Various things I don’t believe

Non credo, dude.

1.  That Herman Cain is a sexual harasser.

2.  That Rick Perry had anything to do with the “leak” of “information” about sexual harassment complaints against Cain to Politico.

3.  That Mitt Romney was behind the “leaks” either.

4.  That the mythical ability to silence baseless innuendo, or spin it and come out smelling like a rose, or avoid it altogether, is a qualification for being president of the United States.

5.  That the left-wing mainstream media act in good faith when they retail these allegations.

6.  That media coverage of such allegations and innuendo is some form of vetted professional activity, rather than just a glorified form of slam book smears and middle-school cafeteria gossip.

7.  That it is incumbent on any of us to take the endless effluvia of the media smear machine seriously.

8.  That it is a sign of intelligence to thoughtfully consider these charges-without-evidence, rather than simply dismissing them.

9.  That the whole circus matters to our choice of president, in terms of illuminating for us the character or abilities of any of the candidates.

10.  That any of these cheap-allegation dramas is even about the candidates, rather than about us, and whether we have any judgment or discrimination when it comes to what we let the media fill our heads with.

If a competent prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich, today’s media can smear one – and then make it look like some innocent ham sandwich over there behind the counter did it.  But the media can only do this because we cooperate with them, by simply accepting every negative, damning, evil thought they suggest to us.

Keeping the barrage up is virtually cost-free for them.  They are not going to stop, no matter how conclusively it is proven that they are full of shinola.  Accepting their cues, and spending day after day discussing things on their terms, is the actual problem.  And that problem starts with us.

There is no corrective for this problem in the mechanics of politics or the media’s M.O.  Politics and the media aren’t going to change.  Period.  We have to decide what our characters and priorities will consist of.  Do we have the strength of mind to say this? – “Don’t bother me with your innuendo about Herman Cain.  I want to talk issues.  We need to cut spending, reduce regulation, and undo all of Obama’s dangerous executive orders.  We need to restore a constitutional balance of power in the federal government.  And that’s just for starters. Iran is closing in on a nuclear weapon.  China is menacing all of Asia.  European security is in jeopardy, and so is ours.  That’s what I want to talk about.  The future of the republic is at stake.”

Who cares if “they” think we’re stupid?  Are we seriously going to let this election degenerate into a suicidal snark free-for-all because someone might think we’re stupid, if we don’t bite on every worm the media dangle on the hook?

Any one of us could be in Cain’s or Perry’s position – or Bachmann’s, or Palin’s, or that of any conservative front-runner past or present.  Ronald Reagan himself wouldn’t have triumphed over this kind of media attack.  He would have looked every bit as caught off guard and flat-footed.  One thing the blogosphere does is amplify cheap, off-the-cuff opinions and send them echoing back to us in chorus, as if “everybody” now thinks Candidate X is toast and his character is in shreds.  Is that really true?  What obliges us to think so, other than the kind of fearful, triangulating approach to our personal opinions that we should have overcome by the time we got our high school diplomas?

Herman Cain hasn’t been convicted of sexual harassment, nor have charges been filed against him.  It would be public record if these things had happened.  It is not a sign of intelligence or moral discrimination for conservative voters to feast on vague allegations against our candidates, which we are told by third parties were made by persons whose names we don’t know, and which never resulted in prosecution or sanction.  As a rule for life, that’s no way to think about morality, law, society, or other people’s characters.

And Cain’s not even my preferred candidate.  But this applies to all of them.  If we wait for cheap “bad news” about other people to cease flowing, we’ll be stuck obsessing over it for all eternity.  It doesn’t have to be true or significant; it will just keep coming.  How much we are preoccupied with evil allegations is up to us.  We only think it’s the media doing this to us.  In reality, we’re doing it to ourselves.  We have the power to say no: we’re not playing any more.  Until we do that, the MSM will have us by the short hairs.

Oh, and one more thing I don’t believe:

11.  That Americans are too foolish and weak-minded to figure this out.

J.E. Dyer’s articles have appeared at Hot Air’s Green Room, Commentary’s “contentions,Patheos, and The Weekly Standard online.


77 thoughts on “Various things I don’t believe”

  1. You had me until point #11.

    There is a credulousness towards the press that flies against reason and experience. Have you ever been witness to an event and then read about it in the paper the next day? Weren’t there major errors in the newspaper story?

    But if we don’t have personal knowledge, we still tend to believe what we read in the papers or see on TV, notwithstanding our knowledge that the press is, to put it mildly, not very reliable. Now add what we have here: accusations that are vague, factless or unsourced — or all three.. Are we going to fall for it? Maybe not the present company, but many people will fall for it. And their votes count just as much as ours.

  2. Um … yeh … we MAY want to talk about THAT but WHO, precisely, among the GOP contenders has been doing so in a plausibly systematic, specific and coherent fashion? Well, Rick Santrorum, mostly, Mitt Romeny, to an extent, New Gingrich, kinda. Certainly not Herman Cain.

    And yet the reason we’re not demanding this discussion is because, as Cousin Vinnie says above, you’re point 11 is unduly … oh … I don’t know … Optimistic?

    The recent polls (I hate to carp on it, but they’re getting worse) show little reason for optimism, and even the behavior of the Republican electorate has been less than optimal as the flirtations with Donald Trump (!?!?!?) and less problematically but still far from optimally, Herm Cain, suggest.

    To return to you point from last week about debates I did not mean to disagree with the specifics but simply to note that is the the way the game is played and until someone gets into a position (it would have to be a very popular president) where he/she can and decides to change it they have to be able to navigate this mess. Jay Cos over at The Weekly Standard has an excellent piece to that effect.

    Now, Paul Ryan (for the umpteenth time – I must excuse my tedious persistence here) is doing precisely that, in and in a rather compelling way and in anything approaching a decent (much less ideal) political system that is how someone WOULD go about running for president, rather than going through they ridiculous B.S. you’ve been observing and documenting. And indeed, were running for president to consistent in a much larger part (if not quite exclusive part – some retail politiking and logistical efforts are more than acceptable) than it is quite probable that he (and others) would be running. As it is, it is understandable that someone who wants to deal with these issues in a serious way may prefer not to run for POTUS.

    And here again we must fault the electorate to a meaningful extent. It might perhaps seem quixotic, but if, say, 30 to 40 percent of the Republican electorate, at least, named Paull Ryan as a (write in? call in?) candidate in the surveys even with his being absent from the ballot, perhaps it would appear that he could in fact run a campaign doing what he is doing, rather than going through this absurd circus.

    On this point I think a great deal blame must go to some in the conservative media. I get a chance to listen to Rush very rarely but he has at times conducted himself in an absurd and embarrassing way the last couple of years, and specifically with his attacks on the GOP “Establishment”. By “Establishment” I don’t mean that “Establishment” that supported Bob Bennett, Lisa Murkowski and (cringe) Charlie Christ. Rather I speak of his constant (perhaps and exaggeration – don’t listen enough – but certainly more than occasional) attacks on same, and specifically things like his attack on the Wall Street Journal for supposedly supporting RomneyCare. Now Rush might have not done his research in this case but that a frighteningly ugly accusation to make without having done so, and TWSOP absolutely shredded RomneyCare way back in 2006 (that was indeed the first time I was appraised of – and appalled at – it). Now Rush is a very smart, sophisticated guy, but one gets the feeling that he’s occasionally indulged in some pretty harmful rabble rousing rather than using his platform to educate (which he does do to an extent to be sure) people about the current, for the Republic almost deadly, situation. And in times like this, that is a valuable resource to waste

  3. Justice Thomas, call your office.
    I suppose Curt Anderson has a few questions to answer.
    Was Mr. Cain naive in trusting Curt Anderson years ago?
    Are the charges a bit murky and without proof?
    Are the ladies in question presenting the allegations themselves?
    Are the stories in the media based soley on heresay?
    Will any parts of the media take responsiblilty that the stories are true? Of course the stories are that there are stories.
    Were the allegations important enough to be brought forward before Mr. Cain began gaining traction as a candidate?
    Did Curt Anderson run from Mr. Cains office years ago and declare he could not work for a man that might be a sexual predator?
    Are we presented another gossipy circus of garbage while important issues are left on the floor?
    I am afraid # 11 is too optimistic.
    The Federal Govt has for about 70 years, cultivated, fertilized and grown a dependent group of people.
    Silly faux reality crap is the popular treat of the entitled class. Waiting for a check, a credit, “free help” if you will is the order of the day for about 46% of the US population.
    Entertainment is important. Soothing escape from reality on reality shows.
    Menckens caustic remarks about politicians and their voting blocks are still valid today. Boobus Americanus is alive and thriving.
    Politicians act like fools, say foolish things, ignor the troubling facts of the day because they accurately reflect their constituents wishes.
    Chuck Schumer, Senator from a bankrupt state, calls a press conference to take a principled stand on carry on luggage charges.
    Dick Durbin, Senator from a very bankrupt state, calls a press conference to castigate BoA for instituing fees that he himself (Durbin) was responsible for.
    Nancy Pelosi………….etc.etc.etc.etc.
    One should always wear a raincoat if running for public office.

  4. Rush actually addressed the RomneyCare thing.. it was, and I know this because I followed the debates and issues at the time (boy was I bored back then)… The Heritage Foundation. (and The HF did help him with it.. individual mandate and all) I heard Rush correct that perception on the “air” – I listen over the Internet due to bad AM in the area – though now WMAL has gone to FM so that is good..

    Here is the deal:

    I disagree with JE on two points.

    1. Point 3. Romney’s campaign might or might not be directly behind the leaks, but he benefits the most from the entire issue being ginned up. And it would definitely be in the “zone” of possibility for that particular campaign to have arranged this. Remember the Establishment takes care of its own regardless of loose party affiliation. Whether Oboingo or the Mittster win in November 2012, the Establishment wins. Romeny is just a Liberal Democrat with the D clumsily converted to an R. (Used one of those fat blue kindergarten crayons to do it, too…)

    2. I agree with the Cuz on the unnumbered point 11… the media (In this case the Washington Post/Politico – invented and vetted the modern Macaca attack…) this latest attack is a prime example of the skills developed since they first smeared George Allen. His angry use of a nonsense word that he made up off of the top of his head. ( Allen wanted to call an annoying opposition campaign operative something more closely related to “barnyard left overs”… but sniggletted a nonsense word together as a euphemism. Too bad he should have just called him an annoying “s#!t” and been done with it.)

    The MSM/DNC Propaganda Corp is still massively influential, and exceedingly powerful. They shape the message, edit the content, and fill in the blanks for most of America. This is regardless of how many polls come out stating that Americans don’t trust the media. Obviously that is a full blown lie, because the entire pop culture is shaped by the MSM…bends to its AgitProp, and dances to its stars.

    Politics is a cold calculating blood sport. Too many “conservatives” are Labradors among the pit-bulls.

    1. Welcome, Julie, and bring on the wide brush if you’ve got one. (wreed knows I’m still a Sooner fan, no matter what’s being done with brushes around the blog.)

      Apologies for the delay in your comment appearing. There’s a one-time “approval,” but anything you want to add will show up automatically from now on. So join the fray!

  5. Cavalier, isn’t Paul Ryan the guy who was caught on video pushing grandmother in her wheelchair off a cliff? I don’t want to think about what the Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) would say about Ryan if he were a candidate.

  6. You’ve certainly the right not to believe.
    Personally, I’m sure that Cain is intent on restoring the Ottoman Empire.

    Herman Cain has not been charged with a crime of sexual harassment, he quite possibly was named in a complaint or three. Whatever it is that suffices to declare someone a sexual harassessasser is less than a criminal conviction.

    1. Sexual assault is a crime in every state of the Union.

      It is also a ground for civil suit.

      Paying off the two ladies in the sums of $35K and $45K respectively, effectively compromised any civil suit, and also bought the silence of the witnesses who would be essential in any criminal prosecution.

      We know that complaints have been made, and someone from Pizzadom believed the allegations were of sufficient substance to justify paying off the complainants with very large sums of money.

      Someone who was in the know (presumably one of the ladies, or someone from Pizzadom, or the office of their lawyers) spilled the beans directly to Politico – or indirectly through Rove or the Perry or Romney campaigns. The source will probably never be established. However, to expect any media organ in this day and age to withold publication of a story like this – particular when large sums of money have been paid out – is simply not reality.

      To further contend that publishing these sort of revelations about a politician running for high office is something the vast screeching panopoly of right-wing newspapers, radio shock-jocks, extremist blogs, and far-right TV stations don’t do is to invite ridicule. Allegations of sexual misbehaviour and wild conspiracy fantasies are the staple diet of the right-wing media. But you never hear of JED and her ilk complaining when it comes to unflattering inventions about mainstream politicians. It is only when the far less frequent event of an unflattering photo or allegation against people she likes happens that she expresses anguish about media standards. This sort of tunnel vision and a-la-carte outrage rather devalues her opinion on anything.

  7. Ronald Reagan HIMSELF would have brought forth frogs abundantly, which shall go up and come into thine house, and into thy bedchamber, and upon thy bed, against anyone that darested to smeareth HIM.

  8. You don’t believe? There are none so blind…………

    Lets have a closer look at your “beliefs”.

    1. We all agree that Cain is entitled to be considered innocent until proven guilty. However, someone in his organization (and not in the “mainstream media”) believed there was sufficient substance in the allegations to pay a substantial settlement to the ladies involved.

    2. There is no evidence that Perry was the snitch. However, I’m told he was rather pleased.

    3. Romney was also rather pleased.

    4. Are we referring to the “Birthers” here?

    5. Since both the reputable and right-wing media universally reported these allegations (and the pay-offs), what leads you to believe that only the disrep…. er, I mean, right-wing media, acted “reputably”?

    6. Huh? Perhaps you might like to provide an english translation?

    7. Dead right, I stopped watching FOX ages ago. (Did you know that FOX is part of the same organization that tapped the phones of the parents of a dead child)

    8. Someone in the Cain organization (not the “mainstream” media) after “thoughtfully considering” these allegations decided they were sufficiently substantial to pay-off the ladies who made them.

    9. Strangely, you didn’t take the same attitude when it came to Bill Clinton (And while Bill was certainly a very naughty boy, Monica was, after all, a consenting adult. In Cain’s case the allegations are anything but consensual). Sorry, I don’t fancy having a possible Dominique Strauss Khan as my next president (And he wasn’t convicted of anything either).

    10. I think the American public is quite capable of sifting substance from dross. That’s why Palin sank without trace and Bachmann is following close behind. But I do agree that unsubstantiated allegations based on nothing but partisanship and hatred are coarsening our public discourse. For example, to use the expression employed by your pal Frank Gaffney when he has no evidence to back up some allegation about someone he hates, “Cain is an “unindicted” sex-offender. This is patently true.
    The problem for your sad, whining, self-pitying argument in which you adopt for the extreme right the mantle of victim, is that the common currency of FOX, the Washington Times, the right-wing shock-jocks, and the fringe right blogosphere is unsubstantiated allegations, personal attacks, distortion and innuendo. It seems that you and the rest of your shower are great at dishing it out, but not so good at taking it. My dear dad always said “don’t start something you can’t finish”. Someone even wiser than him said “If you live by the sword……………

    11. At least we can agree on something (But see the first sentence of 10 above)

  9. Time to wander on down to the library and get a copy of Neal Postman’s “Amusing Ourselves to Death” to read after gruel tonight.

  10. Yeah, gang, somebody’s got to be optimistic. I think there are a lot more people out there with compunction and discernment than we might think, if we went by the quality of the loudest public voices today, or by the stupefaction of our culture.

    At a certain point, it isn’t possible for a person of common sense to believe that EVERY Republican running for office is an evil slimebag. Even the least politically engaged people, like the ones Cousin Vinnie refers to, will sense viscerally that they’re being sold a bill of goods. I predict the media are going to overplay their hand in this regard — people’s native good sense will kick in, even if they don’t have the resources to rhetorically defend each candidate from the particulars of every charge.

    When the media are demanding in chorus that we all believe tendentious things about one side of the political spectrum, the people get suspicious. I think that’s going to spread as this campaign goes on. It may be the MSM who are hoist on their own petard in the end.

    1. Having indulged the “Birthers” and every crank with some conspiracy fantasy about our president, it ill-behoves the right-wing media (mainstream and sewage-stream) to portray itself as the only virgin in the brothel established by themselves.

      And no, people don’t believe that every Republican running for office is an evil slimebag. Most of them are merely weak flip-floppers who will say anything, jettison any principle, and reverse any previously espoused policy, to get elected.

      But you are quite correct about people’s good sense kicking in. The polls show that we very quickly cottoned-on to the two prima-donna phoneys: Palin and Bachmann, and that Obama (in spite of the tenacity of the Bush crash) is preferable to any of the aforesaid bunch of weak flip-floppers.

      There’s hope for you yet, JED.

      1. Let’s see, the Dan Rather/Mary Mapes hatchet job on GW, the “fake but true” episode, was the essence of real journalism. Clinton’s serial sexual escapades had to be revealed in court, the media wouldn’t touch them until everyone already knew. And the nation would be lots better off with ethical stalwarts like gigolo John Kerry, conversor with the dead John Edwards and silly sanctimon Al Gore in charge. To think that we were only a plane crash and a myocardial infarction from seeing San Fran Nan, the diva of Castro Street, an individual that would have to look up to see the soles of the shoes of Palin or Bachmann’s intellect, seated at the big desk in the Oval Office. It’s not strange that the latter two achievers should fall in the polls. After all, Obama, who will no doubt be honored in the future with statuary somewhere near Wall Street, has been gifted with millions by the very financial interests he supposedly intends to reduce to poverty. Pseudo-intellectuals like yourself evidently truly believe the nonsense these demagogues. The reality is that both camps are engaged in a contest to loot the nation, but one has the help of the media and publishing business.

        1. And don’t forget that but for the seminal event of the providential preservation of the soiled blue dress, Clinton would still be denying and the media would still be backing him — a far cry from their approach to the unsubstantiated allegations against Mr. Cain.

          We had scientific DNA evidence showing that the odds of Mr. Cliinton telling the truth were somewhere around one in eight trillion. (Still better than the odds of Barney Frank telling the truth about the sources of the mortgage meltdown.) That sort of proof does not come around very often.

          1. Ah yes, as I said, Bill was a very very naughty boy. But, this was private consensual activity between two adults. Cain has twice paid out settlements to ladies who had alleged something entirely more sinister. That’s why the DSK analogy is appropriate. Strauss-Khan wasn’t convicted of anything either. However, character, not a criminal conviction, is the issue here, and the French said “non, merci”, and adjudged that the dead-cert front-runner to succeed Sarkozy was no longer a suitable candidate to represent them.

            In fact, I believe that legal activity between consenting adults is basically none of my business – whether or not the folks concerned are politicians. It is the right-wing and its media that has made “morals” an issue. And now they have been (as JED aptly put it) hoist with their own (ugly) petard. Somehow, I find it difficult to share JED’s feelings of hurt and sympathy about what has happened.

            Incidentally, I first read about the Cain pay-outs in the Washington Times Online – hardly a right-wing source. But their is an element in the Times readership for which one black President is one too many. The Republican party would not have been short of people to snitch on him either. Many of the mega-rich high-rollers who fund the party would have been worried that a 9% income-tax rate would have seen them paying far more tax than they pay at present.

            1. I think I should have said “hardly a left-wing source” when referring to the WT.

              Apologies. P

            2. ” But their is an element in the Times readership for which one black President is one too many.”

              BHO has spent most of his life trying to BECOME “black”. Born to a white mother with exotic tastes in men and raised by her white parents in one of the least black environments in America while attending the most exclusive educational institutions in the country, BHO shares zero of what most Americans, black or white or Hispanic, consider Afro-American. Nothing racist about 90% of voting blacks making an X next to his name on their ballots because he has slightly more melanin in his skin than Johnny Winter and promised to bring the troops home and take money from the rich to give to the poor. Of course none of that happened. Increased federal meddling in the economy to the benefit of political cronies has made black males basically unemployable but they never show up at the polls anyway.

              1. And do you believe that the multi-millionaire Bush-oil family is typical of American families?

            3. “entirely more sinister”

              This is an example of how the media works. In reality you have no idea what is specifically alleged. You haven’t been told. You have merely been told that there was some kind of allegation and the company settled. You know the allegation was sexual harassment but nothing beyond that. In your imagination, it was more sinister…no wait… ENTIRELY more sinister than what Clinton did. (and I guess by extension, ENTIRELY more sinister than what he was alleged by Paula Jones to have done which of course you may dismiss but only because you know enough about it to formulate a reason to dismiss it. No such handle here)

              1. We have a pretty good idea at this stage thanks to the right-wing blogosphere. In any case, Karl Rove is organizing the ‘coup de grace’ by demanding (on muck-raking FOX) that Cain release the complainants from their gagging agreements.

          2. “…and the media would still be backing him (Clinton”

            Such a short memory you have. Or perhaps you’re too young to remember?

            The media (mainstream and right-wing) were full of nothing else for months and months. And of course, the source of the leak to the press about this (naughty, but consensual) activity between two adults was an embittered right-wing lobbyist who betrayed a confidence. You (and JED) will no doubt have been appalled at her behaviour.

      2. “Prima donna phoney” Palin says: “In fact, the nation’s dividing line today is how you answer this question: ‘Are you entitled to other people’s money?’ The Wall Street crony capitalists, the Obama Administration, the leftist politicos, big union bosses and the occupiers, they all say yes. The rest of America says, ‘No!”

          1. If Palin was Jewish, I would ask Paul to be our best man or bridesmaid. Whatever was appropriate on that particular day for Paulite.

            1. You missed the point. I was just reminding you that you had omitted one of the more prominent entities that would have had to answer “yes” to your question.

          2. And isn’t the $2 billion dollars in aid the US ships to Egypt every year basically a bribe to keep them from starting a fight with the Israelis that they would be sure to lose? Pretty much more aid to the Israelis, wouldn’t you say?

            1. Not exactly, because they have no intention of starting a fight. The €2 bn is to bribe them to police Sinai to Israel’s benefit, and not to interfere with the Israeli siege of Gaza. Why the US taxpayer should be paying out this money – or our annual dole to Israel, beats me. None of this money does anything to assist US foreign-policy interests – or our fiscal situation.

              ALL these dole payments to foreign countries needs to stop now. All they do is foster an ethos of entitlement by people who are largely ungrateful anyhow.

    2. this stuff has been going on for most of forever. it was used against Andrew Jackson, famous Republican candidate a while back.

      1. Tap… tap… tap… Fuster um.. Andrew Jackson was the first official DEMOCRAT President. He was a rank populist with a bad temper, a steaming hatred of banks, bankers, and Indians… especially Indians who historically sided with the British during the Revolution..

        He is credited with dosing the old Democratic-Republicans with enough populist notions that they dropped the notion of Republic from the Party name.

        At the time the Whigs were the opposition, “Conservative” Party. The Republican Party didn’t appear until John C. Freemont helped pull together the left over abolitionist Whigs and Free Soil Democrats in the 1850’s.

        Jackson was long dead by then.

        Lesson over… not that it will do much good… it’s like spraying water on a rock too little soaks in to be of any use.


        1. Nobody’s perfect. Old Hickory was in a perpetual bad mood because Aaron Burr hit the target before he could.

        2. MF -I kinda sorta knew his party affiliation…tanks anyway….I expected that the opticon would have understood…..but don’t sweat it.

        3. As for Jackson, he has two big skutcheons on his record, the removal of the Creek Indians, and the appointment of Lewis
          Taney, his Secretary of Commerce, to the High Court, yet he dispatched the foolish oligarchs of the day, the Gallatins from
          their precursors to Fed Foolishness; the Bank of the United

          1. If these were the only blots on his escutscion he must have been one of our most admirable presidents. But FOX wasn’t around in them there times.

    3. Those are reasons to be optimistic that Barry will get less than say 52% and fewer than 320EVs, that Rs. might keep the House and might even take the Senate. One would have to be completely delusional rather than optimistic to be confident that the elected branches in 2012 will quantitatively and qualitatively consist of people willing to implement the necessary policies and capable of persuading the people of the urgency and, indeed, the painlessness and immediate and prospective benefits of such for a very large majority.

      Again I refer to the very large boost Barry is currently enjoying and while I’ve always been cautious about not giving the people too much credit and underestimating the effect of MSM irresponsibility and propaganda the fact that he is above 40 and indeed 45 constitutes a very severe indictment of our fellow citizens.

      OC’s policies analysis is invariably sophisticated and lucid and pretty close to infallible. Optimism that the implementation of the correct policies can quickly revive our fortunes as a people and a country is entirely warranted. Optimism that such implementation will take place in light of the media, the current R field and most crucially, the current polity is most is rather unwarranted.

    1. And, is my recollection correct when I say that one of our early presidents had his slaves perform rather more personal services for him than washing his smalls?
      As you say, this sort of thing has been going on since God was in short pants.

  11. Some of our most iconic presidents have had difficulty in keeping their pants on. If sexual continance were a constitutional requirement for the presidency, the entire history of our nation would have been different.
    Even in recent times Eisenhower was shagging his driver, and Kennedy shagged everything in a skirt. Both were better presidents than “Shrub” who screwed the entire nation.

    1. P.S. Apologies for using such forthright language, but the entire situation about the sexual habits of our politicians is getting out of hand. Given the frailty of human nature in this area, and the fact that our politicians spend a chunk of their lives away from home, our democratic choice will soon be limited to to certified eunuchs (The Chinese did something like this once). But we need to be consistent. We buy the newspapers and subscribe to FOX and the like and fund the people who are dragging discourse into the gutter.

      The rightwing media started this nonsense, but it would be less than honest to say that it remains confined to that persuasion (Even if that’s where the complaints about Cain and Perry’s behaviour surfaced). However, it adds nothing to the credibility of protestations about the coarsening of the debate, when the same complainants were quite happy to condone, excuse, and promulgate the drek of the “birthers” and their ilk.

  12. Those of us, with long memories, realize this effluvia was exactly what Axelrod used to dispatch two of Obama’s lead opponents, Ryan (who was clearly a fool for other obvious reasons), and Hull. It was also the method
    employed against his most aggressive opponent in the 2008 campaign, and
    again just a few months ago, scurrilous allegations without any foundation,
    yet echoed through the Journolist and more interesting through the media-entertainment complex. Now as with foreign intelligence operations, it becomes necessary to false flag the attacks, through other conduits.

  13. *UPDATE*

    Cain “believes” is was Perry’s campaign that snitched to the media.

    And guess where he made this scurrellous allegation about Perry?

    (No, it wasn’t the New York Times or CNN)

    This allegation was made on FOX!

    And now FOX and the rest of the right-wing media are saying that there have been other similar complaints about Cain. How could they be so disreputable as to assist in publishing this sort of “effulvia”? Don’t they realise what they are doing to the quality of public discourse?

    If you shovel around the poop, some of it will inevitably come back and hit you in the face.

    When you have a dim shower of opportunists, and a right-wing media operating at the same level, this sort of self-immolating poop-fest is bound to happen. Sure as eggs is eggs.

  14. Paul, it is a pleasure to be bombarded with the odd grab bag of statist, left wing, do-gooder, odds and ends scraps of the true believer.
    I see your herd centered antenna are in a state of arousal. The chemical receptors of the collective are working overtime. ( Or perhaps you took a white cross by mistake).
    If you wish to dimiss Presidents Clintons’ “oral brief” (that IS the meaning of “is”) and crucify (tool of the true believer) the great un-washed conservative black males for sin in their hearts, just quote Mencken “Adultery is the application of democracy to love”.
    Perhaps conservative sin could be taxed and redistributed to the needy.
    The do gooder sin could be saved and packaged as art or a special coating for public buildings.
    Personally, I prefer independent sin, it is more spontaneous and reliable.
    By the way, as a refresher, the object is to defeat the pathetic excuse for a president Nov. 2012.
    Speaking of something that is important: LSU/Bama.

    1. The problem is Wreed, it’s dubious there’s much of anything to these charges, can’t be a double standard, because they are not abiding by any,

    1. I’m intrigued. Who in the “leftwing liberal media” decided that there was sufficient substance in these allegations to justify paying out the substantial settlement of $45K?

  15. The MSM will seek to ‘Palinize’ any Presidential Republican candidate who appears to be a credible threat to Obama’s reelection. The current Republican field is less than charismatic and lacking in gravitas.

    If Obama loses in 2012, it will be because the country as a whole has judged the office of the President… ‘as above his pay grade’. A case of ‘anyone but him’.

    Once again as with Clinton, a case of, “it’s the economy, stupid”.

    The country is evenly divided on moral issues and foreign affairs, so barring a major, successful terrorist attack, the only determinative factor in 2012 will be unemployment.

    1. Yup, if Obama loses in 2012 it’ll be because the country disapproves of the way his admin has handled things…

      Of course, there seems to be some chance the country DOES disapprove of him, but will still re-elect him because the GOP won’t manage to nominate anybody that’s palatable to most of the moderate voters.

      there’s disapproval and then there’s …distaste…… The GOP nominates someone such as Bachmann or Palin or West and then Obama can raise the Nigerian/Indonesian/ Anarchist A/Hammer and Sickle over the White House while smoking a joint and sipping a flaming Rum Coco and still win

  16. Leftite, If you enjoy applying “Birthers” as part of the “big tent” of Conservatism, perhaps you could even things out a little and add “Truthers” to that of the Liberals. Fair and balanced and all that.

    You and the rest of the Collective love to harp on how Conservatives vilified Clinton for his “moral failings.” In response you say that it was the consensual act between two adults. What you conveniently leave out though is that Clinton wasn’t impeached for his “moral failings.” He was impeached for lying under oath, which is the far more egregious act to your average Conservative than is whatever he may have done with an intern.

  17. You’re missing the point, Richie. I’m not excusing Clinton telling fibs about the extent of his (completely legal) activities with Ms. Lewinski. All I’m doing is pointing out a small inconsistency.

    We know with hindsight that Bill did certain things with Ms. L. However, when the embittered right-wing lobbiest, Paula Jones, flouted a confidence and high-tailed it to the media with her story, no-one knew whether or not her allegations (of embarrasing, but legal carrying-on) were true. But no one in the media (right, left, or center) seems to have been much bothered by this finer point. And certainly no-one in the right-wing media hesitated for a moment, or considered that what they were doing was inappropriate, or was unfairly prejudging poor Bill, before launching into a full-on gloat-fest.

    Now, we don’t yet know for sure whether Cain has been guilty of the (potentially criminal) behaviour alleged by this burgeoning band of ladies. Neither do we yet know whether Cain lied when he claimed not to have known about the substantial pay-outs made by his company to silence the complainants. All of this is mere allegations – as were the allegations against Big Bad Bill when Jones went to the media. So why was it appropriate to publish the allegations of non-criminal behaviour against BBB, and an outrage, and the end of civilization as we know it, to publish allegations of potentially criminal acts on the part of Cain?

    This inconsistency is why I am taking JED’s anguish and concern about the incivility of our media discourse and its appitite for so-called inconsequential matters with a large pinch of salt.

    And, if any of the candidates want to make consensual whoopie with every adult intern in the White House to celebratie their election to the presidency – I say best of luck to them. However, I would be concerned about having a potential sex-offender as president. That is why we owe a debt of gratitude to whoever in pizzadom spilled the beanz. And I’m sure that Cain will accept Karl Rove’s invitation to exonerate himself. The last thing we need is a DSK scenario on our hands when its too late.

  18. Paulite, I think you are confused about Paula Jones. She was the Arkansas woman whom Clinton asked to “kiss it.” You may be confusing her with Ms. Lucianne Goldberg, who advised Monica to hang on to the blue dress evidence.

    And we should be pretty clear about the crime of perjury. You can deny all you want until you are under oath, without criminal penalty.

      1. I would care very much if these allegations were found to be true AFTER we had elected him to the presidency.

        Anyhow, it looks like it will be Romneycare of the Democratic Lite Party against the incumbent in the general election.

        I’m already thinking “Four More Years”

        1. Four more years of exactly what with Obama Paul???????
          Pick out the high points so far. Shouldn’t take very long.

          1. Stopping the crash that happened on his predecessors watch becoming a total disaster is plenty.

            1. We did crash there Paul. The pres just transferred everones futures to the least productive sector of our economy. The private and public sector unions and very large financial institutions.There is nothing left, except debt.

    1. 1. I stand corrected about the identity of the snitch.

      2. The perjury came much later, and long long after the “prejudicial” media feeding-frenzy had begun.

      3. We don’t yet know how the allegations against Cain will pan out. However, some of them relate to criminal behaviour. I would hope that Cain will accept Karl Rove’s invitation to exonerate himself.

      4. You are still missing the point. When the respective snitches went to the media, the allegations against BBB – no less than the allegations against Cain – were mere allegations. So why the outrage only when Cain is the “victim”?

      5. It is becoming obvious that these allegations arose from within the Republican family. It is also obvious that a large constituency within that party is quite pleased at what has happened. But I tend to agree with JED about Perry and Romney. Neither strike me as having the “originality” of mind to be the source. I think Rove is the key. I think there is a “Stop Cain” movement within the Republican establishment. Or, it may be much simpler. One or other of the ladies who were allegedly paid for their silence decided that the American people had a right to know. Either way, it is ludicrous to expect the Washingtimes or FOX not to publish the allegations once they became known.

  19. Right, like the Vaunted Times piece on the ‘affair’ that didn’t happen with McCain, as opposed to the slush fund with Edwards, who behaved worse
    in reality, than Newt was alleged to have been,

    1. Don’t get me wrong. I believe that BOTH Edwards and Gingrich are slimebags. However, the Dems have had the principles to dump Edwards, The Republicans are still making excuses for Gingrich. Says something, I suppose.

    1. In this case the American thinker is a good example of an oxymoron (with emphasis on the final two syllables)

    2. I read the rather turgid article.

      It confirms that both Edwards and Gingrich are world-class scumbags. It then tries to excuse Gingrich’s monumentally callous behaviour towards his disgarded wife by saying that his purpose of visiting her in hospital while she was recuperating after cancer surgery was to discuss her divorce rather than to serve divorce proceedings on her.

      However, the Dems have dumped Edwards. The Republicans are still making excuses for Gingrich, and he is still activly seeking the Republican nomination.

      The remainder of the article is the usual whingeing nonsense about the right-wing being poor unfortunate victims.

      We share your pain.

      1. November 2012. It will be here on time. Did you say we again? The Borg still on the move?
        His record is un-important. His record is un-important. His record is un-important. Everyone now…….
        Too bad even the Dems couldn’t stand the damage Cap and Trade would have caused. Everyones’ electric and gas bills up by a factor of 4.
        Section 8 folks, people on fixed incomes, single moms, etc. We would have then had more money for Green Energy boondoogles to support rich Dem Bundlers.(Please raise my taxes)
        You could ignore that also.
        Obama goes down. Obama goes down. Obama goes down. (Couldn’t resist a bit of mindless empty rhetoric.)
        Pas it on to the blob.

        1. No one’s utility bills have gone up by a factor of 4 since Obama came to office. (However, many have been severely effected by the collapse of Republican donor fraudsters, ENRON. Cap and Trade has had little effect on utility prices)

          To contend that the Republican Party give a rat’s f..t about section 8 folks, people on fixed incomes (unless the fixed income is more than $1 MILLION), and single moms, is to invite ridicule.

          1. I almost don’t have the heart to tell you Paul, Cap and Trade did not pass. Cap and Trade did not pass. The extreme rise in utilities would have occured if it had passed.
            Paul, Cap and Trade did not pass. On the other hand Mars is warming. When is the President going to make a speech about that disaster. My friends are worried sick.
            Paul re-connect yourself to the main blob switch board to get regular up-dates on current events. You are receiving the current talking points just fine. Let the regurgitation begin. Bucket?

  20. Various things I don’t believe……

    1. That Herman Cain is a sexual harasser.

    1A. I believe I have have to adjust my beliefs.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: