4th Woman to come forward in Cain Scandal

Unless that unpaid intern was not a consenting participant your comment is a completely worthless non-sequitur.

But whatcha gonna do? :dunno:

Unpaid Subordinates were Incapable of Consenting during the Clinton Years, not on in Law, but by the Word of Liberals including Clinton's #2, algore...

Military Officers under Clinton's Command were Prosecuted for what he himself did with Monica...

And to top if all off, he used his Power to try to Destroy her after someone else Ratted them out.

Classy guy, he wasn't.

True Story. :thup:

:)

peace...

Worthless non-sequitur it is. :thup:

Of course you are the king of those, so it's hardly surprising.

But whatcha gonna do? :dunno:

That's not a non sequitur. Not even in the comedic sense mani. IT does follow.

Regardless if you use the term (Non sequitur) incorrectly and disagree.
 
Nah, you're right...I should have compared Cain to Mother Teresa...

Or pretended, as you are doing, that this attack isn't simply the way the Left expresses fear of an opponent.

You shouldn't cry about Liberals deflecting when Clinton was accused........


if you're going to turn around and deflect when Cain is accused.

Yeah, but Clinton was caught.
If Cain's been caught, they've missed it over at MSNBC. All we have are a bunch of paid Liberal operatives "alleging" something.

Clinton was not caught for sexual harassment, which is illegal.

He was caught having a consensual sex, a perfectly legal event. Surely even the small-minded can see the difference between legal behavior and illegal behavior....right?
 

The comparison is a deflection.
Unless of course the point of the comparison was to exonerate Cain for any sexual harassment he may be guilty of having committed.

No it isn't. It's a comparison and a good one imo.

You just want to stir up fights because that's really all you have.

Sad, that...

It's a shitty comparison unless you want to equate sexual harassment with consensual sex.

Maybe you do. :dunno:

It's not a shitty comparison because what Clinton was doing was not consensual due to his power of office.

D'oh

Your misuse of Non sequitur notwithstanding mani....
 
After you've run around here for a week calling everyone that thinks he's guilty a racist.

:lol:

Ravi - everytime someone says something negative about Obama - they're labeled a racist. You are familiar with the tactic, I am sure.
To illustrate how idiotic that concept is, the same is being applied to those who rail against Cain.
Idiotic isn't it.
It's a message board too Rav - smile.
Ah, so you use blacks as tools.

That's kind of sad. Seriously.

Ah - no, I don't.
I said it's idiotic that one should be labeled a racist because they say something negative about Obama, Cain, or any other minority.
 
Unpaid Subordinates were Incapable of Consenting during the Clinton Years, not on in Law, but by the Word of Liberals including Clinton's #2, algore...

Military Officers under Clinton's Command were Prosecuted for what he himself did with Monica...

And to top if all off, he used his Power to try to Destroy her after someone else Ratted them out.

Classy guy, he wasn't.

True Story. :thup:

:)

peace...

Worthless non-sequitur it is. :thup:

Of course you are the king of those, so it's hardly surprising.

But whatcha gonna do? :dunno:

That's not a non sequitur. Not even in the comedic sense mani. IT does follow.

Regardless if you use the term (Non sequitur) incorrectly and disagree.

Yes it is. Your ignorance to the fact changes nothing.

consensual sex =/= sexual harassment no matter how much you, politicaltwat and dopey insist that they are the same.

But whatcha gonna do? :dunno:
 
Ravi - everytime someone says something negative about Obama - they're labeled a racist. You are familiar with the tactic, I am sure.
To illustrate how idiotic that concept is, the same is being applied to those who rail against Cain.
Idiotic isn't it.
It's a message board too Rav - smile.
Ah, so you use blacks as tools.

That's kind of sad. Seriously.

Ah - no, I don't.
I said it's idiotic that one should be labeled a racist because they say something negative about Obama, Cain, or any other minority.
I agree with that. But you have been running around all week calling people racists because they believe Cain is guilty.

So if you don't really mean that they ARE racists, you are using race as a tool.

And it certainly isn't just you that has been guilty of this lately.
 
Hey Ravi - if Cain is guilty of sexual harrassment, he's got no business running for office. I don't care what color he is.

After you've run around here for a week calling everyone that thinks he's guilty a racist.

:lol:

Ravi - everytime someone says something negative about Obama - they're labeled a racist. .

Classic! Talk about building up a strawman and burning it down. it is certainly not true that every negative comment about Obama is met with a charge of racism. But if it helps you sleep at night....
 
Clinton was not caught for sexual harassment, which is illegal.

He was caught having a consensual sex, a perfectly legal event. Surely even the small-minded can see the difference between legal behavior and illegal behavior....right?

Apparently partisan blinders prevent people from seeing the obvious, even when it smacks them upside their underdeveloped noggin.
 
You shouldn't cry about Liberals deflecting when Clinton was accused........


if you're going to turn around and deflect when Cain is accused.

Yeah, but Clinton was caught.
If Cain's been caught, they've missed it over at MSNBC. All we have are a bunch of paid Liberal operatives "alleging" something.

Clinton was not caught for sexual harassment, which is illegal.

He was caught having a consensual sex, a perfectly legal event. Surely even the small-minded can see the difference between legal behavior and illegal behavior....right?

How do you "Get Caught" doing something that's legal? You mean, like a cop pulling over someone for driving the speed limit?
 
No it isn't. It's a comparison and a good one imo.

You just want to stir up fights because that's really all you have.

Sad, that...

It's a shitty comparison unless you want to equate sexual harassment with consensual sex.

Maybe you do. :dunno:

It's not a shitty comparison because what Clinton was doing was not consensual due to his power of office.
No, it was consensual due to the fact that the parties involved agreed it was consensual. hence no charges.
 
After you've run around here for a week calling everyone that thinks he's guilty a racist.

:lol:

Ravi - everytime someone says something negative about Obama - they're labeled a racist. .

Classic! Talk about building up a strawman and burning it down. it is certainly not true that every negative comment about Obama is met with a charge of racism. But if it helps you sleep at night....

Yeah - sure.
 
Yeah, but Clinton was caught.
If Cain's been caught, they've missed it over at MSNBC. All we have are a bunch of paid Liberal operatives "alleging" something.

Clinton was not caught for sexual harassment, which is illegal.

He was caught having a consensual sex, a perfectly legal event. Surely even the small-minded can see the difference between legal behavior and illegal behavior....right?

How do you "Get Caught" doing something that's legal? You mean, like a cop pulling over someone for driving the speed limit?
Nah, more like getting caught picking your nose.
 
Yeah, but Clinton was caught.
If Cain's been caught, they've missed it over at MSNBC. All we have are a bunch of paid Liberal operatives "alleging" something.

Clinton was not caught for sexual harassment, which is illegal.

He was caught having a consensual sex, a perfectly legal event. Surely even the small-minded can see the difference between legal behavior and illegal behavior....right?

How do you "Get Caught" doing something that's legal? You mean, like a cop pulling over someone for driving the speed limit?

yes, just like that! Clinton's trist was perfectly legal. Morally corrupt, but legal.

Sexual harassment is not legal.
 
It's a shitty comparison unless you want to equate sexual harassment with consensual sex.

Maybe you do. :dunno:

It's not a shitty comparison because what Clinton was doing was not consensual due to his power of office.
No, it was consensual due to the fact that the parties involved agreed it was consensual. hence no charges.

Well since there are no charges against Cain - thanks for concurring he's off the hook too.
 
Clinton was not caught for sexual harassment, which is illegal.

He was caught having a consensual sex, a perfectly legal event. Surely even the small-minded can see the difference between legal behavior and illegal behavior....right?

How do you "Get Caught" doing something that's legal? You mean, like a cop pulling over someone for driving the speed limit?

yes, just like that! Clinton's trist was perfectly legal. Morally corrupt, but legal.

Sexual harassment is not legal.

You obviously don't have a career in HR right?
 
It's not a shitty comparison because what Clinton was doing was not consensual due to his power of office.
No, it was consensual due to the fact that the parties involved agreed it was consensual. hence no charges.

Well since there are no charges against Cain - thanks for concurring he's off the hook too.

We don't know what the charges against Cain were. Those charges are in a sealed agreement.
 
Clinton was not caught for sexual harassment, which is illegal.

He was caught having a consensual sex, a perfectly legal event. Surely even the small-minded can see the difference between legal behavior and illegal behavior....right?

How do you "Get Caught" doing something that's legal? You mean, like a cop pulling over someone for driving the speed limit?
Nah, more like getting caught picking your nose.

Or fucking a black college basketball player while you're employed as a sports anchor. :lol:
 

Forum List

Back
Top