Here were my top five favorite political cartoons for the week, starting with a Bill Clinton trifecta, conjuring memories of an era – and a president – I’d like to forget.
by Chip Bok at GoComics.com…
by Dana Summers at Townhall.com…
by Dials at Toby Toons…
by Steve Kelley at GoComics.com…
by Nate Beeler at Townhall.com (and it’s true, btw)…
Violations will be deleted and you may be banned.
Threats will be immediately reported to authorities.
Following these rules will make everyone's experience visiting JillStanek.com better.
Our volunteer moderators make prudent judgment calls to provide an open forum to discuss these issues. They reserve the right to remove any comment for any reason. Jill's decisions on such moderations are final.
Go to gravatar.com to create your avatar.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Let’s see. Cain’s accusers never came forward and we still don’t know specifically what it is the man is alleged to have done. The lame scream media goes beserk.
Bill Clinton’s accusers come forward, accusing him of everything from exposing himself to rape, and the lame scream media attacks the accusers!
Double standard? NAH!!
I had to laugh that PMSNBC’s Chris Matthews, after his sanctimonious spiel about the alleged sexual harassment allegations against Cain, then turned his attention to his new book praising John Kennedy! Excuse me Mr. Tingle up you leg, but your hero Kennedy was a notorious womanizer.
Double standard? NAH!!
Shouldn’t the guy holding the “capitalism is evil” sign while demanding his royalties be a lot heavier, more slovenly, and wearing a baseball cap?
Mary – you might know more on this than me – aren’t the accusers bound by a settlement? Could Cain and the NRA simply say that the folks can come forward without threat of litigation?
Thankfully, I don’t know much about cases like this!
I do think that you are wearing conservative colored glasses though – Clinton got hammered on his wrong-doings for a long time
Furthermore, there’s a heck of a lot of folks on the right saying some pretty interesting things on Cain:
John Derbyshire (The National Review Online, 11/2/11):
“Is there anyone who thinks sexual harassment is a real thing? Is there anyone who doesn’t know it’s all a lawyers’ ramp, like ‘racial discrimination’? You pay a girl a compliment nowadays, she runs off and gets lawyered up. Is this any way to live?”
EGV,
From what I understand they do not want to come forward. Also, they can come forward if they want to. EGV, don’t you think it only fair that someone accusing you must come forward and present evidence before trashing your reputation? Without this, should anyone be accusing you? After all, the women accusing Clinton came forward.
Clinton got hammered? Come on EGV, even you have to admit the feminists fell all over themselves defending him and explaining their double standard treatment of Clarence Thomas and Clinton.. The media referred to Clinton as “propositioning” Paula Jones. You remember her, the bimbo and trailer trash. If it was you EGV, you’d be a “flasher”. Clinton was accused of rape with little more than a nod from the media. Kathleen Willey accused Clinton of groping her, and the media went out of their way to portray her as a stalker and psycho.
Feminist writer Ellen Goodman wrote an article as to how Clinton wasn’t guilty of sexual harassment or anything illegal when he flashed Jones. Oh sure, it wasn’t very nice, but illegal? Nahhh. That sent a couple of police officers I knew into fits of laughter.
Goodman’s rationale was that a man can’t know a woman objects to advances unless he makes them. Thus poor Bill couldn’t possibly know Jones wouldn’t want to be flashed until after he dropped his drawers. So, according to the feminists EGV, you can go grab a woman’s backside and claim you had no idea she might not like it unless she tells you so.
Women still fawn over this degenerate. I am ashamed to admit my professional organization had him for a keynote speaker. I didn’t realize we had been reduced to honoring sex offenders.
I have conservative glasses EGV? You are wearing a blindfold.
Read into it a bit more – seems like there are two issues:
– The settlement came with a signed confidentiality agreement.
– The accuser doesn’t want to become like “Anita Hill”
I don’t know much about the first and if the documents can simply become unsealed, but I do understand the second – people want to move on in life.
On Clinton and Cain – both sides had folks who supported the person that was with their party, both sides had folks who attacked the accuser, and both sides got attacked from folks within their own party and from folks on the other side. Turn off Fox for a few minutes a day – it would be good for you! :-)
EGV,
There are 3 accusers, at least last I heard. Also, the confidentiality clause could be waived and I understand there were “attempts” to do so. If these women want to come forward desperately enough they can. Cain deserves the benefit of the doubt, as would you or I, were we anonymously accused.
Why wouldn’t she want to be another “Anita Hill”? She became a feminist icon. I would be more concerned about being another Paul Jones or Kathleen Willey, who were excoriated by the media,feminists, and Clinton toadies like James Carville.
I saw all this in the lame scream media EGV, not Fox. It involved little more than watching national news and reading the local “news” rag. For the most part I don’t even watch Fox. By any standard Clinton was, and still is, given a free pass, largely by a hugely sympathetic media and loyal feminists.
I’ll give my theory on this, and I stress only a theory, and that is that Cain was never taken seriously as a candidate by either party. Neither the ruling class establishment Republicans or Democrats(who I am convinced spend all their time in smoke filled rooms slapping each other on the back and laughing at the American people) want him and I see this as their first attempt at him.
Why wouldn’t she want to be another Anita Hill? Not many people want to see their lives drug through the press and congress.
Could you link to an article in regards to the attempts to waive them? Who wants all the materials to go forward?
I strongly considered myself a Republican at the time – Clinton was never given a free pass, though I do think that a large chunk of the American people saw it as separate from any type of Presidential issue – it wasn’t about covering up anything war related or money under the table…it took on a soap opera type thing because it was about sex.
On Cain – I agree to a certain extent that the Dems and GOP folks like the power elite circle that they have. I truly believe though that Cain did something stupid, and it came forward when it did because it was the first time he looked legitimate enough to look at his record.
I think you guys get Romney – and I think he has a pretty decent shot at Obama depending on how he toes the line during the election.
Egv,
Google “cain accusers attempt to waive confidentiality agreement”.
Supposedly one of the women does not want to waive the confidentiality agreement.
Whether or not the man did “something stupid” can never be known until his accusers come forward and present their case.
Clinton was found guilty of perjury, obstruction of justice, and impeached, so this was hardly some soap opera. All the while he had a hugely sympathetic media and feminist silence to support him. Heck, it was even OK for him to flash Paula since he had no way of knowing Paula wouldn’t like it.
OK, I will give you this. He did have to go on “vacation” with Hillary right after the scandal broke, which must have been the equivalent of an eternity in hell.
But he did seek the spiritual advise of Rev.Jesse Jackson, who had his pregnant mistress in tow when “advising” Clinton in the White House. You can’t make this stuff up.
Please, Anita Hill became a liberal feminist icon. Democrat women senators fawned over her. Clinton accusers got no such treatment.
The point is these women came forward. Until Cain’s accusers do the same, I will assume the man innocent, as I would you EGV under the same circumstances.
We will see how it all plays out – Cain did something or else they wouldn’t have made a pay out and had agreements signed – but if people want to keep it private, we’ll never know.
Quite frankly, I don’t think that makes a ton of difference on him being Presidential or not (unless he did something more major, which is unlikely since there’s no criminal aspect to it) – I think his downfall is going to be that he hasn’t been a long time part of the establishment (which you eluded to earlier). I think he’s definitely unpolished at times (like his bizarre abortion statements), but I think in general, it will be the lack of money and connections that squeeze him out.
Ex-GOP,
It will come as no surprise that I totally agree with Mary’s comments. There is absolutely no equivalency of Clinton and Cain.
First of all, please try to avoid using “Clinton” and “under the table” in the same sentence.
The press coverage of that scandal started out as “Boy, this looks bad.” and ended decididly anti-impeachment. But it was really about a President using illegal means to win a lawsuit. It didn’t matter whether it started about sexual harrassment or a dispute between neighbors over landscaping
We know virtually nothing of this Cain “scandal”. For all we know he used the word “hon” a lot, like they do down South. I’ve heard it pointed out that he has a tendency to lick his lips quite a bit.
Were these former accusers white? Were they uncomfortable working for a black man for the first time? Unless they have unimpeachable witnesses, they may not want to gamble on paid interviews vs. being sued themselves and held up to scorn.
Anita Hill has been in the news recently, promoting her second book. She’s been the toast of all the feminist media people, being applauded at a speech shown on C-SPAN.
She chose to be the patron saint of victims. I’ll never forget her testimony. Even if what she said was true, they were merely throwaway off-hand musings or a joke. And she had this stricken look on her face as if she were describing the deeds of the Marquis de Sade.
All that being said, I think Cain will have to get the full story out. He can’t just say “We’re moving on. End of story” He’s being shot by flaming arrows, and his hair is on fire. We can’t ignore it now.
We will see how it all plays out – Cain did something or else they wouldn’t have made a pay out and had agreements signed – but if people want to keep it private, we’ll never know.
What utter nonsense! People pay settlements and sign agreements to avoid the hassle and expense of court cases all the time. Without more facts, all the settlement indicates is that Cain’s legal advisers didn’t want to go to court. Possibly they felt a court case would be damning, possibly they thought it was more money than it was worth proving his innocence. Possibly there was some third option that none of us have thought of. Unless you have some inside information you’re sitting on, you don’t know any more than I or anyone else here.
Sure Alice – I can’t deny that there was a chance that he did absolutely nothing, but the NRA was so concerned about a bigger issue and judgment in the event that he did absolutely nothing that they put together a settlement and had confidentiality agreements signed so that the people talked about the absolutely nothing event that absolutely didn’t happen.
Yes, I can’t deny that he might have done absolutely nothing based on that info.
Hans -
I agree with your second comment – the whole story will need to come out if Cain hangs in this for any length of time.
On the Anita Hill thing – not everyone loves the spotlight. I know many, many women, including my wife, who if they went through an uncomfortable situation at work, and that person became a high-up political figure – they wouldn’t want to have it run through the press and congress. Maybe you put money and celebrity above all – I don’t – and I believe a lot of people wouldn’t want the life that Anita Hill has had.
Well Mary, we’ve got an accuser with a name and face now!
By the end of the week, maybe we’ll have a couple more. What are we up to now – 4?
Another comparison would be between the media treatment of John Edwards versus Herman Cain. In both of these instances MSM outlets became aware of a possible scandal but approached them in entirely different ways. By most reports the MSM knew something of Edwards and did not dig into it further or they simply spiked the story. It took a scandal tabloid to break the news. On the other hand from the beginning Cain was subjected to an onslaught. The very first reports from Politico were sketchy at best, but that did not stop the rest of the MSM from piling on. Facts, veracity, validity??? Heck no, we smell blood on this so why bother?
Now we learn that number 4 has come forward. The story on this one does invite comparisons to the left’s hero; i.e. the liberal media go to elder statesman Bill Clinton. Billy boy was fond of using force. Though the actions alleged by this latest accuser are explicit, we have not heard Cain’s side. Nevertheless when she said to stop, Cain did. “Stop” was not in Billy boy’s vocabulary, or if it was he thought it meant something else. In an attempt to destroy these accusers the Clinton team pulled out all of the stops, and in the wake were left some wounded women. In the final act of leftist hypocrisy the normally outraged feminists stood by silently.
Jerry – I certainly can’t comment on Clinton, Edwards, and Cain and the media treatment. Quite frankly, there’s hundreds of places somebody can get their news from – so bias is going to be formed from the four or five places a person visits. If there’s a study, that would be great to see. Otherwise, all we’re doing is speculating, which won’t get us far.
On Cain, I don’t think it matters in regards to his offenses vs anyone else. The question is, to the GOP voters, many who are Christian, is it going to be acceptable to nominate a guy who “might” have tried to have an affair, or multiple affairs with women. I’m sure he’ll lose some votes if any of it is true – I’m guessing a lot of votes. Not as bad as Clinton – sure – but again, if voters have multiple options and are trying to pick somebody as a potential President, how could it not factor in?
I mean, as a Christian, wouldn’t you have some issues with it (if it was true?). I mean, sure, he stopped when asked. I’m a married man – I wouldn’t do what he did in the first place – much easier to simply avoid trying to put the moves on somebody!
EGV 6:14PM
LOL. Clinton had all kinds of accusers and that didn’t mean squat. Come on EGV, if she accused Bill Clinton he’d be getting slaps on the back, and the media and public wouldn’t care less. My whole issue is with the appalling media double standard.
An accuser, yes. Proof positive, no. If she presents proof or Cain admits wrongdoing, then my allegiance to Cain quickly shifts. Unlike liberal Democrats, I’m not willing to overlook sexual abuse to promote a political cause. I find Gloria Allred’s involvement curious. Just how does one contact Gloria Allred and why does she always show up at these events? The same Gloria Allred who tried to portray one of Tiger Woods porn star bed partners as some kind of “victim” of Tiger’s wiles. Judge Janine made Gloria look like the moron she was.
BTW, I have often had great respect for the stands Allred has often taken, i.e. her protection of the OJ Simpson children, but situations like this make her look like a media whore.
The other accusers are anonymous and lacking in any detail, which makes them totally irrelevant at best.
BTW EGV, I would argue just as vigorously in your defense were similar unproved accusations made against you that you denied.
Hi Jerry 9:37PM
Good points. Didn’t feminists argue that Billy boy didn’t commit any crime when he dropped his drawers to Paula Jones since he stopped when she told him no? I mean, how is a man supposed to know a woman doesn’t want to be flashed? Oh excuse me, he “propositioned” Jones, according to the MSM. Well even an ugly old broad like me has gotten a few proposititions, and they never involved anyone’s pants dropping.
Sooooo, since Cain is alleged to have stopped when told no, what’s the problem?
Jerry, if Hillary were elected president, would it be The President and First Flasher?
Wow, Ex-RINO, your weak-mindedness is showing.
Perhaps the NRA attempted to hurry and get everything settled themselves rather than having a candidate that they would like to see win bogged down talking about phoney accusations that matter jack-squat to the election instead of things like real issues that really will and should affect the outcome of the election?
But you go ahead and take the MSM/political establishment bait and muse all you like about Cain’s supposed misdeeds. It’s not as if you’re going to vote for him, anyway. I mean, he won’t even give you free stuff!
x – that middle middle paragraph is so bizarre I need some clarification.
So are you saying the NRA, back in the late 90’s, was so excited to have Cain run for President in a dozen years, that they settled the issue (that didn’t exist) quietly to move on? Is that your assertion?
I actually have some stock, so Cain would give me less taxes with 0 percent capital gains.
Mary – I’ll remember this conversation next time a Democrat is accused of something – I’m sure your judgement will be equally reserved in that case.
Admit it, if you swapped Cain’s name with Obama, you folks would be lit up with excitement.
I know naff-all about Cain on a personal level but he seems quite a nice chap.
I wouldn’t vote for him in a fit of course. And he think he’s highly over-rated all round.
But something about this whole thing doesn’t smell right. Especially the emergence of Sharon Bialek. I may well be wrong but the whole thing just doesn’t gel.
What are the Koch brothers up to? We all know how they operate in the background.
Could the driver be that Cain isn’t white? We’ve seen how obama has been treated, only with more vitriol because he’s also a democrat.
Mary: Yes that is exactly what the feminists argued.
Ha! The “First Flasher” would be it. It was truly frightening how much Clinton got away with and how the libs protected him.
Ex: I am sure the primary voters will be wondering when the next allegations will be coming. That single fact will cool support for Cain. We cannot have a late October bombshell and doubts have been firmly planted.
Cain was never going to beat out Romney for the nomination anyway.