A fourth defendant is expected to plead guilty today in the gruesome case involving the botched abortion deaths and the abortion-infanticides of dozens of unborn children that took place at the abortion facility run by Kermit Gosnell.
I was alarmed to learn today--from a TN Democratic Party GOTV-for-Senate-District-6 email, that Republicans in Tennessee want to end public education:
Wining (sic) this deeply red district would be a political shocker and could deal a strong blow to Republicans’ extreme plan to end public education and hand over our democracy to lobbyists and special interests.
Thankfully all the Left's lobbyists and special interests--Labor Unions like the NEA come to mind, will fight tooth and nail to thwart the GOP's extreme plan . . .
Watching this video, I am reminded of how much I admire(d) Clarence Thomas (watch until the end)
That being said, I like Cain, but regrettably, his situation seems different than the attacks on Clarence Thomas. There seems to be more to the allegations against Cain, to include actual complaints filed, actual legal settlements, third-party witnesses, etc. Frankly, where there's this much smoke . . .
However, I think the ugliest thing about "sexual harassment" is that it is so subjective and so patronizing to females, and it is so hypocritical for Democrats. Libs, who foster sexualization of every part of our culture (and thereby encourage women to assert sexual leverage) and who pooh-pooh traditional values and who try to pretend that there is no difference between men and women act like flirting or telling a dirty joke is a Federal offense (at least when Republicans do it). DEMS IGNORED A SITTING PRESIDENT HAVING SEX WITH AN UNPAID INTERN, FOR HEAVEN'S SAKE . . . and now they're pursuing this story like it is some big deal?
While it bothers me to think that Cain might have been unfaithful to his wife and have violated the teachings of his faith, I think that we shouldn't let the Liberal media establishment frame this debate and drive this story.
After viewing the entire Rick Perry "drunk" speech, I have a couple of observations: 1) I do not think that Perry is drunk or high or anything . . . he may be a little tired or exhausted, I guess. 2) I do think that Perry is patronizing in the speech. A little bit like the "brother" comment in reference to Herman Cain in a previous debate, or Hillary Clinton's puttin' on an accent. 3) Although such patronizing can be related to racism or prejudice, I'd say it is more a result of trying to connect with an audience with whom the speaker isn't comfortable.
