Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    Anti-Cain hoax exposed

    Anti-Cain hoax exposed

    Yesterday I saw a lengthy thread at Memeorandum about a “HermanCainPAC” website which had a large cover story calling Karen Kraushaar an “ugly bitch.” Here’s the screenshot:

    The website looked real, with a donate page and so on. But I didn’t post about it because it looked real but was not believable.

    But it did invoke fury on the left, which went all in on calling Cain names about it.  Here was the reaction from Dave Neiwart (who invented the anti-conservative “eliminationist” narrative) at Crooks & Liars:

    And they’re sooooo funny, too, “clarifying” that Kraushaar is not the horse in the picture.

    Boy, I bet that convinces all the women out there, eh? Granted, it probably will work great with Republican men, who all seem to believe that only attractive women could possibly be sexually harassed. (This is particularly the case with “MP” at the Cain PAC blog.)

    I guess less-than-perfectly-attractive women are just so desperate that of course they would be happy to give Cain a blow job.

    EDITOR’S NOTE: Remember when the right-wing was against sexism? You know back when Palin was their media token?

    And I was right, it was a hoax site, as Crooks & Liars now acknowledges:

    UPDATE: It now emerges that this website is a hoax. Shuksan Tahoma at DKos has the details. We apologize to our readers.

    It’s fine that you are apologizing to your readers, how about apologizing to Herman Cain?

    Do sophisticated hoaxes take place to bring down a candidate? You betcha.

    Are they always provable? Usually not, although there are suspicions as in this Ann Coulter column about the coincidence of David Axelrod saving Obama’s political career by digging up dirt on opponents and just happening to live in the same building as Sharon Bialek.

    This is why we have to demand that light be shed on accusations against candidates, that accusers and files and facts come forward.  Taken nothing for granted or at face value.


    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.


    […] Good: Anti-Cain hoax exposed […]

    tomesnyder | November 10, 2011 at 11:34 pm

    Best line of the week:

    “Do sophisticated hoaxes take place to bring down a candidate? You betcha.”

    teapartydoc | November 11, 2011 at 6:46 am

    I do think the horse is the better looking of the two.

    There is a lot wrong with this post–Mr. Jacobson’s, I mean. To start with the title: “Anti-Cain hoax exposed.” What is the evidence this is anti-Cain, rather than, as commenter nohype suggests, the work of an overzealous supporter? I am not aware of any evidence for the former; on the other hand, if one actually reads the Daily Kos diary entry that Mr. Jacobson is relying on (but I suspect did not read), one finds that the registrant’s administrative contact is a Clifford Hoelz, with an affiliated site of Check that site and search on Mr. Hoelz’s name and tell me if you think he is anti-Cain or not.

    Moreover, there is the usual over-generalization about one’s opponents (“But it did invoke fury on the left, which went all in on calling Cain names about it”), completely ignoring the fact, as I said above, that it was A DAILY KOS DIARIST and her readers who actually unearthed some information about it.

    This is typical of the sloppy work and blinkered thinking I have come to expect from this blog, and I don’t expect my notes here to change anything. I’d love to be surprised.

    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend