Posted on 11/08/2011 4:18:17 PM PST by grey_whiskers
In the past week, ever since the first allegations were made public by Pollutico, GOP Presidential Candidate Herman Cain has been facing a crescendo of questions about misbehavior in his past. The funny thing is, even though the original allegations were made by "unnamed sources" -- which is usual liberal-press-speak for "I made it up" -- they were treated as serious issues. The second funny thing is that, even though the original allegations were of "offensive gestures" of a "non-sexual nature," the scandal has morphed in little more than a week to reports of FIVE cases "of sexual harrassment" in which two "settlements" were made.
Does anyone remember Anita Hill? And the high-tech lynching of Clarence Thomas? No, I'm not going to play the race card. I'd like to point out the inconsistency between THE POLITICIANS then and now.
In the Clarence Thomas affair, you may recall, Anita Hill had accused Clarence Thomas of making off-color jokes to her about a pubic hair found on a soft-drink can. Left unstated were several pertinent facts:
1) that as a black woman with an Ivy League Law degree, she was "untouchable" and nobody would have been able to fire her in that day and age except if she had been caught in flagrante delicto with Ronald Reagan on the steps of the Supreme Court building.
2) that even *after* the supposed harassment, she followed Clarence Thomas around to two or three jobs.
And yet...and yet, even with these disqualifiers, a number of Democrats championed her cause.
Where are all the Democrat heroes of the female cause giving voice to their support of Cain's accusers?
And another (all to obvious example), speaking of Democrats.
What about Clinton?
No, not Bill.
HILLARY.
She's the one who lightly spoke of the "vast right-wing conspiracy" against her husband -- even though she had helped lead the 'bimbo eruption squad' -- until news of the stained blue dress appeared.
And then, with a deftness worthy of David Copperfield, she pirouetted into Victorian femininity. As she wrote in her book, upon hearing of Lewinsky, "...gasping for air, I could hardly breathe." One would be hard pressed to recognize this shrinking violet as the foul-mouthed ashtray hurler we had all come to know and loathe.
So -- a couple of points by way of comparison to Hillary.
1) Having posited a "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" -- even though it is clear now that she believed no such thing -- are any of the press willing to entertain the concept of a "Vast Left Wing Conspiracy" ?
2) Can anyone take one look at Hillary's eyes ; or Elliot Spitzer's wife, or Jonathan Edwards's wife ; and compare them to Herman Cain's wife, and suggest for even a microsecond that Cain is guilty?
3) Speaking of guilty wives, and Hillary, what about Huma Abedin? Long rumoured to be a paramour of Mrs. Clinton, she was paired off in one of those D.C. marriages of convenience and left center stage.
Does anyone remember to whom she was wed?
Why, yes. How very interesting.
She married Anthony. Weiner.
The one who had to resign after his name matched his actions a little too well.
The Congressional Flasher in a Raincoat.
"Say Hello to My Little Friend."
And does anyone remember the response of the press, with multiple independent witnesses, and literal, self-incriminating, PHOTOGRAPHIC evidence?
"Give him a chance to clear himself."
Funny how Jesse Jackson (child out of wedlock) isn't defending you, Mr. Cain ; nor the Congressional Black Caucus.
It's a funny double standard, isn't it?
But then, that's the same way it has been for well over a hundred years with the Democrats.
White and Democrat = Even if guilty, circle the wagons.
Black and Republican = Even if innocent, Lynch Mob.
Give 'em hell, Herman.
I would've voted for Sarah, until she declined to run (God alone knows what they threatened her family with).
But I will back you ALL THE WAY.
Placemark.
We can reject what the media has forced on us, such as “not presidential” etc. In local polls, Santorum is doing well. More people should get behind him.
I sat less than a foot from him while he gave a presentation, and it couldn’t be farther from the truth. He has great ideas that are doable that can turn this country around.
One has a brain and is a tool of the Democrat Party, the other is a gold digger and a tool.
Remember Clinton's comment when news of proof (his semen on Monica's dress) was broken to him?
"Well, we'll just have to win, then."
I read on another thread that Tom Brokaw threatened to resign if the Juanita Broderick rape story was aired as originally planned.
If so, he is just as guilty as a bunch of folks at Pedophile State.
NO cheers, unfortunately.
Ha! Great graphic, Phil!
I can’t wait to see the super graphic you will have on the woman who came out yesterday, and her past.
Buncha manipulators and whiners, imo.
Thanks. I have always enjoyed our exchanges. The question of redemption requires a better answer than I can give before the weekend, and though I won’t guarantee I’ll be able to give you one, I will at least put in the reflection it deserves. [I’m on a deadline and just checking in during a break.]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.