This is not a bimbo eruptions, it is an eruption of three or four bimbos. In cafe terminology, the last 6 weeks of this "scandal" driven political attack from the Lefties, has proven to be a huge nothing burger.
The first two anonymous women Politico came up with, refused to go "public" when told that legal restrictions had been lifted, allowing them to speak freely. My question is this: how is it that Politico did not know of this refusal, before hand? Is it possible that its reporters, had never actually sat down and talked to these women? I mean, when the story "broke" in Politico, no details were given. Politico simply expected us all to believe its [on] crack reporters . . . . . and the Marxist Media took the bait, hook, line and ten pound sinker. After all, it is not the "crime, itself, but the seriousness of the charges" that is most critical, at least, to a radicalized Democrat/Saul Alinsky type pundit. Anyway . . . .
Then Sharon Bialick came along. Her story was one of sexual assault, if you believe her account. Let me summarized her statement: "He rented me a room. It was like, super nice. But he never took me to the room. He just rented it. Instead, we like went back to the National Association's offices. When we got there, he put his hand under my skirt and grabbed my genitals (really, is "it" called genitals??). Then he grabbed my head and pushed it down into his lap. Boy, that made me really mad. I said, 'What are you doing, don't you know I have a boyfriend' (her actual words) ? And then he stopped." Go ahead and check out my summary versus the video of her first press meeting. I have it somewhere, here, on Midknight Review.
In the presence of her attorney, the self centered Gloria Allred, Bialick told reporters that she was not in this for money. But, when asked, "will you, then, refuse an offer for a book deal," she ended the press conference without confirming her supposed disinterest.
Finally, we have Karen Kraushaar. She tried to get all the women to assemble for a huge press conference, but no one wanted to oblige. Understand that this woman sued the INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) for thousands, back in 2003., but failed in this legal action. Today, she works for the Obama Administration at the Department of Treasury. If she can't sue for money, at least she can be in a building where she can smell it. And this afternoon, surprise, surprise, she canceled her press conference.
But you say, where there's smoke, there must be a little fire. I heard, Shep "Bourbon Boy" Smith say this very thing, several days ago, on his Fox News show. To date, there really is no fire.
good article in CNN
ReplyDeleteIn the never-ending debate over whether the United States is a Christian nation, recent events support the nay-sayers. I am referring to the troubles of Herman Cain and Joe Paterno.
How we respond to ethical conundrums often boils down to empathy. In the abortion debate, do you identify with the woman who wants an abortion or with the fetus? Concerning the federal deficit, do you identify with the wealthy person who might see his taxes rise or with the poor person who might see her unemployment benefits extended?
One purpose of the world's great religions is to widen our circle of empathy beyond ourselves and our families to others in our community, and in the wider world. Christianity, for example, has long taught that we should empathize with “the least of these,” and particularly with the poor and oppressed (see Luke 4:18).
The morality plays we are now witnessing—the sexual harassment allegations swirling around Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain and the sexual assault charges swirling around the Penn State football program headed by former coach Joe Paterno — provide an opportunity to assess just where our collective empathy lies.
When we look as a nation at the Herman Cain campaign, do our hearts go out to the wealthy businessman and White House contender or do they go out to the women who are accusing him of sexual improprieties? In pondering this case, and trying to determine where we stand, how do we approach the evidence? To whom do we give the benefit of the doubt? To the “least of these”? Or to the most powerful?
Hey, Willy, be sure to continue to ignore the fact that 80% of this nation declares itself to be of Judea-Christian allegiance. And, let's pretend that the colonies were not the manifest result of Christian's fleeing European State religion.
ReplyDeleteAs to your CNN article; I love it when Lefties start quoting the bible as if it is something that controls their lives or has genuine existential meaning. You Liberal bible thumpers make me sick. It is not your book, so find a different source for your radical and faithless commentary.
I think you might start by answering the questions posed in the article.
ReplyDelete