Sexual harassment charges now being leveled against Cain. No response came until late this past evening. Four women charge him with SR from 20 years ago. Signed confidentiality agreements and took money to stay quite.

Here's the full story:

http://politicaltick...riate-behavior/

These allegations are very serious. However, the thing that always makes me LMAO is that partisans/ideologues have a complete double standard when it comes to these things: When a member of the opposite political party is accused of such behavior, the assumption is usually made that such allegations are likely true; yet when a member of one's own political party is accused of such behavior, these allegations are immediately decried as a "political witch hunt."

Now after having made the above statement, I would not at all be surprised if (1) I am accused of pandering, or (2) presented with an argument that such allegations are more serious when made against GOP politicians because they impeached Clinton "for having an affair" (even though that is a blatant re-write of history, since Clinton was impeached because he lied under oath).

Edited October 31, 201114 yr by Max

According to Wolf Blitzer, Democrats are already panicked over the prospect of having to face political weakling Romney:

http://situationroom...acks/?hpt=hp_t2

Plouffe said that Obama, in contrast, has “conviction” and “a true compass” and is someone “willing to make tough calls.”

I'm really glad that the president is a man of true integrity. Thus, I guess we can pretend the following events never happened:

*Obama stating in 2006 (on "Meet the Press") that he wouldn't run for president, only to change is mind.

*Obama and McCain entering into an agreement whereby each would abide by the limits of public financing, only for Barry to decide the exact opposite the moment he got the nomination. (And as a consequence, Obama's campaign had four times as much cash as did McCain's.)

*Obama pledging to end politics as usual, only to then engage in more of the same.

*Obama promosing to close Gitmo, but then breaking said promise.

*Obama claiming to be on the side of Occupy Wall Street, while taking the money of Wall Street power brokers at the same time.

Edited October 31, 201114 yr by Max

Here's the full story:

http://politicaltick...riate-behavior/

These allegations are very serious. However, the thing that always makes me LMAO is that partisans/ideologues have a complete double standard when it comes to these things: When a member of the opposite political party is accused of such behavior, the assumption is usually made that such allegations are likely true; yet when a member of one's own political party is accused of such behavior, these allegations are immediately decried as a "political witch hunt."

Now after having made the above statement, I would not at all be surprised if (1) I am accused of pandering, or (2) presented with an argument that such allegations are more serious when made against GOP politicians because they impeached Clinton "for having an affair" (even though that is a blatant re-write of history, since Clinton was impeached because he lied under oath).

Well, I'm just proud that you know how people in one party or the other acts and how they determine how to fall on certain issues. I wish I had that power, my friend. LOL!

Also, and this is just me, but if we are to be honest about this, ALL of these politicians say one thing and do another. Now, I personally can't remember the last time a Senate Minority Leader spoke and said that the chief goal of the RP is to make the current POTUS one term. Not jobs, mind you. Not social issues, such as defunding PP, or signing a pledge not to raise taxes (on the top 1%), or suppressing the vote in the southern states, Or not wanting to work with this POTUS on any issue (when first being for it before this POTUS said he agreed and then going against it). This list goes on and on.

Now, i have and will continue to call out POLITICIANS. I don't care what party they are from. But if there is fairness when politics are discussed in this forum, then why is it that it's always one side or the other. Both parties are involved in this mess that THEY have gotten us into. My biggest hope is that the voter realizes who has been on their side and who has been taking care of the richest or the rich (and where are the jobs with the $2 trillion they all are sitting on?) and vote in their best interests, instead of believing whatever is being pushed on CNM.

Now, I personally can't remember the last time a Senate Minority Leader spoke and said that the chief goal of the RP is to make the current POTUS one term. Not jobs, mind you. Not social issues, such as defunding PP, or signing a pledge not to raise taxes (on the top 1%), or suppressing the vote in the southern states

This is funny: after giving me yet another lecture about the dangers of knowing how members of one political party will behave, you then accuse/imply that Republicans are actively suppressing the black vote in the south.

Also, and this is just me, but if we are to be honest about this, ALL of these politicians say one thing and do another.

True. But unlike most other politicans, however, Obama--and his supporters--claimed that he would be above such behavior. Thus, a higher standard should apply to him.

Well, I'm just proud that you know how people in one party or the other acts and how they determine how to fall on certain issues. I wish I had that power, my friend. LOL!

Of course there's always a couple of exceptions, but it is fantasy to suggest many partisans haven't acted the way I previously suggested (in regards to sexual harassment charges) since Clarence Thomas first became famous.

Edited October 31, 201114 yr by Max

http://politic365.com/2011/10/20/silencing-south-carolina-voters/.

I am now going to talk politics with anyone else whop wants to talk politics. This response of your Max is exactly the reason why i did not want to start posting in this forum again. I responded to your comment, and I responded in a respectful manner. I personally, IMO, cannot say the same about you my friend.

I'll just take a little break, like others have, and maybe when things calm down a bit, I'll come back so we can talk about politics once again. I really hope that will be soon.

|

You know, I can't take a break. I love talking politics. But this mess is something I am not getting into anymore. I did that 3 years ago, and am really ashamed of how I acted back then. So, on with the circus!

http://redsfan.newsvine.com/_news/2011/10/19/8402883-south-carolina-gop-operative-admits-suppressing-black-vote-is-goal-of-voterid-law

Did I see Cain singing at a press conference today? I don't know if the charges are true or not, but the way he has handled the response does not help him right now. He and his team better get their heads on the same page and try their best to got out in front of this thing.

You know, I can't take a break. I love talking politics.

Don't feel bad about being unable to abstain from this thread, Roman. A few months ago, I intended to take a long break (from the thread), but then came running back after a few weeks. It it just too hard for many to abstain from talking politics for any long period of time. (I give Qfan massive props for being able to have done so, though I do miss him.)

Did I see Cain singing at a press conference today? I don't know if the charges are true or not, but the way he has handled the response does not help him right now. He and his team better get their heads on the same page and try their best to got out in front of this thing.

Cain's just not ready for prime-time. Even before this, the fact that he "joked" about having an electric, barbed-wire fence along the border is evidence that he lacks the necessary discipline needed to rise to the top.

If this harassment story does not go away soon, Perry and Santorum will benefit greatly, since many of Cain's supporters will most likely flock to one of these two men.

Edited October 31, 201114 yr by Max

According to Wolf Blitzer, Democrats are already panicked over the prospect of having to face political weakling Romney:

I wouldn't take Wolf Blitzer's word on ANYTHING, but beyond that, I wouldn't say Romney is a political weakling. The media worships him, they always have (I remember one reporter gushing over how just being in the room with his masculine strength made them go aflutter), he has tons of money, and he's a robot. The media love Republican Presidents because it fulfills their insecurities about "strong father" and look, there's GWB in his flight suit, isn't he a stud, and so on.

It says a lot about Romney that he hasn't closed this up yet. Everything has gone his way.

I wouldn't take Wolf Blitzer's word on ANYTHING, but beyond that, I wouldn't say Romney is a political weakling. The media worships him, they always have (I remember one reporter gushing over how just being in the room with his masculine strength made them go aflutter), he has tons of money, and he's a robot. The media love Republican Presidents because it fulfills their insecurities about "strong father" and look, there's GWB in his flight suit, isn't he a stud, and so on.

It says a lot about Romney that he hasn't closed this up yet. Everything has gone his way.

Romney is just so bad that they are flocking to these people who cannot possibly win a general election with how many people they have turned off.

Once again, the liberal agenda is not the problem here, nor are the Delta smelt. the problem is that people are trying to farm land that is arid and was never meant to be farmed. You grow crops where the rain falls, and where it doesn't... you might grow crops that like dry conditions, such as onions, garlic, grapes, olives...

With all due respect, Alpha... do you live in the San Joaquin Valley of California? You can research this issue, but unless you live here and have driven the I-5 corridor regularly to see what's up there, it makes it pretty tough to do more than speculate as to the situation here. Onions, garlic, grapes and olives are all grown here in our dry conditions. However, some irrigation is needed even for crops that like more arid conditions. Ever heard of the California aqueduct? An elaborate system for water deliveries was built here and, in my opinion, that it ISN'T being utilized to its full potential is outrageous - still worse, that this creates a negative economic impact in terms of goods and employment in a state that is already broke is outrageous.

If anyone has ever stopped to wonder why California is in such dire straits need only look at the water delivery situation as an example. Someone asked me my opinion of Governor Brown... I didn't vote for him, however I can't blame the current mess on him... or at least totally on him (a previous stint as governor was less than sterling and may have contributed to current issues), but our state legislature is squarely to blame for the economic disaster that has befallen California. The lawmakers in Sacramento make the US Congress look good... damn good. And that's a pretty pathetic statement.

All of this said, it should be noted that the situation moderately improved this past year following a particularly wet winter... and last year's congressional elections. Seriously. Representative Jim Costa, a Democrat, successfully lobbied to get more water delivered to farmers... finally... when his chances for reelection look slim. And he pulled it off... just barely.

Now after having made the above statement, I would not at all be surprised if (1) I am accused of pandering,

Max, Max, Max...

According to Wolf Blitzer, Democrats are already panicked over the prospect of having to face political weakling Romney:

Yeah well Wolf works for CNN which is Fox News South. Not to mention, there is no guarantee that Mitt will make it through the primaries. For Mitt to make it through the primaries, he has to hope more moderates vote than the crazies on the far, far right which in this political climate is easier said than done.

Edited November 1, 201114 yr by dawn9476

Yeah well Wolf works for CNN which is Fox News South. Not to mention, there is no guarantee that Mitt will make it through the primaries.

I've seen liberal criticism of CNN that it is conservatively biased in the past, and I've seen conservatives slam CNN for being liberally biased. If a news organization is regularly getting attacked from both the right and the left, it's quite possible that it is one of the most objective news sources out there.

However, I wholeheartedly agree with your analysis that Romney is far from guaranteed the nomination.

Max, Max, Max...

LOL, Brian!!!

Edited November 1, 201114 yr by Max

I've always thought if CNN leans in any direction its to the left. But, for better or worse... I've always seen MSNBC=Left, Fox=Right and CNN does lie in the middle.

Edited November 2, 201114 yr by Adam

I've always thought if CNN leans in any direction its to the left. But, for better or worse... I've always seen MSNBC=Left, Fox=Right and CNN does lie in the middle.

CNN lies in the media's idea of the middle - right-leaning and occasional posturing to the left. Their idea of liberal is Anderson Cooper, a wishy-washy type who still toes the line, or old guard like Begala and Carville who see this all as theater and are always more than happy to remind everyone of what a failure their party is. Their idea of mainstream conservative is this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erick_Erickson