On Tue, 29 Nov 2011 13:40:25 GMT, "Haywood Jablomie"
wrote:


On 28-Nov-2011, Wayne.B wrote:

On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 17:52:41 -0500, X ` Man
wrote:

Woman says she and Cain had 13-year affair

===

Does anyone really care? I certainly don't. You must be worried
about him however, posting all of this racist crap of yours. He may
not be qualified in other respects but at least he's not a hypocrite
like Newt.

Correct - no one cares - you'll be getting the current asshole for 4
additional years. It will be funny watching the violent demise, if you're
not IN what remains of the former United States. Don't fret - there's
nothing you can do, or are willing to do about it.

Says the mercantile whore who left and now points his finger at those
who remain. Bully for you.

In article ,
says...

On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 18:55:42 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 18:26:13 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 17:52:41 -0500, X ` Man
wrote:

Woman says she and Cain had 13-year affair

===

Does anyone really care? I certainly don't. You must be worried
about him however, posting all of this racist crap of yours. He may
not be qualified in other respects but at least he's not a hypocrite
like Newt.

What I take away from all of this is that everybody making excuses for
Herman Cain is also excusing Bill Clinton.

Personally, I don't think it means anything with respect to Cain or
Clinton. Cain seems to have a better handle on telling the media to
stuff it, which is the proper response. Clinton should have been smart
enough to have done the same.

However, the big thing is the incredibly obvious double standard
evolving between, your guy is immoral, wrong, and a threat to national
security, my guy, well, guys will be guys.

Who made an excuse? I've not seen it.

If Cain took advantage of his position to have sex with an employee, then he doesn't deserve the
presidency, in my opinion. The same opinion was held with regard to Clinton. With Clinton, it was a
fact. With Cain nothing has been close to proven.

Note, there are many, many liberal Christians who believe in 'family values'. Those beliefs don't
prevent ****ty behavior.

Look at Scotty's post, he's made the excuse already that it's a witch
hunt.

On Sun, 04 Dec 2011 20:26:00 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 29 Nov 2011 10:58:28 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 18:55:42 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 18:26:13 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 17:52:41 -0500, X ` Man
wrote:

Woman says she and Cain had 13-year affair

===

Does anyone really care? I certainly don't. You must be worried
about him however, posting all of this racist crap of yours. He may
not be qualified in other respects but at least he's not a hypocrite
like Newt.

What I take away from all of this is that everybody making excuses for
Herman Cain is also excusing Bill Clinton.

Personally, I don't think it means anything with respect to Cain or
Clinton. Cain seems to have a better handle on telling the media to
stuff it, which is the proper response. Clinton should have been smart
enough to have done the same.

However, the big thing is the incredibly obvious double standard
evolving between, your guy is immoral, wrong, and a threat to national
security, my guy, well, guys will be guys.

Who made an excuse? I've not seen it.

If Cain took advantage of his position to have sex with an employee, then he doesn't deserve the
presidency, in my opinion. The same opinion was held with regard to Clinton. With Clinton, it was a
fact. With Cain nothing has been close to proven.

Note, there are many, many liberal Christians who believe in 'family values'. Those beliefs don't
prevent ****ty behavior.

Who received advantages by having sex with Clinton? And what were the
perks received?

What bearing do your questions have on the post?

On 12/5/2011 3:24 PM, Black Cloud wrote:
On Sun, 04 Dec 2011 20:26:00 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 29 Nov 2011 10:58:28 -0500, John
wrote:

On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 18:55:42 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 18:26:13 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Mon, 28 Nov 2011 17:52:41 -0500, X ` Man
wrote:

Woman says she and Cain had 13-year affair

===

Does anyone really care? I certainly don't. You must be worried
about him however, posting all of this racist crap of yours. He may
not be qualified in other respects but at least he's not a hypocrite
like Newt.

What I take away from all of this is that everybody making excuses for
Herman Cain is also excusing Bill Clinton.

Personally, I don't think it means anything with respect to Cain or
Clinton. Cain seems to have a better handle on telling the media to
stuff it, which is the proper response. Clinton should have been smart
enough to have done the same.

However, the big thing is the incredibly obvious double standard
evolving between, your guy is immoral, wrong, and a threat to national
security, my guy, well, guys will be guys.

Who made an excuse? I've not seen it.

If Cain took advantage of his position to have sex with an employee, then he doesn't deserve the
presidency, in my opinion. The same opinion was held with regard to Clinton. With Clinton, it was a
fact. With Cain nothing has been close to proven.

Note, there are many, many liberal Christians who believe in 'family values'. Those beliefs don't
prevent ****ty behavior.

Who received advantages by having sex with Clinton? And what were the
perks received?

What bearing do your questions have on the post?

None except Plume is living vicariously through Monika

--
1-20-13 The end of an error