to give you a head's up as far as "maybe don't get too invested here in the all-in defense," but you are free to reject that advice. I see that advice has been rejected. FINE. It's been rejected. Go all in if you like. But let me alone. I don't feel like going all-in to defend him. I think there's more coming. And I don't even like him.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 02:42 PM (nj1bB)

627 >>>BTW, where was Ace when those "GWBush was doing blow" rumors were swirling?

Who says those were just rumors?  They were almost certainly true.  And Bush neatly and cleverly defused them by saying, in response to the allegations, "when I was young and foolish I was young and foolish."  In the post-Clinton "I didn't inhale" era, that sort of tacit admission was more than adequate.


Posted by: Jeff B. at October 31, 2011 02:43 PM (hIWe1)

628 >>>I totally agree with that, but there's just no evidence whatsoever that he did anything objectionable. OTOH, as Arhooley linked above, the guy has a...looooooong...~40 years...record of having people offer nothing but praise for him. But, hey, let's not give the man the benefit of the doubt, right? Well, we'll see. Look, there is NO POINT with you trying to lobby me. The facts cannot be lobbied. Either the facts are good for Cain or bad for him (or possibly mixed). They are what they are. I don't know what they are yet. I have a hunch but that's *I T*. A hunch is not much. Nevertheless, I have one, so that's the way my thoughts are going. You can sit here trying to convince me all day how innocent he is but it doesn't matter, because in the end, either he's innocent or he's not and we're not going to be able to hash that out on a minimal amount of information 24 hours after the story broke. Remember Clinton? Remember all the fighting in the first 48 hours after the story broke? What did it matter? No one can "fight their way" into better facts. >>>BTW, where was Ace when those "GWBush was doing blow" rumors were swirling? he did do blow. And it was always kind of obvious he did.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 02:46 PM (nj1bB)

629 This is the kind of slander that keeps me from running for public office.  That and the multi-state killing sprees, but mostly, the slanders.

Posted by: toby928 at October 31, 2011 02:47 PM (GTbGH)

630

Tell you what buddy, why don't you take me up on my much suggested offer to wait to see what the week holds, huh?

Okay, let me get this straight. I am to read this and gather that perhaps you have additional information--not ready to go yet--that would lead you to believe Herman Cain may have a history of this?

(Actually, this would fit. The guy had no intention of actually Running For President, so he may be another ass-grabber and had figured he'd never get far enough for it to matter.)

Is there something in the original post (I am too tired and tipsy to re-read) that alludes to this and thus removes from you the conservative responsibility to say, "Hey, this may be the same kind of bullshit a lot of innocent guys got pegged with back then."?

Posted by: spongeworthy at October 31, 2011 02:48 PM (puy4B)

631 My question was about how those rumors were treated here, and I really don't know. (I wasn't a regular reader back then). If they were given a lot of play, then that wd indicate a non-hypocritical consistency. If they weren't...

Posted by: JewishOdysseus at October 31, 2011 02:49 PM (PYxvn)

632

Tricia, your comment nailed it. Everyone should read it and think about it. Your position is my position entirely, just more thoroughly researched.

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 07:30 PM (YiE0S)

Thank you, Random.

 

Guess what else Cain said today? Sheesh.

A couple hours ago, Cain told PBS that he "doesn't recall" whether he asked a woman to come back to his hotel room with him, as per one of the apparent allegations.

"Doesn't recall?"

Posted by: Tricia at October 31, 2011 02:49 PM (gqG91)

633 As near as I can figure, Ace and several other co bloggers here are afraid that the GOP is going to end up with a candidate they're embarrassed to support around their lefty friends.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at October 31, 2011 02:49 PM (r4wIV)

634 I wonder if Cain just picked up a whole bunch of support in the form of Duke lacrosse players...

cnredd
Political Wrinkles
http://politicalwrinkles.com

Posted by: cnredd at October 31, 2011 02:49 PM (XdXvF)

635 >>>That is the funniest thing I have heard here. Okay, Ace, you are "pissy " and a "little bitch". >>>Okay, now it is okay to disagree. I just had some stuff I had to, you know, get off my chest. We're even. no hard feelings an' shit. Do you not get this? You can "I think Cain is innocent, SH suits are bullshit" all you like. I called you a little bitch not becuase you were saying that -- but because you were INSISTING that *I* should say that. My problem is not YOUR belief, but your demand that I repeat YOUR belief. See, that isn't just letting each of us have our own opinion. I don't mind that you have an opinion. But you do mind that mine differs from yours. Worse yet, you're not even trying to get me to change my opinion. No, it would just satisfy you for me to counterfeit my opinion and write, per your instructions, "Cain's totally innocent" in a blog post, whether I had that belief or not.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 02:49 PM (nj1bB)

636

A couple hours ago, Cain told PBS that he "doesn't recall" whether he asked a woman to come back to his hotel room with him, as per one of the apparent allegations.

"Doesn't recall?"



I was drunk at the time!

Posted by: herm cain at October 31, 2011 02:50 PM (GTbGH)

637 Slo-Joe said this kind of crap would happen if we didn't pass Obama's jobs bill.  Damn if he wasn't right.

Posted by: Havedash at October 31, 2011 02:50 PM (JfvbF)

638 I don't recognize the so called conservatives of today.

Posted by: Ronnie RayCon at October 31, 2011 02:50 PM (A/jkv)

639 Who says those were just rumors?  They were almost certainly true.  And Bush neatly and cleverly defused them by saying, in response to the allegations, "when I was young and foolish I was young and foolish."  In the post-Clinton "I didn't inhale" era, that sort of tacit admission was more than adequate.


Posted by: Jeff B. at October 31, 2011 07:43 PM (hIWe1)

Yeah, maybe Cain should take the same approach to the sexual harassment, hell clinton raped a women, and clearly sexually harassed a wh intern. Did not harm him in the least.

He is now an elder statesmen according to the media, so why does anyone care about this sexual harassment, oh yea, this guy is a conservative..

Posted by: lous a girl at October 31, 2011 02:50 PM (R21xD)

640 >>>As near as I can figure, Ace and several other co bloggers here are afraid that the GOP is going to end up with a candidate they're embarrassed to support around their lefty friends. Fuck off, bitch.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 02:50 PM (nj1bB)

641 My biggest fear is two fold first allegations are worse than currently known, and this is going to break to slowly and not allow folks to abandon Cain and instead get emotionally wrapped up defending untenable turf at all costs, the bunker mentality. So first good would be we find out nothing really happened, the second good would be, if something did happen we find out as soon as possible.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at October 31, 2011 02:51 PM (0q2P7)

642 "Look, there is NO POINT with you trying to lobby me. The facts cannot be lobbied. Either the facts are good for Cain or bad for him (or possibly mixed). They are what they are. I don't know what they are yet." We'll have to agree to agree.

Posted by: JewishOdysseus at October 31, 2011 02:51 PM (PYxvn)

643 Cain is gone as here in heaven we can see the future. Don't tell anyone I told you ...

Posted by: Ronnie RayCon at October 31, 2011 02:52 PM (A/jkv)

644 I love the little Female Bitches like Christopher Taylor who don't even attempt any kind of (manful) rational argument -- they just go right for the (girlish) "Do what we say to do or else you're not part of our Special Group."

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 02:53 PM (nj1bB)

645 On a lighter note, the thread above is rockin' the house.

Posted by: toby928 at October 31, 2011 02:55 PM (GTbGH)

646 Ace, here in heaven we know you will fall to the side of good evil before too long, don't fight it.

Posted by: Ronnie RayCon at October 31, 2011 02:56 PM (A/jkv)

647

You can defend Cain all you like. That's fine. I'm not knocking down people's efforts to defend him.

Oh for fuck's sake. Is this some kind of a joke? Are you even drunker than me?

I'm not even defending him--I'm criticizing your own disregard for the abuses in current SH law. Christ, you absolve yourself by saying, "Should I even have to say that?"

I guess you know more is coming and you find it credible. Fair enough--I probably will also at that point. But if you're not even looking at it with a conservative and skeptical eye, than what good are you?

Besides eye candy, of course.

Posted by: spongeworthy at October 31, 2011 02:56 PM (puy4B)

648 OT: Carney: Obama will 'continue' to act 'independently' without Congress

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said President Barack Obama will “continue” to act “administratively” without congressional authorization to “benefit the American people” as part of the White House’s "We Can't Wait" campaign.

Posted by: Miss'80s at October 31, 2011 02:56 PM (d6QMz)

649 593  If a dog licks his genitals in front of company, nobody gets upset.  If I do it, well, let's just say my wife can overreact at times.  Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 07:21 PM (6TB1Z) Dude, if you can lick your own genitals... You're more limber than I was when I was 13.

Posted by: Anthony Wiener at October 31, 2011 02:56 PM (niZvt)

650

Well, I'm going to have to disagree with you. Most conservative blogs are loath to put up anything to critical of Perry. Hell, Redstate is totally in the tank for Perry and helped him with his campaign rollout.

But that's their right. Your right is to open a conservative, but anti-Perry, blog. You know this.

They ban people for criticizing him.

Dude, they banned me after threatening to ban any Ron Paul supporters. I detest Paul, despite being a libertarian, so I made a joke at Paul's expense ... and I was banned ... because the Red State moderators were too stupid to follow along that I agreed with them. So ... I wrote to them and they replied, understood that I agreed with them about Paul and was making a joke ditching him, but couldn't be bothered to unban me.

Because they are unprincipled asshats. Hell, it's the blog co-founded by that plagiarist guy, Ben Domenech (whom Ace disappointingly had writing here recently).

I dislike Red State. I'm so/so on Perry. But people can vote for whomever the fuck they want in the primary. Like it or not, you can't will intelligence and insight into people's minds, you can only talk to them. It's an imperfect strategy, but the only one we got.

And blogging is allowed -- commenters aren't some lower form of life permitted therefore to have greater freedom.

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 02:56 PM (YiE0S)

651 There are two ways to disagree or persuade: 1. You're wrong, and here's why. This is the way that rational men have had arguments since the Greeks. On the other hand, there's the newfangled leftist mode of arguing. This is really catching on like wildfire with the right: 2. You're *disloyal*, and here are the consequences of disloyalty: I shall put you on my ostracism list. That's not argument. That's a menstrual attempt to manipulate with the threat of exclusion. This isn't eighth grade, I'm not a little girl, and I could give a flying fuck if Christopher Who Gives A Shit Taylor decides I can't be part of his Super Secret Special Conservatives Club anymore.

Posted by: ace at October 31, 2011 02:56 PM (nj1bB)

652

Guess what else Cain said today? Sheesh.

A couple hours ago, Cain told PBS that he "doesn't recall" whether he asked a woman to come back to his hotel room with him, as per one of the apparent allegations.

"Doesn't recall?"

Posted by: Tricia at October 31, 2011 07:49 PM (gqG91)

"Doesn't recall" is just a shifty, slimmy, legalistic term for otherwise taking the 5th.  What kind of genius says this and expects people to give him the benefit of a doubt?  And if this is the best response he can come up with after 10 days of prep, then he's guilty as sin.

Posted by: Havedash at October 31, 2011 02:57 PM (JfvbF)

653 659 Ehibit 10001 why we desperatele need to stop fighting each other and beat that fucker.Is even Romney better than him?Is there any fucking doubt???

Posted by: steevy at October 31, 2011 02:58 PM (fyOgS)

654 So, how about that local sports team, eh?

Posted by: toby928 at October 31, 2011 03:00 PM (GTbGH)

655 I would be called a leftest today. Thank you God I am dead.

Posted by: Ronnie RayCon at October 31, 2011 03:01 PM (A/jkv)

656  there's just no evidence whatsoever that he did anything objectionable

Look, that's just nonsense. I'm the guy here railing that false accusations of sexual harrassment are common, but the fact his company settled two cases isn't "no evidence whatsoever".

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 03:03 PM (YiE0S)

657 BTW, in case I haven't made it clear on this thread, I **DO** think it wd be very relevant if it were demonstrated that my man Herman Cain had been cheating on his lovely wife. Call me old-fashioned, or maybe just old, but that'd be a deal-breaker for me. Unless the opponent was the SCOAMF.

Posted by: JewishOdysseus at October 31, 2011 03:03 PM (PYxvn)

658 "666 I would be called a leftest today. Thank you God I am dead."

Oh GD, I just hit the magic number, that should be a sign...

Posted by: Ronnie RayCon at October 31, 2011 03:04 PM (A/jkv)

659 "doesn't recall" whether or not he asked a woman, not his wife, up to his hotel room is shorthand for, "shit, this is going to come out really soon, isn't it?"

Posted by: DrewM. at October 31, 2011 03:05 PM (plesI)

660

Do you not get this? You can "I think Cain is innocent, SH suits are bullshit" all you like.

Not only did I not say Cain is innocent, I don't think anybody else did either. I said I don't think you were fair to him in your original post because you never pointed out how shoddy a lot of these suits are.

Now watch, you'll post a picture of a tweeted brown unit that will prove to be Herman Cain's and say, "See, I told you."

Which would actually be pretty funny, but it wouldn't mean that a lot of SH suits aren't bullshit. Those of us lacking your access to brown weiner pics and such who suspect these claims have reason to.

Posted by: spongeworthy at October 31, 2011 03:05 PM (puy4B)

661 HOLD  FAST

Posted by: toby928 Perrykrishna with tattooed knuckles at October 31, 2011 03:06 PM (GTbGH)

662

A couple hours ago, Cain told PBS that he "doesn't recall" whether he asked a woman to come back to his hotel room with him, as per one of the apparent allegations.

"Doesn't recall?"

Hmm.

Posted by: al-Cicero, Tea Party Jihadist at October 31, 2011 03:08 PM (QKKT0)

663

Posted by: Tricia at October 31, 2011 07:49 PM (gqG91)

Gee, Trish, I'm not even sure I recall every woman I slept with, much less propositioned. (But I would remember any monetary settlements for sexual harrassment made on my behalf for organizations of which I was their CEO; pretty sure I'd recall that.)

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 03:09 PM (YiE0S)

664

Gee, Trish, I'm not even sure I recall every woman I slept with, much less propositioned. (But I would remember any monetary settlements for sexual harrassment made on my behalf for organizations of which I was their CEO; pretty sure I'd recall that.)

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 08:09 PM (YiE0S)

Unless they're too numerous to remember as well...

Posted by: buzzion at October 31, 2011 03:10 PM (GULKT)

665 >>>"doesn't recall" whether or not he asked a woman, not his wife, up to his hotel room is shorthand for, "shit, this is going to come out really soon, isn't it?"

That sure was my take on it.  How hard would it be to say HELL NO?  I would damn sure remember if there had been a time where I was stepping out on my wife or not. 

This seems like it's really being underplayed, actually.  I consider that response to be perilously close to an admission of guilt. 

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 31, 2011 03:11 PM (hIWe1)

666 Stand away from the fan.

Posted by: al-Cicero, Tea Party Jihadist at October 31, 2011 03:13 PM (QKKT0)

667 Let's face it...we're screwed.  It's going to be Romney by attrition.  The 25% will be happy.  We won't gain in the house or senate because the base and Tea Party will be demoralized.  Obama will win and finish his job in destoying America.  Michelle will be proud of her country.  The damn Mayans had it right all along.  We had a golden opportunity this time around and Reagan v2 was nowhere to be found.  Damn depressing.

Posted by: Havedash at October 31, 2011 03:13 PM (JfvbF)

668

A couple hours ago, Cain told PBS that he "doesn't recall" whether he asked a woman to come back to his hotel room with him, as per one of the apparent allegations.

"Doesn't recall?"

I predict that Cain does the full "Jimmy Swaggart" fairly soon, but he won't blubber.   No, he'll just drop out and tell you all to go to hell and mind your own business. 

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 03:14 PM (6TB1Z)

669 Fear not, Havedash, CBS's Tom Pettit pronounced the end of Ronald Reagan's political career when Bush took the Iowa caucuses in 1980. "This isn't so much a pro-Bush vote as an anti-Reagan vote. We have seen the end of Ronald Reagan as a force in American politics."

Posted by: JewishOdysseus at October 31, 2011 03:15 PM (PYxvn)

670 I consider that response to be perilously close to an admission of guilt.

Perilously close, my eye.  He might as well show videos of his pickup attempt.

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 03:16 PM (6TB1Z)

671

"doesn't recall" whether or not he asked a woman, not his wife, up to his hotel room is shorthand for, "shit, this is going to come out really soon, isn't it?"
Posted by: DrewM. at October 31, 2011 08:05 PM (plesI)

Oh, yeah, good point. In that circumstance, I'd probably remember. With my lifestyle? More of a blur really.

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 03:16 PM (YiE0S)

672
I have trademarked the phrase "Five Hour Flip Flop".

Posted by: Dick Nixon at October 31, 2011 06:36 PM (8O4/a)

You've also trademarked the phrase"I proudly toss salads for rednecks".

Posted by: Ed Anger's Cat at October 31, 2011 03:17 PM (7+pP9)

673 "A couple hours ago, Cain told PBS that he "doesn't recall" whether he asked a woman to come back to his hotel room with him, as per one of the apparent allegations. "Doesn't recall?" Remind me the name of the woman claiming she was harassed in a hotel room? This is why the Sixth Amendment provides for direct testimony on specific charges. You do not like how Cain answers an accusation you have not heard or read. You have only heard OF it.

Posted by: Chris Balsz at October 31, 2011 03:18 PM (3GtyG)

674 680 Fear not, Havedash, CBS's Tom Pettit pronounced the end of Ronald Reagan's political career when Bush took the Iowa caucuses in 1980. "This isn't so much a pro-Bush vote as an anti-Reagan vote. We have seen the end of Ronald Reagan as a force in American politics."

Posted by: JewishOdysseus at October 31, 2011 08:15 PM (PYxvn)

I hope you're right.  So who's going to Fl to drag Rubio and West into this kicking and screaming?

Posted by: Havedash at October 31, 2011 03:19 PM (JfvbF)

675 >>But that's their right. Your right is to open a conservative, but anti-Perry, blog. You know this. Of course it's their right. And it's ace's right to post nothing that would be damaging to Perry. But all I ever hear on conservative blogs is that the msm is unfair and totally unbalanced in how they report information. They will put out every tidbit on those they don't like but protect those they do from having anything negative about them see the light of day. That's very true and you know this too. So why is it ok to do that on conservative blogs? It's perfectly fine if they want to support one candidate or just hammer others but they should at least be up front about it and not pretend they are open forums for all the candidates and they will let everything out, let the readers make up their own minds. Perry is no more conservative than Romney. That is demonstrable from the facts on the ground. But it's not if the only things that get posted are negative hit pieces on Romney and anything negative about Perry gets held back. Again, msm places like the WSJ and even conservative magazine/websites have been highly critical of Perry for doing exactly what Obama has been doing with stimulus money and companies like Solyndra. There is no way that conservative blogs could not know this. How is it beneficial to promote a candidate who has this kind of baggage? Do you think the left doesn't know this? I can assure you you are wrong. http://tinyurl.com/6ast27d It doesn't matter what you think of the author of that piece. It's factually accurate. You think this wouldn't come out if Perry is the nominee? Really? Perry is not the great True Conservative hope. His record shows him to be anything but.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2011 03:19 PM (TMB3S)

676

Unless they're too numerous to remember as well...

Posted by: buzzion at October 31, 2011 08:10 PM (GULKT)

lol Well spotted. Especially if the rumors ace has been hearing pan out.

Note the word "if", people.

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 03:20 PM (YiE0S)

677 http://tinyurl.com/6ast27d

I made it as far as By Matt Taibbi, Rolling Stone

Posted by: toby928 Perrykrishna with tattooed knuckles at October 31, 2011 03:21 PM (GTbGH)

678 Cain is guilty, as are all repugs, as their lust for pleasure knows no bounds. Money grubbing, imaginary being believing, scoundrels of the right.

Posted by: Ronnie RayCon at October 31, 2011 03:23 PM (A/jkv)

679 Havedash, my friend, I am in FL right now. Been here 13 years. I just point this out to remind you, and everyone else, that the left/progs have one overriding goal/directive: DEMORALIZE US. Convince us not only that we CANNOT win, but that we DON'T DESERVE to win. America is f'd up, but if we were fundamentally unhealthy, Hussein Obama wdn't be underwater in the polls. Hang in there, amigo.

Posted by: JewishOdysseus at October 31, 2011 03:24 PM (PYxvn)

680 Joins us, ray.  Join usssss.

Posted by: the toaster and the bath tub at October 31, 2011 03:24 PM (GTbGH)

681 Remind me the name of the woman claiming she was harassed in a hotel room? This is why the Sixth Amendment provides for direct testimony on specific charges. You do not like how Cain answers an accusation you have not heard or read. You have only heard OF it.

Posted by: Chris Balsz at October 31, 2011 08:18 PM (3GtyG)

A name doesn't matter here in relation to the question.  He was asked whether he ever invited a woman, who is not his wife, to his hotel room.  He gave the stock guilty as charged answer.  He didn't even attempt to try to requalify the question in any way.

Posted by: Havedash at October 31, 2011 03:25 PM (JfvbF)

682 "676 >>>"doesn't recall" whether or not he asked a woman, not his wife, up to his hotel room is shorthand for, "shit, this is going to come out really soon, isn't it?" That sure was my take on it. How hard would it be to say HELL NO? I would damn sure remember if there had been a time where I was stepping out on my wife or not. This seems like it's really being underplayed, actually. I consider that response to be perilously close to an admission of guilt. << That would be my reflex answer. Hell No, I have not had sex with a woman in a hotel room. But I would be forgetting the time I was at a convention, and we were using a room for a meeting room, and I told some people as we left dinner, that we'd meet in the room. That would be telling a woman to meet me in a hotel room. By 2011 standards, that would be a "lie" that would allow for reasonable speculation as to all the other lies I was telling about my secret harem. And it would be my job to prove it wasn't true. Without one actual person standing up to say, I was there, I was in his hotel room and it happened.

Posted by: Chris Balsz at October 31, 2011 03:26 PM (3GtyG)

683 I thought one of Alinsky's Rules was to make the Enemy live up to his own standards.

Why are people even worrying about what any of the GOP contenders have said/done? 

Seriously.  Clinton took ALL this OFF the TABLE. 

IT'S JUST SEX, remember?

Non Issue !!   Carry on.

Posted by: TXMarko at October 31, 2011 03:27 PM (SqGU5)

684

http://tinyurl.com/6ast27d

I made it as far as By Matt Taibbi, Rolling Stone

Posted by: toby928© Perrykrishna with tattooed knuckles at October 31, 2011 08:21 PM (GTbGH)

Same here, yeah.

JackStraw, you restate the unassailable "facts" against Perry so I don't have to vomit while reading ti?

It's just like if Crystal Mangum wrote guides to ladylike decorum and being truthful. They may be the best written guides in the world, but I'm not buying it, no matter what they say.

OK, I actually could admit which arguments are true or false. I strive toward objectivity. But why the hell do I want to read these facts from a source that makes me want to scratch my eyeballs out? Surely there's some better source, if only yourself.

And if only leftists will cover this because conservatives aren't objective enough, why don't you and other conservatives who dislike Perry for corruption and NOT being conservative, write a blog on the topic?

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 03:28 PM (YiE0S)

685 Hang in there, amigo.

Posted by: JewishOdysseus at October 31, 2011 08:24 PM (PYxvn)

I like your attitude.   Thnx.  And since you are in FL, could you go pull a Cousin Eddie Christmas kidnapping on West and Rubio.  I'm sure that the moron hoard could somehow "pursuade" them to step up for their country.  :-)

Posted by: Havedash at October 31, 2011 03:29 PM (JfvbF)

686 Your plan, JackStraw, to draw conservatives' attention toward Perry's shortcomings can't be to rely on Rolling Stone magazine and make some blog comments, and some Rolling Stone hyperlinks. Sorry to go all Jack Nicolson on you, but please tell me you have something better than that. Please tell me the Republic is not placing its hopes on that?

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 03:31 PM (YiE0S)

687 >>I made it as far as By Matt Taibbi, Rolling Stone Make it further. Everything he wrote has been documented in the WSJ, the NR and others. There are even multiple quotes in the article from the Tea Party candidate who ran against Perry last election. Taibbi just writes one of the most comprehensive accounts. By the way, who exactly do you think started the Romney as flip flopper memes? It was the left who hated him for governing more conservatively than he ran. If you don't like lefty memes you might want to stop with the Romney flip flopper thing.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2011 03:31 PM (TMB3S)

688 Little scared conservative girls, God treats you good in heaven, quite being so durn afraid of everything.

Posted by: Ronnie RayCon at October 31, 2011 03:31 PM (a31uV)

689 Make it further. Everything he wrote has been documented in the WSJ, the NR and others.

Well, link those.  I feel dirty just for having read the byline.

Posted by: toby928 at October 31, 2011 03:33 PM (GTbGH)

690 I would help ray out, but he didn't pay his bill.

Posted by: the gas pipe at October 31, 2011 03:33 PM (GTbGH)

691 But I would be forgetting the time I was at a convention, and we were using a room for a meeting room, and I told some people as we left dinner, that we'd meet in the room. That would be telling a woman to meet me in a hotel room.

By 2011 standards, that would be a "lie" that would allow for reasonable speculation as to all the other lies I was telling about my secret harem. And it would be my job to prove it wasn't true. Without one actual person standing up to say, I was there, I was in his hotel room and it happened.

Posted by: Chris Balsz at October 31, 2011 08:26 PM (3GtyG)

Would it have been difficult for Cain to have qualified an answer in the way you just explained?  You did a pretty good job with only a couple of sentences.  That's the problem here.  Cain didn't even attempt to qualify an answer, nor did he attempt to limit the scope of the question.  That says a lot.

Posted by: Havedash at October 31, 2011 03:34 PM (JfvbF)

692

You can have as comprehensive an article about Perry's flaws at your new JackStraw wordpress blog up by tomorrow nightfall, then link that. Surely you have to see the flaw in trying to pursuade politically impassioned GOP supporters to Rolling Stone as your primary persuasion technique?

?

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 03:37 PM (YiE0S)

693 I'm actually going to read the article now. But seriously, consider what I just wrote if this is something that you care about.

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 03:37 PM (YiE0S)

694 Do people do stuff sua sponte?  I thought only judges did that.

Posted by: Brian at October 31, 2011 03:37 PM (s5MwP)

695 But I would be forgetting the time I was at a convention, and we were using a room for a meeting room, and I told some people as we left dinner, that we'd meet in the room. That would be telling a woman to meet me in a hotel room.

How many of those women sued you for sexual harassment?  You're reaching.

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 03:38 PM (6TB1Z)

696 Scared little conservative girls, come visit me. Heaven is really as warm and fuzzy as you have heard. It's like I imagine heroin to be, times 1000000000. Dont be so afraid little ones.

Posted by: Ronnie RayCon at October 31, 2011 03:38 PM (a31uV)

697 My friend, AFAIC, I'm 100% sure that these kind of allegations would/WILL be made against Rubio and West, whether or not they are true. And all their GOP rivals will jump on them. Look at what the WaPo tried to do to Rubio last week. Oh, and remember Col West's court-martial? See, NO-ONE doesn't have some little chink in the armor (did I just commit racism, sorry), and the MFM will always go after the leading conservative to exploit it, exaggerating, taking out of context, mismatching incidents and quotes, and where necessary fabricating witnesses, episodes and documents. Funny how these people are citing a Cain interview w/NPR...It was NPR and Totenberg who played the lead role in lynching Clarence Thomas in 1991. But no-one remembers THAT far back...

Posted by: JewishOdysseus at October 31, 2011 03:38 PM (PYxvn)

698 Look at what the WaPo tried to do to Rubio last week. Oh, and remember Col West's court-martial?

And how much do you hear about either one now?  They were either ridiculous or things that many viewed as a badge of honor.  I'm not aware of anyone who thinks of stepping out on your wife as a badge of honor.  Well, anyone who doesn't have a D after his name, anyway.

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 03:41 PM (6TB1Z)

699 "Would it have been difficult for Cain to have qualified an answer in the way you just explained? You did a pretty good job with only a couple of sentences. That's the problem here. Cain didn't even attempt to qualify an answer, nor did he attempt to limit the scope of the question. That says a lot." That's the problem with vague anonymous charges--my kind of parsing turns people off too. Cain gave an open blank denial, and he's getting attacked for that also. There's no GOOD defense against anonymous vague accusations. Where's the Gennifer Flowers, the Paula Jones, the Anita Hill to say what, where, when, why? It's bigger than Cain, if THIS is acceptable attack on a politician, we're screwed from now on.

Posted by: Chris Balsz at October 31, 2011 03:42 PM (3GtyG)

700 Cain gave an open blank denial

I don't recall and I'm not aware are not denials.  They are weasel words.

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 03:43 PM (6TB1Z)

701 Ok, since you guys don't like Rolling Stone, are you ok with the Wall Street Journal and Tea Partiers? http://tinyurl.com/3tjouzz It doesn't give all of the info, Taibbi was much more in depth, but you can get the drift. If you still don't like that google Bob Perry and Rick Perry. Or you can just read this report from the Texans for Public Justice, a good government group. http://tinyurl.com/3ojh3ur Texas has the most liberal campaign finance laws in the country. How do you think Perry raised those millions and millions year after year? There are literally thousands of things like this all over the internet. Google away. And even if you don't like Matt Taibbi or Rolling Stone I assure you the left loves them and Independents don't care. If Perry is the nominee they will beat him to death with this crap. Some of you complain that Romney takes Obamacare off the table. I disagree, he has already committed to take it off the table and can make a solid 10th Amendment argument for this. But Perry definitely takes Solyndra and corruption off the table. There is no 10th Amendment argument for corruption.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2011 03:44 PM (TMB3S)

702 The first several paragraphs have been terrible. Ashen faced, looking like a funeral director, etc., with paragraphs more of derision.

Still waiting for the meat of it. Not saying it isn't there, just saying this is the best source you got?

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 03:45 PM (YiE0S)

703 Pep, I was just giving 2 off-the-cuff examples of absurd "scandals" that were ginned up about the very candidates that Havedash was (correctly) so high on. As in: No-one's immune to this cr@p.

Posted by: JewishOdysseus at October 31, 2011 03:45 PM (PYxvn)

704 "if THIS is acceptable attack on a politician, we're screwed from now on."

Bite your tongue, the Monicka BJ scandal was worth every bit of the 100 million spent, even if Bin Laden got away because of it, as Allah planned all along to bankrupt the west through him and 9/11.

Posted by: Ronnie RayCon at October 31, 2011 03:46 PM (a31uV)

705 Remind me the name of the woman claiming she was harassed in a hotel room? This is why the Sixth Amendment provides for direct testimony on specific charges. You do not like how Cain answers an accusation you have not heard or read. You have only heard OF it.

Posted by: Chris Balsz at October 31, 2011 08:18 PM (3GtyG)

Actually you're mistaken in part. No, I don' t know the name of the woman, as none of us do.  Except I do know it is the 2nd woman in the allegation and it IS in the original story.. So I DID read it.

And I never said she was harassed in a hotel room. Please read my post again.

It's not a throw out there question like have you ever invited A woman to your room?  It was specific and in reference to the 2nd woman in the article. At the time, he was being asked about the 2nd woman.

"Cain said he couldn’t recall whether he had invited one of the women up to his hotel room."

If he didn't invite the woman to his room, say so. "Don't recall" is a cover your ass answer in case it comes out that you did.

Example: If I was married and I asked my husband if you've ever invited that woman up to your hotel room.  And his answer was " I don't recall."  You guess where it goes from there.

 

Posted by: Tricia at October 31, 2011 03:47 PM (gqG91)

706

JackStraw, having not yet returned to the article, why do you think I have a problem with someone raising millions and million of dollars or "liberal campaign finance laws"?

I'm in favor of Amendment 1 of the Consitution.

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 03:48 PM (YiE0S)

707 No-one's immune to this cr@p.

We agree.  My point was simply that we have to expect it, and if one isn't able to answer the accusation convincingly, which an innocent person can usually do, one probably shouldn't be in politics.  It isn't fair that the press is so biased, but it is a fact of life. 

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 03:49 PM (6TB1Z)

708 Allahpundit has a good roundup of this stuff (particularly Cain's damning -- IMO -- interview on PBS tonight where he didn't quite deny the allegations) over on Hot Air.

The key quote?  From Sean Trende of RealClearPolitics on Twitter, saying exactly what Ace has been saying throughout the entire day: "The Cain story is almost certainly from an R campaign. The fact it is being dropped in Oct. suggests there is worse to come."

This is going to get worse, folks.

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 31, 2011 03:50 PM (hIWe1)

709 "osted by: Tricia at October 31, 2011 08:47 PM (gqG91)" I will not accept a proxy accusation of private misconduct. I will not condemn somebody for how they try to handle a proxy accusation of private misconduct.

Posted by: Chris Balsz at October 31, 2011 03:51 PM (3GtyG)

710 So what do you think Random? You like the Wall Street Journal or is that a lefty site too? Or should I go all Jack Nicholson on you, You can't handle the truth.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2011 03:51 PM (TMB3S)

711 "This is going to get worse, folks."

Yes, Cain is gone and Ace is switching sides. Sad day for little scared conservative girls. :-)

Posted by: Ronnie RayCon at October 31, 2011 03:52 PM (a31uV)

712 I will not condemn somebody for how they try to handle a proxy accusation of private misconduct.

In a courtroom, of course not.  But political Darwinism says you can either handle a situation like this, or you find a different game.  Cain very clearly can't handle it.  Again, not fair, but politics ain't beanbag. 

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 03:53 PM (6TB1Z)

713 >>>Yes, Cain is gone and Ace is switching sides. Sad day for little scared conservative girls. :-)

Shut the fuck up.

Go the fuck away.

Drop the fuck dead.

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 31, 2011 03:54 PM (hIWe1)

714 >>JackStraw, having not yet returned to the article, why do you think I have a problem with someone raising millions and million of dollars or "liberal campaign finance laws"? Dude. Read. The. Article. It is Solyndra on steroids. Perry didn't just give tax dollars to his campaign dollars to companies that then went tits up, he put them on the board of the grant committee. Do I have to spell this out for you?

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2011 03:54 PM (TMB3S)

715

This is going to get worse, folks.

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 31, 2011 08:50 PM (hIWe1)

A Christian minister being hypocritical about sex and actually acting like a male who -- gasp -- wants sex with women; pursues it; and even acquires power, position, and prestige to get it.

If that turns out to be true, ask me just how surprised I am. And ask me how surprised I am that his faith-based supporters first, second, and third impulses are to defend, defend, defend! ... rather than look at the facts, think reasonably, and gather some data.

But I like to think and find out what's true, so I'm pretty sure that makes me an elitist.

And a RINO. It's the supporting of the Constitution, individual liberties, etc., that does it.

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 03:56 PM (YiE0S)

716 >>didn't just give tax dollars to his campaign dollars to companies that then went tits up, Well that got fucked up on edit. didn't just give tax dollars to his contributors for companies that then went tits up,

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2011 03:57 PM (TMB3S)

717 It's not the veracity of the charges that counts, it's the seriousness of charges. If he had been merely charged with rape, or bioting a lip, or pinning a woman against a wall, or indecently exposing himself then we would have to drop this inquiry...but sexual harrassment is indefensible. That's why these charges must be true.

Posted by: Typical Duplicious DemocRAT at October 31, 2011 03:57 PM (2jMZp)

718

You like the Wall Street Journal or is that a lefty site too?

I don't mind getting information from lefties; he's just particularly distasteful. I will read the article in its entirety, but I'm passing myself, because the author is an ass to read.

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 03:58 PM (YiE0S)

719 Little conservative girls, the time for truth has come. You have driven over the cliff and are now in free fall. Too bad you took the country with you. Never again.

Posted by: Ronnie RayCon at October 31, 2011 03:58 PM (a31uV)

720 Guess what Romney guys Cain's not the only !Romney in the race. At this point I'd support Newt or Perry ahead of him.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at October 31, 2011 04:04 PM (GE1+K)

721 Why do conservatives hate freedom and thus Ron Paul?

Posted by: Ron Paul for President at October 31, 2011 04:06 PM (a31uV)

722

>> Or you can just read this report from the Texans for Public Justice, a good government group.

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... you mean that little group of grumpy hippies in Austin?  This "good government group?"

News alert: Contributions went to the RGA, not to Perry/RGA.

There's like, 30+ other R governors.

 

Be sure to check out TPJ's funding list.

 

Posted by: Dave in Texas at October 31, 2011 04:07 PM (PjVdx)

723

There are so much to learn from your post here, Uma, well done.

Posted by: No Regrets ePub at October 31, 2011 04:07 PM (KCI/1)

724 "How many of those women sued you for sexual harassment? You're reaching." Nope. Any contradiction is touted as proof "he lies". It doesn't matter if that contradiction goes no further than refuting a general assertion. "My point was simply that we have to expect it, and if one isn't able to answer the accusation convincingly, which an innocent person can usually do, one probably shouldn't be in politics. It isn't fair that the press is so biased, but it is a fact of life... political Darwinism says you can either handle a situation like this, or you find a different game. Cain very clearly can't handle it. Again, not fair, but politics ain't beanbag." Nobody can answer it "convincingly". That's why we have the Sixth Amendment. If the standard is "I'm a spectator to see how the politician handles it" you're going to see one after the other fall to a press "expose" that anonymous accusers (name withheld) made detailed accusations (details withheld) and what about that, Governor? Remember that the Bush Guard forgery only failed because the specific allegation was demonstrably fake. If Burkett had been allowed to claim an anonymous source had secret proof of wrongdoing and put it on Bush to "make the case", Bush would have failed. I think it fair and sensible to demand a specific accusation by a named accuser.

Posted by: Chris Balsz at October 31, 2011 04:07 PM (3GtyG)

725

Or you can just read this report from the Texans for Public Justice, a good government group.

The same people who get a lot of money from th national National Association for Public Interest Law (NAPIL), which is now known as Equal Justice Works and the Rockefeller Family Fund. This is your idea of good government?  Nope.....no agenda there.

Go to Equal Justice Workls website and you know what their  first idea they promote is.....learn about student debt relief.

Nice group you hanging your hat on their, JackStraw. Couldn't find anything presentable from #OWS to bash Perry with?

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at October 31, 2011 04:09 PM (OWjjx)

726 And before I forget...Raycon.....have you stopped having sex with family members yet?

Posted by: Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at October 31, 2011 04:10 PM (OWjjx)

727 BTW, you Cain haters, don't count him out. Last week he bought a few minutes of air time on Rush Limbaugh's show. Today Rush spent practically the whole show defending him. I agree, if these charges are substantiated, he will have to quit. If not, he will be stronger than ever.

Posted by: JewishOdysseus at October 31, 2011 04:10 PM (PYxvn)

728 >>News alert: Contributions went to the RGA, not to Perry/RGA. News alert back yea, Perry was the biggest recipient of RGA funds. Come on Dave, you know that Perry has been running a scam with his campaign financing. Even the Tea Party called him out for it. His fund got shut down by the Republican Texas legislature by over a 2 to 1 vote. Way over. None of this is news. It's established fact. If Obama or any lefty was doing this in DC you and everyone else here would be hammering him for it. Come to think of it, Obama is doing and everyone here is hammering him for it. This is what I mean about pretending information about True Conservatives as chosen by the conservative blogoshphere never gets aired. Same thing happened with Fred! last cycle. He was going to save us all, right before he fell asleep.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2011 04:12 PM (TMB3S)

729 >>>Why do conservatives hate freedom and thus Ron Paul? He's ok with nations, that call US the Great Satan, that publicly espouse the virtue of suicide bombing, having nukes.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at October 31, 2011 04:12 PM (GE1+K)

730 Mallamutt, RINO President for Life at October 31, 2011 09:09 This may shock you, Mallamutt, but Republicans don't do that many exposes on other Republican group. I challenge you to find one fact in that report that isn't true. Actually, it doesn't matter. I gave you a WSJ piece that quoted the Tea Party rep who sponsored the bill that shut down Perry's slush fund. You ignored that. I can give you pieces from left wing rags like the Washington Examiner and National Review and you will still claim they mean nothing while echoing the lefty claims that Romney is a flip flopper. Whatever. Vote for Perry. He's a True Conservative cause you say so.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2011 04:19 PM (TMB3S)

731 News alert back yea, Perry was the biggest recipient of RGA funds.

Might have something to do with him being the governor of the largest Republican-lead state.

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 04:19 PM (YiE0S)

732

It is our nature to be defensive when our candidate is attacked, to deride sources and such (Taibbi is ripe for this, no doubt. Truly filth.)

But I think you'd be surprised to find that many of us who do not profess wild hate for Romney are holding back our disdain due to the shortage of alternatives. Perry is not anywhere near the guy he is touted here and he is a weaker candidate than Romney in the general.

'S all I'm sayin'.

Posted by: spongeworthy at October 31, 2011 04:20 PM (puy4B)

733 Nope. Any contradiction is touted as proof "he lies".

We've reached a point of diminishing returns, but I'll restate my case one more time and then I'm done.  It isn't the story or the accusation, it's his inability to convincingly deny it.  The stories of McCain's affair and Bush the first's affair both died, because there wasn't any there there, and both of those politicians were able to make that plain.  The equivocations and weasel words coming from Cain are the exact opposite.  I didn't buy it from Billy Jeff, and I don't buy it here. 

And a RINO. It's the supporting of the Constitution, individual liberties, etc., that does it.

Whoah there, big fella.  We, the charter members of the stinking RINO faction, will decide who is, and who isn't a RINO around these parts. 


Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 04:20 PM (6TB1Z)

734 "He's ok with nations, that call US the Great Satan, that publicly espouse the virtue of suicide bombing, having nukes."

He knows fighting Allah is expensive and maybe we should regroup.

Posted by: Ron Paul for President at October 31, 2011 04:21 PM (a31uV)

735

>> Even the Tea Party called him out for it.

They're pretty bitchy here, yeah. Loved their nutjob truther candidate though.

>> you know that Perry has been running a scam with his campaign financing

Actually I do not know that.  Did Ronnie Earle file charges?

Posted by: Dave in Texas at October 31, 2011 04:22 PM (PjVdx)

736 many of us who do not profess wild hate for Romney are holding back our disdain due to the shortage of alternatives. Perry is not anywhere near the guy he is touted here and he is a weaker candidate than Romney in the general.

 Many of us who support him feel the same way for the same reasons.

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 04:23 PM (6TB1Z)

737

Incidentally, having had first hand knowledge of the "slush-fund", since we got some of it for building/facility expansion, there were specific goals tied to jobs, (not McDonald's jobs).  We didn't meet them and returned the cash.

Put me down in favor of actively encouraging job growth here. A legitimate function of state government.

And suing the EPA to keep them from driving energy prices higher. I like that one too.  I don't "hate" Mitt, I'm on record saying I'll vote for him in the general.

But he didn't do that.  Or Loser Pays tort reform.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at October 31, 2011 04:28 PM (PjVdx)

738 also gotta go.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at October 31, 2011 04:28 PM (PjVdx)

739 >>>He knows fighting Allah is expensive and maybe we should regroup Regrouping will be a lot quicker when there are a lot fewer of us too!!!

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at October 31, 2011 04:38 PM (GE1+K)

740 "Regrouping will be a lot quicker when there are a lot fewer of us too!!!"

Yes, God and Allah should quit promoting kids we can't afford. Or are you talking about after the apocalypse?

Posted by: Ron Paul for President at October 31, 2011 04:40 PM (N7FAT)

741 >>Actually I do not know that. Did Ronnie Earle file charges? How about you read the article that I posted from the Wall Street Journal. Or you could just google ThromboVision, David Nance and the Texas Emerging Technology Fund. Pick an article from any source you want. They all say the same thing. How about the article from NRO entitled Texas Wind Energy Fails Again. Is that a suspect source, too? http://tinyurl.com/45x2gzm Another big Perry contributor, the wind energy industry in Texas. Just a coincidence I'm sure. You well know that Perry is the ultimate political power in Texas and the rules there are not the rules for a national candidate. Perry has definitely been investigated but no, not indicted. Yet. Are you honestly saying that you think he's clean? Then I assume you have no complaints about Obama and Solyndra because it's almost the same thing. Almost, accept Perry took it further albeit for less money. I'm not attacking you, Dave. But facts are facts.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2011 04:40 PM (TMB3S)

742 "The stories of McCain's affair and Bush the first's affair both died, because there wasn't any there there, and both of those politicians were able to make that plain."

So, assuming your idea is correct; Are you insinuating there is a "there there" regarding the Palin "Wombgate" Scandal that the Press loves to keeps fresh?

Posted by: TXMarko at October 31, 2011 04:43 PM (HR/c4)

743 Are you insinuating there is a "there there" regarding the Palin "Wombgate" Scandal that the Press loves to keeps fresh?

Not at all.  This falls into the ridiculous category-it doesn't even warrant dismissal.  However, if Palin had said "well, I don't remember where Trig came from, I'll get back to you", what would you think?

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 04:47 PM (6TB1Z)

744 >>>Yes, God and Allah should quit promoting kids we can't afford. Or are you talking about after the apocalypse? Post first strike. After the loss of our grid kills half our people.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at October 31, 2011 04:48 PM (GE1+K)

745 Night all. 

Posted by: pep at October 31, 2011 04:48 PM (6TB1Z)

746 "Post first strike. After the loss of our grid kills half our people."

We will survive without the electrical grid.

Posted by: Ron Paul for President at October 31, 2011 04:51 PM (N7FAT)

747 You’re a very skilled blogger. I have joined your rss feed and look forward to seeking more of your magnificent post. Also, I’ve shared your site in my social networks!

Posted by: The Next Always epub at October 31, 2011 04:52 PM (bYYfj)

748 I don't have the trepidations a lot of you have about the candidates because I've always thought Romney would be a very successful President. I don't agree with everything he has supported but I hold that same opinion about every President we've had. Romney is a true capitalist who loves his country unconditionally.

Posted by: polynikes - Texan for Romney at October 31, 2011 04:53 PM (IqM9e)

749 "Post first strike. After the loss of our grid kills half our people."

So you are saying we shouldn't allow religious nut nations like Iran to have nukes?

Posted by: Ron Paul for President at October 31, 2011 04:55 PM (N7FAT)

750

No argument from me on wind energy. It's a stupid rathole, it doesn't work, I oppose it.  The overall program has yielded positive results, investments were made in lots of sectors, not just crappy wind farms, so I'm not seeing the net negative from the cherry-picking.  Jobs up in a down economy and while were were absorbing 1000 new citizens a day.

I wish Romney felt the same way about ethanol but he doesn't.  That's a fact too.

 

Also I know you're not attacking me.  Doesn't need to be said, I get that.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at October 31, 2011 05:08 PM (PjVdx)

751 Nice commentary. last thirty days I uncovered this internet site and desired to permit you be conscious that i’ve been gratified, heading via your site’s posts. I should certainly be signing equally as much as the RSS feed and can wait around for another post.

Posted by: Mac OS X Lion ePub at October 31, 2011 05:13 PM (ZCpyR)

752 I've always thought Romney would be a very successful President. I don't agree with everything he has supported but I hold that same opinion about every President we've had.

With Romney I get about 50% conservatism (giving him the national security issue and taxes maybe). With Perry I get about 80% conservatism. Romney is not a conservative and everyone knows it! Let 's not fight against reality here. We can simply look at the records of Romney and Perry. Rush has personal knowledge of both Romney and Perry. He has no doubt that Perry is a conservative and Romney is not. Just another data point for comparison. He liked both of them personally.

Posted by: LAI at October 31, 2011 05:59 PM (nLTW4)

753 Romneycare has increased cost for MA, not decreasing cost as Romney predicted. That 's another fact.

Posted by: LAI at October 31, 2011 06:01 PM (nLTW4)

754 Romney is skating in the primary. The left is saving their big ammunition for him in the general. It doesn't take much to see that Romney is the left 's insurance. They think Romney will help neutralize Obamacare and Goldman Sach 's tie to Obama. If Obama loses, Romney will be their best case scenario. Smart move for them.

I don't share Rush 's optimism about the direction of the country. I do hope that I am wrong. It is depressing just to look at the presidential candidates since 1988. The dem put up socialists like Clintons (they are smarter than Obama though), Algore, Kerry, and Obama. The Rep put up squishy moderates like Bush 1, Dole, and Bush 2 who was probably the best in the lot. Now we are talking about another minimalist moderate who needs to check his homework when it comes to conservatism.

Posted by: LAI at October 31, 2011 06:09 PM (nLTW4)

755 " Although I do generally think "where there's smoke there's fire," that's only a rule of thumb, and not something I'd bet money on. It's perfectly possible he's innocent of almost everything except a misunderstanding." At this time there is NO SOURCE, NO DETAILED ACCOUNT AVAILABLE FROM ANYONE INVOLVED except Herman Cain and Politico. No accuser. No statement. Nothing but the vaguest possible description. Is this really a scandal yet? Should we the (supposed) right conscientiously water it until it grows into a real scandal or something close enough as to have the same effect just to show the left how serious and open minded we want them to think we are? I mean the press will have such a hard time making this work if we don't chip in to show how eager we are to bury any smudge they claim to see right? We OWE THEM the help. Isn't that the reflex? Follow the code/protocol that they wrote for us to follow if we don't want to be implicated somehow by association? We have to do our part to sink our own ship or the left won't ever respect us. That they still don't respect us after we help is irrelevant. It's probably a coincidence. This time it will probably work right? This time we will earn their respect. We aren't facing ruthless dishonest adversaries who will do virtually anything up to making sure the dead vote to keep SCOAMF in the White House or anything. And it isn't like there's an absolutely fucking INSANE lack of detail here or anything. Here is how this looks to me: "Herman Cain can you immediately and categorically discredit this amorphous ghostly accusation that you probably did something awful that we can't specify to someone we can't specify way back when? If not you might as well go home with your head bowed and go to rehab you sick old horn dog pice of crap. I ALWAYS KNEW you wing-nuts are a bunch hypocrites about that family values morality stuff! Idiot! Did you think we wouldn't find out? And if you do have exculpatory evidence or an explanation that destroys the accusation, then how can we trust your word on the matter given that you totally look like the type and you Republicans are all corrupt liars and idiots anyway who got where you are by cheating and fooling decent people? " This isn't even at the "he asked if it was my public hair on a coke can when we were alone" he said/she said level. Right now, no one has had the guts to come forward with any real charge. it's just someone felt there was some form of sexual harassment and they filed a complaint a long time ago and it just came to light NOW that Cain is a front runner. WHO? There's not a who. It's anonymous at this point. Unnamed source. Deep Throat strikes/leaks again. WHAT? Some kind of non-overtly sexual gesture that made someone feel uncomfortable enough to complain. One of those. WHICH gesture? No information. WHERE? At a hotel during a business convention. WHEN? In the 1990's. WHY? No information. GREAT SCOOP! Run with it! Do you want a suspicious guy LIKE THIS to be your president? To me the "smoke" is an implicit racial stereotype of the "everyone knows that a black man can't always control his dick and a rich black man is even worse, ha ha! " variety. The "fire" that the smoke here betrays would be the easy embrace of that stereotype by the press and their cynical attempt to use it as a bludgeon against a successful minority candidate that they instinctively detest on partisan grounds ! Any "elite" news room that would allow this kind of thing to be released, much less propagated, and seriously discussed, in such a vaporous, flimsy, and incomplete form, while insinuating that it kind of sounds right enough to justify suspicion ( and yet pretending to maintain a thoughtful detachment from the whole thing ) is willfully and intentionally pandering to the "dirty rich old man having a mid life crisis" stereotype at best, and the vile old "hot blood of the jungle" stereotype at worst. Tawdry and even sick dog-whistles against REPUBLICAN (aka apostate/traitor/fake) black men are considered to be fair game by these bastards. They think you can't be validly considered racist if your target is a presumably non-certified member of a racial minority. To them minority status and protection isn't so much about appearance, genes, background, culture, or ancestry as it is a set of informally assigned credentials that can be withdrawn at will by the self appointed grantors or their representatives if they should become angry or capriciously moved to wards a state of either disapproval or malice.

Posted by: cackfinger at October 31, 2011 06:21 PM (a9mQu)

756

From what I've seen, about a third of all sexual harassment charges are true, a third are ambiguous events given the worst interpretation, and another third are completely bogus.

I suppose I wouldn't believe that Cain could be subject to a grievance for a harmless gesture if it had not happenned to me.  The fact is that no matter how bad a woman behaves toward you, if it goes to management, the man loses.  The woman can always claim some crazy shit like you've been stalking her.  You are guilty by assertion.  I know because it happenned to me.

Sexual harassment programs are rigged against men.  In my current company, there are six harassment complaints made against men for every one made against a woman.  My bet is that every organization in America has a female to male complaint ratio between five and ten to one.

It would be interesting to discover what the ratio of complaints were at Cain's organization.  That would tell the story of how hostile the workplace was for men.

About one out of twenty women at work is a bitch on wheels.  They know that they can fabricate anything out of thin air and HR will make it stick.

Posted by: Tantor at October 31, 2011 06:37 PM (Hotj8)

757 I hope you never stop!  This is one of the best blogs Ive ever read.  Youve got some mad skill here, man.  I just hope that you dont lose your style because youre definitely one of the coolest bloggers out there.  Please keep it up because the internet needs someone like you spreading the word.

Posted by: The Meaning of Marriage ePub at October 31, 2011 06:50 PM (2rmis)

Posted by: christine at October 31, 2011 07:36 PM (9N764)

759

Posted by: Tantor at October 31, 2011 11:37 PM (Hotj

Yep.

Posted by: Random at October 31, 2011 08:00 PM (YiE0S)

760 http://tinyurl.com/6ast27d

It doesn't matter what you think of the author of that piece. It's factually accurate. You think this wouldn't come out if Perry is the nominee? Really?

Perry is not the great True Conservative hope. His record shows him to be anything but.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 31, 2011 08:19 PM (TMB3S)

JackStraw--that article is full of shit. Top to bottom. Let me tell you, I've been to Andrews, have you? I doubt the author was either.

Let's take this: " I'm barreling down a stretch of State Highway 176 in the deadest, hottest part of the Texas desert, a few miles shy of the New Mexico border and about an hour west of the rusted oil wells and Friday night lights of Odessa-Permian." 1) Andrews is northwest of Midland/Odessa; 2) Andrews is, as the crow files, 31+ miles from the NM border; 3) The area around El Paso is drier and hotter and deader.

Then: "given how dangerously close it lies to the Ogalalla aquifer" 1) Andrews is, if at all, on the very-most Southern tip; 2) The recharge zone for the Ogalalla is not in Texas, very little surface water from TX makes it to the Ogalalla as there is a thick layer of caliche between it an the aquifer; 3)All those oil fields out there around Andrews, you think they are above or below the Ogalalla?

And: "But it's hard not to look beyond the dump to nearby Eunice, New Mexico, visible just a few miles away, and wonder about the wisdom of taking a private company's word that there is no contaminated water running underground to the nearby town." 1) Eunice is about 5.5 miles from the TX/NM border; 2) Anyone who thinks there is a possibility of the nuclear waste contemplated to be stored there "leaking" is a total fucking liar, and I'm being nice about that--It is, all of it, low level waste, contaminated clothes, tools, equipment that have to be discarded after exposure to ANY radiation. It's not glowing goo and it's not in old, used oil drums; 3) They've been storing waste their since 1999--kinda fucking blows up the whole "crony capitalist Perry" meme, doesn't it? 4) You know what else is 5 miles east of Eunice, right on the NM/TX border, between Eunice and this "dangerous" waste site? A uranium enrichment and processing plant, called UNERCO, USA. Odd the author left that out of his "factually accurate" smear job story, right? 5) You know what else? International Isotopes wants to build a uranium processing plant in the area too. Huh, having the only low-level storage, processing and treatment plant in the region doesn't seem so stupid now, does it? Why'd the author leave all that out, isn't that a bit relevant?

I could go on, there is a shit load more half-truths, smears, distortions and outright lies in the story. But when the source is all Democrats and their operatives, people Perry cut off from the gravy train and Debra "9/11 was an inside job" Medina, I think I've spent enough time. But you keep fapping that chicken if you want to.

Posted by: Jimmuy at November 01, 2011 06:33 AM (hROVJ)

761 Herman Cain is a token negro. his minstrel show will end soon.


Posted by: The Political Realist at November 01, 2011 07:01 AM (NZqxU)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
510kb generated in CPU 0.36, elapsed 0.4275 seconds.
62 queries taking 0.1141 seconds, 948 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.