68
   

The Republican Nomination For President: The Race For The Race For The White House

 
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2011 02:27 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
If permits for public gathering are constitutional they must be applied to all groups
99% of America is not a group, it is America. There will be hell to pay if they try that BS.
firefly
 
  0  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2011 02:32 pm
I'm in sympathy with the OWS grievances, and their right to protest, but I think there are legitimate issues involved with their taking over land for an indefinite period.
Quote:
Jeff Norman Director, The Veterans Project
When OWS Protesters Become Trespassers
10/14/11

Is fighting economic injustice such a righteous pursuit that it entitles Occupy Wall Street (OWS) protesters and their disciples to indefinitely control whatever space they invade? Even though the whole movement is centered around the word "occupy," deciding which property to take over, or how long to monopolize it, doesn't seem to be based on any guiding principle. Occupiers need to clarify what, in their eyes, makes terrain seizable.

The owners of Zuccotti Park in New York are apparently authorized to prohibit camping and similar activities, and yesterday they gave entrenched demonstrators a day's notice to vacate the park long enough for workers to clean and inspect it. Thereafter, they warned, only those who obey park rules will be allowed to use the premises.

The decision announced early this morning to postpone the scheduled cleaning, made no mention of those rules.

The protesters say the City of New York should neither enforce the rules nor "evict" occupiers from the park. But what they haven't explained is how the police could legally or morally justify ignoring a property owner's trespass complaint.

Although occupiers pride themselves on adhering to a strict and democratic decision-making method, it's not clear how -- or if -- that procedure honors the wishes of park owners, besieged neighbors and various non-OWS users of the park.

The movement's overall mission has great legitimacy, but its land grabbing policy requires some elucidation.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-norman/occupy-wall-street-zuccotti-park_b_1010317.html

An "occupying" movement isn't exactly like other forms of protests, or even other public demonstrations, that generally take place within a specific timeframe. This one is indeterminate--there are no specific demands/goals that would indicate when this will end or their mission would be accomplished. So, non-OWS members of the community are, in effect, being deprived of using these occupied spaces for other activities for an indefinite period of time, and I'm not sure that's fair to the surrounding community either.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2011 02:33 pm
@snood,
I see I'm pages late, sorry -


I am in agreement with you, except that I know two people here at a2k who fit the refuse to vote mode and they are pretty principled people so I'll acquiesce. It's also not my business. I find it disheartening.

On Hillary, I'm not her fan as she repeatedly gets my goat in a regular fashion - latest being the wish for Gaddhafi's (I give up on how to spell it, newspapers differ so so will I) demise. I'd like to say there's no there, there, but there is. Let's say I differ with her more than I do with Obama.

But re Republicans, the only one who has interested me was Gary Johnson, and being me, it'd be unlikely I'd vote for him, just because of what I consider useful from my days doing hematology - you can tell blast cells by the company they keep. Presidents show up with a whole cohort over time and I'm not liking the Republican cohort these days.

It's possible I'd vote for him though, sometime in the future. I've never voted republican. Did vote green once in a non presidential election. If I remember, the guy turned out to be a turkey (forget his name, started with H). I also voted for Jesse Jackson once. Can't remember the occasion, probably a primary.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2011 02:35 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
So, non-OWS members of the community are, in effect, being deprived of using these occupied spaces for other activities for an indefinite period of time, and I'm not sure that's fair to the surrounding community either.
I am pretty sure I remember hearing Mubarak make that very same argument.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  2  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2011 02:41 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
If permits for public gathering are constitutional they must be applied to all groups
99% of America is not a group, it is America. There will be hell to pay if they try that BS.


This is just more nonsense, based on your buying into a marketing gimmick.

The Occupy protesters don't represent 99% of America and they most certainly don't comprise 99% of America.

If permits are required for any group they must be required for all groups, and if politicians are going to waive that requirement for a group of protestors because they agree with their message or are afraid of how they will react, they need to waive the requirement for all groups. If they do not than they have probably violated their oath of office.

It's rather a simple matter.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2011 02:48 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
I agree; it's part and parcel of our Constitution. If congress tries to limit the freedom of speech, I'm sure it'll never pass the laughter test.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2011 02:50 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:

The Occupy protesters don't represent 99% of America and they most certainly don't comprise 99% of America.
They are fighting for the 99%, but from the polls I have seen only about half of us are signed up right now as supporters.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  2  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2011 03:07 pm
@hawkeye10,
More sloganeering.

First of all no one can say what the hell they are fighting for.

Secondly, I'm no billionaire so I'm definately part of the 99%

I paid off my school loans long ago. My mortage is my only debt and I have no problem meeting my obligations respecting it. Their fighting for debt forgiveness on student loans and mortgages is not fighting for me.

I have no problem with Citizens United and I don't think it's contrary to my interests. To the extent that OWS is "fighting" that decision, they're not fighting it for me.

I don't believe the government can or should attempt to set caps on what private corporations can pay their employees (including their executives). I own my own company and so such caps wouldn't hurt me, but I don't want to see the government assuming such power and so to the extent that OWS is fighting for compensation caps for corporate executives, their not fighting for me.

I want to see crony-capitalism done away with and corporate welfare discontinued. To the extent OWC is fighting for this, they are fighting for me, but so is the Tea Party and I have more faith in them getting things done than OWS.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2011 04:05 pm
@Ticomaya,
Quote:

No ... BECAUSE of the protesters. Nice to have the benefit of hindsight to gauge the reasonableness of the expenditures, isn't it?

LOL..
Unreasonable fears doesn't make it the protesters fault. The fears were unreasonable to begin with and proved to be after the fact.

Quote:
The taxpayers of Phoenix are not pleased.
Perhaps some are. But that doesn't say who they are not pleased with. The protesters didn't tell anyone to work overtime and cost the city money.

Quote:

Perhaps he's not a Communist.

Then perhaps he's a fascist. Extremes seem to be your only argument.
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2011 04:21 pm
@parados,
parados wrote:
Quote:
No ... BECAUSE of the protesters. Nice to have the benefit of hindsight to gauge the reasonableness of the expenditures, isn't it?

LOL..
Unreasonable fears doesn't make it the protesters fault. The fears were unreasonable to begin with and proved to be after the fact.

Of course it's the protesters' fault. They are the cause-in-fact and the proximate cause of these expenses. But for their stupid protests, the expenditures would not have been made.
spendius
 
  2  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2011 06:07 pm
@Ticomaya,
You don't think the bankers should be protested?

And they are still at it. Idi Amin deported the Asians from Uganda saying that they were too clever for his people.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2011 06:32 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
They are fighting for the 99%,

Fighting in what way? For what? What exactly are they advocating?

Do they want greater government regulation of banking and Wall Street practices?

If that's their aim, I'm surprised that you, in particular, would support them.

0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2011 09:39 pm
Quote:

Exclusive: Two women accused Cain of inappropriate behavior
By: Jonathan Martin and Maggie Haberman and Anna Palmer and Kenneth P. Vogel
October 30, 2011 08:00 PM EDT

During Herman Cain’s tenure as the head of the National Restaurant Association in the 1990s, at least two female employees complained to colleagues and senior association officials about inappropriate behavior by Cain, ultimately leaving their jobs at the trade group, multiple sources confirm to POLITICO.

The women complained of sexually suggestive behavior by Cain that made them angry and uncomfortable, the sources said, and they signed agreements with the restaurant group that gave them financial payouts to leave the association. The agreements also included language that bars the women from talking about their departures.

In a series of comments over the past 10 days, Cain and his campaign repeatedly declined to respond directly about whether he ever faced allegations of sexual harassment at the restaurant association. They have also declined to address questions about specific reporting confirming that there were financial settlements in two cases in which women leveled complaints.

POLITICO has confirmed the identities of the two female restaurant association employees who complained about Cain but, for privacy concerns, is not publishing their names.

Cain spokesman J.D. Gordon told POLITICO the candidate indicated to campaign officials that he was “vaguely familiar” with the charges and that the restaurant association’s general counsel had resolved the matter.

The latest statement came from Cain himself. In a tense sidewalk encounter Sunday morning outside the Washington bureau of CBS News — where the Republican contender had just completed an interview on “Face the Nation” — Cain evaded a series of questions about sexual harassment allegations.

Cain said he has “had thousands of people working for me” at different businesses over the years and could not comment “until I see some facts or some concrete evidence.” His campaign staff was given the name of one woman who complained last week, and it was repeated to Cain on Sunday. He responded, “I am not going to comment on that.”

He was then asked, “Have you ever been accused, sir, in your life of harassment by a woman?”

He breathed audibly, glared at the reporter and stayed silent for several seconds. After the question was repeated three times, he responded by asking the reporter, “Have you ever been accused of sexual harassment?”

Cain was president and CEO of the National Restaurant Association from late 1996 to mid-1999. POLITICO learned of the allegations against him, and over the course of several weeks, has put together accounts of what happened by talking to a lengthy roster of former board members, current and past staff and others familiar with the workings of the trade group at the time Cain was there.

In one case, POLITICO has seen documentation describing the allegations and showing that the restaurant association formally resolved the matter. Both women received separation packages that were in the five-figure range.

On the details of Cain’s allegedly inappropriate behavior with the two women, POLITICO has a half-dozen sources shedding light on different aspects of the complaints.

The sources — which include 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.

Peter Kilgore, who was the association’s general counsel in the 1990s, and remains in that position today, has declined to comment to POLITICO on whether any settlements existed, saying he cannot discuss personnel matters.

But one source closely familiar with Cain’s tenure in Washington confirmed that the claims related to allegations of sexual harassment – behavior that disturbed members of the board who became aware of it, as well as the source, who otherwise liked Cain.

“I happen to know there were sealed settlements reached in the plural. I think that anybody who thinks this was a one-time, one-person transgression would be mistaken,” this source said.

The first woman was identified to POLITICO by a former association board member and her identity was confirmed by two additional sources.

The former board member recalled learning of the woman’s departure at a 1999 association board meeting and trade expo in Chicago.

“She was offered a financial package to leave the association and she did,” said the former board member. “What I took offense at was that it was clear that rather than deal with the issue, there was an effort to hush it up. She was offered a way out to keep quiet.”

A second source with close ties to the restaurant association from that period said the woman revealed at the time that she had suffered what the source described as “an unwanted sexual advance” from Cain at a hotel where an event involving the group was taking place.

A third source said that the woman has indicated to her current employer that she received a compensation package from the association and has warned there that she may be the subject of an embarrassing story involving a presidential candidate.

The second woman’s identity was confirmed by a source familiar with the association.

On Oct. 20, POLITICO first approached Gordon, who serves as the campaign’s vice president for communications, about whether Cain had been the subject of complaints of sexual harassment.

After several days of not responding to the question, Gordon emailed on Oct. 24 that any dispute about Cain’s conduct at the restaurant association “was settled amicably among all parties many years ago.”

“These are old and tired allegations that never stood up to the facts,” Gordon said in an email response. “This was settled amicably among all parties many years ago, and dredging this up now is merely part of a smear campaign meant to discredit a true patriot who is shaking up the political status quo.”

Gordon added: “Since critics haven’t had much luck in attacking Mr. Cain’s ideas, they are trying to attack him personally.”

On Wednesday, the response shifted. Gordon telephoned to assert he was not using “settled” in a legal context but rather simply meant the matter was “resolved.”

In that interview, Gordon told POLITICO he had spoken to Cain about the allegations and said Cain was “vaguely familiar” with the situation.

“He was vaguely familiar with it and wanted me to get with the [National Restaurant Association] lawyer who worked the case, Peter Kilgore. He said, ‘Just get with Peter Kilgore at the NRA.’ He remembered there was something vaguely, some allegation, but he wasn’t familiar with it. Our lawyer called Peter Kilgore. Their policy is they don’t discuss personnel. That’s what our lawyer then told me.”

Added Gordon: “When you’re in a leadership position, sometimes people just try to take a shot at you.”

As to whether the association under Cain ever paid a monetary settlement to women who had leveled such accusations against him, Gordon referred the question to the restaurant trade group.

Kilgore told POLITICO in a statement: “Please understand that our corporate policy is not to discuss personnel matters (other than to confirm employment and dates of employment) with outside sources, including media. Thus, I must respectfully decline to comment on your questions or any allegations you may be looking into that concern current or former employees of the Association.”

The revelations come at a time when Cain is riding high in the polls, with a candidacy that relies heavily on Cain’s claims that his experience as a businessman and the former head of Godfather’s Pizza has prepared him to be president.

But the Republican presidential hopeful also has begun to face increasing scrutiny in the press over his management style, presiding over an unorthodox campaign that has seen the departures of several aides and struggled to take advantage of Cain’s sudden vault to the head of the pack.

Cain, who has been married to his wife Gloria for 43 years, did tell at least one campaign staffer this year about the possibility that claims of sexual harassment could surface, according to the aide. Cain, this person said, described a case in which he fired an employee in 1990s and the woman alleged sexual misconduct or harassment. Cain told the campaign staffer he had beaten the case and that the woman had paid for his legal fees. The aide had no further details.

Cain was head of the restaurant trade group after he left the job as CEO of Godfather’s Pizza. He has often referred to his experience running the pizza company but speaks less often about his tenure atop the association. The year before he took the helm, the association represented about 150,000 food service establishments, had roughly 115 employees and a government affairs budget of nearly $20 million. But it was not known as a top lobbying powerhouse.

Cain tried to change that, hiring more lobbyists and taking a much more public role in advocating for the industry than did his predecessor. Boasting of the shift in his book, Cain noted that during his tenure, the restaurant association made its first appearance on Fortune magazine’s list of Washington’s 25 most influential interest groups (it rose as high as 15th).

Information about the incidents was apparently closely held, even among association board members. But one woman’s complaint apparently did make its way to at least some figures on the governing board when, at an association event, one board member got word that a female employee had complained about Cain’s advances, according to a source who was at the event.

The source said the board member asked the woman directly about the episode and was told that Cain had invited her up to his suite at a prior association event.

Ron Magruder, Denise Marie Fugo and Joseph Fassler, the chair, vice chair and immediate past chairman of the National Restaurant Association board of directors at the time of Cain’s departure, said they hadn’t heard about any complaints regarding Cain making unwanted advances.

“I have never heard that. It would be news to me,” said Fugo, who runs a Cleveland, Ohio, catering company, adding such behavior would be totally out of character for the Cain she knew. “He’s very gracious.”

Fassler, who helped bring Cain on board as CEO of the restaurant association, said that any inappropriate behavior was not brought to his attention and that he would be upset to learn it had gone on and he was not made aware of it.

“That’s a shock to me,” Fassler said. “As an officer during all of Herman’s years there as a paid executive… none of that stuff ever surfaced to me. Nobody ever called me, complained about this, nor did I ever hear that from Peter Kilgore, nor did I ever hear that from Herman Cain.”

Fassler – who ran a Phoenix food-service company and finished his term as chairman the month before Cain’s June 1999 departure but remained on the board’s executive committee – described Cain as treating men and women identically and asserted it was “not within his character” to make unwanted advances. “It’s not what I know of him,” Fassler said.

Much like Fassler, almost all board members remember Cain fondly and say he left on good terms.

Cain was “extremely professional” and “fair” to female staffers at the restaurant association, recalled Lee Ellen Hayes, who said she “worked fairly closely with” Cain in the late 1990s, when she was an executive at the National Restaurant Association Education Fund, a Chicago-based offshoot of the group.

Cain’s treatment of women was “the same as his treatment of men. Herman treated everyone great,” said Mary Ann Cricchio, who was elected to the board of the restaurant group in 1998. She said Cain left such a good impression on the organization that when he spoke at a group event in January of this year, as he was considering a presidential bid, “he had unanimous support in the room.”

Revelations about the settlements come as members of the association’s board planned to meet this month to talk about ways to use the organization’s clout to boost Cain’s campaign.

Ideas to be discussed included making a donation to Cain from the organization’s political action committee, which typically doesn’t contribute to presidential campaigns, and, more significantly, organizing a fundraiser for his campaign.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/67194.html


Quote:
Herman Cain Sexual Harassment Accusations: GOP Presidential Candidate Denies Politico Report
AP/THE HUFFINGTON POST
10/30/11

GOP presidential hopeful Herman Cain has denied a report alleging that he sexually harassed women during his time as head of the National Restaurant Association.

Politico released a story Sunday evening, noting that at least two female employees made complaints about Cain.

In a statement given to the Associated Press, Cain's campaign labeled the Politico report as "dredging up thinly sourced allegations" from his tenure at the trade group. Spokesman J.D. Gordon told the AP that the claims include "unsubstantiated personal attacks", adding that the press is "casting aspersions on his character and spreading rumors that never stood up to the facts."

Cain's camp entered Sunday riding an Iowa high. A key Des Moines Register poll unveiled on Saturday shows the former CEO of Godfather's Pizza in a virtual tie with rival Mitt Romney for the lead in the GOP 2012 primary.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/30/herman-cain-sexual-harassment-accusations_n_1066487.html?view=screen


Except Cain has really not flat out denied that he was accused of sexual harrassment by two women who then received financial settlements to keep quiet about the matter.

I just was watching Geraldo Rivera on Fox and he had Cain's spokesman, J.D. Gordon on the phone, and Gerado repeatedy asked him if Cain was ever accused of sexual harrassment by women who subsequently received financial settlements, and he could not get J.D. Gordon to give him a yes or no answer. Gordon just kept saying, "These are unsourced allegations..." and Geraldo kept asking, "But, are they true?" and he could not get a simple yes or no answer.
That Gordon could not say, "No, those allegations are untrue," is what could create problems for Cain in the coming days.




Finn dAbuzz
 
  2  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2011 09:56 pm
@firefly,
Farewell Herman
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2011 09:59 pm
@firefly,
firefly wrote:
He was then asked, “Have you ever been accused, sir, in your life of harassment by a woman?”

He breathed audibly, glared at the reporter and stayed silent for several seconds. After the question was repeated three times, he responded by asking the reporter, “Have you ever been accused of sexual harassment?”

This guy's an embarrassment ...
snood
 
  2  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2011 10:16 pm
@Ticomaya,
Ticomaya wrote:

firefly wrote:
He was then asked, “Have you ever been accused, sir, in your life of harassment by a woman?”

He breathed audibly, glared at the reporter and stayed silent for several seconds. After the question was repeated three times, he responded by asking the reporter, “Have you ever been accused of sexual harassment?”

This guy's an embarrassment ...


Yeah, and it really stands out since Perry and Romney are such great candidates.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  2  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2011 10:38 pm
@snood,
Is there any Republican you think might make a good president?
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2011 11:11 pm
@Ticomaya,
So you are going to believe some police chief without proof? You who dont believe many posters on this site even when they post ironclad proof to you.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2011 11:58 pm
@RABEL222,
So now it's Tico's obligation to question a report he has read because you don't want believe it?

That's an interesting requirement you would impose.

We're each at liberty to accept what we read or hear as the truth, without being required to independently confirm it.

You needn't believe it, but it's up to you to disprove it. I know I would tend to believe police chiefs over many of the posters in this forum.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 31 Oct, 2011 04:55 am
@firefly,
Why are these two females allowed to remain anonymous. Surely they must have appeared at work dressed in a manner known to be intended to make themselves the objects of male attention? If such attention results in an honest response to how they are got up what are they complaining about.

A quote from Love's Labour's Lost--

Quote:
PRINCESS

Here comes Boyet, and mirth is in his face.

Enter BOYET

BOYET

O, I am stabb'd with laughter! Where's her grace?

PRINCESS

Thy news Boyet?

BOYET

Prepare, madam, prepare!
Arm, wenches, arm! encounters mounted are
Against your peace: Love doth approach disguised,
Armed in arguments; you'll be surprised:
Muster your wits; stand in your own defence;
Or hide your heads like cowards, and fly hence.

PRINCESS

Saint Denis to Saint Cupid! What are they
That charge their breath against us? say, scout, say.

BOYET

Under the cool shade of a sycamore
I thought to close mine eyes some half an hour;
When, lo! to interrupt my purposed rest,
Toward that shade I might behold addrest
The king and his companions: warily
I stole into a neighbour thicket by,
And overheard what you shall overhear,
That, by and by, disguised they will be here.
Their herald is a pretty knavish page,
That well by heart hath conn'd his embassage:
Action and accent did they teach him there;
'Thus must thou speak,' and 'thus thy body bear:'
And ever and anon they made a doubt
Presence majestical would put him out,
'For,' quoth the king, 'an angel shalt thou see;
Yet fear not thou, but speak audaciously.'
The boy replied, 'An angel is not evil;
I should have fear'd her had she been a devil.'
With that, all laugh'd and clapp'd him on the shoulder,
Making the bold wag by their praises bolder:
One rubb'd his elbow thus, and fleer'd and swore
A better speech was never spoke before;
Another, with his finger and his thumb,
Cried, 'Via! we will do't, come what will come;'
The third he caper'd, and cried, 'All goes well;'
The fourth turn'd on the toe, and down he fell.
With that, they all did tumble on the ground,
With such a zealous laughter, so profound,
That in this spleen ridiculous appears,
To cheque their folly, passion's solemn tears.


* fleer'd means grinning with sneering. I guess a prosecutor would say "leering lasciviously". "One rubbed his elbow" signifies making a fist on the end of an arm extended forwards and with the other hand under the elbow the fist is moved slowly up an down in a sort of pumping action.

And here's a Princess with her ladies in waiting. Mr Cain's two are obviously just common or garden trollopes on the make.

We sure have come a long way in 400 years.

The IMF, the French presidential election and now your own. 3 ladies--no evidence. " He looked at me funny like your honour and I felt all dirty and ashamed."

Does Mr Vance know about this?

 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 04/28/2025 at 10:03:58