Burn Cain!! Slowly. And. Surely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I assume the poster meant enter Cain's sexually harrassed victim number 4. Now will there be a fifth victim.

Yes, I wanted to know what "red" and "blue" meant. Nice take on the dem/repub colors, Takoma. c: And yes, I was referring to Cain's alleged victim #4, and wondering if there will be more. And, finally, FWIW, I'm a "he".

I'm kinda wishing that the 4th alleged victim didn't select Gloria as her counsel. Nothing against Gloria, but I worry that it could become more sensationalized. Thoughts?

[takoma]

I should definitely have realized what #4 meant -- I feel totally dense. Especially since I missed the obvious fact that you were a he; how could I have thought Anonymous was a woman's name?!

Maybe I'm being a little chauvinist about this, but I think it was not totally outlandish for Cain to think this lady was offering a quid pro quo, and since he dropped it when she said no, I'm not ready to convict him on that. However, I think denying it is the wrong response; "I got the wrong idea and did something I am very sorry about, as far as she is concerned and much more so as far as my wife is concerned" would play much better with me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I assume the poster meant enter Cain's sexually harrassed victim number 4. Now will there be a fifth victim.

Yes, I wanted to know what "red" and "blue" meant. Nice take on the dem/repub colors, Takoma. c: And yes, I was referring to Cain's alleged victim #4, and wondering if there will be more. And, finally, FWIW, I'm a "he".

I'm kinda wishing that the 4th alleged victim didn't select Gloria as her counsel. Nothing against Gloria, but I worry that it could become more sensationalized. Thoughts?

On one hand it makes me question their motives. But on another, this woman isn't suing Cain and so she needs a good attorney who will work for free. The only ones willing to do that are the lawyers who benefit from the publicity, like Allred.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I assume the poster meant enter Cain's sexually harrassed victim number 4. Now will there be a fifth victim.

Yes, I wanted to know what "red" and "blue" meant. Nice take on the dem/repub colors, Takoma. c: And yes, I was referring to Cain's alleged victim #4, and wondering if there will be more. And, finally, FWIW, I'm a "he".

I'm kinda wishing that the 4th alleged victim didn't select Gloria as her counsel. Nothing against Gloria, but I worry that it could become more sensationalized. Thoughts?

On one hand it makes me question their motives. But on another, this woman isn't suing Cain and so she needs a good attorney who will work for free. The only ones willing to do that are the lawyers who benefit from the publicity, like Allred.

Ahh, very good. Thanks.

[Anonymous]

When are we goona get to the good stuff...like the Clinton Rape incident? this is amateur stuff!

[Anonymous]

Polls are showing the republicans have a new favorite: Sandusky. Fox News and Rush are pushing him to enter the race. Should be a good fit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When are we goona get to the good stuff...like the Clinton Rape incident? this is amateur stuff!

You mean the one Republican Ken Starr refused to prosecute because the accuser couldn't keep her story straight?

Nice to know that amateur fondling is unimportant to you though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When are we goona get to the good stuff...like the Clinton Rape incident? this is amateur stuff!

Oh yeah, bring it on, I didn't know that Bill Clinton was running for president again but apparently he must be since you are bringing it up so it will be very timely.

[Anonymous]

If the president can get a rim job from an intern in the Oval Office and not lose his job then I don't see why Cain can't keep his job of being a candidate. He is only a candidate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If the president can get a rim job from an intern in the Oval Office and not lose his job then I don't see why Cain can't keep his job of being a candidate. He is only a candidate.

Certainly he can continue to be a candidate. His main problem will be getting donations and votes and if people choose to give him money and votes, well, no reason he should quit.

However, there's an important distinction between the two incidents you just cited. One involved consenting adults - stupid, irresponsible adults for whom I have contempt - but consenting nevertheless. The other involved an aggressive unwanted advance against an unemployed person looking for help finding a job with a verbal offer suggesting an immoral and illegal exchange - you blow me and I'll get you a job. If you strip these incidents of the celebrities involved, which incident fills you with more contempt? Not a contest for me.

Yeah if people want to give him money and vote for him, that's their business - but the two incidents are not the same by a long shot. And yelling Clinton, Clinton, Clinton at every opportunity is not going to change that.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:If the president can get a rim job from an intern in the Oval Office and not lose his job then I don't see why Cain can't keep his job of being a candidate. He is only a candidate.

Are you not capable of understanding the difference between consensual and non-consensual, or do you simply refuse to recognize the difference?

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the president can get a rim job from an intern in the Oval Office and not lose his job then I don't see why Cain can't keep his job of being a candidate. He is only a candidate.

Are you not capable of understanding the difference between consensual and non-consensual, or do you simply refuse to recognize the difference?

I can only go by what I have read about. I understand consensual and non-consensual but I am not sure that doing an intern as her superior means it was consensual. I do know that when she said no to Cain he stopped.

[Anonymous]

TheManWithAUsername wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's pretty clear that the Huffington Post (among others) has had a lot of fun skewering Cain all week! Love their headline this morning -- "Herman's Squirmin'"!! (-:

"and Clinton's spermin"

It's always funny to me that "conservatives" can't seem to wrap their minds around the concept of "consent".

Clinton was accused of a lot more than consensual sex.

Uh. Not Really. Except for the Willey woman--in which case she should have just kneed him in the groin and got on with her life--Clinton didn't force himself on women. The herman Cain thing is different--she was in his car and he shoved his hand up there? SCUMBAG.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the president can get a rim job from an intern in the Oval Office and not lose his job then I don't see why Cain can't keep his job of being a candidate. He is only a candidate.

Are you not capable of understanding the difference between consensual and non-consensual, or do you simply refuse to recognize the difference?

I can only go by what I have read about. I understand consensual and non-consensual but I am not sure that doing an intern as her superior means it was consensual. I do know that when she said no to Cain he stopped.

I think both women involved have been very clear about whether they consented or not. But, apparently you don't understand consent. Generally, consent is something that is required prior to placing your hand up a woman's skirt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the president can get a rim job from an intern in the Oval Office and not lose his job then I don't see why Cain can't keep his job of being a candidate. He is only a candidate.

Certainly he can continue to be a candidate. His main problem will be getting donations and votes and if people choose to give him money and votes, well, no reason he should quit.

However, there's an important distinction between the two incidents you just cited. One involved consenting adults - stupid, irresponsible adults for whom I have contempt - but consenting nevertheless. The other involved an aggressive unwanted advance against an unemployed person looking for help finding a job with a verbal offer suggesting an immoral and illegal exchange - you blow me and I'll get you a job. If you strip these incidents of the celebrities involved, which incident fills you with more contempt? Not a contest for me.

Yeah if people want to give him money and vote for him, that's their business - but the two incidents are not the same by a long shot. And yelling Clinton, Clinton, Clinton at every opportunity is not going to change that.

Allegedly involved. The woman didn't tell anyone about this in 14 years! With such a long lag time she needs to have some evidence for me to take her seriously. Like everyone else who is commenting online and in the media I don't know what happened with this woman or who is telling the truth. But to keep quiet about something like this For 14 years then come out with it and a celebrity lawyer when it suits is highly suspicious. Even though she isn't suing Cain I will be stunned if she is not trying to gain from this financially: book deal, paid interviews or just 15 minutes of fame. I will choose to ignore anything this woman says. The other accusers went on the record with their claims whether true or false.