Is he drunk or stupid?

---

What’s wrong with Rick? Bizarre video shows a ‘rambling, incoherent’ Governor Perry

Rick Perry has got people talking – but for all the wrong reasons.

The GOP presidential candidate gave a speech in Manchester, New Hampshire, on Friday night which has prompted concerns from his fans and criticism from his opponents.

In it, he appears to be unusually expressive, rambling and sometimes even incoherent.

His tone and pitch verge from the manic to the sombre and subdued as he puts on strange voices and waves his arms in the air.

---

At least he seemed more alert than he did during the last debate.

---

That’s it?

---

Cain details gesture that led to sex accusation

Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain for the first time has offered a detailed recollection of what led an employee of the National Restaurant Association to lodge a sexual harassment charge against him when he was CEO of the organization.

Cain spoke in response to detailed questioning from Fox News’ Greta van Susteren, who led Cain through the facts of the case in an extended interview. That interview was taped to be shown on Fox Monday night.

Cain told van Susteren that he remembered one woman who was a writer in the Association’s communications department. “I can’t even remember her name, but I do remember the formal allegation she made in terms of sexual harassment,” Cain said. “I turned it over to my general counsel and one of the ladies that worked for me, the woman in charge of human resources. They did investigate…and it was found to be baseless.”

Van Susteren asked Cain how often he saw the woman. “I might see her in the office because her office was on the same floor as my office,” Cain said. Van Susteren asked whether the woman traveled with Cain, who spent a lot of time on the road speaking to restaurant associations around the country. “No, never,” Cain said.

Cain said the woman was “younger than I was,” but he could not recall her age. Pressed, he said, “It would have had to have been late 30s, early 40s.”

Van Susteren asked what Cain did that led to the accusation. There were reportedly more than one accusations in the complaint, but Cain said he recalled just one incident. “She was in my office one day, and I made a gesture saying — and I was standing close to her — and I made a gesture saying you are the same height as my wife. And I brought my hand up to my chin saying, ‘My wife comes up to my chin.’” At that point, Cain gestured with his flattened palm near his chin. “And that was put in there [the complaint] as something that made her uncomfortable,” Cain said, “something that was in the sexual harassment charge.”

Van Susteren asked whether the woman complained at the time. “I can’t recall any comment that she made, positive or negative.”

Cain also offered new information about the settlement of the case. Politico, which broke the sexual harassment allegation story, said that the woman received a money settlement “in the five-figure range.” When van Susteren asked about that, Cain said, “My general counsel said this started out where she and her lawyer were demanding a huge financial settlement…I don’t remember a number…But then he said because there was no basis for this, we ended up settling for what would have been a termination settlement.” When van Susteren asked how much money was involved, Cain said. “Maybe three months’ salary. I don’t remember. It might have been two months. I do remember my general counsel saying we didn’t pay all of the money they demanded.”

As for reports that a second woman also complained about his behavior, Cain said, “I am totally unaware as to any formal charges coming from this other person.” Cain said he was told the woman’s name by reporters at Politico. “I have no knowledge that she made a formal complaint,” Cain said.

---

If this is true it certainly explains why Politico was so vague with their allegations – specificity would have ruined their story.

I’m not going to watch FOX to see the interview, I’ll wait to read the transcript tomorrow.

BTW – Here’s Herman and his wife:

---

---

ZOMG – Dogwhistling!!!

---

Herman Cain Just Broke Into Song At The National Press Club

Herman Cain may be the only presidential candidate in history to actually benefit from a sex scandal.

Just hours after Politico broke a story about accusations of sexual harassment against Cain, the former Godfather’s Pizza CEO killed it during a luncheon speech at the National Press Club. And then to top it all off, he SANG.

After very little prompting to reprise his “Imagine There’s No Pizza” performance at the Omaha Press Club, Cain launched into a surprisingly beautiful rendition of the hymn “He Looked Beyond My Faults” — an interesting choice given the sex scandal.

---

Any bets on how long before someone claims he was dogwhistling to the white racists that “he knows his place” by singing an old negro spiritual?

Seriously though, he was dogwhistling – to black Americans. He was reminding the black community that he is one of them. If he can win over a big chunk of their votes he’s not just electable, he’s unbeatable. No other Republican candidate can do that.

I wonder how many hymns Barack Obama knows by heart?

---

Cain: “I was falsely accused”

---

Hot Air:

“I have never sexually harassed anyone, but yes, I was falsely accused while I was at the National Restaurant Association,” he said.

He added that he does not know that a settlement was paid out against the two complainants, and said “If more allegations come, I assure you that people will simply make them up.”

“The only other allegations will be trumped up allegations,” he said.

---

Simple and direct. If he’s telling the truth that should snuff out the fire. If he’s lying, get ready for the other shoe to drop.

---

Are Women Safe at Occupy Protests?

It’s a fair question to ask, considering the continuous reports of rape and sexual assault, as well as sexual harassment coming from the Occupy protests. And it’s a shame that women have to worry first about becoming crime victims when all they want to do is help make the world a better place. I’ve been worried about this angle from the very beginning, when the word on everyone’s lips was that Occupy Wall Street wanted to recreate Tahrir Square in America. I had to ask then, and it’s a more compelling question today: You mean the Tahrir Square where Lara Logan was raped?

And rapes and sexual assaults are happening, 12 by my latest count, with the movement barely six weeks old. That’s a pretty abysmal track record, and in the comparison wars between OWS and the Tea Party, a very bad mark. I don’t recall seeing any reports of sexual assault or rape coming from Tea Party protests. Why is this more liberalized movement more inclined to perpetrate these sorts of crimes?

I can’t answer that question, though I have my own ideas. I haven’t been to any big time Occupy protests, just my little dinky standing occupation in my hometown of Indianapolis, where no tents are allowed. (You still couldn’t pay me to stay overnight.) So maybe it’s time we took a look at the warning signs coming from women who have attended, and enumerate the crimes themselves so women who choose to go to an event can go forearmed with the knowledge that they may be putting themselves at risk, and take action to protect themselves.

Wanting to change the world is a great thing, but getting victimized in the process really sucks. Just ask Donny the Punk.

If all you ever saw of women at OWS was this video, you might be inspired and inclined to go:

But this is what some other women are actually saying about it, and it’s just as important:

The conversation started with the early case of the insensitive, pro-rapist advice given to the women of OccupyBaltimore. But before that, there were warning signs, such as this tale from a Slutwalker about her experience at both protests, in which she claims that Slutwalk was a way more powerful experience for her. Pretty early on, Reena Walker published this screed on Facebook about the reception of black women at OWS.

Now, the movement is so comfortable with the evident misogyny in their midst that there is even a popular website dedicated to OWS babes. That website caused quite a stir when dcblogger posted it under the title “Misogyny at Occupy Wall Street” at Corrente. Dudebros came out of the woodwork to declare: “Shit! We can’t even look at hot women anymore? What’s wrong with feminists today?”

And it’s gotten so bad at Zuccotti Park proper that  women have created a female-only sleeping space.

Ms. Hardikar’s…speaks to a growing community of women who agree with OWS’ message, but who worry that their basic human rights might be getting lost in the shuffle. For that reason, Ms. Hardikar created a Safer Spaces Working Group in the General Assembly. … They have created their own female-only sleeping space in a section of Zuccotti Park.

Left-identified feminists are beginning to pay attention and report on the misogyny that characterizes the OWS movement and which is evident in the crimes against women happening across America. I have been tracking these events and to date we have at least 12 reports of rape or sexual assault events at Occupying protests across America (and one in Europe). Here they are:

Speaking of smelly hippies . . .

---

Comedy gold:

But while officers may be in a no-win situation, at the mercy of orders carried on shifting political winds and locked into conflict with a so-far almost entirely non-violent protest movement eager to frame the force as a symbol of the oppressive system they’re fighting, the NYPD seems to have crossed a line in recent days, as the park has taken on a darker tone with unsteady and unstable types suddenly seeming to emerge from the woodwork. Two different drunks I spoke with last week told me they’d been encouraged to “take it to Zuccotti” by officers who’d found them drinking in other parks, and members of the community affairs working group related several similar stories they’d heard while talking with intoxicated or aggressive new arrivals.

The NYPD’s press office declined to comment on the record about any such policy, but it seems like a logical tactic from a Bloomberg administration that has done its best to make things difficult for the occupation — a way of using its openness against it.

“He’s got a right to express himself, you’ve got a right to express yourself,” I heard three cops repeat in recent days, using nearly identical language, when asked to intervene with troublemakers inside the park, including a clearly disturbed man screaming and singing wildly at 3 a.m. for the second straight night.

“The first time I’ve heard cops mention our First Amendment rights,” cracked one occupier after hearing a lieutenant read off of that apparent script.

“A lot of you people smell,” a waggish cop shot back later after an occupier asked if he might be able to help find more appropriate accommodations for a particularly pungent and out-of-sorts homeless man.

---

Who says cops have no sense of humor?

---

Feeding Frenzy

---

In the next few days and weeks we’re gonna find out more about Herman Cain than we ever wanted to know. I have no idea how this will turn out. Actually I have several ideas but I don’t know which one will turn out to be correct.

But let’s start by taking a closer look at what he is accused of:

During Herman Cain’s tenure as the head of the National Restaurant Association in the 1990s, at least two female employees complained to colleagues and senior association officials about inappropriate behavior by Cain, ultimately leaving their jobs at the trade group, multiple sources confirm to POLITICO.

The women complained of sexually suggestive behavior by Cain that made them angry and uncomfortable, the sources said, and they signed agreements with the restaurant group that gave them financial payouts to leave the association. The agreements also included language that bars the women from talking about their departures.

[...]

The sources — which include the recollections of close associates and other documentation — describe episodes that left the women upset and offended. These incidents include conversations allegedly filled with innuendo or personal questions of a sexually suggestive nature, taking place at hotels during conferences, at other officially sanctioned restaurant association events and at the association’s offices. There were also descriptions of physical gestures that were not overtly sexual but that made women who experienced or witnessed them uncomfortable and that they regarded as improper in a professional relationship.

---

First let’s parse some language:

“at least two female employees“

There are two women involved. If Politico knew about more than two they would have said so. But were these two completely separate cases or one case involving two women?

“multiple sources“

More than one. Possibly as few as two.

“ultimately leaving their jobs . . . gave them financial payouts to leave the association“

Read that carefully. It DOES NOT say they quit because they were sexually harassed or that they were paid to settle claims of sexual harassment.

“The sources — which include the recollections of close associates and other documentation“

That doesn’t say the sources had direct knowledge. Is it two friends and a note?

Now here’s the key part:

These incidents include conversations allegedly filled with innuendo or personal questions of a sexually suggestive nature, taking place at hotels during conferences, at other officially sanctioned restaurant association events and at the association’s offices. There were also descriptions of physical gestures that were not overtly sexual but that made women who experienced or witnessed them uncomfortable and that they regarded as improper in a professional relationship.

---

No groping, no sex, no unwanted sexual advances, no “quid pro quo.” That means we’re talking about “hostile work environment.”

In order to win a HWE case a plaintiff must show “that the harassment affected a term, condition, or privilege of employment in that it was sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the condition of the victim’s employment and create an abusive working environment”. The standard would be that of a reasonable person of the same sex. Cases like that are tough to win.

Without more specifics we could speculate endlessly about what Cain might have said or done. Just because the women were “upset and offended” does not mean their reactions were reasonable.

Last but not least:

There were also descriptions of physical gestures that were not overtly sexual but that made women who experienced or witnessed them uncomfortable and that they regarded as improper in a professional relationship.

---

What the fuck does that mean? Ball scratching?

Seriously, can someone give me an example?

---