|
|
Post by jon on Nov 2, 2011 17:14:28 GMT -8
I think he's done.
He wasn't in it to win anyway. Like Gingrich and Sanatorium, he is simply trying raise his speaking fees, but these sexual harassment charges are getting messy.
First he said he has never been charged with sexual harassment,
then he admitted there were some allegations,
then he admitted there was a small payout,
but he didn't know about those at the time (he was head of the National Restaurant Association-you'd think he'd know about 5 figure legal settlements paid on his behalf),
but that was it nothing else....oops,
now another person has showed up claiming harassment, and she has witnesses.
Cain's handlers are suddenly restricting press access to the candidate.
I can promise this isn't from the left, the left would have saved this until the general election campaign.
What I do see is that one of the witnesses for this third accuser works for Rick Perry, and Karl Rove was on Faux News blathering on and on about how horrible it is that Mr Cain has put himself in this position. Both Perry and Rove are parts of the Bush crony machine.
I'll file this under Republicans eating their own.
I'm willing to guess he'll do quite well on the book sales/lecture circuit over the next few years and wind up either as a candidate for congress in a few years or a commentator on Faux News.
Not bad for a pizza pusher.
|
|
|
|
Post by george1861 on Nov 3, 2011 6:30:41 GMT -8
He's way more than a pizza pusher & his experience is a glaring contrast to the Community Organizer's. What proof is there that he was just in it to raise his speaking fees? Looks like a repeat of Clarence Thomas smear.
|
|
|
|
Post by jon on Nov 3, 2011 7:51:31 GMT -8
What proof is there that he was just in it to raise his speaking fees? He has no serious campaign organization...his campaign head is someone who has been convicted of election related crimes in Wisconsin and was banned from any political activity in that state for several years. |
|
|
|
Post by jon on Nov 3, 2011 8:02:43 GMT -8
He's way more than a pizza pusher & his experience is a glaring contrast to the Community Organizer's. Successful businessman?...200 pizza shops were closed while he was in charge. (oh right you guys like to fire people) How is he at crisis management? a simple little accusation of some sexual harassment has led to several changes to his story and banishment of the press. Oh yeah, he's in total control. Clarence Thomas is a crook who violates judicial ethics standards, lies on his financial disclosure forms, and refuses to recuse himself despite a clear conflict of interest. He probably did do what Anita Hill said he did. That community organizer did a nice job organizing Abbotobad, Pakistan last May. |
|
|
|
Post by msguide on Nov 3, 2011 10:39:50 GMT -8
I was never in Herman Cain's camp.
I am still a Ron Paul supporter. I am not in favor of another program to undo the damage of previous programs. The way to undo the damage is to undo programs that don't work. I'm really surprised that anti-war voters have not picked up on his noninterventionist policies.
|
|
|
|
Post by george1861 on Nov 3, 2011 11:48:38 GMT -8
He's way more than a pizza pusher & his experience is a glaring contrast to the Community Organizer's. Successful businessman?...200 pizza shops were closed while he was in charge. (oh right you guys like to fire people) That community organizer did a nice job organizing Abbotobad, Pakistan last May. You got to stop the ship from sinking before you steam ahead, a concept Dems don't seem to understand about stopping the spending. Obama organized Abbotabad?  At least when the military caught Saddam, Bush gave credit where it was due, instead of self aggrandizement. |
|
|
|
Post by george1861 on Nov 24, 2011 10:49:19 GMT -8
Clarence Thomas is a crook who violates judicial ethics standards, lies on his financial disclosure forms, and refuses to recuse himself despite a clear conflict of interest. Where's your call for Kagan to recuse herself?  dailycaller.com/2011/11/22/kagan-recusal-a-pipe-dream/ |
|
|
|
Post by jon on Nov 24, 2011 11:27:49 GMT -8
Clarence Thomas is a crook who violates judicial ethics standards, lies on his financial disclosure forms, and refuses to recuse himself despite a clear conflict of interest. Where's your call for Kagan to recuse herself? dailycaller.com/2011/11/22/kagan-recusal-a-pipe-dream/can you shown me where she has personally profited from her tenure on SCOTUS? Can you show me where she lied on her financial documents? |
|
|
|
Post by george1861 on Nov 24, 2011 12:48:27 GMT -8
can you shown me where she has personally profited from her tenure on SCOTUS? Can you show me where she lied on her financial documents? How about personally involved with Obamacare, good enough I'd say. |
|
|
|
Post by jon on Nov 24, 2011 13:51:02 GMT -8
can you shown me where she has personally profited from her tenure on SCOTUS? Can you show me where she lied on her financial documents? How about personally involved with Obamacare, good enough I'd say. using your standard of having been involved with anything, creates a conflict of interest, what do we do with the corporate lawyers like Alito & Roberts and corporate shills like Thomas & Scalia (beholden to big corporate interests like big pharma, the Koch brothers, and the like) relative to the Citizens United case? |
|
|
|
Post by msguide on Nov 24, 2011 19:47:29 GMT -8
can you shown me where she has personally profited from her tenure on SCOTUS? Can you show me where she lied on her financial documents? So the standard is not whether someone lied, but whether they profited from the lie? Clear that up for me, please. |
|
|
|
Post by jon on Nov 24, 2011 21:03:42 GMT -8
can you shown me where she has personally profited from her tenure on SCOTUS? Can you show me where she lied on her financial documents? So the standard is not whether someone lied, but whether they profited from the lie? Clear that up for me, please. do you have an example of Justice Kagan telling a lie? |
|
|
|
Post by Maxf1ex on Nov 25, 2011 6:16:33 GMT -8
~chuckle~ And yes, in the heat of the moment I can be just as guilty of not reading or understanding the question. ~chuckle~
But it does make for fun reading when it happens.
But this has drifted far from the starting point. Which when I look at some of the charges and then the reply's I notice one thing.
No one seem to really be behind the Herman Cain's camp.
No one seems to disagree he would be better then what we have now.
As a business man he did close a few stores.
Clarence Thomas is a crook who violates judicial ethics standards
Kagan may have some conflicts due to what she has voice on public records and might need to excuse herself from hearing a case.
=============
How it looks to me.
Ok, in keeping it simple since I believe it is not the Federal Governments duty to interfere in states or a persons freedom unless they are causing harm to others. So, until it is time for the elections, debating who is running is a good thing.
SS (force on the American people as a safety net. With a promise return to the people who money was taken) has no bearing on if the government has the right to force people to buy healthcare. In fact it would seem to me that forcing people to buy health care could go against the General Welfare clause by targeting select groups and not placing everyone under it care.
It all seems so simple, but I am sure i is not all black and white but has many shades of gray.
|
|
|
|
Post by george1861 on Nov 25, 2011 6:34:01 GMT -8
do you have an example of Justice Kagan telling a lie? "Justice" Kagan, no, not off hand, but during her Senate hearing.... |
|
|
|
Post by Maxf1ex on Nov 25, 2011 8:20:47 GMT -8
do you have an example of Justice Kagan telling a lie? "Justice" Kagan, no, not off hand, but during her Senate hearing....
www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/2010/07/27/conflicting-testimony-did-kagan-lie-during-her-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings-about-her-partial-birth-abortions-influence/
When asked during her confirmation hearings about any possible, undue influence over the content of the ACOG statement, Kagan testified that “there was no way in which I would have or could have intervened with ACOG … to get it to change its medical views on the question.”
Far from not “intervening,” however, the released memos and other evidence show Kagan directly rewrote a critical portion of the ACOG statement to contradict the organization’s expert panel and shape the ACOG findings – and ultimately, the U.S. Supreme Court’s rulings – to match the president’s pro-abortion politics.
In a June 22, 1996, memo, Kagan admitted that her meeting with the ACOG was “something of a revelation,” for she learned that “in the vast majority of cases, selection of the partial-birth procedure is not necessary to avert serious adverse consequences to a woman’s health.”
...
Indeed, in her Senate testimony on June 30, 2010, Kagan admitted writing the amendment in an exchange with Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah. |
|
