Wednesday, November 02, 2011

A Herman Cain/Kim Kardashian blog

Herman Cain, shades of Clarence Thomas/Anita Hill. Look this is what happens when you're a conservative uppity nigger who thinks for yourself.

Things went downhill ever since Kris Humphries had to sit on that plane next to Ray J, he of the original Kardashian sex tape. Kim comes across as nominally more intelligent than Paris Hilton and somewhat less annoying than J-Lo who loves herself and she even has a line of something at Sears or Macy's. Andrea Peyser of the New York Post calls her a fame whore. I don't get all that worked up about it, for me it's just to pass the time while reading the morning paper. Word on the street is Justin Bieber may have gotten a girl pregnant. He's dipping and Kardashian is back on the market, hey ya never know. You know what gets me about Montel Williams who tokes the medical cannibus on a daily basis is he doesn't look or act like he has MS, bopping around on that infomercial with the juicer and he did do that talk show all those years, didn't look the worse for wear. Despite years and decades of steady medical and scientific advancements you mean to tell me the only thing that can manage your pain is pot? c'mon! I think he's fronting or as they say in England fron-Ting. A word to the Madoffs, next time try jumping:)

43 comments:

  1. Tweet from 18 hours ago:


    @cwhiatt
    Christopher W. Hiatt

    "Greece on the brink. EU on the brink. US on the brink. And peeps wanna know what Kardashian is doing w/ wedding gifts? Wake the fuck up!"

    As for Cain, if this "scandal" is an attempt to undermine the man's political aspirations that is pretty sad. Wouldn't surprise me given the current state of affairs and propensity towards demagoguery in the political arena.

    His 999 plan, which would tack on a consumption tax without repealing the income is a disaster.

    What's more, some of his statements have shown a complete lack of understanding of the Constitution (most notably on the 2nd Amendment).

    Further, his pre-emptive position with respect to Iran isn't a policy I'd endorse and deserves scrutiny.

    ReplyDelete
  2. As for Montel, there may very well be another option for his pain.

    It might be a pill, manufactured by a multi-national pharma company that comes with an onslaught of known side effects, hasn't been fully tested, and could (at a later date) found to cause your liver to rupture.

    You still want to hang with the camp that wants to deny the guy a natural remedy; one that the United States government itself gives out prescriptions for?

    ReplyDelete
  3. You know how I despise pop culture in general so personally I could give a butter bean about these people. I do feel like maybe it was some kind of a publicity stunt, let's spend $10M getting married and sell all the rights to it for $15M.. anyway it's all such a joke. I will say this though: I have never seen a J Lo movie and don't ever plan on it, but I have seen pictures and she obviously has the bar none best people in the business dressing her. She could put on a Hefty bag and make it look good. Very few people can do that, but she manages consistently to look off the chart great. Actually you could also make an argument for Queen Latifah in this category, but it's a different kind of looking good.

    Quick note on pot: they do say it's good for certain kinds of cancer pain. And there's a drug called marinol (might have two Rs, can't remember) that's derived from THC and used for appetite stimulation. Yep, finally a good use for The Munchies.

    ReplyDelete
  4. More on the benefits of pot:

    The first experiment documenting pot's anti-tumor effects took place in 1974 at the Medical College of Virginia at the behest of the U.S. government. The results of that study, reported in an Aug. 18, 1974, Washington Post newspaper feature, were that marijuana's psychoactive component, THC, "slowed the growth of lung cancers, breast cancers and a virus-induced leukemia in laboratory mice, and prolonged their lives by as much as 36 percent."[xii]

    In 1998, a research team at Madrid's Complutense University discovered that THC can selectively induce programmed cell death in brain tumor cells without negatively impacting surrounding healthy cells. Then in 2000, they reported in the journal Nature Medicine that injections of synthetic THC eradicated malignant gliomas (brain tumors) in one-third of treated rats, and prolonged life in another third by six weeks.[ix]
    Led by Dr. Manuel Guzman the Spanish team announced they had destroyed incurable brain cancer tumors in rats by injecting them with THC. They reported in the March 2002 issue of "Nature Medicine" that they injected the brains of 45 rats with cancer cells, producing tumors whose presence they confirmed through magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). On the 12th day they injected 15 of the rats with THC and 15 with Win-55,212-2 a synthetic compound similar to THC.[x]
    Researchers at the University of Milan in Naples, Italy, reported in the Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics that non-psychoactive compounds in marijuana inhibited the growth of glioma cells in a dose-dependent manner, and selectively targeted and killed malignant cells through apoptosis. “Non-psychoactive CBD produce[s] a significant anti-tumor activity both in vitro and in vivo, thus suggesting a possible application of CBD as an antineoplastic agent.”[xi]

    Met a guy named David Daniels who is a friend of a friend who moved to Denver specifically to he could be medically prescribed hemp seed oil for bone cancer. Within a year his cancer was gone and he still had all his dreadlocks. :)

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think it's important to point out at this juncture that medical preps involving compounds in marijuana are NOT the same as just sitting around smoking you one.

    Digitalis, which is the flowering plant foxglove, is a lot more similar in that it's used to slow your heart rate, and every year kids die after eating them (why do kids eat flowers? because they can) and it slows their heart rate into arrest. What I mean is that the natural state of the thing is basically the same as what it's used for medicinally.

    Now, I could make a pretty good argument for opium in that it's narcotic (and could kill you) either way, but I think in practice it's more the opium derivatives like morphine that are useful in that they can be standardized and dosage-controlled. You'll never get pinpoint consistency out of nature as anyone who's grown a row of hot peppers can tell you.

    There's two ways imo that pot's a bit different. One, the active medical compounds are pretty much not necessarily going to be getting you high. At least I've never seen anyone get high from them. Two, again you move into the standardized thing, and especially you're concentrating one component into larger amounts than what would be contained in like your usual recreational amount. I mean, I've seen an ENT use a 40% cocaine solution, in a hospital, to slow down a severe nosebleed long enough for it to be cauterized. I've also seen people in cardiac emergencies from cocaine. See what I'm saying? It might not make sense. I'm still a little postictal from all that OT.

    Anyway, I guess the ultimate point I'm getting at is that it seems to me to be no contradiction to be against street drugs while still supporting their medical use. And this does not necessarily mean that I think hemp oil is going to knock out all or any cancers that might be. I have always been a little bit reserved towards alternative medicines until I've either personally seen or personally experienced their efficacy. I think chiropractic is quackeric, but I'm 100% behind Traditional Chinese Medicine and acupuncture in particular, so I try to take it on an individual basis.

    And this also doesn't mean that I'm oblivious to the fact that the pharmaceutical giants systematically and industry-wide fuck the public with their patents and their inflated prices. Yeah, they do plenty of R&D and they're required to do batteries of research (lots of which is fudged for speed purposes and no research is ever complete, which both contribute to the number of drugs that come out with a bang and go out with a lawsuit). But on the other hand far more good drugs come out than bad.

    I could go on arguing this with myself back and forth all day but I have to go force myself to be a productive member of my household for a little while.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "Herman Cain, shades of Clarence Thomas/Anita Hill. Look this is what happens when you're a conservative uppity nigger who thinks for yourself."

    Wrong. Cain did this to himself. And even the GOP is beginning to understand that his past and these allegations by these women have been around for a long time.

    I don't know who or what PJ Media are but here's a report.

    BTW, it is extremely amusing to read those quoted words above, which are almost identical to what the Liberals say about Obama when the Right attacks him.

    "Herman Cain says Rick Perry is behind the sexual harassment story? Wait a second. So Cain thinks the story was motivated by racism, and that Perry is the one who leaked it? Is Cain calling Perry a racist?"

    Cain was never a serious presidential candidate. And saying that is not racist.

    As I said on another blog, so far I have not seen one blast email from lefties showing Herman Cain with a bone through his nose or with watermelons on his front lawn or his imaged morphed into a monkey's. Those type of images WERE sent around in conservative emails. And they ARE racist.

    ReplyDelete
  7. You know, something that I think gets missed here is that these are facts that are being reported. There WERE women who accused him. There WERE settlements paid. These are things that actually happened. To investigate the background of a prospective presidential candidate is an expected and normal proceeding. Didn't we hear about GWB and the Skull and Bones and being in the Guard instead of being in Vietnam? Didn't we hear about Clinton smoking some weed? Don't we hear about every other thing there is? Isn't the President still being grilled over everything from birth onwards including having his school grades questioned?

    Why is anyone surprised that shit comes out of people's closets? And why is it in any way racist to mention that it did? This scrutiny happens to everyone. The point at which it became racist was when the President was questioned on things no other president has been questioned (and still despite debunking continues to be questioned) on. This is pretty ordinary stuff, going through someone's work history, especially since he brags on it all the time, and seeing that it wasn't all escargot and roses.

    Perry got nailed on that hunting camp. Bachmann got nailed on her crazy husband who thinks he can cure gay folk of being gay. Oh, and those farm subsidies. Santorum's just a lunatic.. you don't have to look into his past to prove that. Gingrich proves it every time he opens his mouth, not like he hasn't got plenty in his dossier to drag out. So Cain is just another presidential candidate who thought no one would notice this. And his handling of it has been piss-poor.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I guess that Barack Obama never made a mistake before or after getting elected?

    I guess that Nancy Pelosi or Hillary Clinton or Bill Clinton never told a "UN-Truth" No when the LYE they call it "miss-spoken"

    I guess that Al Gore or John Edwards NEVER strayed?

    What great and wonderful, righteous people our leaders must be. Just ask them.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Shaw the Left is like a bunch of Scientologists, they smear their enemies. It's like clockwork, you can set your watch by it.

    ReplyDelete
  10. As for Montel he reminds me of my dept. manager - her heart is bad, her back hurts, she has a pain here, this that and the other thing but she comes to work everyday bright and early. She's wide awake @6 in the AM, she ain't collapsed on the floor and she's highly alert to every minor mistake you make. What kind of ailment do you have again?

    Soap if pot's your thing be honest about it. This notion that we don't have good pain management in this country unless we legalize pot is...it's just mierda de toro.

    ReplyDelete
  11. "I guess that Barack Obama never made a mistake before or after getting elected?

    I guess that Nancy Pelosi or Hillary Clinton or Bill Clinton never told a "UN-Truth" No when the LYE they call it "miss-spoken"

    I guess that Al Gore or John Edwards NEVER strayed?"


    So the defense of Herman Cain is "He's just as bad as the other guys?"

    Shall we bring back the old Bill Clinton phrase "Bimbo Eruptions" now?

    The number of women who claim Cain harassed them is now up to 6.

    ReplyDelete
  12. "Shaw the Left is like a bunch of Scientologists, they smear their enemies. It's like clockwork, you can set your watch by it."

    I don't know how old you are, Z-man, but perhaps you were in diapers during the Clinton Administration when the conservatives accused the Clintons of murdering Vince Foster, when the conservatives labeled Hillary Clinton a lesbian AND, at the same time, the lover of Vince Foster.

    You probably weren't born during the rancid Willy Horton political ads from the GWHBush campaign, and when Richard Nixon had an "enemies list" which was used to smear Democrats.

    You make a naive statement when you fail to acknowledge that the GOP is as smeary as the Dems.

    Google conservative Lee Atwater, who was one of the best for smearing his opponents and who, on his death bed, apologized for the damage he did.

    "Atwater's tactics in that campaign included push polling in the form of fake surveys by "independent pollsters" to inform white suburbanites that Turnipseed was a member of the NAACP. He also sent out last-minute letters from Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-S.C.) telling voters that Turnipseed would disarm America and turn it over to liberals and communists. At a press briefing, Atwater planted a "reporter" who rose and said, "We understand Turnipseed has had psychotic treatment." Atwater later told the reporters off the record that Turnipseed "got hooked up to jumper cables"– a reference to electroconvulsive therapy that Turnipseed underwent as a teenager.

    "Lee seemed to delight in making fun of a suicidal 16-year-old who was treated for depression with electroshock treatments", Turnipseed recalled. "In fact, my struggle with depression as a student was no secret. I had talked about it in a widely covered news conference as early as 1977, when I was in the South Carolina State Senate. Since then I have often shared with appropriate groups the full story of my recovery to responsible adulthood as a professional, political and civic leader, husband and father. Teenage depression and suicide are major problems in America, and I believe my life offers hope to young people who are suffering with a constant fear of the future."

    After the 1980 election, Atwater went to Washington and became an aide in the Ronald Reagan administration, working under political director Ed Rollins. In 1984, Rollins managed Reagan's re-election campaign, and Atwater became the campaign's deputy director and political director. Rollins tells several Atwater stories in his 1996 book, Bare Knuckles and Back Rooms. He states that Atwater ran a dirty tricks operation against vice-presidential nominee Geraldine Ferraro including publicizing the fact that Ferraro's parents had been indicted of numbers running in the 1940s. Rollins also described Atwater as "ruthless", "Ollie North in civilian clothes", and someone who "just had to drive in one more stake".


    IOW, a GOP dirty trick operative.

    ReplyDelete
  13. "Soap if pot's your thing be honest about it. This notion that we don't have good pain management in this country unless we legalize pot is...it's just mierda de toro."

    Who gets to decide what you as an individual want to use for your pain management?

    That's the issue for me.

    When you're off of work you have freedom to choose what you want to do with your spare time.

    What if we told you could fold laundry or clean your toilet? Those were your options.

    That's not choice dear lad.

    It's not about pot per se. It is about freedom to choose. Some people want to go all herbalistic/holistic.

    The FDA and their miscreants want to regulate what herbal remedies individuals can choose from.

    That's BS. That's my beef.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Z, why are you in a knot over this Cain thing? How is it really any different than finding out about Perry's hunting camp or Bachmann's farm subsidies? I mean really different?

    If it was people coming out right now at this minute and saying, oh, Herman Cain sexually harassed me a month ago, or a week ago, or anytime since he started this campaign, then yeah, I could see some suspicions there.

    But this isn't new or recent. This is an established thing that happened. I find it hard to believe that it's any different than finding shit on any of the other candidates.

    And isn't it a funny thing that Cain himself isn't trying to blame the Left for it? He thinks Perry is behind it, although 'he has no evidence to support that.'

    Anyway, I think it's to be expected that when you put yourself in the Big Eye like this that every reporter on the planet is going to comb through everything you ever did that's a public record and bring it to the light.

    I don't see how it's a different issue.

    ReplyDelete
  15. The ALLEGED allegations against Herman Cain are a fraction of seriousness of the sexual harassment that was PROVEN against Bill Clinton, and Ted Kennedy, and Barack Obama’s past and so many other Democrats that got a free pass.
    Oh, the shameful hypocrisy!

    ReplyDelete
  16. This notion that we don't have good pain management in this country unless we legalize pot is...it's just mierda de toro.

    Lemme think on this one a minute.

    Pain management is a funny thing because different kinds of pain get handled differently. That's for a bunch of reasons. For example, neuropathic pain (like diabetic neuropathy, or shingles, or post-amputation phantom pain) doesn't respond well to opiates. A lot of times for this they use the drugs you'd least expect; antidepressants and anticonvulsants. The reason is because these types of drugs work differently in the body and mediate in another way.

    Another issue would be people who can't take certain drugs due to allergies, liver issues, renal issues, or just plain narcotic intolerance. We have a girl, you give her one Lortab (which is a one-step-from-worthless drug for me) and she literally just about goes into respiratory arrest. So this for her pretty much negates the entire narcotic class, and you have to struggle to find something that'll adequately address her pain without killing her.

    Cancer pain in particular has been noted in many cases to be a non-responder to opiates. This is why you see these oncology patients on ridiculous, insane, unbelievable doses of morphine (I saw 200 MILLIGRAMS being given one time and nearly had a heart attack.. I thought it was like the med error of the millenium) and the person was still awake, coherent, lucid and uncomfortable. Some types of cancer are more painful, or painful in different ways, than others. So again addressed differently.

    Nontraditional approaches do in a lot of cases work. For my nerve damage what worked better than anything else for me was a TENS unit and acupuncture. There should always be research into new ways to address this stuff.

    There are reasons herbal things aren't promoted as much in this country. One, again you have that standardization issue. It's got to be something you can pinpoint quantify. That's a biggie. Interactions with other medications are also an issue, but that's with everything. And I'd be a liar if I didn't mention that a lot of big pharma isn't going to promote something they can't patent. They can patent things like Marinol, but you can't patent a bunch of pot plants.

    I don't approve of street drugs on the street, but I do think research into their potential medical uses is warranted and a good idea. Those are two different things in my book.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Alleged allegations?

    The issues were brought forth years ago, presumably investigated at the time and settlements were paid, which would indicate to me that there was something there that they couldn't simply dismiss.

    I'm not negating any issues against any other candidate on the left or right. I'm just saying that every candidate gets every dust bunny dragged out of their respective closets and I don't see how this is any different than anyone else's.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Soap I hear you but to hear the potsters tell it NOTHING can control their chronic pain 'cept the weed. THAT is dishonest, that is propaganda and that you should be against.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Hey Shaw you're right, I'm simply focusing on the Left as you focus on the Right so maybe we'll meet somewhere in the middle. Sexual harassment, you know when I make the following argument some think I'm pro-Neanderthal Man, pro-sex-harassment but my point is simply this and I'm sure the soapster would agree:

    SUBJECTIVISM CANNOT BE THE BASIS OF THE LAW

    You're uncomfortable? well my boss makes me uncomfortable.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I don't know, Z... in school we're taught that pain is what the patient says it is.

    I know that some doctors didn't believe me until I started to REFUSE the narcotics on the grounds they were useless. Then everything changed and they went in the direction of anticonvulsants. It was more helpful, but I had a reaction that we caught before it blinded me (Stevens Johnson) and then I said that everything was worthless for me to even try. And at that point I started looking at other stuff, and found the TENS. I looked like an ass walking around with electrodes all over my arm but I was able to sleep and function and start building up all the muscle mass I'd lost.

    So I don't know; maybe there's pain that nothing else does really control. I don't know how the compounds in pot mediate in the body; I wouldn't be quick to dismiss it, though. There's other things like that in different areas... look at ADHD. The most helpful types of drugs in this area are 'CNS stimulants' (read: speed). Lots of these drugs on the market today have 'amphetamine' right in their generic names because that's where they come from. The bar none best one on the market right now is Vyvanse and that's another one; lisdexamfetamine. So before I was even diagnosed, when I was a kid, I was doing assloads of speed... why? Because I thought clearer, functioned better, could concentrate. It just worked for me. I didn't know I was ADHD, all I knew was that this was workin it. There's a lot of risk in that kind of thing, people die every day. But I guess the point I'm making is that some of this stuff does work.

    I still don't approve of street drugs on the street.

    ReplyDelete
  21. This Cain saga, while perfectly acceptable to serve as a basis on which to question one's character, ought not in itself sink the man's hopes. His 999 plan and various other statements and positions should effectively do that. Less drama there andso it goes....

    ReplyDelete
  22. And here's a note on sexual harassment in legal terms.

    Sexual harassment doesn't legally become 'sexual harassment' until the person being harassed tells the other person that what is happening makes them uncomfortable and that they need to stop.

    It's only when it continues after that point that it becomes 'sexual harassment' that can be legally addressed.

    So if you tell someone that their behavior is upsetting you, making you uncomfortable, whatever.. they have to CONTINUE to do it in order for it to be something you can charge them with.

    So even if it's based on what an individual subjectively finds uncomfortable, the other individual has been informed that whatever particular behavior they're exhibiting towards them is unwelcome.

    That in itself is enough. If you know something is bothering a person on this level, and you keep it up, you had been warned and ignored it.

    All the person had to do was stop the behavior when it was brought to their attention. They chose not to.

    ReplyDelete
  23. About the pot, you know I think these people just want a legal way to smoke pot. Put the compounds in a pill and they'll lose interest in a hurry. Also nicotine is bad for you, we hear no end of that but pot is supposed to be good for you in some ways, kind of a socially contradictory message no? (juggling so many topics here): Saty I'm sure that's the law on sexual harassment I'm just against subjectivism being the basis of any law. That is wrong and needs to change and will be changed until then we're just left with this quagmire of people's feelings.

    ReplyDelete
  24. "SUBJECTIVISM CANNOT BE THE BASIS OF THE LAW

    You're uncomfortable? well my boss makes me uncomfortable."

    Unfortunately, it is not that simple.

    While working part-time for a guy who had his office in his home's basement [and his wife puttering around upstairs in the kitchen], this guy put his hand on my shoulder as I was working on the pc. I said nothing, taking it as a harmless touch--unwelcomed, but harmless.

    Over the next two days, the hand on the shoulder became a hand rubbing my back--again, I said nothing, thinking I would be over reacting.

    But on the last day, when his hand found its way to my thigh, I KNEW the miscreant was nothing more than a predator. I jumped up, grabbed my coat, called him some name, told him I quit, and left.

    He called me the next day to find out why I hadn't shown up to work. I explained to him that he knew very well "why," and if he was confused about my quitting, I would be happy to come to his house and explain it to him and his wife.

    That guy made me uncomfortable.

    I guess in a libertarian world women should just quit their jobs instead of using the law to get these creeps to stop preying on them?

    But there is an endless supply of women who need jobs, so quitting isn't going to stop these predators' behaviors. Making them pay in $$$$$ or reputation should do the trick.

    I don't know what actually happened in Cain's case. But if more women come forward with the same stories, then that does say something about the guy's character.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Shaw what you described was plainly physical that it should be the basis of the law even in a libertarian world, so should quid pro quo but after that alot of it is SUBJECTIVE and again that is a poor basis for the Law.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Your ignorance of that which you speak Shaw should be fucking criminal. What fucking part of "Do as thou wilt shall be the whole of the law until you violate the rights of another." are you incapable of understanding. One has no right to lay their hands upon you.

    In fact we made a sign for a rally once that said, quite matter of factly, whoever lays his hands on me to govern me is a usurper and a tyrant and i declare them my enemy. Go read some fucking Rothbard and try again.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Satyavati devi dasi said...

    Alleged allegations?

    The issues were brought forth years ago, presumably investigated.


    The What Issues.

    What exactly was the inappropriate thing that he did?
    A suggestive remarks and inappropriate gesture? Compare that to the President of the United States aka " Hummer Man" getting a BJ in the Oval Office and he is still to this very day the Poster Boy of the Left..

    ReplyDelete
  28. Just as soon as the women, who are bound under a confidentiality agreement (apparently there was something that someone didn't want anyone to know, or there wouldn't have been a confidentiality agreement to begin with) can get a release to tell their story.

    Otherwise, we have to go on what we have: that allegations were made of sexual harassment that were taken seriously enough to warrant both confidentiality agreements and settlements.

    Now, I see you keep trying to compare right and left here. I'm not comparing right and left; I'm saying that every single candidate gets nailed on every single thing they've ever done in their entire lives while they're running.

    In the case of President Obama, allegations were made and proofs demanded that no previous president had ever had to endure, and despite debunking, continues to have to endure.

    Now, can you please explain to me the difference between the press nailing Perry on his hunting camp, the press nailing Bachmann on her farm subsidies and gay-curing husband, the press nailing Romney on his illegal immigrant employees, and the press nailing Cain on this sexual harassment suit?

    The point I have consistently tried to make here, which I hope you've just deliberately ignored rather than been too dense to see, is that ALL candidates undergo this kind of thing. There is NO difference between what's happening to Cain now and what happened to Perry, Romney, Bachmann, Santorum, etc.

    When it's time for the Democratic primaries those candidates who come forth are going to undergo the exact same thing.

    I'm not putting forth a partisan argument here. You seem to keep trying to make it one.

    Please don't forget I am neither Democrat nor Republican. I'm a Socialist, affiliated with one of the many Socialist groups (which are all different in their emphases, goals, and ways to get to them). I either agree with specific issues presented by the Republican and/or Democratic parties or I don't. I don't claim either as my own.

    So I'm not sure why you keep trying to make this partisan, unless you somehow feel that this kind of thing only happens to Republican candidates.

    Herman Cain himself is blaming this on his comrade-in-party Rick Perry, not the Left. I found that really interesting.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Z: I think there's an important distinction to be made here.

    The 'subjectivity' ends when the person tells the other person to stop.

    At that point, it doesn't really matter what you did. The person made it clear to you that it had to stop.

    When you make the conscious decision to continue on with a behavior that you have been informed makes the person uncomfortable, there's no more subjectivity there.

    And that's why the law includes the provision that the person must be informed that the behavior is not acceptable and needs to stop. Because seriously, they might be just joking or not realize that it's inappropriate or makes the other person uncomfortable. That can happen, easily.

    But once you're told, then you're making a conscious decision to carry on, and that's the point at which it becomes harassment.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Actually, I think that in any kind of harassment case, the person has to be told that whatever behavior it is has to stop, and then when it continues after that it becomes harassment.

    This became important in my stalking thing. I had to make sure he was told to stop, and then when he didn't I went to the magistrate's.

    He pled (pleaded? pled sounds better) no contest.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Satyavati devi dasi said...
    Now, I see you keep trying to compare right and left here. I'm not comparing right and left; I'm saying that every single candidate gets nailed on every single thing they've ever done in their entire lives while they're running


    Just trying to straighten out the dingbats.


    Satyavati devi dasi said...
    Otherwise, we have to go on what we have: that allegations were made of sexual harassment that were taken seriously enough to warrant both confidentiality agreements and settlements.

    Don't you think that many of the allegations that were made of sexual harassment in the past were False?

    For example Tawana Brawley/Al Sharpton, the Kobe Bryant rape case, the Duke University suspended the lacrosse team. So lets not take allegations as being factual.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Mal,

    Perhaps they were true, perhaps false. What we do unequivocally know is that at the time, the allegations were taken seriously enough that not only was a settlement paid, the women involved were required to sign confidentiality agreements to prevent them from discussing it in the future.

    I would imagine that a group as large (and presumably well-funded) as the National Restaurant Association did not simply pay these women off at face value. I would venture to say they hired lawyers and did a thorough investigation of their own. I would further venture that if their investigation determined that the allegations were strictly false, no settlements would have been paid out and certainly no confidentiality agreements would have been signed.

    Until those confidentiality agreements are suspended and the women involved can talk about it, we're not going to know what happened. But we can surmise that given the response of the NRA to those allegations, that it certainly warranted some hush-hush money.


    Like the Magic 8 Ball says: 'All Signs Point To Yes."

    ReplyDelete
  33. Truth is stranger than fiction. LMAO

    Herman Cain’s Settlement Is Dated 9/99

    http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/11/herman-cains-settlement-is-dated-999.php

    ReplyDelete
  34. dear soapster,

    My goodness. You're such an angry little man.

    You might try meditation or yoga, it really helps those whose rage overtakes them when all we're doing is having a discussion.

    You have a habit of trying to win every argument with a sledge hammer.

    Try to handle your emotions to fit the situation.

    This is nothing more than a blog comment section, not Act V of King Lear.

    ReplyDelete
  35. It's Friday. I'm having fun.

    And really I'm not that little. I'm 5'11".

    Still, you need to learn a thing or two about libertarianism.

    Case you didn't get the memo, we're the non-interventionists. Force isn't our bag.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Wow... reading this discussion, I feel like such a moderate.

    LOLOLOL

    ReplyDelete
  37. I'm 5'7" so you've got 4" over me.

    Still in my 3" heels, it could be a pretty good head-to-almost head.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Z: this whole Madoff thing has me asking who cares. He is actually around the corner and about two miles down Old 75 from where I work (the town of Butner, NC consists mainly of state/federal facilities including the Fed prison and the Fed prison hospital-I applied there and ugh, I couldn't deal with the environment).

    Are his kids pertinent to anyone? I guess we could ask this about the vast majority of what counts for news these days. Is Kim Kardashian really pertinent? Her husband's making a public pathetic-ness of himself, but the whole story, do we really care?

    Is Lindsay Lohan's newest legal f-up important in the daily course of my life?

    So I guess in reality this is what passes for news. And so why is this? You could get all conspiratorial and say it's the way we're distracted as a society from the things that matter: how many weeks was OWS going on before it got so big the media couldn't ignore it? All this pop culture stuff, the American Idol crap, the Survivor crap, Justin Beiber: baby daddy? is just a way to keep us from the serious business. What's sad, though, the really sad part, is that people are so willingly eating it up, not asking for the real stories, not even really concerned about the big stuff, the important stuff that's going to seriously impact their lives. They're too interested in the trivial, meaningless shit-the things it doesn't take work to think about, the things that aren't serious. Maybe this is because they need an escape from the very real problems they deal with every day; but in the long run it's going to hurt them.

    I despise pop culture.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Saty I agree and if you check what's trending on a daily basis it's mainly celebrities and not even good ones at that. Yeah Shaw how sharper than a serpent's tooth it is to get on the soapster's bad side. Getting back to Cain and harassment let's say my workplace discussions offend others and I'm told to stop WELL WHAT ABOUT MY FREEDOM OF SPEECH?!?

    ReplyDelete
  40. That wouldn't be harassment. You gotta look up the legal definitions of these things. It's real titchy.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Well actually Satyavati some workplaces I've been in have it posted that among other things you cannot engage in "continuous offensive talk about sex" and other variations and that falls into the old free speech category least as I see it:)

    ReplyDelete
  42. You could also argue that yelling Fire in a theater is free speech...

    ReplyDelete
  43. You know as many times as people bring up the classic line "shouting fire in a crowded theater" I wonder how many times someone's actually done this. Perhaps we're in need of a new metaphor.

    ReplyDelete