Question for Bill Bennett

It is hypocritical in the extreme for those members of the media who didn’t take the charges and allegations against Bill Clinton seriously to be taking the allegations against Herman Cain that we now have as seriously as they are. Hypocritical is probably too soft a word, frankly

via Cain must confront sex harassment issue – CNN.com.

Is it also hypocritical for folks that slammed Clinton repeatedly for years to now attack Cain’s accuser?   Which is to say….why don’t you take this “Clinton got a pass” b.s. to Fox where they actually *thrive* on blatant hypocrisy, and consider it a virtue.

BTW, the Daily Show did a great job of this comparing and contrasting Fox’s coverage of the Tea Party with that of Occupy Wall Street.

For those under 30 or so, who don’t remember what the Clinton/Lewinsky thing was like…it was 24/7 media coverage for years.   It was what *made cable news a viable business*.

If Herman Cain wants to be taken seriously as a public advocate for anything, never mind running for the chief executive and commander in chief of the most powerful and important and blessed country in the world, he needs to give a full press conference dedicated exclusively to this issue and these allegations.

If, however, Cain is pulling a Palin and simply using a completely non-critical right-wing media to build a cult of personality and never intends to actual serve the public in any official capacity…you do exactly what he’s done, and play the victim card, the race card, the sexist card, and pretty much any card you can find.

Advertisements

After reading RPN, Republicans realize one politician’s “spending” is many thousands of people’s “jobs”

SPIN METER: GOP flips on job creation for defense http://m.cecilwhig.com/mobile/news/national_news/article_ec8924de-08b4-11e1-8970-001cc4c03286.html

Consider the latest argument from Republicans on the House Armed Services Committee as lawmakers stare down at least $450 billion in cuts from projected defense spending over the next 10 years. Running for re-election, Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon, R-Calif., said in February 2010 that the stimulus package did not create new jobs. In a statement about the economy and jobs now on his website, McKeon says “congressional Democrats and the administration continue to insist that we can spend our way out of this recession and create jobs, but the numbers just don’t add up.” But at a hearing last week, McKeon, now the committee chairman, argued against cuts to the military, saying, “We don’t spend money on defense to create jobs. But defense cuts are certainly a path to job loss, especially among our high-skilled workforces. There is no private sector alternative to compensate for the government’s investment.” He later added, “While cuts to the military might reduce federal spending, they harm national security and they definitely don’t lead to job growth.”

This is pretty standard b.s. rhetoric.   It’s getting a bit more attention now, as rational folks ask how firing a bunch of people in order to prolong tax cuts for high earners makes even a lick of sense during an employment crisis.

Note: Title reference.