Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

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

Archives

But what if they really are "nuts and sluts"?

James Joyner Doug Mataconis, “Herman Cain Goes For the “Nuts Or Sluts” Defense”:

The press conference, for the most part, struck me as a train wreck. The “I don’t remember” defense isn’t an explicit denial even though that’s how Cain wants us to take it, and characterizing a single mother of a 13 year old boy as “troubled” and part of a Democratic conspiracy is the kind of paranoia one usually expects from a rabid Palinista. Denying every single accusation and statement that Bialek made opens the door to every investigative reporter in Washington wearing out the shoe leather to try to determine if she is indeed correct that he upgraded her room at the Capitol Hilton and took her to dinner in July 1997. If it turns out that those details of her story are true, then his statement that he has no idea who she is becomes far, far less credible. More importantly, Cain opened the door to every other woman who has made accusations against him to come forward and counter his statement that she is a liar. In other words, all this press conference did is guarantee that this is story will last until at least the end of this week, if not longer.

Of course, James, there’s another way to look at the press conference: Cain is telling the truth, telling the truth to the press to the best of his ability and recollection, and we’ve become so cynical that we no longer even recognize that — from the (hypothetical, let’s say) perspective of a man being falsely of multiple instances of sexual harassment, at least one instance of which he says he can’t even place the accuser — the Cain press conference looks exactly as it should: a man literally telling you what he knows, what he remembers and what he doesn’t, and explicitly denying the charges against him.

Really, are we so comfortable in the gutter these days that we feel somehow emboldened to distrust those who simply refuse to get down in there with us?

And what do we make of conservatives and constitutionalists praising the Cain presser, while the more “pragmatic,” establishment type “conservatives” found the whole thing to be troubling, for reasons having largely to do with its having broken from the defensive playbook they consistently counsel we not stray from.

Since when does answering questions to the best of your ability, and demanding that accusations be scrutinized alongside the party being accused, constitute “discrediting” yourself?

Losing. More. Slowly.

30 Replies to “But what if they really are "nuts and sluts"?”

  1. MissFixit says:

    and characterizing a single mother of a 13 year old boy as “troubled” and part of a Democratic conspiracy is the kind of paranoia ..

    You see what he did there? Did you see that? Single mothers are inherently trustworthy, respectable, and beyond question when they are serving the purpose of the left.

    If you’re not on the left, than you are just a stupid woman who got knocked up by a loser.

    Trust me on that one.

  2. Carin says:

    . The “I don’t remember” defense isn’t an explicit denial even though that’s how Cain wants us to take it, and characterizing a single mother of a 13 year old boy as “troubled”

    Didn’t Hillary CLinton teach us that the proper response was “I don’t recall…”

  3. Funny how men see this totally in terms of politics and women see this totally in terms of relationship, whether Cain did it or not.

    The Political Blog of Win

  4. dicentra says:

    Denying every single accusation and statement that Bialek made opens the door to every investigative reporter in Washington wearing out the shoe leather to try to determine if she is indeed correct that he upgraded her room at the Capitol Hilton and took her to dinner in July 1997.

    He didn’t really say this.

    Really, he didn’t. He’s not complaining that reporters should have to do their damn job.

    Cain opened the door to every other woman who has made accusations against him to come forward and counter his statement that she is a liar.

    Given how easy and profitable it is to be a habitual accuser, why shouldn’t they have to defend their former accusations? This is a presidential campaign that’s being derailed on some pretty flimsy evidence. The burden of proof is on THEM.

  5. Jeff G. says:

    and characterizing a single mother of a 13 year old boy as “troubled” and part of a Democratic conspiracy is the kind of paranoia

    This is a single mother who told the nation she asked her 13-year-old what to do. About something she alleged happened before he was born.

    And then, there’s the whole Chicago local angle, which the MSM is refusing to dig deeply in to, where the local media is literally LAUGHING at this woman and her allegations. Because she has a history. Which we’re not permitted to probe. Because she’s a single mom. And single mom’s, like children, are our future.

  6. sdferr says:

    If they really are nuts and sluts, Glenn Beck tells me, it won’t matter, because as he puts it, “The damage has already been done.” Fait accomplis. Truth, we see, doesn’t matter, or perhaps, in another view, “truth” is only ever what people say it is, mindlessly — perception without perceiving — so . . . forget it, America.

  7. Physics Geek says:

    Since when does answering questions to the best of your ability, and demanding that accusations be scrutinized alongside the party being accused, constitute “discrediting” yourself?

    That question is raaaaacist.

    And so we’re being stuck with Romney as the alternative to Obama. On purpose. Truthfully, I have no idea whether or not Cain would make a good president, but his candidacy is over now. Even if raw video footage turned up of these women in a room with DNC operatives planning out this hit, there are a large number of “independents” (hi James!) who would be unfazed. After all, per the October surprise criteria, we know that neither the veracity of claims nor the credibility of the claimant have any bearing on the situation at all. What matters is the seriousness of the allegation.

    The reality is that I expect several of these women to have book deals and/or make appearances on the talk show circuit AFTER the election, making oodles of cash along the way. Can’t have Anita Hill be the only who can cash in on unsubstantiated allegations decades after the fact.

  8. geoffb says:

    Joint news conference of Bialek and Kraushaar to be done sometime.

  9. Jeff G. says:

    I think getting the two of them together will be a hoot.

    Think the press will ask them about their past harassment claims, or shit like that?

  10. geoffb says:

    The last paragraph is so nice.

    Bialek’s allegations are particularly shocking. On Monday, she described a 1997 groping to reporters that sounds more akin to assault than mere harassment. She said Cain reached into her skirt and pushed her head towards his lap. Bennett has said publicly that Kraushaar’s experiences were similar to Bialek’s, but so far has not confirmed any details. Kraushaar, he now says, will detail a “series of inappropriate behaviors and unwanted advances” at the forthcoming joint press conference.

    Joel is proving to be a real sweetheart.

  11. alppuccino says:

    When the poop hits the fan, and we’re all wandering the streets – every man for himself – single moms will get mowed down faster than a cupcake in Oprah’s dressing room.

    And seniors? Those idiots who were begging to get their levy passed yet voting down Issue 2 in Ohio because they’re too stupid to not be scared by the police and fire protection racket slogan ‘A no vote could save your life’ – they’ll be used for firewood.

  12. bh says:

    Many sluts are also nuts. There’s a term for that, college girlfriend.

  13. Pablo says:

    This is a single mother who told the nation she asked her 13-year-old what to do. About something she alleged happened before he was born.

    Because she’s his role model.

    She’s not just troubled, she’s dumb as a stump.

  14. Obstreperous Infidel says:

    Nice, Al. I’ve got my eye on two oldsters down the block who had a rather large Vote No on Issue 2 sign in their yard. But as I told a co-worker today, Issue 2 was the compromise, now comes the layoffs. Unions, especially public sector ones, are notorious for cutting off their noses to spite their faces. Fucking morons. It can’t happen to a more deserving group of people.

  15. MissFixit says:

    When the poop hits the fan, and we’re all wandering the streets – every man for himself – single moms will get mowed down faster than a cupcake in Oprah’s dressing room.

    This is why single moms need to armed. Not all of us are going down like that, I promise. :)

    But as I told a co-worker today, Issue 2 was the compromise, now comes the layoffs.

    One can only hope. I worked in Ohio in the automotive industry, before the company went bankrupt. The union guys I worked with made 100k/year and never produced a thing.

  16. Jeff G. says:

    Is it time to tout the media’s polling on how well they’ve done in bringing down Cain as proof that he’s unelectable, and so therefore pragmatic conservatives concerned about real victory (and not “purity”) should dismiss him for the good of the Party?

    Probably so.

    Followed by complaints about the liberal media, bias, leftists controlling narratives, etc., for the next however many years, all done without irony — and for a paycheck.

  17. Jeff G. says:

    I think they’ll be in for a shock when Cain’s lawyer decides to take after them.

    Why no EEOC complaint?

    Remember, these are the things these woman alleged in order to force a monetary settlement, and both of them appear to have histories of having done so either before or after, as well. And then at least one of them agreed to sign an agreement saying that she accepts the finding of no liability on Cain’s part.

  18. Pablo says:

    They keep talking about how Cain’s numbers are sure to fall, despite the fact that they haven’t.

  19. sdferr says:

    Who’s with ya? Seth is:

    But even if Gingrich can finally knock Cain out of the lead, there simply doesn’t seem to be a path to the nomination for him. He is less likable than Romney, has less executive experience, and carries several suitcases worth of baggage. Conservative grassroots won’t flock to him, even if Cain exits the race. Gingrich may be an impressive debater, and those debates may be playing a greater role in this year’s contest than ever before. But for Gingrich, the votes simply aren’t there.

  20. geoffb says:

    These various pieces about Bialek and Krausnaar filing complaints at other places may show, in part, the answer to “Why NRA”. They just may have a corporate culture of doing payoffs and NDAs rather than the more of a hardline taken by these other places.

  21. Carin says:

    They keep talking about how Cain’s numbers are sure to fall, despite the fact that they haven’t.

    I’ve seen breathless reports about how polling is currently being affected by the dealo. But, yea. Of course. OF COURSE it’s going to have an affect now.
    But, what it does in the next few weeks is a bit more indicative.

  22. sdferr says:

    Heh. Cain’s campaign walks with an outward spasm. It’s affect.

  23. geoffb says:

    The email joke.

    Are computers male or female?

    A language instructor was explaining to her class that French nouns, unlike their English counterparts, are grammatically designated as masculine or feminine.

    Things like ‘chalk’ or ‘pencil,’ she described, would have a gender association although in English these words were neutral. Puzzled, one student raised his hand and asked, “What gender is a computer?”

    The teacher wasn’t certain which it was,and so divided the class into two groups and asked them to decide if a computer should be masculine or feminine. One group was comprised of the women in the class, and the other, of men. Both groups were asked to give four reasons for their recommendation.

    The group of women concluded that computers should be referred to in masculine gender because:
    1. In order to get their attention, you have to turn them on.
    2. They have a lot of data but are still clueless.
    3. They are supposed to help you solve your problems, but half the time they ARE the problem.
    4. As soon as you commit to one, you realize that, if you had waited a little longer, you could have had a better model.

    The men, on the other hand, decided that computers should definitely be referred to in the feminine gender because:
    1. No one but their creator understands their internal logic.
    2. The native language they use to communicate with other computers is incomprehensible to everyone else.
    3. Even your smallest mistakes are stored in long-term memory for later retrieval.
    4. As soon as you make a commitment to one, you find yourself spending half your paycheck on accessories.

  24. It was not James Joyner but Doug Mataconis who posted this. His utter obsession with attacking whomever might get the Republican nomination is fascinating to watch as he moved from Palin to Bachmann to Perry and now Cain. It’s almost clinical.

  25. Not that it matters but I used to like OTB quite a bit, but how they can in good conscience still call themselves “Outside the Beltway” eludes me.

  26. Jeff G. says:

    Oh, okay charles. It was JJ on Twitter, which is why I thought he wrote it. Will make the change.

  27. Jeff G. says:

    Ooh. Didn’t have the piece linked, either. Whoops. Fixed.

  28. mojo says:

    Laughing my butt off here, Jeff.

    “The accursed has been advised of his lack of rights under the Secret Code of Military Toughness, and will conduct himself accordingly!”
    “But…”
    “Bailiff, gag him!”

  29. Pellegri says:

    Funny how men see this totally in terms of politics and women see this totally in terms of relationship, whether Cain did it or not.

    That is actually a gendered thing. Women by and large do a lot of their moral calculus and evaluation based on relationships (what relationship do I have with so-and-so, what relation do these two people have with each other).

    It’s an interesting variation in the sexes.

Comments are closed.