That's right, Mr. Cain, you're a victim, but I doubt we can agree about what you're the victim of. If you bumble and fumble and contradict yourself about political stances in some strange pantomime of someone who might have reasonable solutions to real problems rather than doggy treats thrown to the barking mob: if you elected to join the minstrel show hoping to win over the racists and rednecks with a little soft shoe and a big grin: if you thought slashing jobs at a pizza chain made you eligible to tell us how to run the world, why sure, you're your own victim but most of us are too tired of it to be saintly and forgive you.
But a "high tech lynching?" Don't make me laugh, and besides Clarance Thomas made that trope a dopey joke a long time ago. You're just the rude, crude and blatantly phoney burlesque of a candidate to dress up accusations of sexual harassment in stylish credibility and denying things we know that you know or breaking into a song isn't going to convince mama that those porn mags under your mattress belonged to someone else. Talking about lynching in this context is like digging up all the real victims and lynching them again.
"The Cain campaign has boasted that it is raking in more campaign contributions than ever despite the scandal."
ReplyDeleteDidn't realize that TeaBaggers so admired "bimbo eruptions" in their politicians.
This perfectly explains their love of Donald "I've Always Had A Great Relationship With The Blacks" Trump, and Newt "I Wed Three Wives" Gingrich.
Go Herbie The Love Bug!
Apparently, being accused of sexual harassment is a badge of honor amongst the moral imbeciles who associate themselves with the Tea Party. Without even bothering to address the substance of the complaints, I think it's easy to see that Cain's response to the accusations is in itself utterly disabling. I don't see how any serious person could take this man seriously as a candidate for any office, let alone the presidency.
ReplyDeleteIt seems the more offensive they are, the more 'the base' rewards them; and the prize goes to the best nihilist.
ReplyDeleteBJ from Demwit makes a point. The GOP just filibustered another job creating infrastructure spending bill, which received precious little media coverage since we focused attention on the latest clown show. Today, Cain calls himself "Koch's brother by another mother." It makes you wonder if these distractions are orchestrated.
ReplyDeleteIt makes you wonder if these distractions are orchestrated.
ReplyDeleteI've wondered the same thing, Octo.
Captain, thank you for addressing Cain's proclivity for breaking into song. I think that you placed it in the proper context. I read some place that he has recorded a couple of CDs. It's nice that he has something to fall back on just in case this presidential thing doesn't work out for him.
Shaw, thanks for the new phrase, "bimbo eruptions." If you don't mind I'd like to use it on occasion.
Sheria,
ReplyDelete"Bimbo eruptions" is a phrase from the Clinton era. Betsey Wright deserves the credit.
Are we saying that Mr. Cain is lacking in ethics and a sound objective philosophy that is consistent and all candidates, conservative or liberal should have?
ReplyDeleteIf so I find myself n agreement.
As to "bimbo eruption" it certainly brings back memories of the "Bubba" era.
Well I don't know what we are saying, but certainly some would like to keep the focus off Cain's crude, bumbling, dishonest and somewhere south of stupid character by making captious comparisons with Bill Clinton. I'm most certainly saying that to compare the two is like comparing shit to shoe polish, which is fine as long as I don't allow you to shine my shoes.
ReplyDeleteIf you really think you can get away with posing as someone who cares for reason and for the survival of civilization, you might at least pretend to worry more about the chorus of staggeringly unhinged zombies your party offers than about something as worthy of straight jackets and padded cells as your "concern" that President Obama is a Communist. But of course you can't get away with it, can you? At least not here.
Cap - where did I say Obama is a communist? What party are you referring to? As I belong to no party I am interested to find out. I do express concern over the extremes of both parties. I just do it more respectfully than some.
ReplyDeleteRN,
ReplyDeleteYour favorite candidate over the weekend: Ron Paul Says He May Not Support Another GOP Nominee. If you were to follow suit, I imagine this puts you in tough spot. There are even some rank-and-file conservatives willing to bypass Mittens and give Obama another 4 years. What will you do next year?
Well, look at it this way. Note the semantic similarities in the words "liberty," "libertarian," and "liberal." Maybe not your first choice, but not your worst choice either given the current field of dummies whose ventriloquist is named "Koch."
Octo - I have long realized my choice of Ron Paul puts me in the minority within the republican party. But then again I do not give a rats arse for what the establishment anti-rational thought individuals may think. Nor the position that such a position may put me in. Especially since I do not belong to, nor do I financially support any party in anyway.
ReplyDeleteKeeps my independence don't you think?
As to what I'll do in 2012... It is too soon to tell. Who knows who may be running as a candidate on an independent ticket.
What I do know is... I will NOT vote for 1} Cain, 2) Perry, 3) Romney, 4) Bachmann 5) Gingrich.
Lots of time yet.
Oh, and I will not vote for Obama.
RN,
ReplyDeleteThat leaves Rick "Belongs-in-a-Sanitarium" Santorum. You can't! You won't! Would you?
Octo - Santorum barely even registered on my radar. But thanks for reminding of something I never gave a thought to, and forgive me for forgetting it. :)
ReplyDeleteGee, RatNat, you do, in fact, repeat on your blog several times that Obama isn't a Communist. Of course, you're almost Birch-like in your hatred of communism (and more than willing to imply that liberals are turning college campuses into hotbeds of communism - btw, "enemy within"? Really? As in "someone we must destroy"?)
ReplyDelete(Oh, incidentally, name me a truly communist nation anywhere on this planet).
But then you go and say things like this: "my concise view is that Barrack Hussein Obama is a socialist, a statist, and if allowed to further centralize power in the government and his office our Republic will become unrecognizable"
So, no, you don't get a pass on that.
You know, it's weird. I'm thumbing my way through your blog, and you, even when completely wrong, do on occasion try to be "rational" - and then you say completely batshit stuff like that.
(Oh, and you know that old saying about "the company you keep"? Some of your coauthors on your blog are entirely off the rails: let's remember that Left Coast Rebel was one of those trying to claim that Mexico was invading America.)
So, your name is meant to be ironic, then?
Nameless Cynic - I am pleased and honored you have taken the time to peruse through my stuff.
ReplyDeleteOf course I would not expect you understand much of what you read. Other than to look for ways to twist things to represent your opposition to anything outside you're own viewpoints.
Which is just fine by me. It would be awfully boring if everyone thought like you or me... Now wouldn't it?
As for this... ""my concise view is that Barrack Hussein Obama is a socialist, a statist, and if allowed to further centralize power in the government and his office our Republic will become unrecognizable"
I firmly stand by that statement. You cannot expect me to retract the truth, nor be belittled into backtracking.
And by the way, I hold similar opinions of the statist and sometimes reactionary base of the "opposition" party. One I am proud to admit I no longer belong to and haven't for a few years now.
At any rate It really matters not to me your interpretation of what I produce. I come here because this sight offers views different from my own. IE:It provides food for thought and help keeps my mind open.
Can you say the same? I wonder.
RN,
ReplyDeleteWhat you call “statism” is one of those weasel words often hurled as an epithet but lacking in clear definition or consistency. What is deemed “statist” to one group of stakeholders may have an opposite meaning or impact on another. Where competing stakeholders have competing claims, one function of government is to strike a reasonable balance between the two.
From time to time, Ron Paul has been the subject of various and sundry posts at the Swash Zone – sometimes laudatory, sometimes not. My reservations with Ron Paul in specific and libertarians in general is a lack of “internal consistency” and and a world view that borders on naivety. There are benchmark issues I cite as examples.
First is Ron Paul’s position on abortion and women’s reproductive freedom, a position that is virtually identical to the extreme right wing of the GOP. If a main tenet among libertarians is the maximization of “freedom,” abortion represents an outright contradiction to the extent that the male half of the human population intends to subjugate the female half. If Roe V. Wade was reversed and abortions are criminalized, women and their doctors will be turned into criminals. How does this square with libertarian concepts of “freedom?”
Libertarians are fervently anti-regulatory, and yet there are many regulations on the books that maximize “freedom” for the greatest number of stakeholders. Among these are the canons of business law and safety regulations. Anti-trust laws, for example, make capitalism and free enterprise safe from predators. Food and drug regulations make the marketplace safe from dishonest operators. Liberals recognize that there are crooks and honest folk; libertarians think everyone has a moral compass. How naรฏve!
If Ron Paul was at least more nuanced and balanced in his views, liberals might pay more attention. Unfortunately, we find him to be contradictory, inconsistent, unrealistic, and downright eccentric.
"I do express concern over the extremes of both parties. I just do it more respectfully than some."
ReplyDeleteSome times "respectfully" means pretending to be oblivious to one's arrogance and condescension.
H/t to The Political Carnival:
ReplyDeleteHERMAN CAIN spent all week responding to claims that he once sexually harassed not only one or two but three women. It seems HERMAN just can’t take “Nein, Nein, Nein!” for an answer.
The National Restaurant Association finally confirmed that it paid a cash settlement to one of the women. Poor HERMAN! Now he has to explain away all his denials, evasions, misstatements and little white lies. And after the Tea Party he has to face his wife.
When CAIN was asked if any other women might accuse him of sexual harassment he said, “I’ll cross that bed when I come to it.”
Nevertheless, CAIN is still up there in the polls. It seems people don’t care. HERMAN’S popularity hit an all-time high, right after the public found out his zipper hit an all-time low.
(Perhaps our good Captain should write my material for me!)