Herman Cain

#703
#703
GAVol said:
Do you often have clients with solid civil cases that choose to back down because they're embarrassed?
Click to expand...

All the time. That's why I make my own judgments about who is lying and who isn't. In this case, methinks Cain doth protest way too much. He hopes his indignance will distract from the similarities in the stories.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#704
#704
volfanjustin said:
Anyone who hires Gloria Allred loses all credibility.
Click to expand...

agree 100%, how this doesn't automatically discredit her I don' tknow.

Gloria made a freakin' joke at the press conference when this chick came out. It was completely absurd.
 
#705
#705
Gloria Allred continued by saying “Mr. Cain instead decided to try to provide her with his idea of a stimulus package.”

Are you kidding me, did I just hear her say that?
 
#706
#706
KiffinKiller said:
Look. Imo, he was referring to you using that big ol partisan paint brush that I'm getting tired of.

I don't think pointing that out was stupid.
Click to expand...

Please name the left wing group or significant Dem leader that came out and called for Clinton to resign. Please name the one who took the side of the credible accusers. Name the feminist organization who came to Paula Jones' rescue when Carville (a paid Clinton adviser and close confidante) quipped "That's what you get when you drag a $100 bill through a trailer park".

Sometimes... broad brushes work because they are accurate.

If you can't find what I asked for before then maybe tell me which left wing groups are after Jesse Jackson right now who has a suit filed against him. I can name numerous examples where the left virtually as a unified bloc dropped all pretense of principle for political expediency.

At the same time... Livingston, Gingrich, Sanford.... are guys who immediately come to mind for having paid a significant price for doing much less than Clinton... because main street conservatives have a low level of tolerance for demonstrated lack of integrity and hypocrisy.

If any of this sticks to Cain he will be done in this race because conservative voters will not vote for someone with demonstrated integrity problems... even someone whose positions, personality, and performance they like.

You can get offended or pretend there isn't a difference all you like. The facts are still there for you to see.
 
#707
#707
difference_between_herman_cain_and_democrats.jpg


cainpoliticoyoufailed.jpg


25arfyg.jpg


100408_600.jpg


CainClinton.jpg
 
#708
#708
sjt18 said:
Please name the left wing group or significant Dem leader that came out and called for Clinton to resign. Please name the one who took the side of the credible accusers. Name the feminist organization who came to Paula Jones' rescue when Carville (a paid Clinton adviser and close confidante) quipped "That's what you get when you drag a $100 bill through a trailer park".

Sometimes... broad brushes work because they are accurate.

If you can't find what I asked for before then maybe tell me which left wing groups are after Jesse Jackson right now who has a suit filed against him. I can name numerous examples where the left virtually as a unified bloc dropped all pretense of principle for political expediency.

At the same time... Livingston, Gingrich, Sanford.... are guys who immediately come to mind for having paid a significant price for doing much less than Clinton... because main street conservatives have a low level of tolerance for demonstrated lack of integrity and hypocrisy.

If any of this sticks to Cain he will be done in this race because conservative voters will not vote for someone with demonstrated integrity problems... even someone whose positions, personality, and performance they like.

You can get offended or pretend there isn't a difference all you like. The facts are still there for you to see.
Click to expand...

offended? you don't know me very well. I'm not going to bother defending 'the left' because I have no attachment to them. But brushing them with some morally deficient paint is intellectually dishonest.
 
#709
#709
KiffinKiller said:
offended? you don't know me very well. I'm not going to bother defending 'the left' because I have no attachment to them. But brushing them with some morally deficient paint is intellectually dishonest.
Click to expand...

Not if it fits. The left circled the wagons around Clinton even though what he did should have been an egregious violation of everything they claim to stand for. There is nothing "intellectually dishonest" about stating a fact. Clinton isn't unique. Obama was involved with a real estate crook... not important apparently to Dems or the MSM. If a GOP candidate had gone to a church as explicitly racist as the one Obama attended... there's no chance they'd be elected. Geithner has been defended by the left- tax cheat as Treasury Secretary? Holder... where do you want to start?

Do you think a Republican would have gotten away with the comments caught on an open mic between Sarkozy and Obama? If the press did nothing... conservatives would have racked their guy up.

Barney Frank continues to serve... his lover ran what amounted to a prostitution service out of his home. Ted Kennedy? He pretty much committed manslaughter and continued to be elected repeatedly by Dems... they even seriously considered him for Prez afterwards.

How many examples do you want or need of liberals tolerating or even defending people with serious ethical, moral, or even legal issues?
 
#710
#710
All this is diversion from the bottom line. The fact remains that if Cain is proven to have done things FAR less than we KNEW Clinton had done before he was elected... he will lose his conservative base. The Dem base was solid for Clinton throughout.
 
#711
#711
The irony is that the so-called values based right seems to have no problem with hoisting up as one of their own - as their representative - a man credibly accused of having grabbed a woman (or two) and tried to force them to .... And then blatantly lied in an effort to save a political career.

It is shameful how the right is willing to just dismiss these charges out of their own partisan arrogance.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#712
#712
lawgator1 said:
The irony is that the so-called values based right seems to have no problem with hoisting up as one of their own - as their representative - a man credibly accused of having grabbed a woman (or two) and tried to force them to .... And then blatantly lied in an effort to save a political career.

It is shameful how the right is willing to just dismiss these charges out of their own partisan arrogance.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

He hasn't been nominated yet.
 
#713
#713
lawgator1 said:
The irony is that the so-called values based right seems to have no problem with hoisting up as one of their own - as their representative - a man credibly accused of having grabbed a woman (or two) and tried to force them to .... And then blatantly lied in an effort to save a political career.

It is shameful how the right is willing to just dismiss these charges out of their own partisan arrogance.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

you'd vote for Clinton again wouldn't you?
 
#714
#714
lawgator1 said:
The irony is that the so-called values based right seems to have no problem with hoisting up as one of their own - as their representative - a man credibly accused of having grabbed a woman (or two) and tried to force them to .... And then blatantly lied in an effort to save a political career.

It is shameful how the right is willing to just dismiss these charges out of their own partisan arrogance.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

what evidence do you have? they all seem to have associations with obama and his pals. quite interesting, don't you think.
 
#715
#715
lawgator1 said:
The irony is that the so-called values based right seems to have no problem with hoisting up as one of their own - as their representative - a man credibly accused of having grabbed a woman (or two) and tried to force them to .... And then blatantly lied in an effort to save a political career.

It is shameful how the right is willing to just dismiss these charges out of their own partisan arrogance.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Credible? Why? The only reason I have seen so far is that you and the rest of the left NEED to believe them.

The one who accused him of grabbing her... has incredible integrity issues. The only other woman to give specifics... later sued another employer because she didn't get to work from home. She filed a frivolous S/H suit and solicited a coworker to help her.


I am not dismissing anything. I am waiting for real proof or at the very least a credible accusation from a credible accuser. Neither of the two women who have come forward fit that bill.

I have repeatedly said that if there is proof of him even propositioning one of those women I would have a hard time voting for him.

You have not even demonstrated a lie. You have constructed one for your own convenience. The MSM isn't even making a big case of these supposed "lies".

You just need badly to believe he is a liar and guilty of these charges. You refuse to look rationally at the circumstances and tangible facts. Your brand of racism requires that black conservatives be not only bad people but the worst of people.
 
#716
#716
joevol320 said:
what evidence do you have? they all seem to have associations with obama and his pals. quite interesting, don't you think.
Click to expand...

I'll answer. None.

They made accusations that he needs to believe in order to maintain his racist views about what blacks can say, do, or believe.

Bialeck PURSUED Cain who did not help her get another job after she had been fired. She was described by a longtime acquaintance as a "gold digger". There are two potential reasons she might come forward now. One, she has such a high sense of morality that she had to come forward to prevent this terrible man from becoming President. Two, $$$$$$$$$$ cha-ching. Knowing just what we know... option two is far more likely.

We do not know exactly what happened with accuser two. Cain said that he was told after the fact that the most serious charge she leveled was somethinig to do with the height thing. Her lawyer said it was much worse and continuous but has not given specifics. We also know that she agreed to leave the company with a monetary severance. If the $45K reported is accurate then she had no case and everyone involved knew it.

However what we do know about accuser #2 is that she also filed a SH complaint against her next employer and had to drop it. She was very obviously selfishly... vindictively motivated in that case.
 
#718
#718
utvolpj said:
you'd vote for Clinton again wouldn't you?
Click to expand...

If he ran again he wouldn't have to spend a dime and he'd get 70 percent of the vote.

Meanwhile, if either Bush ran again they could spend $100 billion and they'd get maybe 30 electoral votes.

That ought to tell you something about which party is wiser in nominating
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#719
#719
lawgator1 said:
The irony is that the so-called values based right seems to have no problem with hoisting up as one of their own - as their representative - a man credibly accused of having grabbed a woman (or two) and tried to force them to .... And then blatantly lied in an effort to save a political career.

It is shameful how the right is willing to just dismiss these charges out of their own partisan arrogance.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...
Every time I read one of these posts, I envision LG hitting the submit reply button and snickering ever so slightly. They're strangely entertaining.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#720
#720
lawgator1 said:
If he ran again he wouldn't have to spend a dime and he'd get 70 percent of the vote.

Meanwhile, if either Bush ran again they could spend $100 billion and they'd get maybe 30 electoral votes.

That ought to tell you something about which party is wiser in nominating
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

You all nominated Obama and John Kerry so I am not sure if I would consider that wise.
 
#721
#721
lawgator1 said:
If he ran again he wouldn't have to spend a dime and he'd get 70 percent of the vote.

Meanwhile, if either Bush ran again they could spend $100 billion and they'd get maybe 30 electoral votes.

That ought to tell you something about which party is wiser in nominating
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

So you're saying that proven instances of sexual misconduct by a candidate don't matter? WTF have you been talking about this entire thread?
 
#722
#722
LMAO at Tyson. "Cause the T-party loves crazy more than they hate black."...even if it's ignorant it's funny as crap.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vA4CHDgqo7g[/youtube]
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#724
#724
bamawriter said:
So you're saying that proven instances of sexual misconduct by a candidate don't matter? WTF have you been talking about this entire thread?
Click to expand...

Of course it matters. But 1) there is a difference between Clinton having an affair with a willing partner and Cain forcing himself on women asking for a favor at work; and 2) Clinton was good enough a prez that folks would accept his apology at this point.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#725
#725
lawgator1 said:
there is a difference between Clinton having an affair with a willing partner and Cain forcing himself on women asking for a favor at work
Click to expand...

Yeah . . . the difference is that Clinton found someone too stupid to realize she was being taken advantage of.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top