Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27
  1. #11  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    3,269
    Quote Originally Posted by noonwitch View Post
    I'll bet you believed Paula Jones, even though she used her brief time in the spotlight to pose for Playboy.
    According to Jones' account, on May 8, 1991, Paula Jones was escorted to the room of Clinton, then Governor of Arkansas, in the Excelsior[2][3][4] (now Peabody) Hotel in Little Rock, Arkansas, where he propositioned her. She claimed she kept quiet about the incident until 1994, when a David Brock story in American Spectator told a lurid account, sometimes referred to as Troopergate, about an Arkansas employee named "Paula" offering to be Clinton's girlfriend. Jones filed a sexual harassment suit against Clinton on May 6, 1994, two days prior to the 3-year statute of limitations, and sought $750,000 in damages.[5]
    Jones was a flake. She got lucky and sold her bimbo status for a bundle of money. Whether anyone believed her or not I don't know.

    We could talk about Monica Lewinsky, if you like, or maybe Gennifer Flowers if Monica is too painful.......Gee, why didn't you bring up those two?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12  
    Best Bounty Hunter in the Forums fettpett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Southwest Michigan (in Exile)
    Posts
    8,757
    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    There is a huge difference between being a "womanizer" and being an aggressor. A womanizer is an heterosexual male who is always on the make. A sexual aggressor crosses the line from invitation to assault.
    Well you described Willy Clinton perfectly, not Cain
    "Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings..." Patrick Henry
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    2,615
    Quote Originally Posted by Starbuck View Post
    The problem Mrs Starbuck and I had with her story is her description of Cain's opening move. I've made my share of opening moves over the years - although not lately - and I never opened by grabbing for her genitals and pulling her head toward my lap!

    I mean whatever happened to the old, "first he kept touching my arm; then he put his arm around me; then he (YUCK!) tried to kiss me!" , stuff? Nope. We're led to believe that he went from discussing whatever to going for the "Full Monte". Didn't need none of that kissing stuff, I guess.

    Aside from being a 50 year old flake, though, she is convincing. Be real interested in what Mr Cain has to say. He needs to say the right thing, but I don't now what that is.

    Good Luck, Mr Cain! Do it right, because we sure need you here in America.
    "I was out of the country for the month of July, 1997, and here are the travel records and passport stamps to prove it."

    I would just LMAO at something like that.
    Olde-style, states' rights conservative. Ask if this concept confuses you.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #14  
    Power CUer noonwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Warren, MI
    Posts
    12,433
    Quote Originally Posted by Starbuck View Post
    Jones was a flake. She got lucky and sold her bimbo status for a bundle of money. Whether anyone believed her or not I don't know.

    We could talk about Monica Lewinsky, if you like, or maybe Gennifer Flowers if Monica is too painful.......Gee, why didn't you bring up those two?

    I don't have a problem talking about either of those situations, but this isn't really about Bill Clinton, this is about Herman Cain. I'm not saying I believe the allegations against him, but I will say that comparing the situation to Clinton's misdeeds is not exactly the honorable way to handle the situation. So what if Clinton was a bigger womanizer than Cain? Does that mean that there is an acceptable level of womanizing that the GOP will tolerate from one of their candidates?

    Again, Cain needs to defend himself from the allegations against him, and not allow the media to compare him to other politicians and/or celebrities who have been caught up in scandals, whether we are talking about Clinton or Clarence Thomas . Anything else lets the media run with the allegations totally unchecked by any facts that could clear Cain.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #15  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    3,269
    Quote Originally Posted by noonwitch View Post
    I don't have a problem talking about either of those situations, but this isn't really about Bill Clinton, this is about Herman Cain.
    THEN WHY IN GOD'S NAME DID YOU BRING UP CLINTON AND PAULA JONES??!!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #16  
    Zoomie djones520's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    St. Louis
    Posts
    10,072
    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    There is a difference between making an opening move and taking what you want. I'm guessing that you were raised to be, and were expected to be a gentleman. There is no reason to project that on Cain.
    Ummm... have you paid any attention to what his history was? Everything I've heard gives plenty of reason to "project" that on Cain.
    In most sports, cold-cocking an opposing player repeatedly in the face with a series of gigantic Slovakian uppercuts would get you a multi-game suspension without pay.

    In hockey, it means you have to sit in the penalty box for five minutes.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #17  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Quote Originally Posted by Starbuck View Post
    THEN WHY IN GOD'S NAME DID YOU BRING UP CLINTON AND PAULA JONES??!!
    Because it's about Herman Cain, not Clinton, so she brought up Bill Clinton so that we'd focus solely on Cain. I think. Or maybe not.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #18  
    Moderator txradioguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Bavaria
    Posts
    7,638
    Quote Originally Posted by fettpett View Post
    Well you described Willy Clinton perfectly, not Cain
    "better put some ice that"
    In Memory Of My Friend 1st Sgt. Tim Millsap A Co, 70th Eng. Bn. 3rd Bde 1st AD...K.I.A. 25 April 2005

    Liberalism Is The Philosophy Of The Stupid

    To Achieve Ordered Liberty You Must Have Moral Order As Well

    The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #19  
    Moderator txradioguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Bavaria
    Posts
    7,638
    Quote Originally Posted by Starbuck View Post
    Jones was a flake. She got lucky and sold her bimbo status for a bundle of money. Whether anyone believed her or not I don't know.
    Obviously a court of law believed her. Her case is what caused Clintons disbarment for 5 years and permanent ban from ever arguing a case before the Supreme Court.


    We could talk about Monica Lewinsky, if you like, or maybe Gennifer Flowers if Monica is too painful.......Gee, why didn't you bring up those two?
    How about Juanita Brodderick and Kathleen Willey?
    In Memory Of My Friend 1st Sgt. Tim Millsap A Co, 70th Eng. Bn. 3rd Bde 1st AD...K.I.A. 25 April 2005

    Liberalism Is The Philosophy Of The Stupid

    To Achieve Ordered Liberty You Must Have Moral Order As Well

    The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #20  
    Fabulous Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    10,161
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    I am not taking a side in this particular imbroglio (I find it all distasteful to begin with and an indication of our Media's debasement of the American political process) but I think we can see why the others did not want their names used. The feeding frenzy is awful.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •