Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Jen Rubin really really REALLY really wants Mitt Romney to be the nominee [updated]

What did Herman Cain know and when did he know it? And isn’t the cover-up (and there has to be one, because there just has to) of a non-overtly sexual sexual harassment worse than the non-overtly sexual sexual harassment anonymously alleged?

WE MUST KEEP THIS STORY ALIVE! FOR FREEDOM!

****
update: It’s all very concerning, this evasiveness in responding to how much he knew about unsourced allegations of harassing someone sexually in a non-overtly sexual way and how those incidents were resolved by the National Restaurant Association.

Exit question: Has anyone bothered to ask the National Restaurant Association what it’s policy is with respect to potentially sequestering those charged from the settlement/severence process — particularly in light of an investigation that found no basis for the original charges?

****
update 2: Jen Rubin last evening: “This reeks of guilty!”

(thanks to CindyCoops)

145 Replies to “Jen Rubin really really REALLY really wants Mitt Romney to be the nominee [updated]”

  1. Ernst Schreiber says:

    For Freedom, and page views. Don’t forget the hits.

    Or whatever the hell it is that you techie-tech techniks with your mad computer programemer skills use to measure each other.

  2. sdferr says:

    The Commentary crowd has been predominantly and consistently hostile to Cain, I’ve noticed.

  3. happyfeet says:

    Mitt Romney sexually harassed me at a Dunkin Donuts in St. Paul last year

  4. happyfeet says:

    no means no Mitt Romney

  5. cranky-d says:

    The only reason people call her a Republican is because she calls herself a Republican. That’s what the GOP establishment needed, yet another voice crying out for “pragmatism.”

    If you are hostile to Cain, it’s probably for the same reason you’re hostile to Palin. They just aren’t the “right sort” to be president. Also, they’re scary, because they are still real people who are not steeped in the beltway way of life. They actually have principles, and we simply cannot have that.

    The real experience a president needs is getting advisers they can trust and manage, who will provide the detailed information a president needs to make good decisions. The idea that one person can have all that knowledge is ludicrous. You need experts for that. Both Cain and Palin have a proven track record for that ability.

    If you think Cain is weak on foreign policy, for instance, all he needs to do is ask John Bolton to come on board as his adviser. Problem solved.

    I think Cain will make a great president. I hope he survives the onslaught from the left and the right. If not, then Perry had better make a comeback, because Romney is a non-starter for a lot of people, including me.

    As for those doing the attacking from the right, their names shall be remembered, and their voices, in the future, largely ignored.

  6. happyfeet says:

    all I wanted was a tasty flatbread sammich

  7. McGehee says:

    Remember, you can’t say “Jen Rubin” without saying “rube.”

  8. leigh says:

    If you are hostile to Cain, it’s probably for the same reason you’re hostile to Palin.

    Or not. I like Mr. Cain very much. Mrs. Palin not so much.

  9. Jeff G. says:

    See update: some people are very very concerned that Mr Cain wouldn’t know about certain things. And the cover up is worse than the crime.

    I know, because I’ve read All the President’s Men and I have lots of followers on both Twitter and my blog.

  10. Jeff G. says:

    Jen Rubin last evening: “This reeks of guilty!” http://twitter.com/#!/JRubinBlogger/status/130815116710133760

  11. bh says:

    She’s just covering herself in glory lately.

  12. sdferr says:

    Well heck, Jen mustn’t believe she has any repute worth preserving, so let her fly.

  13. DarthLevin says:

    Jen Rubin undressed me with her eyes. Through the internet.

    Prove it didn’t happen, bitches.

  14. Crawford says:

    She’s just covering herself in glory lately.

    So *that* is what they’re calling it these days.

  15. Darleen says:

    Has anyone bothered to ask the National Restaurant Association what it’s policy is with respect to potentially sequestering those charged from the settlement/severence process — particularly in light of an investigation that found no basis for the original charges?

    This.

    Someone said that if Cain actually did NOT know there was a settlement, it did not speak well of his management style

    I replied how could they make such a statement without knowing if the Nat. Rest. Association’s chain of command for these kind of things? I know where I work, HR investigates and makes determinations and they will NOT tell the people involved what the resolutions are.

  16. guinspen says:

    Jen Rubin reeks of shrimp boats.

  17. Jeff G. says:

    By the way: I think I now know why I’ve been frozen out by a lot of the big blogs / big “conservative” media personalities. I’m a dick and a pain in the ass.

    But regardless of what people may tell you, I’m pretty fucking principled, as well. That should matter.

  18. Sears Poncho says:

    For Freedom, and page views. Don’t forget the hits.

    Funny thing about that. I would occasionally read her when she was contributing to Commentary. Now? I wouldn’t click on a Washington Post link if my life depended on it. Why bother reading that rag? They’re completely disreputable at this point.

  19. Darleen says:

    via Dan Collins

    My problem with a part of Hillyer’s analysis is that he says that since these charges were made years before Cain ever ran for political office, there can’t be anything political about them. Anyone who’s been in business knows that there’s a good deal of politicking that goes on in most business environments.

    Once, employed by a company that I’m not going to mention here, I was made to go to a kind of ad hoc occupational therapy. My transgression? The company chat room were having a conversation about instituting a policy of charging more for plus-sized garments, and I asked, “What are the sales people supposed to do? Ask whether they want their orders super-sized?” The only details on why I was called into my supervisor’s office I ever got were that there was a woman who regarded herself as overweight in the chat who was offended. Was my (admittedly glib) comment aimed at her? Hell, I never found out who it was, because accusers are entitled to protections that the accused are not. Merely for recognizing this disparity aloud, Professor Thomas Thibeault was fired in the most humiliating fashion. […]

    The people whose opinions I value the most, though, are those women who have worked with Herman Cain over his campaigns, and they seem, to a person, incredulous regarding any sexual harassment charges. For the moment, their testimony means more to me than anonymous accusations of alleged impropriety.

  20. LBascom says:

    I just find it hard to believe Cain wouldn’t have to approve something like that given that it’s his reputation at stake

    Maybe he didn’t think his reputation was at stake regardless. You know, ‘cuz he’s innocent…

  21. guinspen says:

    *sniff*

    *sniff*

  22. batboy says:

    Completely off-topic, and cock-slap me if I deserve it, but when did “concerning” start doing the work of “worrying”?

    Also, where did “irrespective” come from. Shouldn’t that be “regardless”?

    Just wondering.

    Oh, and as for the Herman Cain thing: As I understand it, Politico has a completely unsourced story, but since the unsourced story is out there, Cain must explain himself, including sources.

    On that basis, I could just about spin gold out of hay.

  23. serr8d says:

    I’m a dick and a pain in the ass.

    Larry Sinclair said that too. Baracky agrees.

    But Politico? having none of that!

  24. LBascom says:

    batboy, they’re called synonyms.

    Been around awhile…

  25. batboy says:

    Well, ok, but “concerning” for me has always meant “about”. I’ve only recently noticed it as a substitute for worrying in the last 15 years or so.

    Same with “irrespective”.

    Ooooooooooooohhhhhhh!!! I got it. I’m an old fart. The world is moving on.

    Someday, the English I speak will be as comprehensible as “WHAN that Aprille with his shoures soote/The droghte of Marche hath perced to the roote…”, etc.

    The world embiggens. I nonetheless feel cromulent, but offer the world my most enthusiastic contrafribularities. I’m anispeptic, frasmotic, even compunctuous to have caused the group such pericombobulation.

  26. mojo says:

    Me, I’m waiting for the “Group of 88” to issue a letter on the matter.

    No doubt it’s being touched up even now…

  27. mojo says:

    Crystal Magum sings: “YES! He vas… my BOYFRIEND!!”

  28. batboy says:

    What did Cain expect? “Welcome, sonny”? “Make yourself at home”? “Marry my daughter”?

    You’ve got to remember that these are just simple establishment Republicans. These are people of the land. The overlords of common clay of the East coast. You know … NRO types.

  29. The National Restaurent Association has released a statement that these questions refer to a dispute nearly fifteen years ago, and that it is their policy never to discuss personnel issues either during or after employment.

  30. LBascom says:

    That song made me a little misty…

  31. If the complaint was being adjudicated between the NRA and the complainants, rather than between the complainants and Cain, e.g. because the complainants were acting against the NRA for hiring Cain, then Cain might well never have heard about any resolution.

  32. Jeff G. says:

    HOOEY, RICHARD! JEN AND CO SAY HOOEY!

  33. batboy says:

    Great. Clint Eastwood enters the fray.

  34. An interesting tweet from Politico

    @rcpvideo ” @Politico HACK @jmartpolitico: ‘It’s Up To @THEHermanCain To Explain What He Was Accused Of…” – http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/10/31/politicos_martin_its_up_to_cain_to_explain_what_he_was_accused_of.html

    In short, we demand the candidate provide the details we don’t have…

  35. Jeff G. says:

    No, seriously. She actually did use the word “hooey.”

  36. DarthLevin says:

    In short, we demand the candidate provide the details we don’t have…

    …and if he doesn’t, we’ll “just ask questions” and demand he address them.

  37. LBascom says:

    ? Wa wa waaaa ?

  38. sdferr says:

    I caught a couple of minutes of Shep interviewing Ed Rollins. heh. Rollins says Cain has to come clean. hahahaha

  39. geoffb says:

    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.”

    Of course Hot Air has another angle for today.

  40. sdferr says:

    The interview with Fox is part of a series of interviews Cain is making this week. The press offensive was originally planned to discuss Cain’s economic plans, but has turned into a series of questions about the sexual harassment allegations from the 1990s.

    Which is precisely what Politico had in mind I believe. So, mission accomplished.

  41. Ernst Schreiber says:

    update 2: Jen Rubin last evening: “This reeks of guilty!”

    Have any of you tweeting twits thought to ask Jen Rubin what rush to judgement smells like?

  42. Jeff G. says:

    Cain answered a question about the campaign finance thing. Said he hadn’t heard the story, but he’d check it out, check with his campaign, and they can ask him about it later.

    That’s a non-politician’s answer, and that’s precisely why he’s doing so well.

  43. Pablo says:

    If I had to guess, Ernst, I’d say brie with a hint of Merlot.

  44. LBascom says:

    I think it’s a sad day when so many on our side are willing to use Alinsky’s rules on one of our own.

    Illuminating, but sad.

  45. motionview says:

    It’s not sexual harassment to bust someone’s balls for being short.
    Ah, my sexism showing through. To squeeze someones’s uteri?

  46. mojo says:

    “Hooey?”
    “Hooey. Balls, baloney, bilge, blague, blah-blah, blah, bop, bosh, bull, bullshit, bunk, bunkum, claptrap, crap, eyewash, flam, flapdoodle, flimflam, gammon, gas, guff, gup, hogwash, hoke, hokum, hot air, humbug, humbuggery, jiggery-pokery, malarkey, moonshine, piffle, poppycock, rot, scat, shit, tommyrot, tripe, wind. You know – bullshit.”

  47. BBHunter says:

    – There is an upside to this sort of politico-defamery tactic. Should Cain show himself to be adroit at handling his detractors, and so far he seems to be doing a yeoman’s job of it, and should this yellow print fall apart in the next few days, also which seems to be happening in fact, the nimrods behind this, and other antagonists will find the going tough in any future attempts.

    – So there’s that.

  48. DarthLevin says:

    That’s a non-politician’s answer, and that’s precisely why he’s doing so well.

    Hmmm. Maybe Herman has stopped listening to his handlers. Or replaced them with better, less lick-spittly finger-to-the-wind politico-type handlers.

  49. newrouter says:

    We thought he was finished. Cain, without raising an eyebrow, had answered questions. The Q-and-A was over. But the moderator had one last query: He asked Cain, a longtime Gospel singer, for a tune. Cain paused briefly, mulling, then shuffled back to the podium.

    The audience loved it — even the journalists, many of whom couldn’t hide smiles. Cain is under fire, to be sure, and song is by no means a political strategy. But Block, sitting a step away, didn’t intervene; he sat back and looked on. And Cain, his hands gripping the podium, burst into a few verses of one of his favorites — “He Looked Beyond My Faults.”

    “Amazing Grace will always be my song of praise,” Cain sang, his rich baritone filling the room. “I do not know just why He came to love me so. He looked beyond my faults and saw my need.”

    After a few more bars, he finished, dipped his head as the cheers rang, then pumped his fist in the air. More media hits, with Fox News and others, awaited. But on the toughest afternoon of his presidential journey, Cain left the event a fighter — and a singer, belting grace under fire.

    Link

  50. newrouter says:

    speaking of hooey mittens/baracky’s fav rube

    This is fast becoming a mess. First, the Politico story was baseless and he wouldn’t respond to unknown accusers. Then there was an admission of sexual harassment claims. Next we heard he didn’t know of any settlement. Now he says he knew about the settlement and the amount.

    Something here — lots of things — are not holding together. The error Cain made was in not getting the entire story out early, completely and truthfully. He left the day with voters and the media more confused than ever.

    This may not be the end of the Cain campaign, but it will take a toll. The never-ending stories here suggest Cain hasn’t been honest with the public. That’s going to be harder to explain than the original allegation

    Link

  51. sdferr says:

    Rubin must think she knows the public. I have my doubts as to that.

  52. LBascom says:

    That’s going to be harder to explain than the original allegation

    Only if you presumed him guilty on the original allegation to start with.

    You know what’s hard to explain is making allegations there is no evidence for. I mean, you can gossip if you want, but let’s not pretend it’s anything else.

  53. newrouter says:

    jen the rube is playing the wapo game. gots to get the mittens and baracky sitting in the tree. #ows demands it.

  54. Crawford says:

    newrouter points out another game the press plays:

    This is fast becoming a mess. First, the Politico story was baseless and he wouldn’t respond to unknown accusers. Then there was an admission of sexual harassment claims. Next we heard he didn’t know of any settlement. Now he says he knew about the settlement and the amount.

    Something here — lots of things — are not holding together. The error Cain made was in not getting the entire story out early, completely and truthfully. He left the day with voters and the media more confused than ever.

    This may not be the end of the Cain campaign, but it will take a toll. The never-ending stories here suggest Cain hasn’t been honest with the public. That’s going to be harder to explain than the original allegation

    Call it the “why didn’t the story appear perfectly formed like a Stephen King novel” syndrome. The MSM conveniently cannot comprehend the concept of imperfect knowledge, of time delays, of hearing things out of order or of getting only partial information. If it’s not all wrapped up in a pretty bow, clearly it must be a cover-up.

    Of course, when it’s a Democrat-National Socialist Worker’s Party member, the press plays the opposite game — the accusations, if not fully formed, completely sourced and already prosecuted, are dismissed as a fishing expedition.

  55. happyfeet says:

    National Soros Radio tries to run the Politico football into the end-zone

    I thought this gem was the sparkliest

    Cain’s account would become even more questionable if the women had pursued their complaints through the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, or through the courts.

  56. happyfeet says:

    also in another story today National Soros Radio thought the Cain allegations were a good occasion to remind its audience that Republicans are racist black-haters

    Perhaps Cain really believes that all the people who expressed racial animus or even anxiety about Obama during the 2008 presidential race have had a conversion. But that seems unlikely.

    or even anxiety? Really?

  57. geoffb says:

    Mojo, add flummery, a Nero Wolfe-ism

  58. Pablo says:

    I don’t think Cain really cares what the Clintons think.

  59. BT says:

    Cain needs to upgrade his message control and discipline departments.

  60. geoffb says:

    C-Span To Cover Gingrich/Cain Tea-Party Debate November 5th

    GREAT!

  61. Jeff G. says:

    Rubin keeps insisting this is really going to hurt Cain. Keeps insisting.

    And yet the world won’t listen to the fake conservative who last night all but declared him guilty, and who now is pitching the “cover-up worse than the crime” bs that she would never try on, say, Romney.

  62. sdferr says:

    That sounds like Krauthammer BT, who keeps his blade well hidden most times. Cain most likely doesn’t have such “departments” at this juncture, since as Krauthammer likes to point out, Cain is “winging it” — or as I find it easier to call it — living a human life.

  63. sdferr says:

    One woman wrecking crew, revisited, over at Powerline, looks back at Rubin’s view of Romney, Huckabee and Thompson in 2008.

  64. Pablo says:

    Let’s assume that Herman Cain misbehaved, in the manner that is alleged in Politico, during his time as the head of the National Restaurant Association in the late 1990s.

    Such an assumption is hard to make—not because the allegations are unbelievable, or because Cain vehemently denied the charges today at a National Press Club lunch (“I was falsely accused”), but because Politico wrapped the allegations in journalistic gauze that frays and dissolves as you unwind it.

    When Reuters is calling you out…

  65. leigh says:

    I have found myself looking at Dr. Krauthammer through narrowed eyes of late.

  66. newrouter says:

    well we could be talking about the “drunken” ricky perry vid. but sex sells.

  67. Joe says:

    Stuart Varney and Juan Williams were great on Hannity today, both say the attacks on Herman Cain, by both the left and right, are motivated by his economic policy and challenging the status quo. Williams was shocked by the vileness of the attacks from the left. Varney pointed out how it was only when 999 started to change the dynamic that the attacks really started in earnest.

    I know a lot of Dems who think Cain has little chance of beating Obama in the general, but they really do not like the idea of the GOP having a committed black conservative running. Better to exercise their “right to choose” the GOP nominee.

  68. leigh says:

    Joe, I think they are fearful that all of this talk of changing the way we tax our citizens is upsetting a lot of applecarts.

  69. BT says:

    Whether it sounds like Krauthammer or not, really doesn’t change the fact that within 24 hours we have had how many clarifications?

    What is sad is that it is extremely possible that Cain did not have direct knowledge of the negotiations etc, that went into the settlements because they were most likely handled by HR, corporate council and the insurance carriers. And since the insurance carriers were paying the bills they got to call the terms of the settlement if any.

    The only thing Cain would have been concerned about was that there would be no admission of guilt in any settlement.

    The reason i know is that when i held office i was sued as part of the city, the council and as an individual for an alleged civil rights violation. I doubt a restaurant association has less protections than a municipality.

    The insurance company settled. and we admitted no wrongdoing. Heck we didn’t even get to choose our attorney.

    I understand that Cain inspires a lot of trust amongst his supporters. And being the un-candidate has its charms. But he is running for President and if present performance is an indicator of future performance, i have to be concerned.

    This debate with Newt is revving up to be an epic make or break situation for Herman.

  70. newrouter says:

    “But he is running for President and if present performance is an indicator of future performance, i have to be concerned. ”

    yes scoamf gets a pass on effin everything include his presidency.

  71. BT says:

    “yes scoamf gets a pass on effin everything include his presidency.”

    I don’t believe i have given Obama a pass on anything. And being critical of Cains performance isn’t related to Obama anyway. Different people different expectations. I fully expect Obama to be a one termer. I fully expect Cain to leave this country in better shape than he found it.

  72. happyfeet says:

    And since the insurance carriers were paying the bills they got to call the terms of the settlement if any.

    Mr. Beldar seems to think insurance companies were probably not involved

    Karl, for what it’s worth: It’s not a major part of my practice anymore, but in the past I’ve represented both plaintiffs and defendants in sexual harassment cases from time to time. I could be mistaken, but my impressions are:

    Most businesses and associations have commercial general liability (CGL) insurance policies that promise to indemnify and defend the insured against a broad variety of risks. The insurance industry generally treats sexual harassment claims as being like intentional torts — battery, for example — that are excluded from coverage as part of standard policy boilerplate.

    Of course if you go to Lloyds of London or similar syndicates of specialty insurers and reinsurers, you can buy coverage for anything — Lauren Bacall’s legs, Tony Romo’s arm, the risk of aliens teleporting your data off your hard drive. It’s also possible for companies to purchase claims adjustment services — outsourcing that function — separately from liability insurance against any resulting judgments.

    But I believe that for the most part, businesses and organizations are generally self-insured — i.e., liable for both costs of defense and payment of any judgment out of their own pockets.

    Of course, cost of defense is an important factor to consider in settlement decisions no matter who is bearing those costs.

    Comment by Beldar — 10/31/2011 @ 4:57 pm

  73. newrouter says:

    the klondikes makes me defensive tonight

  74. newrouter says:

    “Of course, cost of defense is an important factor to consider in settlement decisions no matter who is bearing those costs.”

    if you be recused you be mostly out of the fruit loop

  75. BT says:

    In our case because the alleged civil rights violations took place in the course of our normal duties, we were covered. What the specifics of the National Restaurant Associations coverage is, i do not know.

  76. happyfeet says:

    I like how the klondike bars are so cold that was a great idea to freeze them, whoever thought of that

  77. happyfeet says:

    I have no idea either Mr. BT I just mentioned it cause of how Mr. Beldar is co compunctillious about legal stuff

  78. happyfeet says:

    *so* compunctillious I mean

  79. newrouter says:

    i hope the #ows oakland weren’t lobbing klondikes the other night. that be a big carbon foot print and hurt to boot.

  80. geoffb says:

    I would bet that the NDAs are the cause of some of the inconsistencies. How to answer without violating whatever was signed.

  81. newrouter says:

    ot mr. jeff g. could you put your twitter feed on the sidebar so i don’t have find bh’s post?

  82. Jeff G. says:

    If I knew how to do that I would, newrouter.

  83. newrouter says:

    me neither but there’s this

    “Widgets let you display Twitter updates on your website or social network page

    Our widgets are compatible with any website and most social networks. Simply choose the one that matches where you would like to include it.”

    http://twitter.com/about/resources/widgets

    or just the link bh posted. i like the pw raw feed.

  84. happyfeet says:

    here is the blowjob propaganda slut Jen Rubin gave Meghan’s coward daddy after the NYT ran its dubious story suggesting that McCain might have gotten his tiny little geriatric pecker all aroused for some bimbo lobbyist

    here’s a taste

    The New York Post, which the Times crowd surely holds in low regard, had to remind their Gotham brethren that: “This was no failure to live up to high standards. It was a drive-by shooting masquerading as a newspaper story. Indeed, the 3,000-word piece — written by a team of four reporters after months of ‘work’ – was long on innuendo, thick with anonymous sources and shockingly short on substantive facts.”

  85. sdferr says:

    I’ve always been in favor of the cover up of the crime that didn’t happen. Makes for mustn’t see tv.

  86. John Bradley says:

    So Jen is engaging in “situational journalistic ethics”. Imagine that.

    Apparently, you need proof when accusing an establishment RINO of a sexual dalliance, but a mere anonymous charge of “harrassment of a non-sexual nature” is a hanging offense if you’re an outsider seeking the R nomination. Or, y’know, a shvartze.

  87. Jeff G. says:

    So don’t vote for him BT

    He’s addressing questions as they arise. He answers them like a businessman because that’s what he is.

    I bet he gets a bounce. And I’m sick of people pretending to watch how he’s handling this phony story to determine his ability to handle the job. He’s not some bug on a pin, and those on the right who’ve piled on are part of the reason we get useless milquetoast candidates who are in constant pander mode.

  88. newrouter says:

    well i gave herman $10 tonite just to say eff you to jen the rube.

  89. BT says:

    Maybe i won’t. But i’m running out of not Romney choices.

    And if he is answering questions like a businessman, and a CEO, then he should be able to surround himself with staff that serve him better. That is all I’m saying. I mean that is what good executives do.

    Let’s be honest. Would you hire a candidate who constantly has to clarify items on his resume?

    Let’s review. I like the man. I trust the man. I would like to continue to trust the man. I just see areas he needs to improve upon. It’s really as simple as that.

  90. sdferr says:

    Why do you like him BT? Or to say better maybe, how does he fit what you would want in a man of government?

  91. newrouter says:

    “And if he is answering questions like a businessman, and a CEO, then he should be able to surround himself with staff that serve him better. ”

    romney or cain on #ows?

  92. happyfeet says:

    Mr. daleyrocks, who is a man of no small expertise in such matters, offers this

    Beldar – Insurance coverage for harassment these days is most often covered under separate Employment Practices Liability policies and/or D&O policies for Officers and Directors I believe.

  93. newrouter says:

    “Would you hire a candidate who constantly has to clarify items on his resume? ”

    ax the romney thing about that sir!

  94. guinspen says:

    God bless Jennifer Rubin and all the shrimps at sea.

  95. newrouter says:

    please folks
    jen the rube is
    the best you can do
    burka shave

  96. BT says:

    Sdferr,

    I like his back story. Best i can tell he is 6 years older than me, grew up less than 20 miles from me, yet we grew up in different worlds. His answer to Lawrence O’Donnell about his lack of participation in the freedom rides was dead on. He knew his ticket out of the southside was to keep out of trouble and finish college. His answer came from the heart. His daddy told him to keep his head down, focus on school and get that education. If he had been out there getting arrested i doubt seriously the chairman of Coca Cola, whom his daddy drove for, would have given him the stockshares that paid his way through Morehouse.

    There was a little exchange during one of the debates that also rang true. When asked to describe himself he said he was po before he was poor.

    It’s the American dream, and Cain represents what education and effort can do.

  97. sdferr says:

    So far — and I much agree with you BT as to the man’s background and evident character — in the main, what I hear from Cain is closer to a grasp of the core of American political thought as uniquely expressed in our founding documents than what I hear from any of the other candidates: he cleaves to the essential principles as to a life-raft for our political salvation. In combination, the two — Cain’s character and his grasp — seem to me to make him the strongest proponent of our needs. And he fulfills his understanding in the manner of his leadership, working as he does to bring the people, the first thing, along with him, as well as depending on that gathering to make the substance of his prospects.

    In contrast, Newt, for instance, gets the political core too, but as to character, Newt is a wanderer in too many senses. Ron Paul also understands the meaning of our liberty, but too far in his case in a frictionless ideal sense, than in the applied political sense at hand. Perry, I can’t decide on, to the extent that I haven’t heard enough from him, haven’t had his broader views of our political theory from his own mind — he may have it, he may not, I dunno. I leave the others aside.

    But it’s the primacy of that core which sets the difference to me. Without it, every politician will fall short.

  98. Jeff G. says:

    Let’s be honest. Would you hire a candidate who constantly has to clarify items on his resume?

    Depends. Does he have a spot on his resume for “sexual harassment successes”?

  99. Jeff G. says:

    I think that was very well put, sdferr. To me, Cain’s biggest failing was his reaction to the Perry painted rock story. But given his own history, you can almost understand his blind spot. Other than that, his “gaffes,” as we’re told to think of them, are not — unless all you care about is political polish.

    I think people are looking for the opposite of slickly packaged mush and blank slates this time. Cain, for what he lacks in political experience, makes up for in speaking his mind and exhibiting leadership, fearlessness, and likability.

  100. Slartibartfast says:

    Would you hire a candidate who constantly has to clarify items on his resume?

    Depends on to what extent those clarifications reveal that the need for clarification was all smokescreen.

  101. newrouter says:

    mr. mittens should clarify about his clarifications.

  102. BT says:

    Sdferr,

    So you are completely satisfied with Cain’s performance thus far?

  103. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Do we want authenticity in a candidate, or is it that what we really want is the illusion of authenticity?

    Because this is what it looks like when you get a “real person” running for elected office. Real people are imperfect. And bothersome. Sure, it would be nice if Cain were more disciplined, his message more controlled. But the trade-off is that he would be less genuine, less accessible. Because that kind of discipline creates an artificial distance between the messenger and the audience.

    You gotta let Herman be Herman.

  104. sdferr says:

    Satisfied in what sense BT? He has a great deal to learn I’m sure, and so far as I can tell is working hard at it while keeping to the campaign’s determination that Herman be Herman, or stay Herman, as the case may be. But sure, I think he can make his dealings with the opponent press far better than they have been, for one instance of dissatisfaction I’ve felt now and again. But this is to me a relatively trivial matter as regards my own view of him, though I recognize possibly not so trivial in regard to achieving his ultimate goals, to the extent that other people focusing on what I think trivial view that differently.

    Still, I’m not disappointed on the topics of the main problems, while allowing that not everything has been directly addressed as yet.

  105. newrouter says:

    “So you are completely satisfied with Cain’s performance thus far?”

    is mittens many flip flop really fun to watch? m

  106. BT says:

    Wouldn’t authenticity also involve clarity and the illusion of authenticity would require constant clarification to bring the illusion into focus?

    I prefer authenticity with an extra helping of clarity in my Cain.

  107. newrouter says:

    “So you are completely satisfied with Cain’s performance thus far?”

    yea i like how the scoamf term is not discussed. hey dude the meat loaf in the oven from 3 days ago is better than scoamf!!11!!

  108. sdferr says:

    What is it that’s unclear which most counts to you BT? That is, is it some particular issue (or many such?), or merely his scattershot approach today on the Politico gin-up?

  109. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Wouldn’t authenticity also involve clarity and the illusion of authenticity would require constant clarification to bring the illusion into focus?

    Exactly backwards in my opinion. What’s clear is that Cain stumbles through answers from time to time. I happen to think that it’s because he’s trying to communicate relevant information that’s a matter of public import while also keeping things that are nobody’s damn business but his own private. As opinions within the campaign about what’s public and what’s private change, the information changes. I also think that he’s got a lot of amatuers around him because the professional campaign handlers don’t want anything to do with him because he’s either not considered a serious contender or because they deem him uncontrollable. If you or others want to think it’s because he’s a lying liar in search of a lie that people want to believe, or else something between those extremes, be my guest.

    Cain may improvise his way to the nomination and on to the White House brilliantly. He may blow himself up somewhere along the line. He may settle down into a more conventional role. I don’t know. But I don’t see much point in decrying the fact that we keep ending up with McCains and Romneys and Bushes if we’re going write off the Cains for not having the political accumen and organizational strength of a McCain or Romney or Bush.

  110. sdferr says:

    Or worse, the terrifying sales acumen of Axlerods and Plouffes.

  111. newrouter says:

    “I prefer authenticity with an extra helping of clarity in my Cain.”

    i think you missed the “mc” part. allah the gop is old and stupid since 1988. party rovester!

  112. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Axelrod is as much of a genius as is Karl Rove, sdferr.

  113. Ernst Schreiber says:

    allah the gop is old and stupid since 1988.

    You have to blame Reagan for that.

  114. Ernst Schreiber says:

    And the 22nd Amendment too, I suppose.

  115. sdferr says:

    His campaign design in 08 was just what it had to be to sell the lie he sold. In other words, perfect. So perfect that he can’t do it again, so he undid himself I reckon. But still, credit due where credit falls.

  116. BT says:

    Sdferr,

    It is a general raising of the hairs on the back of my neck. 9-9-9 now is 9-0-9 or 9-9-9 modified. What was the gotcha on Gitmo? Nothing that kills his candidacy with me, let’s just say caution flags are up.

    Now lets look at what Mr. Ernst has to say.

    ” What’s clear is that Cain stumbles through answers from time to time.”

    “I also think that he’s got a lot of amatuers around him because the professional campaign handlers don’t want anything to do with him because he’s either not considered a serious contender or because they deem him uncontrollable. ”

    Gee i wish i had said that.

    ‘If you or others want to think it’s because he’s a lying liar in search of a lie that people want to believe, or else something between those extremes, be my guest.”

    Glad i never said that.

    And Newrouter yes Obama is a stuttering cluster fuck of a miserable failure.

    And Romney flip flops worse than a fish out of water.

    K?

  117. newrouter says:

    “You have to blame Reagan for that.”

    nah ghw bush. bush 1,2,3 4 rubio all a holes. eff the bushop.

  118. newrouter says:

    hey ricky perry another texass bushop

  119. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Good campaign design, but Axelrod had as much to do with Hillary interjecting herself into that “Gee you seem to be relying awfully heavy on the advice of other older, more experienced politicians Senator Obama” debate question as Rove did with making Al Gore all but hump W’s leg in their respective debate.

  120. sdferr says:

    I think the tax plan one of his assets, as opposed to a liability BT, because of where it comes from. I don’t see the 9-0-9 detail as a problem at all, nor even, so far as I can tell, so much a modification as merely an element which hadn’t been foregrounded and now is. Which, heck, the rationale is plain enough, isn’t it?

    As to the Gitmo flub? meh, I wrote that off as a brain-fart of decidedly minor import.

  121. newrouter says:

    “It is a general raising of the hairs on the back of my neck. 9-9-9 now is 9-0-9 or 9-9-9 modified. What was the gotcha on Gitmo?”

    so do you buy 1 jew for 1000 arabs if you are in mid east? that be gotcha. tax 999 if you want.

  122. BT says:

    I like 9-9-9 just fine I’d like 5-5-5 better.

    What i don’t like is special dispensation based on income.

    Fair is fair, flat is flat.

  123. Ernst Schreiber says:

    I know what you said and what you didn’t, BT. I’d like to think we’re both offering our opinions (and our opinions of each other’s opinions) in good faith.

  124. BT says:

    NR,

    If memory serves he said he could see himself negotiating with terrorists,in a quick soundbite with Wolf Blitzer and then denied saying it to Anderson Cooper then clarified himself by telling Cooper he mispoke.

  125. Ernst Schreiber says:

    newrouter,

    who put ghwb on the ballot in ’80? who kept him on the ballot in ’84? who was scrupulously neutral in ’88?

    Reagan was not perfect

  126. sdferr says:

    What i don’t like is special dispensation based on income.

    Fair is fair, flat is flat.

    That, I guess, is an area I’d look at under the rubric of a friction in the polity that can’t be worked around just now, or just yet, I don’t know which BT, what Lincoln refers to in the Peoria address in this wise:

    “Whether this feeling accords with justice and sound judgment, is not the sole question, if indeed, it is any part of it. A universal feeling, whether well or ill-founded, can not be safely disregarded.”

  127. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Fair is fair, flat is flat.

    15 isn’t 20, but if you like your bracket, you can keep it.

    he said he could see himself negotiating with terrorists

    He said he could see himself making that call (i.e. negotiating a “hostage” “exchange” with terrorists) if that was the right thing to do. Which isn’t quite the same thing. But I’m going off of what was written after the fact. I didn’t see the debate.

  128. Ernst Schreiber says:

    To add on briefly, my take is that Cain thought the question he was answering was “Are you ready to make tough, unpopular decisions (like, hypothetically, negotiating the release of an american serviceman held hostage by a terrorist organization)? Not the “Are you in favor of negotiating with terrorists?” that it became after the fact.

  129. sdferr says:

    Though I haven’t listened to the Blitzer interview, I had thought that Cain understood Blitzer to be asking a hypothetical along the line “if you were in Netanyahu’s position, would you do what Netanyahu did?”, then Blitzer added Gitmo to the scenario and Cain says he didn’t reevaluate what had been altered, focusing on the earlier hypothetical in error. But, again, this is genuinely trivial, isn’t it?

  130. BT says:

    Blitzer asked if Cain would be willing to negotiate with al-Qaeda by releasing all of the prisoners at Guantanimo Bay.

    “I could see myself authorizing that kind of transfer but what I would do is I would make sure that I got all of the information, I got all of the input, considered all of the options and then, the president has to make a judgment call,” Cain said.

    link

  131. Ernst Schreiber says:

    That’s my take as well sdferr. If you want to fault Cain for anything, it’s for answering the question like a regular guy (text, context, all that) instead of like a lawyer (text —no such thing as context, all that).

    Of course if he starts answering questions like they were asked,just exactly, we’re probably going to start faulting him for sounding like just another politician.

    Who do you want me to be
    to make you vote for me?

  132. newrouter says:

    “who put ghwb on the ballot in ’80? who kept him on the ballot in ’84? who was scrupulously neutral in ’88?”

    who got a repub congress in 1994(1st time in 50 yrs)? where’d that weirdo think that. don’t be bush!

  133. newrouter says:

    “Blitzer asked if Cain would be willing to negotiate with al-Qaeda by releasing all of the prisoners at Guantanimo Bay.

    “I could see myself authorizing that kind of transfer but what I would do is I would make sure that I got all of the information, I got all of the input, considered all of the options and then, the president has to make a judgment call,” Cain said.”

    effin’ damning. fruit loop.

  134. Slartibartfast says:

    I prefer authenticity with an extra helping of clarity in my Cain.

    You prefer authoritatively stated wrong answers to considered correct ones? If not that, what?

    Glibness self-assuredness is not, for me, a plus in a politician. I could live with a bit more of honest I-don’t-really-know over the guy who puts on a facade of having everything handled.

  135. Slartibartfast says:

    It is a general raising of the hairs on the back of my neck. 9-9-9 now is 9-0-9 or 9-9-9 modified.

    I personally don’t give a flying fuck about Cain’s notions of tax policy. The President doesn’t set tax policy. I think it’s been kind of a mistake for him to tout it as vocally as he has, but I’d rather have a President who makes the occasional mistake in the realm of words than a polished orator who thinks an Executive Order is just the solution to today’s healthcare problems.

  136. sdferr says:

    Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum’s presidential campaign on Tuesday called on GOP frontrunner Herman Cain to be more “forthcoming” about harassment allegations dating back to his leadership of the National Restaurant Association in the 1990s.

    Santorum adviser John Brabender made the remarks during a forum of top aides to the 2012 presidential campaign managers in Washington D.C. hosted by the National Journal. Brabender appeared irked during the discussion when Cain’s campaign manager suggested Cain is the front-runner of the race.

    “What I would encourage the Cain people to do is if you are the front-runner and you plan to be the nominee, to be forthcoming, so that you are vetted and we don’t get into a situation where you’re the nominee and we find things after the fact,” Brabender said.

  137. sdferr says:

    Herman Cain’s presidential campaign raised one quarter of a million dollars on Monday, just as sexual harassment allegations swirled about the candidate and his campaign was forced into its most defensive position to date.

    “It was one of our best fundraising days ever,” campaign manager Mark Block said Tuesday, adding that Cain’s economic message and outsider status were clearly resonating across the United States.

  138. Slartibartfast says:

    If we had a REAL Manchurian candidate, he’d have had a few skeletons thrown in, so as not to appear too squeaky-clean.

    Naturally not of the screwing-the-neighbor’s-dog variety. Because that shit is messed up.

  139. BT says:

    “You prefer authoritatively stated wrong answers to considered correct ones? If not that, what?”

    Yeah. That must be it.

  140. Jeff G. says:

    The unfollows coming fast and furious on Twitter now. Not a team player, me.

  141. Carin says:

    What did you do?

  142. bh says:

    May as well start sending pictures of your junk then. Upside!

Comments are closed.