I would not vote for Governor Haleey Barbur as dogcatcher of Mt. Ida, Arkansas (which, as I have said before, is not meant as any kind of apsersion on Mt. Ida, the small Arkansas town where I spent a hayyy childhood through the sixth grade). This blog has previously pointed out that no one should pay any atention to Karl Rove, who I would also not vote for as dogcatcher of Mt. Ida, Arkansas. Herman Cain? His only connection with Mt. Ida is that I WOULD vote for him as dogcatcher of Mt. Ida, Arkansas, and have, in fact, endorsed him for PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. There is a reason Cain has a chance to be Preisdent, while Barbour did not even have enough support to run. Barbour is a grade A, dishonest, incompetent politician of the "old school". That description also fits Karl Rove. Cain, Barbour and Rove are connected because CNN used Barbour, and Barbour used CNN, to do a HIT PIECE on Herman Cain (Owhich dooms Barbour, forever, in my view). In the same breath, CNN CONNECTED Rove and Barbour, and I totally believe that connetion. this blot has DISOWNED Rove long ago. Yep. See my previous two articles on thiis subjet, where I told Republclicans (especailly Romney, who is TEETERING on the edge hre of an "I ACCUSE" blog artticle, as I come very close to promising to FIGHT against Romney all of the way through the general election) that I would hold Republicans RESPONSIBLE for bringing out the "long knives" againt Herman Cain. Barbour brought out a very long knife this Monday night, and Hell will freeze over before I will forgive him for it. Do't doubt me. I KNOW lhow these peole think, and the code words they use. Oh, you may have wondered why I did not call Barbour an "evil racist" (see previous articles on this subject). I would have, except that Barbour is governor of the Southern state that leftists love to hate. It was just too much of a steortype for me to call Barbour a "racist", even if he has joined the racists of the left in taking out the long knives against Herman Cain.
What can yoiu say about the propagandists at CNN? This is The Liar Network, and earns the title again every night. We are talkihng about that new babe on at 7 p.m. (5 in El Paso), replacing John King. But all CNN people are the same, with some only being a very smal degree worse than the others. How did this program beging? I already hinted. The babe anchor went into a COMMERICIAL for Haley Barbour and Karl Rove as the MONEY men who are gong to raise the money to defeat Barack Obama. Rove has a target of raising 240 million to defeat Obama, and CNN was careful to say that Barbour had raised over 100 million to support Republican goovernors, and was now joining forces with Rove. Now CNN HATES Barbour and Rove. So why the commercial. I know. Do you?
Were you thinking of voting for Herman Cain? Will you do so if yoiu think that Cain will NOT have the support of people who are out there raising, and contributing, the most money to defeat Barack Obama? The not-so-subtle mmessage CNN was trying to send is that the MONEY PEOPLE do not have any confidence in Herman Cain. Screw them. Yoiu heard me. Conservatives are often told, in effedt: "Screw you. You have nowhere else to go.". Well, Haley Barbour and Karl Rove havbe nowhere else to go. And I would be glad to tell them so to their face. Rove even flatly says that he is raising money to dEFEAT OBAMA, and that he will try to do so no matter who the Republican nominee is. However, you can take it to the bank: Barbour and Rove SUPPORT ROMNEY (over any conservative, anyway), even if they will not publicly sayso. The only question is (the fate of Mitt Romeny hanging by a thread--at least with me--on whether I ultimately decide that ROMNBEY is behind things llike the Barbour appearance on CNN)--the only question is whether Mitt Romney (see previous parenthesis) is BEHIND these attacks on Herman Cain (or at least is sending out the message that he wants such attakcks to be made by the establishment people he surely believes are in his corner).
you ask what Haley Barbour SAID? I am glad you asked lthat. It is a textbook example of how to take out the LONG KNIFE and try to ASSASSINATE someone. Did Barbour say that this kind of hysterical PROPAGANDA, based on SPECUALTION and CHARGES (of not much), is an example of LEF WING (including left wing media) hypocrisy and unfairness? Not a chance. Barbour was there to ASSASSINATE Herman Cain. What he did was say taht whether it would "derail" (the CNN word) teh Cain campaign depended on what "facts" came out, but that it was just not what Cain wanted to be talkig about at this time (the purpose of the unfair attack in the first place, which Barbour could have said, but did not). Barbour repreated mroe thatan once, as if ite were IMPORTAN, that the Cain campaign "could do without" this kind of publicity forcing Cain to talk about this. NO "defense" of Cain. Just a "long knife" in the BACK (Barbour being a Republican RACIST , in the CNN view, being the only reason he was on CNN to make the attack CNN would like to keep its fingerprints off as much as possible). What Barbour was saying was that this will HURT the Cain campaign, whehter it is true or not, and that he is going to withhold judgment on whether it shold totally END the Cain campaign until the "facts" are fully presented (never, by the way, as it is impossible to FULLY pshow the facts att his late date).
Rush Limbaugh had this right: For leftists, including the leftists of the mainstream media, the FACTS do not matter at all. Al aht mattters is the SERIOUSNESS of the "charege". And, as this cases shows, you can even distorth the CHARGE. The decade old "complaint" against Cain ws NOT really a charege of "secual harrassment" (except as a legal term of art). That did not keep the DISHOENST media, including the unfair and unbalanced network, from reporting that Cain had been "charged" with "sexaul harrassment" (having a very different connotation from the specific facts actually alleged), and must have been "tuillty" because money was paid to stop the charges from going forward. In the law (as a plaintiffs' tril lawyr for 35 years, I can tell you this as a FACT), this is known as a "sttlement" of a "doubtful and disputed claim" (the language in every release I ever saw). In the world of business, these settlements occur all of the time, because it makes BUSINESS sense to settle (and the lawyers are telling you that there is no telling what a jury might do, exctly bECAUSE "sexual harrassment", as a legal matter, is a very VAGUE concept depending mostly on the eye of the beholder). .
What did Haley Brrbour and CNN really say? You can summarize it this way: We don't know whether there is anything to this or not, but the mere rEORTING of SPECUALTION is hurting Herman Cain at a time when he cannot afford it. Furtehr, you have to worry about what else might come out, now that the unfair, leftist media are in a FEEDING RENZY (racists that they are) to "get " Herman Cain on "sexual misconduct". Even further, you can be sure that tghe MONEY will not foow in to Cain, or maybe even againt Obama if Cain looks like he will win the nomination, and WE are the "money men" who know about that."
I guarantee you I am right on this. Haley Barbour had the "long knnives" out for Cain, and I now have my "long knife" out for Barbour.
On the general issue, think of how EVIL it is to suggest, as Barbour almsot does, and meant to, that all the propagandists oft eh mainstream media have to do is bring up AnYTHING against a conservative like Cain, and it idoes not matter if it is true,. or unimportatn. All that matters is that the CHARGE ahs been made, and the media thinks it has a green light to not only SPECULATE aobut that "charge" (and distort it), but that they also have a green light to engage in a FEEDING FRENZY to "discredit" a BLACK MAN. "Racist" is too kind a word for theese evil people. Yes, lurking at the bottom of all of this is the REPUTATION (among racists, to whom CNN is pandering) taht black men are sexually "dangerous". If I were questioning Haley Barbour, I would ask him that: "Don't you think that this matter is getting so much play partly because of the old RACIST attitude that black men are DANGEROUS sexually?"
You think I am kidding? I am not. That is exactly the kind of questin the mainstream media--the worst hypocrites to ever walk teh Earth, on two legs or four--has asked with regard to EVERY criticism of black man Barack Obama. yet, with Barack Obama, thre usually ha been NO obvius connection with old racial stereotypes. Thus, the mainstream media, hypocrites, have said that it is RACIST to call Obama a "socialist". Say what? How is it one of the old reacial stereotypes that blakc men are SOCIALISTS. Never even occurred to me.
And letist Democrats, and the mainstream media, are out there DEFENDING Barack Obama against "unfair" attacks (including tryong to ignore, and then dismiss, Jeremiah Wright, who was certainly more important thatn this "rinky dink" "charrge" of "inappropriate conduct" in the workplace). Here Haley Barbur is throwing Cain to the wolves, while leftist Democrats are willing to scream "RACISM" every time a black Democrat is accused of AnYTHING. I know that conservatives are against "playing the race card", but you have to label UNFAIR attacks as UNFAIR, and note lthe HYPOCRISY here.
The Republican Party (CNN is obvious, and not worthy of concern) remains ON THE EDGE. The Republcian establishement, is unwillng to stand up for either principle OR conservatives . Well, I am unwilling to stand up for THEM, and am on the verge of walking totally away from the Republican Party FOREVER.
You may think I am am special case. Dont' be so sure of that. There are more people out there like me than you would think, and more every day (as the games become obvious, and even Newt Gingrich fees that it is an advantage to pint them out). . The MONEY MEN (lol--again, the peole that CNN HATES, except when supporting Barack Obama) had better watch out. They are on the verge of losing all control. And it si NOT "Occupy Wall Street" that is bringing us to the point of a "revolution" against the establishment. It is people like the Tea Party people, and like ME.
I repeat yesterday's endorsement: I endorse Herman Cain for President of the United Staates, both for the Republican nomination and in the general elecdtin (assuming he makes it there, where if he does not there is EXTREME doubt I will support the Repubilcan nominee, as I refused to support John McCain).
P.S. No proofreading or spell checking (bad eyesight).