Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMercenary
Bottom line, Liberals are willing to jump on the band wagon of demonizing Cain over accusations where as they have no defense over a sitting President shooting his DNA on a young professional staffer while in the White House. An accusation is just that, often the expedient thing to do is to arbitrate, and what ever the decision is after that is what happens, you pay them off, you agree to something in private, issue over. It still does not rise to the level of High Crimes and Misdemeanors, as Clinton was accuse of (due to his lies on the stand), not to mention his lies to the public, "I did not have sex with that woman". You people become more laughable every day....  |
As usual, you don't answer my questions.
As for what happened between Clinton and Lewinsky and what happened between Cain and these three women, you fail to make a distinction between consensual sex and sexual harassment. They're as different as happy-sexy-fun time and rape. Consent is crucial. It seems clear that there was consent in Clinton's case, it seems equally clear, indeed the very definition of sexual harassment, that there was NO consent in Cain's case. If you don't understand this, or don't respect this, you need to stay the fuck away from me and my family and my friends. It's not that hard to understand, but based on your post above, you don't get it.
What I find hilarious is that your "defense" of Cain is "Clinton did it!" REALLY? That's... ok with you? That Cain's no worse than Clinton? You've made your opinion of Clinton pretty clear over the years, and if this isn't damning with faint praise, I don't know what is. Hilarious.
You don't get what sexual harassment means and you excuse it because other people did something. If attitudes like your continue to represent Obama's opposition, this is gonna be easier and more embarrassing than I previously expected.