Resolved: Herman Cain should withdraw from the primaries

[Xavier_Onassis]

Clinton did not force himself on Monica Lewinsky. She was in love with the dude and only confessed to her dalliances with him when some creeps told her that she would be thrown in jail unless she did confess.

She committed no crimes, and at most all she had to do was say that she took the 5th Amendment. But they were convincing and she was easily duped.

Monica was willing to have an affair with Clinton. She enjoyed it. She was known for having affairs with her teachers in HS and professors in college.

This Sharon Bialick was unwilling to submit to Cain, who was not at all subtile. He was a gross old coot and she was simply trying to get a job.

[Michael Tee]

<< I have not said that it is impossible that this accusation is true, but the presumption of innocence applies untill proof appears.>>

NO, it does not.  The presumption of innocence is made only in criminal court and is a relic of the days when most criminal cases were capital cases. 

No criminal charges were ever brought against Cain for sexual harassment and I'm not sure that sexual harassment of an employee was ever a criminal matter; regardless, none of the women involved appear to have pressed criminal charges, and I commend them for it.  But since Cain was never faced with criminal charges, there is no reason for him to be claiming a criminal court standard of proof.  According to your logic - - and believe me, I am using the term very, very loosely - -  Cain will be forever innocent, as long as no criminal charges are brought against him - - because the presumption of innocence is only ended by a conviction.

<<    and then!

   << If the infraction is mild I will forgive it, if the infraction is serious I will not.>>

Fair enough - - so sexual harassment by a CEO of a female employee - - of at this point, FOUR employees - - could be "mild" in your opinion?  Maybe, since I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around some of your concepts, you could help me out here with a specific example - - supposing you, for example, were sexually harassed by a gay CEO: what would be an example of "mild" sexual harassment in your eyes?


     <<Where shall I draw the line?

      <<Personally,... I want a president that reapects the human dignity of every individual including women. If he is out of controll of himself I probly won't vote for him to have greater controll of me.>>

Fair enough.

     << Nationally,.... we have determined Bill Clinton to be alright, and Clinton is guilty of worse than these alligations.>>

That's more than a little bit disingenuous on your part, plane.  YOU, personally, have NEVER determined that Bill Clinton was alright, but you sure seem convinced in the face of all the existing circumstantial evidence, including allegations from four different women, that Cain is "alright."

[Plane]

Clinton did not force himself on Monica Lewinsky.

I agree.
   Monica Lewinsky should not be counted amoung Clintons Accusers, although Clintons bimbo eruption response team was ready to destroy her.

    Many of Clintons accusers sound so much like Herman Cains accusers that it makes me wonder at the great commonality.

     Is Herman Cain a lot like Clinton , or is that how the script was written?

[Xavier_Onassis]

      <<Personally,... I want a president that respects the human dignity of every individual including women. If he is out of control of himself I probably won't vote for him to have greater control of me.>>
=====================================
That sounds entirely logical and rational.


I think that Cain and Clinton are different individuals. Perhaps they have different motives. I respect Clinton more than I think I will ever respect Cain, because Cain has not shown me that he is motivated more by patriotism than egotism. Stealing a tax plan from a video game that could never be implemented sounds far too gimmicky. Proclaiming that he does not care who rules in Uz becky becky stan sounds like something a hick proud of his ignorance would say. It might not be important for the president to have the names of 205 world leaders committed to memory, but saying that a president does not have to care is plumb ignorant, it is a redneck thing to say, even if his neck is not red. A president is supposed to appear to care about all foreign affairs. He is supposed to do all he can to avoid looking like some hicktown yokel.

[Plane]

<< I have not said that it is impossible that this accusation is true, but the presumption of innocence applies untill proof appears.>>

NO, it does not.  The presumption of innocence is made only in criminal court and is a relic of the days when most criminal cases were capital cases. 

Sometimes it seems as if you have never met an American, Bill Clinton was elected entirely on the presumption of innocence , which later turned out to be a poor presumption.

No criminal charges were ever brought against Cain for sexual harassment and I'm not sure that sexual harassment of an employee was ever a criminal matter; regardless, none of the women involved appear to have pressed criminal charges, and I commend them for it.  But since Cain was never faced with criminal charges, there is no reason for him to be claiming a criminal court standard of proof.  According to your logic - - and believe me, I am using the term very, very loosely - -  Cain will be forever innocent, as long as no criminal charges are brought against him - - because the presumption of innocence is only ended by a conviction.

Good point, I think you are getting my drift. If the guy is a masher then he should suffer the appropriate penalty after the appropriate due process. Just saying so to derail his election is political talk and of all talk political talk is the cheapest.

<<    and then!

   << If the infraction is mild I will forgive it, if the infraction is serious I will not.>>

Fair enough - - so sexual harassment by a CEO of a female employee - - of at this point, FOUR employees - - could be "mild" in your opinion?  Maybe, since I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around some of your concepts, you could help me out here with a specific example - - supposing you, for example, were sexually harassed by a gay CEO: what would be an example of "mild" sexual harassment in your eyes?

     

I would have drawn the line far short of a govenor who makes it plain that promotion is found in his frount pockets, or who asked state troopers to cover for his dalliances, but I would not believe this of Clinton either untill after at least some of the alligations were verified somehow.
  I don't feel bad about having higher standards than you do, I wonder tho how you can make it important that your lower standard can be reversed on Herman Cain.

     <<Where shall I draw the line?

      <<Personally,... I want a president that reapects the human dignity of every individual including women. If he is out of controll of himself I probly won't vote for him to have greater controll of me.>>

Fair enough.

     << Nationally,.... we have determined Bill Clinton to be alright, and Clinton is guilty of worse than these alligations.>>

That's more than a little bit disingenuous on your part, plane.  YOU, personally, have NEVER determined that Bill Clinton was alright, but you sure seem convinced in the face of all the existing circumstantial evidence, including allegations from four different women, that Cain is "alright."

    I think the Nation generally gave Bill Clinton too much benefit of the doubt Herman Cain is mainly diffrent by being black and as far as we can prove at this point innocent of the charges.
     Will you have a higher standard for a Black guy or a lower standard for a Black guy?

      The accusations against Clinton are simular and in Clintons case well founded .

      If Herman Cain comes halfway down to the sleeze factor of Bill Clinton I will try to find better.

      But where is your right to complain about Herman if you can't complain of Bill?

[Plane]

      <<Personally,... I want a president that respects the human dignity of every individual including women. If he is out of control of himself I probably won't vote for him to have greater control of me.>>
=====================================
That sounds entirely logical and rational.

  Thank you , I really appreaciate this.

I think that Cain and Clinton are different individuals. Perhaps they have different motives. I respect Clinton more than I think I will ever respect Cain, because Cain has not shown me that he is motivated more by patriotism than egotism. Stealing a tax plan from a video game that could never be implemented sounds far too gimmicky. Proclaiming that he does not care who rules in Uz becky becky stan sounds like something a hick proud of his ignorance would say. It might not be important for the president to have the names of 205 world leaders committed to memory, but saying that a president does not have to care is plumb ignorant, it is a redneck thing to say, even if his neck is not red. A president is supposed to appear to care about all foreign affairs. He is supposed to do all he can to avoid looking like some hicktown yokel.

Ah , you only respect Clinton better because he is a big D, Democrat.

   Other than this and being white he has nothing to be preferred over Herman Cain.


     I disagree that a president needs to pretend and maintain illusion of omnicience.

     Do you recall the hoopla when a reporter asked George Bush about the president of Packistan?Good Gotcha, but didn't cost Bush all that many votes because only a few voters knew the answer themselves, ironicly the US- Packistan relationship became highly important less than a year later.

     By the way, the Capital of Tuva is Kizzell, if you didn't already know that, would this make me a better choice for president than you?

     I do quite well in the Historical cards when playing Trivial persuit, if the national champion were automaticly president we could save a tremendous amount of money we are spending on elections. The national champion for Scrabble could be Veep.


     Do you seriously think that the 9*9*9 plan is from the sims? I think that finding another house with my own house number on another street is much less than miraculous.

     

[sirs]

she was sued by the motherfucking bloodsuckers in September of 2009

good grief Michael do adults have zero responsibility when they sign for loans?
is it always the poor baby's fault that is a frickin idiot to sign shit like this?
if you're paying 28% on your credit card...you're the friggin moron, not the credit card company!

*golf clap*.......well said, C

[Plane]

       I respect Clinton more than I think I will ever respect Cain, because Cain has not shown me that he is motivated more by patriotism than egotism. [/quote


     Very few Presidents meet the Bill Clinton standard for lack of egotism.

[BT]

Cain to hold press conference Tuesday
Posted by
CNN Senior Producer Kevin Bohn

(CNN) - Republican presidential contender Herman Cain will address the latest sexual harassment allegations against him at a Tuesday afternoon news conference, his campaign announced late Monday.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Other than this and being white he has nothing to be preferred over Herman Cain.

=======================================
Clinton was an admirable president in that he started no wars.  Cain peddled pizzas.  Gimme a break!

The capital of the Tuvan SSR is spelled Kyzyl.
It may not be important on a metaphysical plane, but I recall the mention of it in a documentary on Richard Fineman and in the film "Genghis Blues" about Paul Pena's learning how to throat sing and how he won a first prize at a contest in Kyzyl for his efforts.

I have the same house number as Homer Simpson, but I do not live on Evergreen Terrace.

9-9-9 never had any more chance than Steve Forbes Flat Tax. It has, however, made nearly everyone shut the eff up about the "Fair" Tax. So Cain has served a semi-useful purpose. Let him run, Let us see how important this is. I am curious.

[sirs]

Clinton did not force himself on Monica Lewinsky

He did on Kathleen Willey, AND Juanita Broaddrick.  And neither was in love with him.  Nuff said

[Plane]

Other than this and being white he has nothing to be preferred over Herman Cain.

=======================================
Clinton was an admirable president in that he started no wars.  Cain peddled pizzas.  Gimme a break!

  Hahahaha Clinton supporters are always forgetting the wars that he started, think for a minute you will recall. Cain has been a professional mathmatician, now that is a pretty appropriate skill .

The capital of the Tuvan SSR is spelled Kyzyl.

I bow before your spelling prowress.

It may not be important on a metaphysical plane, but I recall the mention of it in a documentary on Richard Fineman and in the film "Genghis Blues" about Paul Pena's learning how to throat sing and how he won a first prize at a contest in Kyzyl for his efforts.

I bet you would enjoy Richard Feynmans book   http://www.amazon.com/Surely-Feynman-Adventures-Curious-Character/dp/0393316041

I have the same house number as Homer Simpson, but I do not live on Evergreen Terrace.

  Wow , do you look like Homer too?  I don't really think that one coincidence leads to another, rather, coincidences of a trivial nature are pretty common.

9-9-9 never had any more chance than Steve Forbes Flat Tax. It has, however, made nearly everyone shut the eff up about the "Fair" Tax. So Cain has served a semi-useful purpose. Let him run, Let us see how important this is. I am curious.

   I would like taxes to be fair, how is a tax code so complex that it befuddles specialists studying it have any potential for fairness?

[Michael Tee]

<<Sometimes it seems as if you have never met an American>>

It's quite possible at this point in my life that I have more American relatives than Canadian.  My American relatives now live in Detroit, Allentown, Seattle, Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Dallas, Washington DC, New York, South Florida and probably other places that I have forgotten to include.

<<Bill Clinton was elected entirely on the presumption of innocence , which later turned out to be a poor presumption.>>

That's absurd.   Nobody gave a shit about Monica, Gennifer or any of the others because they were willing participants.  Paula Jones?  Who the hell knows?  She told one of the troopers that she'd like to be Bill's girlfriend.  Kathleen Willey?  After the encounter she wrote 12 letters and made 14 phone calls to the Prez, all of the letters being friendly.  Broaderick I think surfaced after Bill had won his second term of office.  Voters did not reluctantly give a presumption of innocence to Bill, they knew he was a babe magnet and that almost all his encounters had been by mutual consent.  The allegations of forcible harassment were simply unbelievable - - why on earth would this guy have to force his attention on any woman when so many others were lined up to give him anything he wanted?  A presumption of innocence is what you give a guy who you otherwise could easily believe was guilty.  People voted for Clinton because they liked him and because they just didn't believe he'd force himself on any woman and they didn't give a shit about his consensual encounters.

<<I think you are getting my drift. If the guy is a masher then he should suffer the appropriate penalty after the appropriate due process.>>

You missed the point again.  There is no "appropriate due process."  The claims were settled or never brought.  The women who didn't claim then don't want to claim now, and it's fully understandable, given the shitstorm of abuse and innuendo that every female complainant is subjected to.

<<Just saying so to derail his election is political talk and of all talk political talk is the cheapest.>>

That is totally absurd.  Was it political talk to derail his election when the first three victims surfaced and nobody knew who this guy was?  Is it the cheapest talk when a female employee comes forward to complain of sexual harassment on the job?  You obviously don't know what the hell you are talking about - - it's one of the worst ordeals any woman can face - - she's called a liar and a whore, degraded in every possible way a good lawyer can think of, her job is on the line.  That is such a line of bullshit that I can't imagine you typing it with a straight face.

<<But where is your right to complain about Herman if you can't complain of Bill?>>

Why should I complain about a guy most of whose sexual encounters were purely consensual?  Don't you understand anything of the difference between a serial sexual predator and consensual sex between adults?  And the odd woman who complained of non-consensual sex was basically non-believable, Kathleen Willey, for example, who continued to write and call Clinton after the office encounter, Paula Jones who told the trooper she'd like to be Clinton's girlfriend after coming out of his room, and Brodderick, whose ONLY sworn statement was that Clinton had NOT sexually assaulted her.  She later repudiated the first affidavit, but never in any sworn statement or sworn testimony.

[Xavier_Onassis]

The current tax code is complex, but I have not had much difficulty filling out my 1040's over the years. The current tax code is undoubtedly unfair to some and fair to others. 9-9-9 is a gimmick that will never get through Congress, but it would be unfair most of all to those who have the least.

There are, of course, differing views of fairness. The Koch brothers and their pals at Cato seem to think that they are such a boon to all the people they hire with their money that they are a national treasure, and should be taxed lightly or not at all.

I hardly think that Cain's alleged expertise at math is the equivalent of Clinton's leadership skills. I note that what some might call Clintons "Wars" had few or no casualties. Certainly he was far more peaceful that either Bush or Reagan. And I consider that to be a huge plus in his favor, far, far more valuable than Cain's alleged skills with a pencil or a calculator.

[Christians4LessGvt]

He did on Kathleen Willey, AND Juanita Broaddrick.  And neither was in love with him.  Nuff said

and SIRS dont forget about Paula Jones.