I'm sure no one besides Cain and the accusers really know. I do find it ironic however that these women have not stepped forward until now though. Does it make it worse now than when it happened (if it happened) due to the fact that he is running for Presidential nomination? It seems like all these allegations come out just about the time that someone becomes "famous". Then of course the left liberal media plays it up and the story is on everything from the Batavian to CNN. In my opinion the bottom line is Unless it is proven then the media should not be reporting it. Whether this claim is true or NOT. All reporting it does is smear the candidate even if he is innocent. I'm surprised no one dug any dirt up on Obama when he was running...why is that?? Oh yeah he's a Democrat. lol
Mr. Tambe, I agree 100%! I was going to write something in regard to this topic but you stole some of my "thunder". How come these supposed "incidents" were not reported at the time of the allegations? Oh, that's right, the confidentiality agreements that are in place did not allow the supposed "victims" to speak of the incidents because of the so called "settlements" that were part of the agreement. What a bunch of bologna!
Me Cain has just showed America that in a crisis he isn't prepared for anything. He knew about 2 allegations many years ago, and when they finally were reported, his "recollection' and his "facts' changed many many times.
as for Mr tambes post.........when are allegations suppose to be reported? When someone is NOT famous?
The payouts are a matter of fact, and Cain's attorney who introduced him yesterday at his press conference was pretty clear when he stated that "no one pays out or settles on a sexual harrassment complaint because it is a nuisance suit". If it was only one claim, made by one women, it could be dissmissed as politics as usual, however as the number of claims rise Cain's credibility shrinks. As a Deomocrat I truly hope that Herman Cain is the Republican/Tea Party nominee.
This isn't about politics or money, but power. History has shown that most power driven men have been sexually active with their young and impressionable female staff members. MLK, JFK are the two that come to mind.
didn't Bill Clinton Deny allegations when he was running for Pres. and then didn't he state "I did not have sex with that woman"? and didn't we "all" say then that it was a private matter and nobody's buisness?
didn't the same ty[e of thing happen to Clarence Thomas when he was nominated to the Supreme Court? and didn't "most" people rally around him to support him?
politics makes strange bedfellows is a very true statement indead!!!
As has been pointed out no one knows for sure what happened except for Cain and the women. If you have gone thru any corporate training on this you will find that the definition of sexual harassment is very very broad. Almost anything can be defined as this type of harassment. In the last job I interviewed for it was defined as any unwelcome comment or advance in the workplace. Almost any friendly interaction can be defined nowadays like this, and in most workplaces there is a bit of good humored joking and goofing around that takes place (unless it's a very very professional or uptight atmosphere)In the resteraunt business this can be a survival tool when dealing with the stress of customers, work and other such variables.
I'm not denying that it didn take place, but with the fact that it was settled a while ago and nothing was said until Cain gained some political sucess this seems to be a very convenient and timely time to suddenly need to speak out on this. I have even seen that one or two of the accusers have a history of accusing others of sexual harassment after dealing w Cain showing that their claims may have been settlement motivated.
Time and how Cain deals with this will be the true test of this issue as has been pointed out some greatly admired and respected men like MLK and JFK had allegations of this type of misconduct. Bill Clinton and Clarence Thomas also had their go arounds with this issue and the public sided with them. It not that big a deal considering that there are much more important topics for the Presidential candidates to be discussing.
I personally don't believe the allegations against Herman Cain. At this point we have his word against theirs and until proven otherwise, I take his word. What we do have is a case of flat out racism amongst the media, Democrats, and even some Republicans. Herman Cain represents everything that is right about the American black experience. Everyone embraced the notion of the first black American president who overcame racism and worked his way through the trials and tribulations to become the leader of our country. What President Obama really represents is a bi-racial American who largely discounts the value of his white childhood experience provided by his white affluent bank vice president grandmother who put him through an expensive private college prep school in Hawaii. Then on to ivy league college for Political Science, a short career in community organizing before launching into his elected career. He never led anything(other than protests), managed anything, nor created jobs. He came in with zero executive experience and it shows.
On the flip side, Herman Cain born and raised in the poor black neighborhoods of Atlanta, always attending public school, worked his way through a small predominantly black college with a degree in mathmatics, then on to Purdue. He worked in the real world, making himself a success at each endeavor. He lived the good, the bad, and the ugly of the black American experience to become a successful business man, job creator, executive, and family man.
Again, I believe the allegations are false or at most overblown and hope that as the Republican nominee, our country has the opportunity to elect it's first black president and move past what is quickly becoming a renewed surge of hate based on the color of people's skin
The only ones trying to drag race into this mess are Republican apologists who dismiss the claims as unfounded,unproven allegations and nuisance suits that never happened ey only surfaced recently. The fact that substantial money and non-disclosure were part of settlement agreements negotiated at the time is a pretty good indication that there was substance to the claims. The absurd notion that the public sided with any of the above mentioned public figurs regarding the allegations of sexual improprieties is nonsense. The allegations regarding MLK have never been proven, JFK's exploits with women have never been described as uninvited by any woman, Bill Clinto was impeached and lost his license to practice law and Clarence Thomas was confirmed by the narrowest of margins, has yet to ask a question in the two decades he has been on the bench and is remembered for his treatment of Anita Hill. Cain's shifting positions and conflicting explanations are the reason the story persists in the media.
The bothersome aspects of Cain's situation: the pay-offs, the non-disclosure agreements and Cain's contradictory statements.
"I do find it ironic however that these women have not stepped forward until now though." Apparently two of the women stepped forward in the 1990s otherwise there wouldn't have been a story. Discounting Sharon Bialek, the two women who accused Cain in the 1990s didn't actually step forward (recall the non-disclosure agreements). POLITICO broke the story relying on "a half-dozen sources shedding light on different aspects of the complaints.
"The sources — including the recollections of close associates and other documentation — describe episodes that left the women upset and offended. These incidents include conversations allegedly filled with innuendo or personal questions of a sexually suggestive nature, taking place at hotels during conferences, at other officially sanctioned restaurant association events and at the association’s offices. There were also descriptions of physical gestures that were not overtly sexual but that made women who experienced or witnessed them uncomfortable and that they regarded as improper in a professional relationship."
No one is bothered that Cain's first response was denial and fuzzy memory?
This week Cain named Curt Anderson (Rick Perry campaign adviser) accusing him of leaking the story. Anderson was on Cain's team during his 2004 Senate race. Cain admits discussing the NRA sexual harassment charges with Anderson, preparing a response if a story surfaced then.
The real irony: Cain blames Perry/Anderson, and the balance of the red-universe blames, you guessed it, the liberal media.
Ann Coulter has delineated "our blacks," as opposed to someone-else's blacks. "Our blacks are so much better than their blacks." ...Just wondering if she adopted them, inherited them or found them knocking at her back door? It's great that she's given them commercial appeal!
@poster jeffallen......You don't want people to base opinions on someones skin color but you reminded us 6 times that Cain is black, that Obama is bi racial, that he has a white mother, that he had a white childhood.
@ tim raines, that was the whole point. How many times during the last campaign was Obamas race referred to? Almost always. Obama always refers to himself as African American or black, never bi-racial. Obamas base and the media played the race card at every turn and still do when even a remote nuance is read as a reference to race. Yes I want people to stop basing their opinions on the color ones skin, I also want the media and the left to stop pretending they don't.
@ed, you said "JFK's exploits with women have never been described as uninvited by any woman"...isn't that an offense to women who have been exploited by powerful men? It's not immoral on JFK's part because the women wanted/initiated it? As for Bill Clinton, he enjoys all the trappings of a rock star, ambassador, and elder statesman. His toothless impeachment and disbarment had the net negative effect of revoking one's library card. And Clarence Thomas' slim margin was brought to us by the ad nauseum references to a pubic hair and a can of Coke. It was one of our countries all time low points in the Supreme Court nomination process.
If the allegations against Herman Cain turn out to be true then he loses my vote. Until then, I will be more than proud to vote for a man who stands for the same ideals that I do. The fact that he is black only enhances the story since his is one of making it in this country against the tide of racism, by your own abilities, talents, and perseverance.
@Jeff Allen. The allegations regarding Herman Cain were validated by monetary settlements and non-disclosure agreements that the National Resturaunt entered into with the women who raised the initial complaints. If there was no evidence to support the complaints there would not have been a settlement. This stopped being a "he said , she said" when they settled the matter and paid the ladies to drop the matter and remain silent.
Ed, on your previous post you mentioned "substantial money". The settlement money was paltry, somewhere between $34,000 and $45,000, and non-disclosure agreements are standard practice and do not imply guilt. This brings up another point, that of contract law. Since when does a non-disclosure agreement (a contract between two parties) become void when one party is running for President and the other suddenly decides that the pain and anguish from 14 years ago is too much to bear any longer and must break the contract, hook up with a high priced attorney and go public. Does she now have to pay the National Restaurant Association back the settlement money? I'm sure her lawyer will cover it, since this was never about money, but principle.
I'm so sick of the word "black" being used to describe people who are brown in color.
I wonder if some of our "white" political leaders are getting pissed because the brown dudes are getting all the action ???.
Jeff, since when is $34,000 and $45,000 a paltry sum of money. Maybe it is for you but from where I sit it's substantial. To your point about the lady who hired attorney Gloria Allred, she was not a part of any of the aforementioned settlements and is not bound by any non-disclosure.
In terms of lawsuits against large corporations, those sums of money are a mere pittance, I don't agree with the process, but nonetheless, they are very meager payouts in a corrupt business. Karen Kraushaar is represented by Joel Bennett, a high priced DC lawyer. The fact that we know her name indicates a violation of the contract. Gloria Allreds client is another story altogether since she did not feel compelled to file a complaint when it happened or at any of the many upwardly mobile milestones in Herman Cains career over the last 14 years. Now that her 13 year old son told her to do the right thing, Gloria was more than happy to parade her in front of the cameras.
Cain being a pervert, isn't the problem. His lies and inability to manage his way out of this, is the problem. How can a guy who has proven himself completely incapable of managing a small crisis be the guy to handle our enormous economic problems? The last thing I want to see is the Republicans give up on a guy who said he wasn't a troublemaker. When the man told him to get his ass in the back of the bus, he just did because, he didn't want any trouble. Gutless....
Mr. Raines, I don't get my information from television. Television newscasts are designed to sell advertising by dumbing down stories into short snippets full of edgy and controversial versions of the story. I prefer to read it for myself from multiple sources from all sides. Somewhere between the right and the left lies the truth and you have to ferret it out yourself.
"Cain being a pervert, isn't the problem. His lies and inability to manage his way out of this, is the problem. How can a guy who has proven himself completely incapable of managing a small crisis be the guy to handle our enormous economic problems? The last thing I want to see is the Republicans give up on a guy who said he wasn't a troublemaker. When the man told him to get his ass in the back of the bus, he just did because, he didn't want any trouble. Gutless...."
All you have to do is stir the political cesspool and someone will surface. It's just Mr. Cain's turn in the barrel. There isn't one of these clowns out there that is squeaky clean. Politics is a dirty business, always has been, always will be. I don't have time for this crap, I'm too busy trying to keep my head above water.
Maybe the party bosses should look into female candidates, women don't seem to get caught up in these sex scandels as much as their male counterparts do.
It must be grand to be a Republican these days living in a world where $34,000-to-$45,000 is chump change and any lie told by one of your own is embraced as gospel like if it comes from God's mouth to your ears as long as it is uttered in the third person and repeated on Fox News.
At the very least we owe him our heartfelt thanks for the entertainment "Herman Caine" is providing. I hope that he stays in this race and keeps on keeping doing the things he's doing.
Did you catch that new reality show last night? Its about a bunch of idiots who think they are going to be President. My favorate line was.
.. and I will also cut the Department of ... Environmental Protection.... wait that's not it... oops, I don't know ... looks like I stepped it, good thing I wore my boots.
At least here, in Genesee County, all of those idiotic replies will be accepted as okay. No matter how inane the answers, Genesee Co. GOP voters will eat it up and swallow it whole.
The Republican debates have been such great comedy this season Fox is looking to renew it in next seasons fall line up. Let's hope it comes down to a ticket with real majic that appeals to our sense of humor......Herman Cain as the scheming excuse tendering always in hot water President, with Rick Perry as the bumbling but loveable Vice-President who vamps for the applause lines....with a cathy theme song and title they could be a lock for an Emmy. The ratings for the debates would be off-the charts....maybe even with a canned laugh track at the end of each one have Mitt deadpan a line with Michelle about how the voters blew it.
Enlightening would be another one. The crowd of party faithful has been in spotlight on par with the candidates. The mob has proven time and time again that they lack the values they pretend to advocate.
I don't understand the point of local Democrats bashing whoever the Republican nominee for President might be. Barack Obama will carry NY next year by a large margin regardless. It's not like you have anything to be concerned with. I also would be interested to know how many of you that are absolutely convinced that Herman Cain sexually harassed women were just as certain that the McMartin family abused all those children back in the mid 1980's? It had to be true, right ,since there were so many accusations at the time?
I find Mr. Mallow's comment; "When the man told him to get his ass in the back of the bus, he just did because, he didn't want any trouble. Gutless..." incredibly distasteful. How dare you tell a black man that actually grew up in the segregated South and was in his teen years during the early and mid 1960's how he should or shouldn't have behaved. Please tell us all about the years of oppression and hardship you overcame due to your race. I'm sure it was quite the struggle.
Herman Cain has been a terrible candidate from the start, harassment or no harassment. He climbed the polls because he was a lot less terrible and even more vague on his positions than Bachmann, Santorum, Perry etc.. and as soon as he got to a point where he was actually challenging Romney, the hammer dropped.
Rest assured, Democrats weren't wielding that hammer. If I had to make an educated guess, I'd say that the blame Cain sent Perry's way was misplaced. I'd look at the establishment Republicans for this and that means Romney-supporting Karl Rove. Of course Rove is smart enough to backdoor the info to Perry's people and let them run with it...
The Machiavellian equation: Rove and his people dig the dirt on everyone early on and hold it. They identify the most dangerous challengers to Romney and instead of releasing the nasty stuff themselves, they give the Cain info to dangerous challenger number two. Perry's people leak the harassment story, Cain's people blame Perry's people and Mitt Romney stays above the fray, maintains his solid 25-28% hold on primary voters and marches to victory without a real scratch on him.
Karl Rove is a sleazy disgusting toad, but he's also a political genius. Well played.
Alot of Cain support comes from the Tea Party..Which i would think would drive all the lefties crazy...They have all along claimed the that Tea Party was made up of a bunch of angry bigoted white men.There argument doesn't hold water with the support of Cain....If any group would want him gone, i would think it would be those on the Left...Obama is a big liberal...I don't think he would want to face him.....I would tend to point the finger more in that direction......Cain didn't get where he got without some kind of intelligence..He's not stupid.......Maybe he is using the Clinton playbook on how to deal with Bimbo's.....
"Rest assured, Democrats weren't wielding that hammer. If I had to make an educated guess, I'd say that the blame Cain sent Perry's way was misplaced. I'd look at the establishment Republicans for this and that means Romney-supporting Karl Rove. Of course Rove is smart enough to backdoor the info to Perry's people and let them run with it...
The Machiavellian equation: Rove and his people dig the dirt on everyone early on and hold it. They identify the most dangerous challengers to Romney and instead of releasing the nasty stuff themselves, they give the Cain info to dangerous challenger number two. Perry's people leak the harassment story, Cain's people blame Perry's people and Mitt Romney stays above the fray, maintains his solid 25-28% hold on primary voters and marches to victory without a real scratch on him."
I can believe that there are some who won't believe that the Republicans can turn on each other. Chris is right about Rove.
I'm not a lefty, or a righty, but I am an inney. I thought at times, Cain was funny last night, but not a "leader". More a salesman for the 9-9-9 plan, which is fine because it's his message, but it just felt hallow. Although the Princess Nancy thing did make me chuckle and roll my eyes at the same time....which is something.
That said, last night was more Blah than helpful, well except to completely rule out Rick Perry ever winning a live debate award. It really is time to thin out the field a lot now. Huntsman, Bachmann, that guy on the other end who's smile creeps me out, and Perry just need to go away. Cain...well...I don't know he can stay a while longer.
Still, I know it's just Dave Olsen and I in Genesee County that believes this but, Ron Paul is the most intelligent person on that stage, and could out think or plan Obama anyday, so he's got my vote.
Mark, with all sincerity I can say, Cain is the best the right has to offer. I truley believe he represents the Tea Party. The Republicans should pick the guy and get on with this election.
Phil ,,Just for the record i have been in support of Ron Paul since the last election...His libertarian views most represent mine, as compared to all politicians our there.. He also gets ridiculed for his views and stances the he takes....
The current field of Republican choices is not stellar. I said yesterday that if the charges against Herman Cain prove to be false, I would proudly cast my vote for him. If they are true I am not left with much and am not sure what direction I would take. That being said, Democrats are having a field day bashing the current Republican line-up while their choice is already been made in the incumbent. I asked a similar question a while back and not surprisingly received no response, so I'll put it out there again. Is anyone really excited about the prospect of 4 more years of President Obama and why? Specifics please, not just lefty talking points or party platitudes but actual "this is why I'm excited about putting President Obama back in the White House", and not just "he's better than anyone else out there". There must be someone out there willing to step up and promote the guy.
Jeff, You have been watching too much Fox News if you think for one second Democrats don't overwhemling support Obama. The only problem is that he didn't go far enough....
Like I said Charlie, specifics. Tell us why YOU are excited about 4 more years, not what Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews say. Why is Charlie Mallow pining for a second Obama term based on his first. Don't hide behind the tired old Fox news escape, I don't watch Fox.
But, I bet you listen to Rush on a daily basis. Or, maybe you get your information in print form, but it is all right sided.
You are so sure that the left has nothing to say why bother having a discourse on why we need Obama for four more years?
I'll listen with an open mind, and I'll discuss with people who have an open mind.
Without Cain, you are left with nothing? Sounds like you are really receptive to discussion.
We Democrats support Barak Obama, we realize that when he was inagurated in 2009 he has dealing with an economy that was in a near collapse on the verge of a depression caused by the previous administrations engaging in two unpaid for wars, tax cuts that were a gift to the wealthiest American corporations and individuals at the expense of the majority, deregulated Wall Street which paved the way for the tanking of the economy.
So when Republicans ask why are Democrats exited about Obama it's because he's none of the above running on the Republican ticket."You can fool some of the people all of the time and you can fool all of the people some of the time but you can't fool all of the people all of the time" the country has experienced the Republican formula of government of tax cuts for the wealthy and program cuts for the middle class and poor, between 8 years of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and the Tea Party now running Congress we've reached the part about "fooling all of the people all of the time".
So far all we get is he ain't the rest, blame Bush, Cheney, Tea Party, Rush, Wall Street, etc., etc., etc., and still nobody can articulate a positive, position oriented, accomplishment driven reason that they are anticipating 4 more years.
I think health care is a human right and sick people are not a burden to be disgarded. I'm pro choice and government should mind its own business. Obama actually knows how to defeat terrorists and two bit dictators. Immigration is good, all of it. Obama saved our economy and the auto industry, how about that one? The unemployed are not deadbeats, they just need a hand up. All kids deserve to have lunch in school and a loan for college. Executions should never be cheered. Gay soldiers deserve respect. All Social Security needs is to be funded correctly.
The man truly cares and he gives me a sense of pride. Simply, America is better with the man leading. By the way, I've always supported Obama, even in the primary when no one else did.
Finally, someone gave actual reasons for wanting 4 more years of Obama. Thank you Charlie. I'm not sure how some of those things are considered positive, but they are your opinions and you gave specifics.
I don't receive anything from the government. I pay every year and get nothing back. When did it become fashionable to not care for those that can't help themselves? When did our nation decide it wasn't nessasary to pay enough taxes to cover our debt? That's not conservative.
"When did it become fashionable to not care for those that can't help themselves? (when the church abdicated it's responsibility and the government took it over) When did our nation decide it wasn't nessasary to pay enough taxes to cover our debt? (when they decided that spending no longer had to have any correlation to revenues) That's not conservative."(that's not responsible)
Since when is it the responsibility of churches to provide for those who cannot financially, medically and/or intellectually provide for themselves? Even in societies where religion and government are co-determinant, organized religion cannot serve in a comprehensive manner. We pay taxes to provide a universal safety net. The fact that the tax revenue dedicated to that aim is poorly allocated demands repair NOT reassignment to the private sector. The Bush notion of Faith-based services was pandering NOT improvement.
C.M., when I say the church, I mean the body of believers. The concept predates our country but was still practiced to some extent. Before government welfare programs, families took care of their own and if they had no one, they went to the a local church for the provisions of food, clothing, money etc.. Unfortunately, churches became inwardly focused and spent more of their resources on fancy buildings and amenities. Churches as a whole began failing to reach outward and focused on building inward. This left the poor, the widow, and those with no one to turn to literally out in the cold. My inference had nothing to do with Bush faith-based initiatives. The pendulum has swung so far in the other direction, and angst towards organized religion as a whole grown so large that "the church" being the source of welfare is no longer a viable option.
The Constitution defines under congressional responsibilities what we pay taxes for. Welfare is not one of them. Many people automatically go to the "general welfare" clause but reason would dictate that is not just a catchall that would include social programs because that then would negate the need to lay out the specifics of roads, postal services, the military, etc., everything would simply fall under the "general welfare" clause.
Our taxes were never meant to be a "universal safety net" nor the open checkbook that they have become.
And to get back to where this little offshoot started, There is no shortage of people who will disparage candidates from a party to which they don't belong and have no intention of voting for, but we are still only at a whopping ONE person who could clearly define why they are anxious for 4 more years of Barak Obama.
Jeff, there is a fundamental point the right keeps missing. Our debt is from war and giving tax breaks to rich guys, that were never paid for. That drove our economy into the ground and the following Wallstreet bailouts added to it.
Now common wisdom is the money needs to come from grandma's purse, colleage loans, school lunches, etc. Not the rich compaines and people that benifited from the system. That augment isn't going to win, ever, ever, ever.
If you want to raise taxes, then tax all earned income, like in the 1950's. No more 47% of the people not paying Federal income taxes.
Flat tax or graduated tax, everyone pays.
Cut all tax breaks and credits, for everyone.
Remove the income cutoff for SS taxes.
And maybe, just maybe, the Senate could pass a budget, something it has refused to do in two years.
John, if we were the ones who made the decisions, I'm sure we could work it out, in one morning over a cup of coffee and find a good balance. The problem is those Republican candidates are trying to convince people grandma, student loans, gays and Imigrants are the problem. It's not going to fly because the country doesn't buy it and NEVER will. Obama's numbers are down a bit right now but, when given the choice between him and the guys on that stage the other night, it's a no brainier. A landslide win over each and everyone of them is an easy call. I'll call the election now, it's over. Save the money...
Charlie our debt is also caused by the 45% who don't pay federal taxes.Its all part of it..Its made up of many different reasons..I agree with the wars being a big part of it...Debt is also caused by spending more then you take in plain and simple..Whats wrong with pay as you go or a balance budget admendant ..Those are the things that Republicans are promoting..... I don't believe in any of this corporate welfare ..Same with the banks..That alot of republicans were against bailing out...What alot of the wall street protests are about..Obama was for..People who don't like the big banks should move their money somewhere else,or people who don't like certain corporations,don't buy there products..If people have a problem with the high cost of college education they should be mad at the colleges for raising the tuition's so high..Or go to a less costly school.Or get into a field that their are jobs in.....But don't ask me the tax payer to pay for it....
Charlie,
Again, cut every program, but not mine, right. You have the ones you don't want touched, just like everyone else.
As for the 47% who don't have to pay federal income tax, they will vote for whoever tells them they will not have to. People tend to vote for those that will give them stuff.
I'm sure no one besides Cain
I'm sure no one besides Cain and the accusers really know. I do find it ironic however that these women have not stepped forward until now though. Does it make it worse now than when it happened (if it happened) due to the fact that he is running for Presidential nomination? It seems like all these allegations come out just about the time that someone becomes "famous". Then of course the left liberal media plays it up and the story is on everything from the Batavian to CNN. In my opinion the bottom line is Unless it is proven then the media should not be reporting it. Whether this claim is true or NOT. All reporting it does is smear the candidate even if he is innocent. I'm surprised no one dug any dirt up on Obama when he was running...why is that?? Oh yeah he's a Democrat. lol
Mr. Tambe, I agree 100%! I
Mr. Tambe, I agree 100%! I was going to write something in regard to this topic but you stole some of my "thunder". How come these supposed "incidents" were not reported at the time of the allegations? Oh, that's right, the confidentiality agreements that are in place did not allow the supposed "victims" to speak of the incidents because of the so called "settlements" that were part of the agreement. What a bunch of bologna!
Me Cain has just showed
Me Cain has just showed America that in a crisis he isn't prepared for anything. He knew about 2 allegations many years ago, and when they finally were reported, his "recollection' and his "facts' changed many many times.
as for Mr tambes post.........when are allegations suppose to be reported? When someone is NOT famous?
how's that koolaid taste?
The payouts are a matter of
The payouts are a matter of fact, and Cain's attorney who introduced him yesterday at his press conference was pretty clear when he stated that "no one pays out or settles on a sexual harrassment complaint because it is a nuisance suit". If it was only one claim, made by one women, it could be dissmissed as politics as usual, however as the number of claims rise Cain's credibility shrinks. As a Deomocrat I truly hope that Herman Cain is the Republican/Tea Party nominee.
This isn't about politics or
This isn't about politics or money, but power. History has shown that most power driven men have been sexually active with their young and impressionable female staff members. MLK, JFK are the two that come to mind.
didn't Bill Clinton Deny
didn't Bill Clinton Deny allegations when he was running for Pres. and then didn't he state "I did not have sex with that woman"? and didn't we "all" say then that it was a private matter and nobody's buisness?
didn't the same ty[e of thing happen to Clarence Thomas when he was nominated to the Supreme Court? and didn't "most" people rally around him to support him?
politics makes strange bedfellows is a very true statement indead!!!
I would like to believe there
I would like to believe there are still men (and women) of honor, character, and integrity left in this world.
I'm surprised no one dug any
I'm surprised no one dug any dirt up on Obama when he was running...why is that?? Oh yeah he's a Democrat. lol
-Really? Have you not heard of the Birther movement? Allegations that he is Islamic/a terrorist?
Sam, are you calling
Sam, are you calling thebatavian a left liberal media source?
As has been pointed out no
As has been pointed out no one knows for sure what happened except for Cain and the women. If you have gone thru any corporate training on this you will find that the definition of sexual harassment is very very broad. Almost anything can be defined as this type of harassment. In the last job I interviewed for it was defined as any unwelcome comment or advance in the workplace. Almost any friendly interaction can be defined nowadays like this, and in most workplaces there is a bit of good humored joking and goofing around that takes place (unless it's a very very professional or uptight atmosphere)In the resteraunt business this can be a survival tool when dealing with the stress of customers, work and other such variables.
I'm not denying that it didn take place, but with the fact that it was settled a while ago and nothing was said until Cain gained some political sucess this seems to be a very convenient and timely time to suddenly need to speak out on this. I have even seen that one or two of the accusers have a history of accusing others of sexual harassment after dealing w Cain showing that their claims may have been settlement motivated.
Time and how Cain deals with this will be the true test of this issue as has been pointed out some greatly admired and respected men like MLK and JFK had allegations of this type of misconduct. Bill Clinton and Clarence Thomas also had their go arounds with this issue and the public sided with them. It not that big a deal considering that there are much more important topics for the Presidential candidates to be discussing.
I personally don't believe
I personally don't believe the allegations against Herman Cain. At this point we have his word against theirs and until proven otherwise, I take his word. What we do have is a case of flat out racism amongst the media, Democrats, and even some Republicans. Herman Cain represents everything that is right about the American black experience. Everyone embraced the notion of the first black American president who overcame racism and worked his way through the trials and tribulations to become the leader of our country. What President Obama really represents is a bi-racial American who largely discounts the value of his white childhood experience provided by his white affluent bank vice president grandmother who put him through an expensive private college prep school in Hawaii. Then on to ivy league college for Political Science, a short career in community organizing before launching into his elected career. He never led anything(other than protests), managed anything, nor created jobs. He came in with zero executive experience and it shows.
On the flip side, Herman Cain born and raised in the poor black neighborhoods of Atlanta, always attending public school, worked his way through a small predominantly black college with a degree in mathmatics, then on to Purdue. He worked in the real world, making himself a success at each endeavor. He lived the good, the bad, and the ugly of the black American experience to become a successful business man, job creator, executive, and family man.
Again, I believe the allegations are false or at most overblown and hope that as the Republican nominee, our country has the opportunity to elect it's first black president and move past what is quickly becoming a renewed surge of hate based on the color of people's skin
The only ones trying to drag
The only ones trying to drag race into this mess are Republican apologists who dismiss the claims as unfounded,unproven allegations and nuisance suits that never happened ey only surfaced recently. The fact that substantial money and non-disclosure were part of settlement agreements negotiated at the time is a pretty good indication that there was substance to the claims. The absurd notion that the public sided with any of the above mentioned public figurs regarding the allegations of sexual improprieties is nonsense. The allegations regarding MLK have never been proven, JFK's exploits with women have never been described as uninvited by any woman, Bill Clinto was impeached and lost his license to practice law and Clarence Thomas was confirmed by the narrowest of margins, has yet to ask a question in the two decades he has been on the bench and is remembered for his treatment of Anita Hill. Cain's shifting positions and conflicting explanations are the reason the story persists in the media.
The bothersome aspects of
The bothersome aspects of Cain's situation: the pay-offs, the non-disclosure agreements and Cain's contradictory statements.
"I do find it ironic however that these women have not stepped forward until now though." Apparently two of the women stepped forward in the 1990s otherwise there wouldn't have been a story. Discounting Sharon Bialek, the two women who accused Cain in the 1990s didn't actually step forward (recall the non-disclosure agreements). POLITICO broke the story relying on "a half-dozen sources shedding light on different aspects of the complaints.
"The sources — including the recollections of close associates and other documentation — describe episodes that left the women upset and offended. These incidents include conversations allegedly filled with innuendo or personal questions of a sexually suggestive nature, taking place at hotels during conferences, at other officially sanctioned restaurant association events and at the association’s offices. There were also descriptions of physical gestures that were not overtly sexual but that made women who experienced or witnessed them uncomfortable and that they regarded as improper in a professional relationship."
No one is bothered that Cain's first response was denial and fuzzy memory?
This week Cain named Curt Anderson (Rick Perry campaign adviser) accusing him of leaking the story. Anderson was on Cain's team during his 2004 Senate race. Cain admits discussing the NRA sexual harassment charges with Anderson, preparing a response if a story surfaced then.
The real irony: Cain blames Perry/Anderson, and the balance of the red-universe blames, you guessed it, the liberal media.
Mr Cain is lame.....First,
Mr Cain is lame.....First, blame Gov Perry, second, blame white people, third, blame democrats, fourth, blame eveyone else. Next, he'll be blaming Bozo the Clown.
Ann Coulter has delineated
Ann Coulter has delineated "our blacks," as opposed to someone-else's blacks. "Our blacks are so much better than their blacks." ...Just wondering if she adopted them, inherited them or found them knocking at her back door? It's great that she's given them commercial appeal!
@poster jeffallen......You
@poster jeffallen......You don't want people to base opinions on someones skin color but you reminded us 6 times that Cain is black, that Obama is bi racial, that he has a white mother, that he had a white childhood.
Pot....what color is that kettle?
@ tim raines, that was the
@ tim raines, that was the whole point. How many times during the last campaign was Obamas race referred to? Almost always. Obama always refers to himself as African American or black, never bi-racial. Obamas base and the media played the race card at every turn and still do when even a remote nuance is read as a reference to race. Yes I want people to stop basing their opinions on the color ones skin, I also want the media and the left to stop pretending they don't.
@ed, you said "JFK's exploits with women have never been described as uninvited by any woman"...isn't that an offense to women who have been exploited by powerful men? It's not immoral on JFK's part because the women wanted/initiated it? As for Bill Clinton, he enjoys all the trappings of a rock star, ambassador, and elder statesman. His toothless impeachment and disbarment had the net negative effect of revoking one's library card. And Clarence Thomas' slim margin was brought to us by the ad nauseum references to a pubic hair and a can of Coke. It was one of our countries all time low points in the Supreme Court nomination process.
If the allegations against Herman Cain turn out to be true then he loses my vote. Until then, I will be more than proud to vote for a man who stands for the same ideals that I do. The fact that he is black only enhances the story since his is one of making it in this country against the tide of racism, by your own abilities, talents, and perseverance.
@Jeff Allen. The allegations
@Jeff Allen. The allegations regarding Herman Cain were validated by monetary settlements and non-disclosure agreements that the National Resturaunt entered into with the women who raised the initial complaints. If there was no evidence to support the complaints there would not have been a settlement. This stopped being a "he said , she said" when they settled the matter and paid the ladies to drop the matter and remain silent.
Ed, on your previous post you
Ed, on your previous post you mentioned "substantial money". The settlement money was paltry, somewhere between $34,000 and $45,000, and non-disclosure agreements are standard practice and do not imply guilt. This brings up another point, that of contract law. Since when does a non-disclosure agreement (a contract between two parties) become void when one party is running for President and the other suddenly decides that the pain and anguish from 14 years ago is too much to bear any longer and must break the contract, hook up with a high priced attorney and go public. Does she now have to pay the National Restaurant Association back the settlement money? I'm sure her lawyer will cover it, since this was never about money, but principle.
I'm so sick of the word
I'm so sick of the word "black" being used to describe people who are brown in color.
I wonder if some of our "white" political leaders are getting pissed because the brown dudes are getting all the action ???.
Jeff, since when is $34,000
Jeff, since when is $34,000 and $45,000 a paltry sum of money. Maybe it is for you but from where I sit it's substantial. To your point about the lady who hired attorney Gloria Allred, she was not a part of any of the aforementioned settlements and is not bound by any non-disclosure.
In terms of lawsuits against
In terms of lawsuits against large corporations, those sums of money are a mere pittance, I don't agree with the process, but nonetheless, they are very meager payouts in a corrupt business. Karen Kraushaar is represented by Joel Bennett, a high priced DC lawyer. The fact that we know her name indicates a violation of the contract. Gloria Allreds client is another story altogether since she did not feel compelled to file a complaint when it happened or at any of the many upwardly mobile milestones in Herman Cains career over the last 14 years. Now that her 13 year old son told her to do the right thing, Gloria was more than happy to parade her in front of the cameras.
Mr Allen.....me thinks you're
Mr Allen.....me thinks you're watching too much TV.
Cain being a pervert, isn't
Cain being a pervert, isn't the problem. His lies and inability to manage his way out of this, is the problem. How can a guy who has proven himself completely incapable of managing a small crisis be the guy to handle our enormous economic problems? The last thing I want to see is the Republicans give up on a guy who said he wasn't a troublemaker. When the man told him to get his ass in the back of the bus, he just did because, he didn't want any trouble. Gutless....
Mr. Raines, I don't get my
Mr. Raines, I don't get my information from television. Television newscasts are designed to sell advertising by dumbing down stories into short snippets full of edgy and controversial versions of the story. I prefer to read it for myself from multiple sources from all sides. Somewhere between the right and the left lies the truth and you have to ferret it out yourself.
"Cain being a pervert, isn't
"Cain being a pervert, isn't the problem. His lies and inability to manage his way out of this, is the problem. How can a guy who has proven himself completely incapable of managing a small crisis be the guy to handle our enormous economic problems? The last thing I want to see is the Republicans give up on a guy who said he wasn't a troublemaker. When the man told him to get his ass in the back of the bus, he just did because, he didn't want any trouble. Gutless...."
Right on, Charlie.
all politicians of both
all politicians of both parties are liars and scumbags!!!
All you have to do is stir
All you have to do is stir the political cesspool and someone will surface. It's just Mr. Cain's turn in the barrel. There isn't one of these clowns out there that is squeaky clean. Politics is a dirty business, always has been, always will be. I don't have time for this crap, I'm too busy trying to keep my head above water.
Don't get me started.......
Maybe the party bosses should
Maybe the party bosses should look into female candidates, women don't seem to get caught up in these sex scandels as much as their male counterparts do.
It must be grand to be a
It must be grand to be a Republican these days living in a world where $34,000-to-$45,000 is chump change and any lie told by one of your own is embraced as gospel like if it comes from God's mouth to your ears as long as it is uttered in the third person and repeated on Fox News.
At the very least we owe him our heartfelt thanks for the entertainment "Herman Caine" is providing. I hope that he stays in this race and keeps on keeping doing the things he's doing.
Did you catch that new
Did you catch that new reality show last night? Its about a bunch of idiots who think they are going to be President. My favorate line was.
.. and I will also cut the Department of ... Environmental Protection.... wait that's not it... oops, I don't know ... looks like I stepped it, good thing I wore my boots.
At least here, in Genesee
At least here, in Genesee County, all of those idiotic replies will be accepted as okay. No matter how inane the answers, Genesee Co. GOP voters will eat it up and swallow it whole.
Well, Mr. Cain received a
Well, Mr. Cain received a reprieve from scrutiny after last night's Rick Perry oops moment. On the the next thing America.
Well, Mr. Cain received a
Well, Mr. Cain received a reprieve from scrutiny after last night's Rick Perry oops moment. On to the next thing America.
Cain may not be the sharpest
Cain may not be the sharpest tool in the shed, but somebody who works for him is:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/09/cain-camp-turns-accuser-s…
The Republican debates have
The Republican debates have been such great comedy this season Fox is looking to renew it in next seasons fall line up. Let's hope it comes down to a ticket with real majic that appeals to our sense of humor......Herman Cain as the scheming excuse tendering always in hot water President, with Rick Perry as the bumbling but loveable Vice-President who vamps for the applause lines....with a cathy theme song and title they could be a lock for an Emmy. The ratings for the debates would be off-the charts....maybe even with a canned laugh track at the end of each one have Mitt deadpan a line with Michelle about how the voters blew it.
I have to agree with most of
I have to agree with most of you on the Republican debates. They have been too early, too many, too funny, too embarrassing, and generally useless.
Enlightening would be another
Enlightening would be another one. The crowd of party faithful has been in spotlight on par with the candidates. The mob has proven time and time again that they lack the values they pretend to advocate.
Were's Antony Wiener when you
Were's Antony Wiener when you need him................
I don't understand the point
I don't understand the point of local Democrats bashing whoever the Republican nominee for President might be. Barack Obama will carry NY next year by a large margin regardless. It's not like you have anything to be concerned with. I also would be interested to know how many of you that are absolutely convinced that Herman Cain sexually harassed women were just as certain that the McMartin family abused all those children back in the mid 1980's? It had to be true, right ,since there were so many accusations at the time?
I find Mr. Mallow's comment; "When the man told him to get his ass in the back of the bus, he just did because, he didn't want any trouble. Gutless..." incredibly distasteful. How dare you tell a black man that actually grew up in the segregated South and was in his teen years during the early and mid 1960's how he should or shouldn't have behaved. Please tell us all about the years of oppression and hardship you overcame due to your race. I'm sure it was quite the struggle.
Herman Cain has been a
Herman Cain has been a terrible candidate from the start, harassment or no harassment. He climbed the polls because he was a lot less terrible and even more vague on his positions than Bachmann, Santorum, Perry etc.. and as soon as he got to a point where he was actually challenging Romney, the hammer dropped.
Rest assured, Democrats weren't wielding that hammer. If I had to make an educated guess, I'd say that the blame Cain sent Perry's way was misplaced. I'd look at the establishment Republicans for this and that means Romney-supporting Karl Rove. Of course Rove is smart enough to backdoor the info to Perry's people and let them run with it...
The Machiavellian equation: Rove and his people dig the dirt on everyone early on and hold it. They identify the most dangerous challengers to Romney and instead of releasing the nasty stuff themselves, they give the Cain info to dangerous challenger number two. Perry's people leak the harassment story, Cain's people blame Perry's people and Mitt Romney stays above the fray, maintains his solid 25-28% hold on primary voters and marches to victory without a real scratch on him.
Karl Rove is a sleazy disgusting toad, but he's also a political genius. Well played.
Kevin, tough. Our next
Kevin, tough. Our next president isn't the guy who put his tail between his legs and walked to the back of the bus. Cains too wreak in the knees.
I find the current batch of Republicans all distasteful.
Charlie, If you mean Obama,
Charlie,
If you mean Obama, he was never part of the Civil Rights movement.
Alot of Cain support comes
Alot of Cain support comes from the Tea Party..Which i would think would drive all the lefties crazy...They have all along claimed the that Tea Party was made up of a bunch of angry bigoted white men.There argument doesn't hold water with the support of Cain....If any group would want him gone, i would think it would be those on the Left...Obama is a big liberal...I don't think he would want to face him.....I would tend to point the finger more in that direction......Cain didn't get where he got without some kind of intelligence..He's not stupid.......Maybe he is using the Clinton playbook on how to deal with Bimbo's.....
"Rest assured, Democrats
"Rest assured, Democrats weren't wielding that hammer. If I had to make an educated guess, I'd say that the blame Cain sent Perry's way was misplaced. I'd look at the establishment Republicans for this and that means Romney-supporting Karl Rove. Of course Rove is smart enough to backdoor the info to Perry's people and let them run with it...
The Machiavellian equation: Rove and his people dig the dirt on everyone early on and hold it. They identify the most dangerous challengers to Romney and instead of releasing the nasty stuff themselves, they give the Cain info to dangerous challenger number two. Perry's people leak the harassment story, Cain's people blame Perry's people and Mitt Romney stays above the fray, maintains his solid 25-28% hold on primary voters and marches to victory without a real scratch on him."
I can believe that there are some who won't believe that the Republicans can turn on each other. Chris is right about Rove.
For those of you too young to remember Karl Rove, here is a little bit of info published 9 years ago.
Exposing Karl Rove
http://www.counterpunch.org/2002/11/01/exposing-karl-rove/
As a lefty....I love Herman
As a lefty....I love Herman Cain and wish him well in his quest for the Republican nomination.....GO HERMAN GO....
I'm not a lefty, or a righty,
I'm not a lefty, or a righty, but I am an inney. I thought at times, Cain was funny last night, but not a "leader". More a salesman for the 9-9-9 plan, which is fine because it's his message, but it just felt hallow. Although the Princess Nancy thing did make me chuckle and roll my eyes at the same time....which is something.
That said, last night was more Blah than helpful, well except to completely rule out Rick Perry ever winning a live debate award. It really is time to thin out the field a lot now. Huntsman, Bachmann, that guy on the other end who's smile creeps me out, and Perry just need to go away. Cain...well...I don't know he can stay a while longer.
Still, I know it's just Dave Olsen and I in Genesee County that believes this but, Ron Paul is the most intelligent person on that stage, and could out think or plan Obama anyday, so he's got my vote.
Mark, with all sincerity I
Mark, with all sincerity I can say, Cain is the best the right has to offer. I truley believe he represents the Tea Party. The Republicans should pick the guy and get on with this election.
Phil ,,Just for the record i
Phil ,,Just for the record i have been in support of Ron Paul since the last election...His libertarian views most represent mine, as compared to all politicians our there.. He also gets ridiculed for his views and stances the he takes....
Bye Bye Rick Perry. When you
Bye Bye Rick Perry. When you can not remember your own plan, in a debate, you're burnt toast.
The current field of
The current field of Republican choices is not stellar. I said yesterday that if the charges against Herman Cain prove to be false, I would proudly cast my vote for him. If they are true I am not left with much and am not sure what direction I would take. That being said, Democrats are having a field day bashing the current Republican line-up while their choice is already been made in the incumbent. I asked a similar question a while back and not surprisingly received no response, so I'll put it out there again. Is anyone really excited about the prospect of 4 more years of President Obama and why? Specifics please, not just lefty talking points or party platitudes but actual "this is why I'm excited about putting President Obama back in the White House", and not just "he's better than anyone else out there". There must be someone out there willing to step up and promote the guy.
Jeff, You have been watching
Jeff, You have been watching too much Fox News if you think for one second Democrats don't overwhemling support Obama. The only problem is that he didn't go far enough....
Like I said Charlie,
Like I said Charlie, specifics. Tell us why YOU are excited about 4 more years, not what Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews say. Why is Charlie Mallow pining for a second Obama term based on his first. Don't hide behind the tired old Fox news escape, I don't watch Fox.
I don't watch Fox. But, I bet
I don't watch Fox.
But, I bet you listen to Rush on a daily basis. Or, maybe you get your information in print form, but it is all right sided.
You are so sure that the left has nothing to say why bother having a discourse on why we need Obama for four more years?
I'll listen with an open mind, and I'll discuss with people who have an open mind.
Without Cain, you are left with nothing? Sounds like you are really receptive to discussion.
We Democrats support Barak
We Democrats support Barak Obama, we realize that when he was inagurated in 2009 he has dealing with an economy that was in a near collapse on the verge of a depression caused by the previous administrations engaging in two unpaid for wars, tax cuts that were a gift to the wealthiest American corporations and individuals at the expense of the majority, deregulated Wall Street which paved the way for the tanking of the economy.
So when Republicans ask why are Democrats exited about Obama it's because he's none of the above running on the Republican ticket."You can fool some of the people all of the time and you can fool all of the people some of the time but you can't fool all of the people all of the time" the country has experienced the Republican formula of government of tax cuts for the wealthy and program cuts for the middle class and poor, between 8 years of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and the Tea Party now running Congress we've reached the part about "fooling all of the people all of the time".
So far all we get is he ain't
So far all we get is he ain't the rest, blame Bush, Cheney, Tea Party, Rush, Wall Street, etc., etc., etc., and still nobody can articulate a positive, position oriented, accomplishment driven reason that they are anticipating 4 more years.
Jeff, I think health care is
Jeff,
I think health care is a human right and sick people are not a burden to be disgarded. I'm pro choice and government should mind its own business. Obama actually knows how to defeat terrorists and two bit dictators. Immigration is good, all of it. Obama saved our economy and the auto industry, how about that one? The unemployed are not deadbeats, they just need a hand up. All kids deserve to have lunch in school and a loan for college. Executions should never be cheered. Gay soldiers deserve respect. All Social Security needs is to be funded correctly.
The man truly cares and he gives me a sense of pride. Simply, America is better with the man leading. By the way, I've always supported Obama, even in the primary when no one else did.
Phil, not just you and
Phil, not just you and Dave.
Of all the Republicans, I'm sure Paul is the last one Obama wants to face.
Finally, someone gave actual
Finally, someone gave actual reasons for wanting 4 more years of Obama. Thank you Charlie. I'm not sure how some of those things are considered positive, but they are your opinions and you gave specifics.
And only cut the other guys
And only cut the other guys programs, not mine.
I don't receive anything from
I don't receive anything from the government. I pay every year and get nothing back. When did it become fashionable to not care for those that can't help themselves? When did our nation decide it wasn't nessasary to pay enough taxes to cover our debt? That's not conservative.
"When did it become
"When did it become fashionable to not care for those that can't help themselves? (when the church abdicated it's responsibility and the government took it over) When did our nation decide it wasn't nessasary to pay enough taxes to cover our debt? (when they decided that spending no longer had to have any correlation to revenues) That's not conservative."(that's not responsible)
Since when is it the
Since when is it the responsibility of churches to provide for those who cannot financially, medically and/or intellectually provide for themselves? Even in societies where religion and government are co-determinant, organized religion cannot serve in a comprehensive manner. We pay taxes to provide a universal safety net. The fact that the tax revenue dedicated to that aim is poorly allocated demands repair NOT reassignment to the private sector. The Bush notion of Faith-based services was pandering NOT improvement.
When was the last time a
When was the last time a republican presidential candidate won N.Y.State?
C.M., when I say the church,
C.M., when I say the church, I mean the body of believers. The concept predates our country but was still practiced to some extent. Before government welfare programs, families took care of their own and if they had no one, they went to the a local church for the provisions of food, clothing, money etc.. Unfortunately, churches became inwardly focused and spent more of their resources on fancy buildings and amenities. Churches as a whole began failing to reach outward and focused on building inward. This left the poor, the widow, and those with no one to turn to literally out in the cold. My inference had nothing to do with Bush faith-based initiatives. The pendulum has swung so far in the other direction, and angst towards organized religion as a whole grown so large that "the church" being the source of welfare is no longer a viable option.
The Constitution defines under congressional responsibilities what we pay taxes for. Welfare is not one of them. Many people automatically go to the "general welfare" clause but reason would dictate that is not just a catchall that would include social programs because that then would negate the need to lay out the specifics of roads, postal services, the military, etc., everything would simply fall under the "general welfare" clause.
Our taxes were never meant to be a "universal safety net" nor the open checkbook that they have become.
And to get back to where this little offshoot started, There is no shortage of people who will disparage candidates from a party to which they don't belong and have no intention of voting for, but we are still only at a whopping ONE person who could clearly define why they are anxious for 4 more years of Barak Obama.
Jeff, there is a fundamental
Jeff, there is a fundamental point the right keeps missing. Our debt is from war and giving tax breaks to rich guys, that were never paid for. That drove our economy into the ground and the following Wallstreet bailouts added to it.
Now common wisdom is the money needs to come from grandma's purse, colleage loans, school lunches, etc. Not the rich compaines and people that benifited from the system. That augment isn't going to win, ever, ever, ever.
If you want to raise taxes,
If you want to raise taxes, then tax all earned income, like in the 1950's. No more 47% of the people not paying Federal income taxes.
Flat tax or graduated tax, everyone pays.
Cut all tax breaks and credits, for everyone.
Remove the income cutoff for SS taxes.
And maybe, just maybe, the Senate could pass a budget, something it has refused to do in two years.
John, if we were the ones who
John, if we were the ones who made the decisions, I'm sure we could work it out, in one morning over a cup of coffee and find a good balance. The problem is those Republican candidates are trying to convince people grandma, student loans, gays and Imigrants are the problem. It's not going to fly because the country doesn't buy it and NEVER will. Obama's numbers are down a bit right now but, when given the choice between him and the guys on that stage the other night, it's a no brainier. A landslide win over each and everyone of them is an easy call. I'll call the election now, it's over. Save the money...
Charlie our debt is also
Charlie our debt is also caused by the 45% who don't pay federal taxes.Its all part of it..Its made up of many different reasons..I agree with the wars being a big part of it...Debt is also caused by spending more then you take in plain and simple..Whats wrong with pay as you go or a balance budget admendant ..Those are the things that Republicans are promoting..... I don't believe in any of this corporate welfare ..Same with the banks..That alot of republicans were against bailing out...What alot of the wall street protests are about..Obama was for..People who don't like the big banks should move their money somewhere else,or people who don't like certain corporations,don't buy there products..If people have a problem with the high cost of college education they should be mad at the colleges for raising the tuition's so high..Or go to a less costly school.Or get into a field that their are jobs in.....But don't ask me the tax payer to pay for it....
Charlie, Again, cut every
Charlie,
Again, cut every program, but not mine, right. You have the ones you don't want touched, just like everyone else.
As for the 47% who don't have to pay federal income tax, they will vote for whoever tells them they will not have to. People tend to vote for those that will give them stuff.
John, I don't mind cutting
John, I don't mind cutting but, I do mind a lack of balance.