The press and the non-politician candidate
For the moment the issue in the Cain sexual harassment case has become “Cain should have been ready to answer these charges. So this shows he’s not ready for prime time.”
It’s a good point, but not a great one. A fair part of Cain’s appeal is that he’s neither slick nor a politician. So it’s not so surprising he wasn’t ready for something he thought was a minor nuisance suit. This shows naivete about the press and politics more than anything, and he probably has learned a lesson on this already.
Of course, we don’t know how minor and nuisance-y the sexual harassment claims actually were, or how strong the evidence backing them up. New allegations have surfaced today that are as thinly sourced as the rest and almost as vague (the woman in question had told people that she’d gone with Cain to his home and stayed overnight, according to two more nameless faceless protected anonymous sources). If any of that is true, Cain’s shown even worse judgment than originally indicated.
So it may be that you can’t have it both ways. If you want a candidate who’s not been exposed much to politics in the big leagues, you’ll get someone less adept at the gotcha game and less fully vetted for this sort of thing. For a Democrat that might be okay, because the press would be inclined to be less hostile and far less interested in digging this stuff up. For a conservative—especially a black conservative like Cain—it could be politically fatal.
Who was behind the leak of the original story? There’s no dearth of candidates, but we really don’t know; almost all the candidates are candidates for the honor.
That’s politics.
I tend to agree with Ace on this, let’s get it out there in the open. Let’s know what happened, so we can either make a different choice, or defend our support of Cain rationally and logically. Personally, based on this and a number of other gaffes, I don’t think the guy is ready for prime time, nor do I think he’s our most articulate candidate.
I can tell you this.
I, Baklava, cannot run for office and I know this.
I haven’t been charged with sexual harrassment.
I haven’t been arrested.
I’ve never done drugs.
I’ve had a full career.
I’ve been a good father.
But guess what?
I have an evil-exwife who is freakishly mean.
Now – I’m not mean to anybody that I know. But I’m always having to protect myself from this person.
When I pick up my daughters I park 100 feet away even in the rain – because she sees fit to yell at me and stick her head in my minivan doing so.
I never answer her call and have maintained that all communications must be in writing or by voice mail. I’m not interested in being yelled at.
No matter how perfect you are – you can basically be run away from running for President.
At the point that Herman Cain became wealthy enough – he was a target by jeaolus women.
I’m sorry. I have not seen a wealthy person alive that doesn’t have the claws come out by so many people around them – and I’ve seen a lot of wealthy people with the clawpeople around to know.
IT people seem to be in this “wealthy” class.
Clawpeople are endless.
We are not going to find the man who drove in Driving Miss Daisy to run for President.
We will always have somebody successful and fairly wealthy (in the top 1%) run for President.
Jealous people will clamour to tear that person down.
I am absolutely enraged in PJMedia’s lack of factual reporting today.
I am absolutely enraged with Roger Simon.
I will NEVER NEVER read from their sites again.
I’m not interested in Palinizing Hermanizing reporting.
I’m interested in reporters doing their job with perspective and facts.
And let me speak to that a little further.
Where has the reporting been no the Herman Cain success story?
His brilliance, experience and resume outshine and outperform Obama’s by far.
His career in the military was due to brilliance – not because of name dropping.
He went on to do big things in life. He is a Thomas Jefferson of today’s era so to speak.
If you were to compare Thomas Jefferson and Herman Cain’s resume you’d see a pattern. Two men doing big things in life.
Reporters explain yourselves please? Can you do your damn job!!!
Report the facts
Report the truth
Report what is known.
Report with perspective.
Herman Cain education in Wikipedia:
I agree with Tom: let’s get it all out there especially since the allegations are now what is hurting Cain, and wrongly so. Let it be the facts, either hurting or helping him, that decides the issue. Not dirty politics by the other side, the media, or competing candidates.
I’ve put forth the idea that Cain isn’t deficient so much as he’s different as a politician. Cain resembles Hoover and Hamilton and maybe even Washington. Hoover the engineer, Washington the true doer not talker: Hamilton, a piercing analyst whose genius probably makes him singular and therefore doesn’t belong on this list. Jefferson, the scientist? But a pretty damn good politician too. Adams, the hater? How would these men have handled Cain’s accusers?
Other than Mr. Cain’s ineptness in handling this affair, the controversy is mostly long on innuendo and short on substance. At this point, his most egregious offense may have been the indiscretion of some level of womanizing twelve years ago. Nobody was kidnapped, surreptitiously drugged, or ended up dead by design or reckless disregard. No minor was involved. The alleged victims were, apparently, something on the order of twenty-two year old college graduates, in reality, substantially sophisticated and smart; smart enough to get, and take a five figure settlement. This exposure at this time has all the indications of sinister political sabotage. Slick politicians in general can’t be trusted, especially Democrats…
Until actual evidence is presented this remains a 24/7 media circus and nothing more. If the allegations turn out to be unfound it will end up boosting Cain’s campaign. If the allegations are credible it will end his campaign. I’m waiting for facts and ignoring the media gossip.
Its true that Cain is not a career politician nor was he born with a silver spoon. Hurray! We need a doer, not a talker. A straight shooter, not a slick willy. I think Cain may just be the kind of president who would be honest and forthright with the public. We certainly could use both in the Oval Office after 4 years of hype, lies, and whines.
There’s a reason people are allowed to face their accusers, it is to prevent this sort of nonsense.
There’s nothing he can do. Right now he’s shadow-boxing innuendo, and that innuendo is probably being orchestrated by JournoList 2.0. Sooner or later they’re going to have to produce a witness — then we’ll see where the story goes.
I hear many people echoing the narrative that Cain bungled this. Few actually say *how* he bungled it. As Neo posted previously, the Big Media version of events is itself inconsistent.
I have room to believe it was misplayed. I’m not sure about Mark Block fingering Perry staff, but I haven’t taken the time to see what he actually said, in context. All I know is Big Media says Block accused, they did not tell why or why not that accusation has/hasn’t any weight.
So far it is all farts in a windstorm. How would any of the Cain’s critics have avoided getting some stink on them?
My speculation on the third woman was that Cain invited her drunk ass to his place to try to talk her out of an abortion.
Just as many facts to my version, and wouldn’t that be delicious if the truth was closer to Evangelism than philandering?
Again, these allegations are not more than several accusations of rare incidences of possible womanizing some twelve+ years ago. Similar controversies of significantly higher profile were of no critical importance for the MSM and others when it concerned the Kennedy’s or the Clintons. Until Herman Cain became a high profile candidate there were no long-term issues being pursued by any of the alleged victims. The only people with any vested interest in this story are Democrats, former Democrats and/or Democrats posing as Republicans, as well as various political operatives, journalists and activists with significant vested financial and/or political influence interests at stake, end of story. Unless the allegations become significantly more serious in quality, this incident should only be an early (fortunately) blip in Mr. Cain’s campaign momentum.
Perfected democrat said…
Nobody was kidnapped, surreptitiously drugged, or ended up dead by design or reckless disregard. No minor was involved…
Way to lower the bar for a candidate you like. Would you be this fair if a Democrat were accused of the same and running for office? That said, I will agree a lot more info has to come out before I would accuse Cain of anything other than not being prepared for the media onslaught. But I don’t think he is a serious candidate anyway.
The bungling by Cain in order…
1) Came out and said he knew nothing about it.
2) Came out and said he knew a little about it, but it was no big deal, and he doesn’t remember.
3) Came out and said the campaign knew about it 10 days ago, but then was ill prepared to deal with it when it did come out.
This comes on top of comments about not allowing churches to be built, the China nukes thing, and one or two other things that I’ve heard peripherally, but not investigated.
In the 2010 election cycle we most likely lost control of the senate based on the fact that we didn’t have properly vetted candidates(Delaware, Nevada, Colorado). While I’m a big fan of the theory of the citizen politician, in practice, it’s a bit of a disaster. I’m coming to realize that having a real politician, with real political skills IS important.
I also want to parrot Ace and ask the question, what exactly are Cain’s conservative credentials?
I had a VERY brief love affair with Cain, but it came to an abrupt end when I watched Lawrence O’Donnell rip him a new asshole. He’s not prepared to pick up the conservative mantle and be our standard bearer. We DESPERATELY need someone who is capable of articulating conservative principals, and convincing people why they should agree. Cain is not that guy.
MDL I agree, and Perfected Dem, we don’t get to be held to the same standard as the Democrats do. That’s just how it is. We’re going to be held to a different standard. It’s game time. It’s time to tighten up the laces, put your mouth piece in, and pull your helmet strap a little tighter.
The Democrats are fighting for their lives, and they know it. This is the playoffs, and whoever wins, wins it ALL. Whadda we got? About 366 days and counting?
Too many years have gone by. If I were Cain and I really believed I didn’t do anything “wrong”, call these women on the carpet. Let them have their day…all the gory details. Get it out. Let them do a Gennifer. Bill survived! And if they don’t have a foot to stand on…go after them and take them to court. I just don’t think Cain is “the candidate”, but he deserves to refute and explain. Just for his wife and family…..And if he is guilty, then we are all better off. And we will move on to pick someone else. God it must suck to be a candidate.
Yes, I would be this fair even if it was a Democrat; if it was a candidate with the kind of profile which, otherwise, exemplifies Mr. Cain. But then I would hammer away at the authentic and critical issues which begins with the brazen dishonesty that now infects the entire Democratic Party syndicate’s partisan interests and agendas; from promoting serial voter registration fraud (http://www.truethevote.org/what-fraud) to a litany of probable offenses which make Mr. Cains possible indiscretions, over a decade ago, inconsequential by comparison, ie. http://charlestonteaparty.org/obama-campaigns-from-the-sinking-titanic-grants-amnesty-to-illegals-by-fiat-tries-to-hide-involvement-in-project-gunrunner/.
Tom:
Is mistake number 1 in regard to the allegations or the settlement?
Mistake 2 seems like an honest answer. Is forthrightness a mistake?
Mistake number 3 is a circular argument. It presumes there was some other better response. As I challenged before, what would that response be?
In 2008 John Edwards was sleeping with his mistress and his wife had cancer. that was during the campaign. The press knew about it. We heard nothing.
17 years Herman Cain was accused by who knows of harassment of an unknown nature. It’s front page news on every media outlet for the foreseeable.
What we are dealing with here is evil. The media is not “biased”. The media is evil. Because it is evil it is biased.
Liberalism thrives for one reason alone: it has convinced us to believe that either there is no such thing as evil, or we may not call it so. Until we condemn liberals for what they are, the good will suffer.
“Sooner or later they’re going to have to produce a witness – then we’ll see where the story goes.”
This is (probably) deja vu ala Clarence Thomas. There is no credible evidence/testimony offered to date. Most likely its an attempt to knock Cain out of contention without any substance offered beyond innuendo. If there is no credible evidence I’ll get behind Cain 100%. His Majesty Obama obviously fears Cain and that tells us much about the magnetism Cain would wield as the GOP nominee. Picture Cain debating Obama sans teleprompter.
Tom:
What would be sufficient to pass your test for conservative credentials? Is holding public office and moving legislation required? Would being a principal in the defeat of HillaryCare work for you?
I can’t expect you would find and listen the archive of his radio show, but you could look at the archives of Herman’s Intelligent Thinkers Movement: http://www.thinkersvoice.com/content/keyissues
And if you haven’t had much time to accommodate your ears to Cain’s dialect, try out his 2010 speech to CPAC:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGhdG5J7r5g
If that’s not conservative, the word has no meaning.
fox, this is stupid, you wanna split hairs, go for it. What he didn’t do was come out, right at the beginning and say yeah, there were some allegations. Yeah, there was a settlement paid. I made some comments that might have been miscontrued as sexual harrassment. I feel like I was wrongly accused, and I am more than willing to allow my accuser/s to tell her/their side of the story/ies. If you have ten days to prepare for a question you know is coming, you should be able to formulate a response….IF you’re innocent. It took me five minutes and I don’t get paid to do this kinda shit. From my persepctive, this is WAY worse than Perry’s “no heart” comment. The dude’s not ready for primtime IMNSHO. One thing I also forgot to mention was Cain’s playing of the race card. The race card needs to be burned, and never used again, and I thought maybe Cain was above that. Either way, none of this addresses my other concerns.
For the record, I actually believe that these are probably some seriously bullshit allegations, made by people who were out to get a few bucks. I just think that when you have ten days to prepare an answer, and you’re interviewing for the postion of The Most Powerful Person in the World, you better be able to answer, and get it right.
Oh yeah, the abortion thing too, he made Romney look positively DECISIVE with that one.
So, Tom, you’re changing your story? You listed three errors and then walked away from them.
Your response has the luxury of both ignorance and hindsight. You presume you know what Cain knew, and you’ve had thousands of pixels to help you come up with a response based on your shared assumptions.
But, yes, you rose to my challenge, and if the facts are as you presume, that would have been a better course.
I just watched the interview you cited, O’Donnell vs. Cain. If you think O’D ripped Cain a new one, we live in different universes. It sounded a lot like a conservative guest on a Prog radio show. O’D came across like a prosecutor beating on a hostile witness (maybe that’s his schtick?). Cain took charge and made his points.
I encourage everyone to watch that “interview”. You’ll probably end up wanting to send Cain a donation.
“The dude’s not ready for primtime IMNSHO.”
The dude is not a professional politician and does not have a cadre of highly paid PR consultants.
“It took me five minutes and I don’t get paid to do this kinda shit.”
Perhaps you have a job opportunity.
Bottom line, cut the guy some slack. It just may be that this came out of the blue and Cain is not a Slick Willy anticipating bimbo eruptions. As far as Cain playing the race card is concerned, its the race card in reverse. Clarence Thomas was attacked by the left because he did not reside on the democrat party plantation.
I think everyone should stop sniffing for the pubic hair on the Coke can until there is credible evidence of a pubic hair on a Coke can that can pass or fail the sniff test. IMO Cain is being targeted because he is a credible threat to Obama. He definitely threatens the 90% assured black vote for BHO. BHO needs 90+% of the black vote to win; if he gets 85 or 80 or 75% in crucial, key states it will be a game changer. (Think VI, NC, OH & FL.)
We do need someone who articulates but such need isn’t always met. I watched the President of Hillsdale, I think his name is Larry Arnn, something like that, sorry I don’t have it exactly, but I watched about a 40 minutes interview, and he is such a gracious and appealing person that I remembered what he said about teaching and that Presidents are teachers, like Lincoln and Reagan. That’s what we need. But we don’t have that, unless it would be Newt whose character has not matched his brain. And we have the opposite in Cain. That’s my belief. Not his brain as a whole, which is fine, but his brain as a teacher having that peculiar power to understand the whole. Tis the prevalence of rational analysis which does this to us, engineering, reduction, “science” if you will. I believe Palin has it and was underestimated in her articulation because of the nasal quality of her voice. Ryan definitely has it. Love the Ryan.
Foxmarks, he came out and said he had no knowledge at first, whether that was of the allegations, or the settlements, I am not sure. M<y impression at the time, hearing HIS words, was that he was claiming complete ignorance of it. Then he came out and laid down some BS about saying something about his "victim" being about the same height as his wife. I find that laughable. Finally he came out and said..well, I'm not even sure what he's saying now, except to cry racism, and blame Perry. As far as the interview my interpretation is that O'Donnel dinged him hard on the issue of sitting out the racial protests, while taking full advantage of the benefits. I don't think O'Donnel was out to impress you or I. I think he was out to impress the maybe sorta kinda left leaners, and African Americans that might be considering voting for Cain. I think he did a fine job of hurting Cain badly among those voters.
Perker, I don’t have to cut him any slack, nor should I, he wants to become President of the most powerful nation on earth, and he’s going to be taking on a candidate that I think is going to be very difficult to beat, with the media against him. If he can’t handle the heat now, he won’t handle it then. Also, the timing of this thing, if they are truly scared of Cain, isn’t right. If they were really bothered by him, they would have waited until after he got the nomination, and then taken him down.
*Parker…sorry, that truly was a typo, and not intended to be rude.
But, you see, Tom, knowing what he was talking about is precisely the issue. Your other comments suggest to me you are not a close or familiar listener of Cain.
We really do live in different universes. O’Donnell demonstrated that he didn’t get the facts correct. Another sloppy or unfamiliar listener. O’D wanted to hang a frame around Cain. Cain said why it didn’t fit. Same as O’D tried with the military service. Cain hosed O’D on that point.
“Why didn’t you charge that VC machinegun nest? How can you be President when you didn’t throw yourself on a grenade like so many brave veterans did!” Media bias can be hilarious–from a distance.
We don’t have to give any candidate “a break”, but integrity requires we make an effort to understand them. That includes Santorum and Paul and Bachmann. Sure, the rubes in the general election will vote by sound bite, but we’re supposed to be more informed and more discerning, right?
“If they were really bothered by him, they would have waited until after he got the nomination, and then taken him down.”
Perhaps, but you have to consider timing. Cain the nominee in April, May, of June 2012 is cutting it pretty short what with what will be virtually 10% unemployment and rising.
You seem to have a hard on against Cain. Okay, that is your opinion, but who do you see as a better candidate to bring down BHO? If you say Romney I will fall down laughing.
Media shall make no scandal covering the congressional investigation of executive misconduct.
So far, we’ve only heard accusations and sound bites. This is how the liberal press operates, and it’s too bad that so-called conservatives are falling for the scam.
If Republicans had any brains, they’d ban together to support Cain. There’s a reason why the Democrats are known as the evil party, and the Republicans are known as the stupid party.
Didn’t 8 years of Bush-bashing teach us something?
“band together to support”
“Didn’t 8 years of Bush-bashing teach us something?”
Add on nearly 4 years of PDS and yes, we should know better by now.
Tom interestingly wrote, “fox, this is stupid, you wanna split hairs, go for it. What he didn’t do was come out, right at the beginning and say yeah, there were some allegations.”
um. yes he did. You weren’t listening or… you were listening to Politico. I saw his very first interviews.
I grimace as Tom writes, “It took me five minutes and I don’t get paid to do this kinda shit.”
You need a few years Tom. You strung together a few sentences of which you know nothing about. It is OBVIOUS that you haven’t listened to Cain himself.
Tom, In 5 minutes I’m going to ask you a question about you beating your wife.
Because what trait is more important in the person holding your life in his hands than glib?
Tom according to Wikipedia you beat your wife and you have no education – not compared to Cain’s education.
beat your wife divided by no education equals infinity stupid.
Parker, no I’m not a Romney supporter, and I’m on record here saying on several occasions that I won’t vote for him, work for him, or contribute to him. I don’t “have a hard on” for Cain, I just don’t think he’s got the skills. Right now, I’m thinking about Newt, since you asked. I’ve looked at all of the candidates, they all seem to have some flaws that are going to be exploited during the general election. I think if we’re going to have a flawed candidate, and we are, then it should be the best and brightest flawed candidate. It should also be the person who has the most solid convservative record, and the person who has the best political skills. That person is Newt.
By the way, these accusations are not ENTIRELY baseless. If they were completely baseless, there would not have been a pay out, and the story would have no legs. There is some basis to them, we just don’t know how big of a deal it is.
There’s a world of difference between being glib, and being prepared.
Tom: no, actually they could be entirely baseless. Organizations often pay a settlement rather than fight, as long as the settlement is small enough that it is less than the legal costs would be to fight the claim. This case involves a rather small settlement amount (relatively speaking) and so it is very possible that the accuser was paid off because it was easier, without regard for the truth or falsehood of the accusation. It could have been either true or false; we simply don’t know, despite the pay out.
To many who call themselves feminist the fact that a man is alive is sexual harassment. One would have had to be a fool not to expect the charge.
Nuisances suits are settled like this because many lawyers would rather settle than go through the process because of time, costs, et al. As was said of Paula Jones one can troll through the NOW ‘trailer trash’ and find any number of women who will allege sexual harassment. It was one of the favored tactics of NOW. A perfect he said she said. This occurred at a time when NOW was basically pushing women to do this.
If one is a boss and has the lack of forethought to say “that is a nice sweater and outfit you have on today” then you can be charged with sexual harassment and people have been. NOW knew that most of these charges would be settled and they might come in handy later on because many of these people like Cain may run for political office.
It is a great extortionist’s tool.
Interesting that we’re now borrowing arguments from Democrats. What you’re asking me to belive is this..
Person A went into the HR department of the Restaurant Association, and with no evidence at all accused Cain of harrassing her. Then the Restaurant Association said here, we’ll pay you $45,000 dollars. You’re asking me to believe that this happened not once, but twice. I very often find that when Anthony Weiner, or Bill Clinton, or Mark McGuire, or some other person involved in a budding scandal tells me “Nothing to see here folks, move right along” there’s almost ALWAYS something to see.
Tom: But what you are asked to believe is very believable (and by the way, I tend to reserve judgment on all such scandals whether they involve Republicans or Democrats) [emphasis mine]:
We already know the figure was on the lowish end of the five-figure range (it was $35K, not $45K as you have stated, by the way).
One got $45,000, one got $35,000
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/67551.html
Still…point taken.
With the sexual harrasment bar at the insane level it is, i’m not sure i’d want a President who was never accused of crossing such a ridiculous threshold. What kind of eggshell walking pu**y whipped absurdity of a man would we be talking about?
Knowing several women from NOW and from other activist groups, i agree with SteveH @ 10.00.
The bar today is set too low for sexual harrassment complaints as well as ethnic discrimination complaints. It’s time for a big do over in these areas.
Despite Tom’s attempt to roll this thread–meaning that I don’t believe that Tom is actually for Newt–I think that Cain is quite a fabulous candidate. He’s tough. And if he toughs out this attempt to pull him down, he’ll be even tougher.
Doesn’t this scandal remind anyone of the Sarah Palin witchburning? As soon as a non-leftist gets somewhere, all slime missiles are fired.
Promethea, the punditocracy is casting about for the best label they can paste on Cain to marginalize him. Just like they settled on Palin as the simpleton.
Can’t call Cain stupid: math major and rocket scientist. Can’t call Cain a blueblood: humble beginnings. Can’t call Cain corrupt: no political office. Can’t attack his faith: everybody knows a Baptist. Calling him inexperienced was reinforcing Cain’s self-branding.
So they were going with “disorganized campaign”. Nobody who matters (voters) care about that. Next attempt is the current one, to either label him a pervert or get him entangled in the Martha Stewart trap to counter his trustworthy persona.
Funny how nobody wants to challenge his platform. I guess everybody in the bi-factional ruling party has a copy of Alinsky.
Promethea, you’re VERY wrong about that. I have the donation receipts to prove it. I have concluded that we’re going to have a candidate that has some problems. If that’s going to be the case, then let’s choose the smartest guy in the race (Newt). Newt also has the advantage of already having been on the front lines of politics and campaigns. He’s the most articulate, and the person who’s most able to coherently articulate conservative principals.
Newt “believes” in global warming. Nuf said.
Newt isn’t smart. If he was, he wouldn’t be in a position to never be electable as President.
This philosophy exactly reflects my own…
Knowing that conservatives would be concerned,
Newt immediately explained his reasons for the “Alliance for Climate Protection” ad with Pelosi. He said, “I want to be clear: I don’t think we have conclusive proof of global warming. And I don’t think we have conclusive proof that humans are at the center of it.”
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/06/why_newt_1.html#ixzz1cksYq74S
There’s also this regarding Newt and his “belief” in global warming.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEOXI88lSw8&feature=colike
Tom wrote, “By the way, these accusations are not ENTIRELY baseless. If they were completely baseless, there would not have been a pay out, and the story would have no legs. There is some basis to them, we just don’t know how big of a deal it is.”
Perspective. You have none.
Even if he did make her “uncomfortable” you want to Clarence Thomas Cain.
There was a radio station manager who mentioned yesterday that Cain asked a lady if she can ‘doctor’ his tea and that made the lady uncomfortable.
To the Tom wife beaters of the world that would disqualify Cain because he doesn’t know what kind of accusation, he recused himself from the investigation, the restaurant association made an agreement WHICH THEY DO in HR because it can actually save them money.
Tom – it seems you know nothing about sexual harrasment in the workplace and the policies and procedures that brought Cain to where he is.
The man is wealthy and the claws of women come out for wealthy people. The claws of men also btw.
There is absolutely no way in hell these allegations of somebody said he said something uncomfortable to me (with no specificity) is having any affect on me negatively towards Cain.
It affects me negatively toward people like you and the echo chamber that is.
Tom wrote, “Still…point taken.”
Really.
Then take back all your senseless comments. State clearly and loudly for people that you don’t know how the sexual harrassment racket works.
From my angle, Tom doesn’t have to take back any comments. But I wish he would show the same curiosity in Cain’s ideas as he does for Gingrich’s.
And it would be nice if he stopped beating his wife… 😉
But he’s showed an incurious way towards understanding how the process works with an SH accusation.
Now he says point taken to Neo’s explanation of the stuff and he continues on as if the point really isn’t taken.
Tom the lyncher
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/11/04/new-cain-ad-high-tech-lynching/
Politico publishes 90 stories
http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/politico-publishes-90-stories-cain-scandal
That is obsessive.
That is gross.
Accuser sees no value in re-visiting case
http://www.news4jax.com/election-2012/Lawyer-Cain-accuser-sees-no-value-in-revisiting-case/-/1875986/4445738/-/e2054/-/
Baklava: Why is everyone protecting her identity, I wonder? Usually these things leak out.
My take.
Because of the facts.
People will groan out loud if they hear the facts probably. Sort of like the woman who was extremely offended that I used the words “fellow coworkers”.
There is all kinds of people in life. Those with perspective and those without. The complainer and the non-complainer. The person with work ethic and without. The person with too much time on their hands and the one with no time.
I can’t even IMAGINE picking a fight with somebody because of some words they chose.
I asked a woman a group of people today if there was something on my butt because I fell on the asphalt and I wanted to make sure there wasn’t a grease spot.
One of the women said, “ooh. Thanks for the show!” (because I had to lift my shirt which was untucked).
Anyways. I believe people know that Cain would SURGE in popularity if they knew what truly was said.
It’s better to let the vague accusation sit out there and hang over his head like a cloud. This way the Tom’s of the world can keep squawking.
At least in this accusation there is a woman coming forward:
http://www.nbclosangeles.com/entertainment/music/Justin-Bieber-I-Know-Im-Going-to-Be-a-Target-133232123.html
Madeleine Albright makes an accusation against Herman Cain. So juicy!!!
http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/albright-cain-didnt-call-me-because-im-female