It’s just a fact that no one knows the specifics of what GOP frontrunner Herman Cain was accused of while he was running the National Restaurant Association from 1996 to 1999.  Nor, outside of the term “five figures,” do we know what the amount of the settlements were. There are no reports, however, that the police were involved. What we do know is that even though Politico doesn’t have much of a story, the same MSM that ignored a sex scandal involving Democrat John Edwards while he was running for President is now obsessed with a decade-plus old scandal involving a black Republican.

It’s also pretty obvious that The Philadelphia Inquirer has just decided to take it to another level with this wildly misleading headline:

—–

A tipster informs us that this is the headline in the Inquirer’s print edition, as well.

Here’s Merriam-Webster’s definition of sexual abuse:

(more…)

Quite an unbelievable case. Reporter Tom Burlington files suit against the station that fired him, because, he alleges, it was acceptable for a black person to use the “n word” but not him. When illustrating the discrepancy in a staff meeting, he says in his suit, he used the word and was fired for it.

I don’t think there should be any restrictions at all whatsoever on speech in any form, period. I’m all for people using whatever charged-term they want, be they black, white, etc. because when people let their freak-flags fly, you know what you’re dealing with right from the start. Also, I trust people, not the government, to be the arbitrators of what is or is not acceptable speech. When the government elects to decide acceptability for people it removes the opportunity for people to better themselves by deciding that certain terms are no longer acceptable for themselves. Government robs society of the change to truly and organically progress which will have a more lasting effect than any change government could artificially create by suppression.

Tom Burlington

From the Philadelphia Inquirer:

A federal jury will be asked to decide whether it is acceptable for an African American person, but not a white person, to use the “n” word in a workplace.

U.S. District Judge R. Barclay Surrick has ruled that former Fox29 reporter-anchor Tom Burlington’s lawsuit against the station, claiming a double standard and alleging that he was the victim of racial discrimination, may go to trial. However, Surrick denied Burlington’s claim of a hostile work environment.

Burlington, who is white, was fired after using the “n” word during a June 2007 staff meeting at which reporters and producers were discussing reporter Robin Taylor’s story about the symbolic burial of the word by the Philadelphia Youth Council of the NAACP.

Burlington, who began work at the station in 2004 and is now working as a real estate agent, was suspended within days and fired after an account of the incident was published in the Philadelphia Daily News. He alleges that he “was discriminated against because of his race,” according to court documents. He claims in his lawsuit that at least two African American employees at Fox29 had used the word in the workplace and were not disciplined.

(more…)

The Philadelphia Inquirer published a reader feedback opinion editorial from reader Stan Isaacs that is as outlandish as it is indicative of the disregard for the American process that liberals in the Old Media all too often exhibit. It is proof once again that tradition, law, and any effort at legitimacy is wholly outside a liberal’s field of interest. Winning is all they care about, voters opinions and the rule of law be damned.

What sparked Mr. Isaacs’ interest is when he somehow stumbled upon the fact that the number of U.S. Supreme Court Justices is not set in stone in the U.S. Constitution. We now have nine justices but in the past have had fewer. What intrigued him is that the number of justices fluctuated because of politics. “Political issues accounted for the changes,” Isaacs gleefully reported.

In keeping with these “political issues,” Mr. Isaacs lit upon the ideal way to help Obama finally push his left-wing agenda. He advised President Obama to add three new justices to the SCOTUS, justices who will mindlessly adhere to the grand vision of the age of Obama and will rule accordingly. This is necessary, Isaacs thinks, because the court has proven an impediment to Obama’s grand socialist design. Worse, Congress has balked at Obama’s wholesale destruction of America and has resisted his attempts to turn America into a weaker, less free version of Europe. Issacs, you see, demands a recount. (more…)