« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

A Moment for Two Deep Breaths

“These are the two natures of man,” she said. “Never forget them, because someday you will be King, and Kings grow to be great and tall – as tall as dragons in their ninth moltings.”

“Father isn’t great and tall,” objected Peter. Roland was, in fact, rather short and bowlegged…

Sasha smiled. “He is, though. Kings grow invisibly, Peter, and it happens all at once, as soon as they grasp the scepter and the crown is put on their heads . . . Kings grow most awfully big, and that’s why they have to be specially careful, for a very big person could crush smaller ones under his feet just taking a walk, or turning around, or sitting down quickly in the wrong place. Bad Kings do such things often. I think even good Kings cannot avoid doing them sometimes.”

- From The Eyes of the Dragon

A number of sensational allegations about some inappropriate behavior on the part of Herman Cain are floating around the Internet today. I’ve carefully avoided saying anything about this fracas until now but I find myself in at least partial disagreement with much of what has been said here and elsewhere on the subject thus far, so I thought I would throw in my $.02 USD, for whatever it is worth (adjusting for inflation).

The first thing I think it is necessary to say is that the general tenor of the allegations has moved beyond allegations of vague inappropriate comments and gestures to allegations that are considerably more serious. We are walking into territory now where the allegations, if true, would destroy Herman Cain publicly both as a candidate for President, and a candidate for any other office he might seek in the future, and furthermore as a prominent spokesman for the GOP. I find that the way these charges were reported by another prominent conservative website today was irresponsible and reckless. The story was written in such an intentionally vague way that it was possible for the reader to infer anything from a woman regretting a one night stand to an actual rape committed by Herman Cain. Later, after the damage had been done, this website posted corrections which changed significant details of the story at the bottom of the story and on the second page, where the casual reader would not see them unless they bothered to click the “Next” at the bottom of the screen. Given the nature of the allegations and the materiality of the corrections that were intentionally buried, I can only conclude that this piece was an intentional hatchet job and that its rollout was maliciously intended to cause the maximum political damage to Herman Cain.

This conclusion leads to some necessary things that I think need to be said about both the way we as conservatives treat our primary candidates and the particulars of Herman Cain’s alleged behavior. More below the fold…

First, I recognize that “politics ain’t beanbag.” Anyone who throws their hat into the ring of the most hotly contested political race in the country must know that intense scrutiny will follow from the media, other candidates, and Democrat candidates. If Herman Cain knew that these allegations were out there (and it is virtually inevitable that he did), then the possibility that they might surface should of course have entered into his calculus when deciding whether to run in the first place (furthermore, the fact that Cain did not get out in front of this before someone else had the chance to fire the shot for him is just one failure in Cain’s lamentable handling of this affair – a handling which may well show that he lacks the necessary political skill to win in the general).

All that having been said, I am discouraged at least to some extent by the glee with which some are receiving the news and then disseminating it as fact. At this point, we have no names, no statements that have been sourced by any identifiable person, and only thirdhand recollections of facts from anonymous people that have been sensationalized into a “story” and passed on unscrupulously. This is sufficient for us to conclude that a man’s entire political career and perhaps a significant portion of his personal life should be destroyed? A man who has, by all accounts, been a loyal advocate of conservative causes for years? If Barack Obama was behind these attacks I have no doubt that we would all rally to Cain’s defense and laugh at the flimsiness of this proof and mock the sensationalistic way in which it was being reported. But since there’s a primary going on, I guess it’s fair game. It’s depressing.

Here is an important question: What if no further proof is forthcoming and Herman Cain wins the nomination? Should we participate in the fatal wounding of the guy who is currently leading most primary polls on non-ideological grounds, based on this evidence? Or perhaps more realistically, are we prepared to hand the nomination over to Romney before we even know what the score is on these facts? As Rush would say, some of Cain’s enemies are eschewing the quality of the proof in favor of the seriousness of the allegations. I find this to be an unworthy tactic against a pretty conservative Republican.

It may well be that the charges leveled against Cain are true (although we are a long way from being able to say that with literally any degree of certainty). If so, I am not really sure what to make of them because for the most part, I don’t know what they are. According to some radio host in Iowa, Cain called one of his staffers “pretty” while his wife was absent. Pardon me for not fainting.

We also are told that two internal sexual harassment complaints were filed against Cain during his tenure at the NRA in the 90s. For those who don’t remember, in the wake of Anita Hill/Monica Lewinsky, workplace complaints of sexual harassment (and employers’ willingness to settle such claims quietly rather than risk litigating them) may have gone a little overboard. That is not to say that I am automatically dismissing either of these complaints – I would like to know something about the identity of the people making the complaints and the particulars of what Herman Cain is alleged to have done. It seems that at least that much information should be known before coming to a conclusion about how serious an issue this is for Herman Cain.

The one and only particular I have seen alleged is that on one occasion, Cain was out drinking socially with a number of subordinates, and afterwards singled out one of his female subordinates and asked her to return to his apartment with him for more drinks afterwards. If I have my facts straight (and at this point I might be forgiven if I don’t), we have been told this morning that this woman actually did get in a cab and accompany Cain to his apartment. The details of what allegedly occurred there vary depending on what update you are reading from the source that broke this story. However, if this is true – even if the woman didn’t come to his apartment at all – just the fact of Herman Cain making the request is troublesome to me.

Losing a job, especially as a professional, is a horrible and unsettling thing. No one should be put in a position where they worry about losing a job because of turning down amorous advances – male or female. I don’t really think it has anything to do with gender – it’s just wrong and it’s an abuse of power and it doesn’t speak well of the person who does it. It’s not something that should be tolerated in the workplace.

As a society, I can agree that perhaps we have gone too far in the direction of “watch what you say” in the workplace; however, if you’re out with a bunch of your subordinates having drinks and you single one of the opposite sex out and ask her to come back to your apartment, that is way over the line to me. Maybe that kind of behavior was tolerated in the past and I guess some people would still be okay with it, but not me. Part of being a supervisor is having the responsibility to realize that your employees are somewhat in terror of you for their livelihood, no matter how nice of a guy/gal you are. You HAVE to be more conscious than the ordinary schmo about how your interactions will be perceived by your subordinates – that is part of what you are paid for. If you can’t manage that level of responsibility to understand why it’s wrong to make amorous advances (or what will reasonably be perceived as amorous advances) on your subordinates, you should be fired. The end. This is part of what made it so horrifying that so many on the left saw no problem with the President of the United States making passes at a 22-year-old intern. And if this turns out to be true about Herman Cain, I will be significantly less likely to vote for him for President. And I do not agree with those who are likewise ruling out the possibility that these allegations could be true – if the women are credible and their allegations believable and consistent with the known facts, they deserve to be heard.
However, we are a long way from anything having been proven either way (except perhaps that Herman Cain’s ability to respond to a media crisis is… less than ideal). We are especially a long way away from anyone having proven that Herman Cain took advantage of someone and/or raped them (or had sex with them while they were passed out, which amounts essentially to the same thing) – which is an allegation that could not only stop his nomination but ruin him in perpetuity, even if untrue. Maybe, just maybe, we should pause for a couple deep breaths before we (yet again) end up with a nominee as uninspiring as McCain or a President as incompetent as Barack Obama.
Get Alerts

COMMENTS

  • Change Jar Conservative

    If Cain isn’t it, we need to rally around Newt or Rick quickly or it will simply be Romney’s by default.

    Rasmussen has Newt rising into 3rd by a bit over others though only at half of the levels that Romney and Cain are at.

    • bzip

      Perry lets go for it and be done with it. We could try for a Perry/Newt ticket.

      Perry’s got tthe best plans for; tax reform, entitlement reform, energy reform, has the governing experience and the election experience as well as he can enure us a victory in the end. The true tested consistent conservative Rick Perry :-) .

      Rick Perry to the rescue.

    • joecollins

      Gingrich and Cain will debate each other at 5 PM Pacific time on Saturday night. Texas Tea Party is hosting and C-SPAN is televising. No annoying questions from liberal reporters. This will provide a long, deep look into both Newt and Herman.

      Watch it. It could be the best debate of the primary process. Cain may be toast by then, but the debate will be instructive to see if Cain can hold his own against Gingrich. And we can evaluate Gingrich to find out if all his baggage is worth ignoring by selecting him for our nomination.

      Wish Perry were attending . . . maybe next time.

      • uncmike

        That’s not the best timing since I the LSU-Alabama (#1 vs. #2) game starts at 8 PM EST (5 PM Pacific), same time as the debate. Fortunately, there aren’t many football fans in Texas. ;o)

        • jrmax13

          uncmike – I like that last sentence about we Texans and football. Very clever.

        • arthurmanger17

          A head to head meeting of minds. Hashing out the difference between their ideas for the role of government in our free enterprise system. No moderator asking dumb questions seeking to raise their star. Two men willing to sit down and face off takes the courage any Republican nominee will need in the general election to face down the left stream media. The left stream media will freeze hell and burn heaven to keep Obama in office. This we see now with this non story of sexual harassment.

    • clowngirl

      Rasmussen had Cain 26, Romney 23, Newt 14

    • josephine

      Politico was the messenger for the evil opponents to, pretty much, a wholesome, do-right guy.
      The left is dividing the good guys. Divide,create chaos,conquer.
      After reading all of this “stuff” over the past couple of days, I’d say that they are succeeding. They have us running around with our heads cut off. If we don’t get past this we will lose our country.
      As a southern woman younger than Cain, but older than Redstate, I have never been in the situation that “anonymous” was, even though I used to be pretty good looking in a wholesome,do-right way. I believe this: 1. the claim cannot be for anything of much substance or the agreement would have been for much more money. 2. Cain has no power to get the NRA to release the documents. If this woman wants to damage Cain,she herself, should be willing to show herself also.

      I believe there was a leak by someone connected to the NRA or that fellow that went over to Perry’s team, of course, that this was there somewhere,that the media released it in order to cause Cain to lose his momemtum-even though they do not have any details. They can not attack him on anything else. If the agreement is opened up,and I think it should be, then I also think the accuser should be vetted.

      As a woman, I have learned many things in my life. I have learned to accept compliments from men and enjoy that for what it is. I have also learned to stay away from men and situations that cause some concern with me. I would have never even gotten near Clinton at a cocktail party. I could read him a mile away. Looking at Cain, and being a southerner and knowing our ways I doubt very seriously that Cain did anything that Southern culture doesn’t approve of. The world needs to know that we all hug each other, wink at each other, call each other darling and cutie pie on an everyday basis. It is not often that one meets another that is 5 feet tall. not where we come from (scots and such) it is no wonder that he commented on that fact. The liberals are laughing all the way to the bank. I also think this Bennett guy should be reprimanded by the Bar.

    • msjallen

      PLEASE!!! Newt and Rick for my vote. Cain or his campaign handlers should never have pointed fingers at Perry’s campaign blaming them for the leak. The GOP needs to show some responsibility during this intense period of campaigning to show that we can be good leaders.

    • jackdaniels11

      Newt.

      If I had to pick one of the two, I’d pick Newt, just because I’ve read most of his book and I like what I read.

      I like Romney the best. I like competence and experience. Although Perry is incredibly competent at governing, he won’t ever get to govern on the national level until he starts aggressively prepping for debates.

      • retire05

        and his unemployment rate reductions compared to Perry’s during the same time frame? How about comparing state debts, state debt to GDP, per capita debt between January, 2003 and January, 2007?

        Mitt was a miserable failure on all of those items. But hey, you go ahead and vote for him. Don’t be surprised when he is not what he claims to be. After all, he did become a conservative only when he had to to run to the right of John McCain.

      • bzip

        Might I suggest that if debates are concerning you (and a valid concern) that you might consider looking at Moe’s thread on Perry’s Iowa debate.

        The format isn’t the same as what we are use to and is surely a much better format but Perry can debate and do it very well.

        Perry’s interviews have also been stellar. I don’t deny that Perry’s past debates are concerning but take a look at thisand decide for yourself;

        http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2011/11/01/gov-perry-at-the-iowa-republican-presidential-forum-on-manufacturing/

        or the YouTube version at;
        http://youtu.be/FeKKY-sVLgU

  • spinoneone

    right on! The other conservative outlet just did a total hatchet job on Cain with innuendo and half-truths, at least so far as we know at the moment.

    Regardless, everyone needs to consider how poorly the Cain campaign has handled the situation. We all know, from very long experience, that it isn’t the act that gets one “shot at dawn,” its the denial.

    Taken together, the two things do not bode well for Mr. Cain’s continuing candidacy.

    • danielbdp

      Was great! Cain seemed cool, calm and collected as he categorically continued to deny any sexual harassment or inappropriate behavior took place. As it looks ever more likely the National Restaurant Association is strongly predisposed not to waive confidentiality for Cain’s accusers (btw, Cain explained he’s not under any confidentiality agreement), and Cain has backed off from accusing the Perry campaign for the leak, seems the damage has been contained (Cain should probably “retire” his campaign manager and get someone with a proven track record real soon though).

      Time for the hatchet jobbers to either put up (with hard facts), shut up, or get ready for slander lawsuits.

      Full disclosure: Just an average Joe Conservative. Happen to like Bachmann, Perry and Cain – though they each seem to have a propensity to self-destruct via diarrhea of the mouth!!
      And, will hold my nose with both hands and vote for Romney if I have to…

      • kdubs

        for the Perry campaign? He’s backing off, but where’s the apology for the people that Cain’s campaign slandered while he was flailing in the water?

        • jbt1971

          Hannity went over the top yesterday to treat Cain as delicately as possible. Cain’s management of this entire situation has been awful. This is one huge skeleton in the closet so Cain should have had a game plan ready over a year ago on how to handle it WHEN it came out. Did he really think it wouldn’t come out? Why act all shocked and confused when the story broke? Give me a break. Hannity did ask one good question near the end of the interview. He asked if ALL of the documents and facts were to be made public now would any of that information disprove anything that Cain is saying now. Cain emphatically implied they would not. We’ll see.

      • circlegranch

        Hannity gave Cain basically an hour today I’m told. Hannity should come out up front and offer the disclaimer that because they are personal friends and to a degree, business associates, he will be offering Cain as many breaks and make as many excuses for him as he can squeeze in. Cain will get as much air time on the radio and face time on TV as required to continue to try and sell him as the ultimate tea party candidate.

        I have big reservations w/ Cain simply because there was more than one alleged incident. That’s troublesome and reeks of a pattern of behavior that “I can get away with it”. As I wrote this morning, there’s much discussion about whether or not he’s guilty of sexually charged comments or actions but at this point, apparently Cain gets to determine what is considered good and bad behavior. It happened once and then it happened again. Apparently, whatever he considered to be just fun and having a good time was perceived in quite another way by the women. He claims the accusations were dismissed but in the mind of whom? A panel of men that reported to him? A team of attorneys that worked for the NRA and knew from prior experience in the business world that sometimes victims willexchange money for a chance to start anew at another job and don’t have to go home and explain to a spouse or kids why they quit a good job?

        Cain is getting every break in the book and that’s reflected in polling where folks may not be moving past emotional attachment to the man and stopping to consider that this does not go away. He has a cozy chair at any desk on Fox and don’t discount the huge benefit these celebrity conservatives have given him. They have shown clear bias toward him and against others, Perry in particular.

        Anybody that believes if Cain gets the nomination that this won’t be at the forefront of the general election is simply a fool. I can never get past Cain’s blatant disrespect for Gov. Perry, accusing him of being basically a racist over The Rock without any evidence and then yesterday and today still accuses Perry of Cain’s so-called smear attack. Again, he has no proof yet believes there’s something honorable about throwing out accusations of his own while clearly not caring much for any coming at him. He’s arrogant to think that he can accuse at will without any responsibility but woe to those that might fire some his way. It’s a double standard that I can’t accept.

        Someone blogged today that hey, let’s back off. He’s another conservative. That should mean something and after all, even if he did say some suggestive things several years ago, surely this experience has schooled him quickly and he’ll never dare say something offensive again. Why must we give him all these breaks? Why should another candidate that has not made a habit of making offensive remarks to people in the work place, and certainly never had a formal complaint filed be passed over simply because Mr. Cain has learned his lesson? His record as a candidate shows many flaws. Why skip over another person for him?

        We’re hearing alot of flap about how awful Mr. Cain has been treated and how this discussion turns people off from politics. I would argue we’ll really be turning people off if we, as conservatives, gloss over some troubling incidents and nominate someone that will face all the same scrutiny again in a year and this time, we won’t be wondering who the ‘leaker’ is. Cain’s record is tainted whether fairly or not. Candidates have lost standing for lesser things. For all his pleas of innocence and victimization, he’s had years to make this a very insignificant issue. He failed to do so. That’s his problem, not ours. We don’t have to defend and support him ‘just because’. We have a willing field ready to get a little love out of Fox and get a chance to get their message out.

        • tyman

          when he was getting ready to announce. I’d say this is a big skeleton, and, for me anyway, it shows either dishonesty or his belief that this is something not to worry about.

          Obviously he remembered it, because he remembered telling Curt Anderson about it. Even though Curt Anderson says he hadn’t heard about it before. Never mind that there were two women, and Cain says he only told Curt about one.

          If you think this will go away in the GE, it will be even bigger.

          If Republicans espouse a high moral ground (and I believe we do), then it’s no wonder the press hits harder against a Republican than a Democrat.

          • ladydoc

            …just wondering after the latest from Leon (no posting capability after that column). I mean, if YOUR name is NOT out there – unlike Herman Cain’s – AND you don’t intend to release it (in the statement you hope the National Restaurant will allow you to release Friday 11/4), then why on earth should you be worried about your ANONYMOUS reputation? Makes no sense. Plus, what would the “statement” state if it’s going to exclude not only your name, but any details of what Herman Cain allegedly said or did that made you uncomfortable?

            Like most women, I’ve been made uncomfortable by men’s comments at various times over the years and one episode tgat comes to mind could be construed as sexual harrassment, but there’s a huge range of what could be said to make one uncomfortable and also important would be the circumstances/potential for misunderstanding of what was said or done. As you must know, there are false claims from time to time and without knowing you and the details, we in the public have no way of determining if this is a true claim, a false claim, or perhaps something in the middle.

          • Scope

            If Cain becomes the nominee, the Obama campaign team won’t allow the names to remain anonymous. The Politico has the names, and I believe the Washington Post also has their names, and they both are leftist orgs who release their names during the general, at the worst time. The accusers won’t be able to hide behind anonymity, the press will be camped in front of their homes, their places of work, and they will follow them where ever they go. If they agree to talk then to get rid of the press, or for whatever reason, and they are credible women with clean backgrounds, it will be devastating to Cain.

            As much information as possible needs to be released now, from Cain, or from the women, or from the NRA, in order to put the entire matter to rest. It would be devastating to happen in the general if Cain becomes the nominee.

            Someone at the NRA is calling this a hatchet job. I’m sure the NRA never wanted to be put in the spotlight over possibly scandolous information about one of their former heads. With Cain saying they don’t want the information released, and the NRA now calling this a hatchet job, I only wonder more at what they so desperately don’t what anyone to know. It only makes people more and more curious.

        • http://xmmlbchat.blogspot.com katesmith

          Hannity knows Cain but if one human being is responsible for the fact that Gingrich still has a career in politics today it’s Sean Hannity. Regarding Rush, I appreciate him throwing independent conservatives a lifeline as he does, but I’ve seen him take the side of the establishment when it matters most. Rush did say the following on 11/4/10: ‘The establishment GOP will fight more viciously to defeat a conservative candidate than it will to defeat Obama.’ Mark Levin has for the past 2 days discussed how Cain and his staff handled this and gave reasons why from a legal standpoint it wasn’t handled incorrectly. (As much as it appears it should have been handled differently, ie better).

          • izoneguy

            Hannity will have to get use to calling Newt – Mr. Vice-President

      • politicalgal1

        for all the positive spin on this situation, as well as all of the love fest interviews with Cain over the past month.

        Cain is still accusing Perry’s camp. Cain is starting to remind me of Obama – you know, the Arab spring, the Japanese earthquake, etc. Always someone else’s fault.

        CNN actually has better political analysis than Fox these days. If you didn’t see John King’s interview with Governor Perry in Iowa today, it is worth viewing. John King out-interviewed Sean Hannity on the interview with Governor Perry.

        • izoneguy

          to Perry. During the summer Hannity loved to tease Perry about getting in the race. When Perry did get in Hannity seemed to be taken aback. I think Hannity had talked to Palin about Rick Perry and I even think Palin thought Perry would not get in the race. Hannity is flying wingman for Cain but the Cain plane is taking direct hits.

        • avagreen

          I’ll look for it.

          • avagreen

            crowd after Ailes wanted to supplant the MSNBC crowd with FOX?

            Hilarious! Serves the guilty ones on FOX right!

            Missed the interview and couldn’t find it in future ones. Hopefully, there will be a video.

        • Scope

          King was honest with his questions, and they weren’t softball questions. He went into many different issues. I thought it was one of Perry’s best interviews yet. It far outweighed the Wallace interview, where Wallace wanted to keep bringing up negative stuff, and kept pressing Perry to answer to just how bad his tax plan is, and how it helps only the wealthy. I’ll take John King interviews over any of the Fox hosts any day.

          Yes, CNN has become much more tolerable to watch than Fox. Never thought I’d be saying that I actually like some of the leftist hosts of CNN than those on Fox.

          • pttx333

            went over to their website but didn’t find a video of it (did see some great snippets, though!). Youtube doesn’t have anything either. Do you know if such a video exists? Would love to see it.

            I think our guy is really coming into his own. Even if he should end up in total last place (God forbid!), I will still be yelling BRAVO!

          • bzip

            Oh I missed the interview too. I didn’t know there was one.

            Darn, hopefully it will be ion their web site or on YouTube.

            Though there is some information on the interview at;
            http://rickperryreport.com/article/2011-11-03/rick-perry-economy-cnns-john-king

          • pttx333

            ..

          • msjallen

            interview, thanks for the info. Perry makes good sense with his “can do” attitude about our country.

      • jackdaniels11

        If Clinton had avoided them in 1998, he might not have been impeached.

        When Cain issues denials like the ones he issued on Hannity, he better hope that no evidence shows up to contradict him. No one will ever believe him again if he is proven to be a liar this close to the Iowa caucuses.

  • NeoKong

    A little bit of objectivity.

    That’s all a man can ask for.

  • miconservative

    Herman Cain has been a good conservative warrior and as a father of daughters I certainly hope the charges are not true. But what we do know is true is the Cain Campaign (and Herman Cain personally) lobbed an unfounded charge against Rick Perry, Curt Anderson and the Perry campaign and when the Cain campaign was made aware of how mistaken they were they did nothing but have Block offer a statement that seemed to be him accepting Curt Anderson’s apology although Anderson had nothing to apologize for. I now question the credibility of anything and everything that comes out of the Cain campaign. They need to admit a mistake on the Perry charge and issue an apology for making the charge in the first place.

    • circlegranch

      He won’t man up and make a formal public apology to Perry, or to Romney and Rahm Emanuel, for that matter. And its not because he can’t get any air time to do it!

      He accuses at will without fact checking first or having proof. When the same comes at him, its a witch hunt and he’s being smeared.

      A better candidate and a better politician, George Allen, went down for uttering one single word. Cain has made this mess, his candidancy needs to be over. Rush always comments about how quickly the Republican Party chastises their own and removes them from the stage so they don’t bring down others. We’ve had Congressmen stepping aside frequently in recent years and then here’s Cain, being arrogant enough to say he refuses to allow these women to opt out of the confidentiality clause so the truth can come out. Still, the GOP stays silent and the celeb’s pump him up even more. Oh well. Tomorrow’s another day: another Romney flip flop, another explanation from Cain. It’s becoming as usual as the sunrise these days.

  • Tbone

    or their underlying allegations, Cain has not been forthcoming in an honest and straight forward manner. He has actually lied and omitted, played the race card and has sought to use the situation to damage an opponent by making an obviously false accusation.

    All of these disqualify him as a viable candidate. If this is how he handles challenges at this level, what the Democrats and press will do to him in the General will make even the strong of stomach turn away.

    As such. it is best that Cain become the Howard Dean of 2011 and be discounted by any thinking voter.

    • Jack_Savage

      This makes me sick, but better now than in the general. The only way, the ONLY way he gets out of this is if she did not go to his apartment for drinks at all, or if she did go and was one of fifteen people who got in a shuttle bus and got dropped off there, then slept in his apartment on the couch fully clothed while his wife watched over her and he took the Metro to Ballston Station and slept in a car in the parking lot.

      I really began to worry about this when word of a settlement was confirmed. You don’t pay money if you didn’t do anything. Period. His campaign has handled this poorly at best, or maybe they are trying to play a really, really crappy hand. I think it’s some of both.

      Another wonderful spokesperson for conservatism done for, apparently. Too bad this isn’t a career enhancer for conservatives like it is for Democrats.

      • romansdaughter

        I frankly will never respect him again. He lied and then blamed it on everyone else besides himself. We already have that in the White House..so no thank you.

        • radicalrighty

          That’s unforgivable.

      • alaskaescapeartist

        You have probably never been named in a suit alleging sexual harassment and inappropriate behavior causing a hostile work environment by one of your employees, and faced with a minimum $25k legal bill, plus court costs, depositions, travel…. or pay a $10k settlement to make it go away.

        Sorry to tell you, but the fact is… you WOULD certainly pay money even if you didn’t do anything wrong.

        The idealistic sentiments are nice and all… but there’s nothing quite like the feeling of being sued for something that didn’t happen. The instinct of winning the case, quickly gives way to the reality that the threat simply needs to go away.

        • Jack_Savage

          I haven’t been named in a sexual harassment suit because I have never sexually harassed anyone.

          I have been accused of something I absolutely didn’t do and threatened with a lawsuit, and I made it plain that I was going to make it rain down hell fire to the best of my ability, that everyone was going to be on record and under oath, that you could go to jail for perjury, and they better be ready. Incredibly, the lawsuit went away. Funny how that goes, isn’t it?

          Maybe if businesses weren’t so willing to be extorted, and turn things over to lawyers who know nothing but compromise, these situations would be less prevalent.

          • Finrod

            There are a lot of people out there who have never sexually harassed anyone yet have been named in a sexual harassment suit. So all your dissembling is just blowing smoke.

            Businesses first and foremost are concerned with their bottom line. If it’s going to cost significantly more to defend a suit than to settle, they’re going to settle almost every time no matter what the suit is.

          • Jack_Savage

            Negotiating with extortionists is never a good long term policy, and any business that chooses to do what is expedient over what is right deserves every frivolous lawsuit they get.. As a matter of fact, why don’t you ask Herman Cain how your “bottom line is good” argument has gone for him?

        • politicalgal1

          tort reform in Texas. Perhaps this would have been helpful to Cain back in the days…

          • jakeofalltrades

            but you’re probably right.

      • ragstoriches

        Many corporate policies are “pay them off with the inclusion of a ‘you no longer work here nor will you ever’ and get them out so we don’t end up getting accused again and again and again by the same person.”

        Many companies have this policy. Whether the accusations are founded or not, they simply pay up and show them the door. Because as we’ve seen, merely the accusations can damage reputation and juries are (and have been) predisposed to fall on the side of the poor victim against some corporate “man”.

        • Scope

          Companies/corporations pay off sexual harassment cases because whether true or not, they don’t want any tarnishing of their company, especially if the accusations are against someone at the highest level. Cain was at the highest level you can get. It doesn’t make him innocent.

          • guidvce

            make it go away as cheaply as possible. That is what it seems the NRA did in these cases. Back in the 90′s when these event are purported to have taken place, there was a lot of harassment allegations going around. Keep in mind this was the “Clintion era”.
            There is no evidence anything took place in these allegations leveled at Cain. All the accusers seem to be shying away from naming names and giving details to bolster their claims. Lights up my B.S. detector bright!
            My bet is on the DNC being behind all this stuff. They fear Cain being the nominee.
            Also, keep in mind that Cain is a businessman running for a political office. In his past jobs, he either submitted a resume or was asked if he wanted the job of whatever it was that needed doing based on his past performance. How would you handle these accusations if you knew they weren’t true?

      • timkellogg

        So, the NRA is guilty of harassment, but we know nothing about Cain…

  • bzip

    Look, I don’t want to see a innocent person treated guilty when there is no evidence and for that reason Cain needs to be given the benefit of the doubt.

    On the other hand, Cain has handle this entire mess extremely pathetic and clearly leaves one wondering if they guy is even qualified to run for any office. If Cain’s past gaffe and constant walking back wasn’t enough to make you question his ability to lead than this entire mess and the way Cain has handled it sure should have convinced most people. Cain needs to take and bare responsibility for his actions and this entire mess.

    In addition, it pretty hard to feel sorry for a guy who is now going around blaming everyone else, other candidates and making a complete XXX out of himself.

    So no I don’t want anyone to be treated guilty when there isn’t any proof yet but I sure am not going to feel sorry for the guy either. He alone could have handled this differently and made it a much easier and better situation than what it is now. Cain is the one to blame, no feel sorry for and NOT feel guilty for either.

    • captkirc

      If Cain is wrong for accusing the Perry campaign without any proof, what does that make the Perry spokesman who in turn accused the Romney campaign of being the source of the leaks? Is it reprehensible behavior only if done to the guy you support?

      • bzip

        Excuse me? This entire mess belongs to Cain and only Cain.

        Go ask Cain and his women friends.

        • captkirc

          From the Cain haters new favorite media outlet Politico:

          “That is false, patently untrue, no one at this campaign was involved in this story,” said Perry communications director Ray Sullivan.

          Sullivan then suggested to CBS News and National Journal reporter Rebecca Kaplan that Mitt Romney’s campaign is behind the allegations.
          Continue Reading

          “I wouldn’t put it past them,” he said, stating that blog posts have noted that Cain’s successor at the Restaurant Association “is a big Romney donor.”

          “There are much closer connections between the Restaurant Association, Cain and the Romney camp than there are with us,” he said.

          Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/67500.html#ixzz1cgLc0mXn

          As you can plainly read, an official spokesman for Rick Perry blamed Romney for the leaks with absolutely no proof. I haven’t heard one Perry supporter in the last 24 hours condemn that but I’ve sure heard a lot of condemnation by them for the Cain campaign when they did the exact same thing.

          • runner12

            I am a Perry supporter, by the way. But an off the cuff comment like that is much different from going on Brett Baeir an having a thirty minute or so interview accusing Perry and Anderson by name of springing the leak and demanding an apology. This is what the Cain camp has done.

            Furthermore, the Cain campaign continues to double-down on their accusations despite a flat denial by Perry and Anderson that they were the leaks.

            I will admit, Sullivab probably should not have been so snarky. It was ill-advised. Has the Romney campaign denied the leak? Just curious. If they have, then we need to cut out the circular firing squad.

          • captkirc

            I asked Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul to respond to the insinuation that her campaign was involved in the story. Her response: “Not true.”

            When Jennifer Rubin asked the Perry campaign if they had evidence Romney was tied to the story, Sullivan answered: “I’m simply citing the ties between Romney camp and [the National Restaurant Association] based on the facts.”

            Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/67500.html#ixzz1cgQtFka9

          • runner12

            Then let’s let Cain work this out on his own and quit pointing fingers.

          • gator_hoo

            A statement that it might have been Romney, which is a possibility. It is not a flat out accusation demanding an apology. Those are two entirely different statements, and types of statements.

            Probably better to just issue a flat denial, I’ll grant that, but the two statements are nor similar in character in the least.

        • paulplantowin

          bzip – post at 5:08 ‘… Cain needs to be given the benefit of the doubt’
          bzip – post at 5:45 “go ask Cain and his women friends.’
          To me the second comment comports best with the overall tone of your sustained anti-Cain post all week and beyond.
          If Cain camp thinks Perry camp is source and says so – you are incensed.
          If others – including Perry supporters – SPECULATE publically that it might have originated in Romney’s camp – you’re fine with that.
          captkirk asks a fair question of you – since you push into everyone of these threads as a leading pro-Perry leading light.
          To me – you are a pure partisan with NO credibility.
          Bloggers or commentariat that go off on speculative slurs of others are not helping the conservative cause – and I wish ya’ll would chill out a bit.

  • cldonley

    for those who are jumping on the Perry camp with no credible evidence that they leaked this information. Pause and remember that all are innocent until proven guilty, even in politics. The thing that disturbs me is Mr. Cain’s reaction to it all, which does more to make him appear guilty than innocent. As streiff has already said, better to get this out and be done with it now than in the general.

  • attherubicon

    Frankly, I’m tired of seeing this happen to every conservative candidate that comes along. The only way that the MSM is going to stop these smears is when they no longer work.

    Support Herman Cain despite the allegations.
    Support Herman Cain in spite of the allegations.

    • miconservative

      No way. If there is credible evidence that he did inappropriate actions toward women then he is through. This is not the Democrat Party. We do not celebrate leches like Bill Clinton. We don’t say it’s ok to lie because it just about sex. We want leaders we can trust.

    • gator_hoo

      With an albatross around his neck that will absolutely get us killed in the elections. At this point, there is too much smoke to say, no need to look over there.

      Let me say this. We know next to nothing about Cain. And every time on this site that I have tried to constructive ely engage with Cain supporters to find out why they think he is a great conservative, I get 0 replies. But yes, let’s all vote for Cain because, hey, he might be conservative. Let’s ignore the ever increasing number of statements that indicate to the contrary.

    • bzip

      As I said before, innocent till proven guilty BUT Cain has clearly lied and lied and lied over this entire mess and has handled it extremely poorly.

      I can NOT and will NOT support or ever vote for Cain. Cain’s constant gaffes, inexperience and completely acting like a fool in addition to playing the race card and victim card and blame game is enough to never ever consider the guy for POTUS!

      • Darin_H

        Cuz I’d blast your candibot into outer space (and I say that as a Perry for my first choice.)

        • runner12

          And I am a big Perry supporter. You may want to tone it down a bit. People will not listen to you if you act like a “bot.” Just some friendly advice.

        • gator_hoo

          But I would agree that bzip should tone it down. That said, it should be said to a lot more people than him/ her.

      • uhangtight

        the primary you will not vote? essentially handing the win to Obama? or will you vote for Obama?

        Seriously, folks I have not choice in the matter, as I have not decided yet who I will vote for in the Primary. I live in California. We usually do not get a say as by the time it gets here the other states have made the choice for us.

        But, I am tired of the rhetoric from the Perry.bots for sure. The blinding vitriol from these Perry.bots has caused me to not want to visit this site to get information. As the information here has become biased. Until This Piece of Reason was published.

        • gator_hoo

          “Are the two policies that I can think of, yet this LBJ clone Southern Democrat is considered ?the only conservative republican candidate?, can hardly tell the difference between Mitt and Petty Perry.

          Alas, they cannot see how blind they are towards this LBJ clone.”

          “I know a Democrat when I hear and see one: Perry.”

        • davesinsanantonio

          only a very small percentage of the Perry supporters. So, let’s stop lumping all supporters for a particular candidate into the “bot” pot.

          That includes supporters of each and every candidate, by supporters for each and every candidate.

          One “bot” for a particular candidate does not make all that person’s supporters into “bots”!

          Thank you,

      • rightwingmom52

        Are you saying that if Cain is the nominee (and I realize it’s a big if), you will not under any circumstances vote for him? Have I got that right? If that’s the case, you’re left to vote for Obama or third party, and it’s always been my understanding that folks here at redstate support the GOP nominee in the general. If that’s changed, I haven’t heard, but I’m not in charge of anybody else’s rule book – just my own which is I get to make my own choice in the primary, and I intend to work for and support the GOP nominee in the general.

        • gator_hoo

          You do know that Cain has said he would not fully support Perry if he were the nominee?

          That doesn’t make bzip right, but I do find your post interesting, with that history.

          • rightwingmom52

            that I wouldn’t “fully” support either, even if they are the nominee because of certain issues and even though I would still work and vote for them in the general and donate as well. For example, I don’t agree with Gary Johnson on legalizing marijuana, and it would trouble me greatly if he were the nominee, but I’d certainly vote for him over a Democrat or a third party candidate. And even though there are others who disagree with me, if by some bizarre twist, Ron Paul were to be the nominee, I’d most likely even vote for him because I think we’d have a Congress that could keep him in check, but that decision would require a lot of thought and prayer on my part.

          • gator_hoo

            I’ll spot you that on a personal level.

            Not to say I don’t still think it is extremely irresponsible of a candidate to say that of a primary opponent.

          • rightwingmom52

            But I wish they had all taken Newt’s approach of focusing on Obama rather than shooting at each other. I guess that’s too much to ask for.

            By the way, still waiting on bzip for an answer. While we’re at it, what’s your answer? Will you vote for the GOP nominee in the general – whoever that is?

          • gator_hoo

            We need to get the White House back.

          • aggie91

            Gator is only one vote. But he represents a host of voters that for a wide variety of reasons will NOT vote for Cain. Period. That is the real problem. Even if Cain made it through the primary, big ‘if’ then millions of conservative would stay home and potentially cost us the general election. To what extent this would be true is hard to determine. Wouldn’t it be better to just accept the vetting process for what it is and move along to the next most favored candidate? Since Cain has proven he has serious flaws that would disqualify him.

          • aggie91

            Gator is only one vote. But he represents a host of voters that for a wide variety of reasons will NOT vote for Cain. Period. That is the real problem. Even if Cain made it through the primary, big ‘if’ then millions of conservative would stay home and potentially cost us the general election. To what extent this would be true is hard to determine. Wouldn’t it be better to just accept the vetting process for what it is and move along to the next most favored candidate? Since Cain has proven he has serious flaws that would disqualify him.

          • tngal

            “Even if Cain made it through the primary, big ?if? then millions of conservative would stay home and potentially cost us the general election.”

            Flip the names…
            If perry is all we have at the end of the process, there will most likey be a lot of cainiacs staying home.

            And technically, the same could be said of any candidate. Paulbots can get spiteful when they want to. And if we don’t give Romney supporters a reason to come over to another candidate soon, they may just stay home. And they’ll be tough cause they are more mod than the rest of the bunch.

            The point being, every one on this board “represents a host of voters”, but the ” Its Perry’s way or the highway” meme isn’t much of a reason to support somebody. Its actually kind of a turn off.

          • aggie91

            I’m talking about the conservative voters that will vote in the general election not the primaries.

            Cain supporters, for the most part, are conservatives first. Every candidate has its bots.
            But ultimately when the primary voting starts, the fiscal and social aspects of a candidate will be assessed. Right now Cain is failing miserably in the social side of that equation.

            Dishonesty is not a reflection of solid conservative core values.

            When the ad wars really heat up in (IA, NH, SC, FL) The social conservative are going to be very turned off by his handling of this story. Not the charges, but the lying about them is what is going to cost him.

          • mbrown2517

            How about the fact he wants the Federal government to issue visas to illegals so they can pass freely between the U.S. and their home countries?

            I read sites like this to try to find positive information and I find you can learn a lot about someone by the people who admire and support them. I had already pretty much written Perry off because of his supporters attitudes on this site before I read the (AP) article about giving visas to illegals but that cinched the deal. That is a much bigger problem to me than anything Cain may or may not have done years ago. Anonymous accusations are worth about as much as career politicians promises. Exactly nothing! But a candidate’s statements regarding the circumvention or doing away with immigration laws smacks too much of Obama for me to vote for Perry.

          • gekster

            Perry work visas for Mexicans

            excerpt:
            “You can put a program into place in which these individuals can be identified, and work visas in which they can move back and forth between their countries but not to become United States citizens,” Perry said. “And I think that’s where McCain, that’s where Romney, that’s where even Bush went wrong when they talked about the issue that, ‘we’re going to give amnesty to these individuals,’ and people just said, ‘no, we’re not.’”

            Perry didn’t elaborate on what such a visa plan would look like, saying only that authorities need to determine a better way to identify illegal immigrants and make them part of mainstream society. He also said the program would only work if the federal government first does a better job securing America’s borders.

            “I disagree with the concept that somehow or another we’re going to pack up 10, to 12, to 15 million people and ship them back to the country of origin. That’s not going to happen,” Perry said. “So realty has to be part of our conversation. And then you need to have a strategy to deal with it. That is what I think we will have, but first you have to secure that border.”

          • mbrown2517

            Qualify it all you and Perry want. He is planning on legalizing them being here with a visa so it is amnesty. It is rewarding them for breaking the law. That is no different than the Obama Administration refusing to deport them.

            If you think his poll numbers dropped after the fact he signed the bill for instate tution became known just wait until real conservatives see that he wants to reward the illegals with a visa giving them free passage across the border.

          • heraklios

            and right on cue we have a Romney supporter on Red State attacking on the exact same issue. Pretty organized but misguided I must say. Perry is running at what, 6% in Iowa? The man tied for first place at 25% is using robocalls to attack his opponent sitting at 6%? I’m glad Romney’s campaign manager isn’t running my campaign.

          • gekster

            He is not for giving amnesty.
            In the excerpts I gave he said it was a wrong approch.
            Read the first paragraph again.
            You are just against Perry from the start, so it is no use trying to use reason with you.
            Keep your mind closed. It lets little out, and nothing in.

          • mbrown2517

            My mind is fine and apparently a lot more open than yours.

            You and Perry can call black– white all you want but giving free passage across the border without fear of deportation is pardoning their unlawful entry and therefore meets the definition of amnesty. It is freedom from prosecution, in effectl a pardon for an illegal act. You and Perry need to get a dictionary and look up the word amnesty.

            Accusing me of having a closed mind and being called a Romney bot is exactly the reason posters like you turned me and probably a lot of other people reading this blog off Perry to start with. You are every bit as bad as the cult of Obama. Anyone calls Perry on what he says or does that is a matter of record and the attacks start. But you are all fine with lynching Cain on rumors and unsubstantiated accusations. Looks a lot like Chicago politics to me.

            I won’t vote for Romney because he is liberal lite. Always has been.

            I won’t vote for Perry because he is Obama lite on immigration and is a bit too Obama like with executive orders. And don’t give me the crap about him apologizing. He did it and it would be law if the legislature hadn’t called him on it. The only reason he was sorry was he was held accountable.

            Gingrich was way too comfortable cuddling on the couch with Pelosi endorsing global warming.

            I don’t know who i will vote for but it won’t be Obama lite on healthcare, immigration, global warming, or any other area.

          • gekster

            is that if they get visas, a common occurance for nationals from other countries, then they wouldn’t be illegal. We would know who and where they are.
            That is the purpose of the visas.
            It’s in the article that you didn’t bother to read.
            If they can come here, work, and then go home after the harvest season, without worrying about being able to come back next harvest, there would be less incentive to come here to live.
            We give other people visas, why not the people who want to pick our grapes and such.
            And another thing you choose to ignore, is that he emphatically wants the border secure first. It is stated in the article you didn’t read.
            Read the article, but I know you won’t, because you are predisposed against Perry.
            That’s where the closed mind thingy comes in.

          • mbrown2517

            Exactly! Perry is just like Obama. To solve the problem of illegals we just make them legal. To heck with the laws of this country.

            Thank you for making my point so well!

            But you are really uninformed if you think the bulk of the illegals are working in harvest fields. They are undercutting Americans in construction, oilfield, and various other jobs Americans aren’t hired to do because an American has to support a family. And Americans insist on safe workplaces. And Americans work for wages and have taxes withheld. Illegals work as contract labor usually stealing someone else’s identity and that person has to prove to the IRS they don’t owe the taxes on the 1099 issued to their social security number.

            But yeah all we have to do is trash the law and give them visas. Hundreds if not thousands in this state alone found out if you have an ITIN you can get a child tax credit so they applied for ITINS and use it only long enough to qualify for the child tax credits. The rest of the time they use someone else’s SSN so they don’t owe any taxes.

            You are really uninformed if you think the government doesn’t know where they are. There are two possibilities either they have ITINS or they are using someone else’s SSN. But it is against the law for the IRS or the SSA to report the 1099′s and W-2′s issued to them with someone else’s SSN to INS. And even if they were required to report them INS has been ordered to ignore them.

            But all we have to do is give them a visa and to heck with the people they have damaged with identy theft. To heck with the citizens who are unemployed. To heck with the rapes, stabbings, and deaths from their drunk driving. Let’s just make them legal and all that will go away.

            A van load of them were stopped just a few miles from my home a couple weeks ago again. Happens about once a month. None of them were headed to any harvest field. With unemployment at historic levels, in part because of illegals taking jobs Americans would do if they were paid at least minimum wages, you and Perry want to aid and abet those who are criminals by pardoniong them.

          • gekster

            who cares.
            At least Perry is addressing the problem.
            What’s your guy going to do. More lip service.
            As far as illegals working construction and that, put the blame where it belongs, on the unions who overprice wages.
            And they don’t have any problems with illegals also.

          • mbrown2517

            You have done everything you can to explain away Perry’s own words unsuccessfully. You are the one who pointed out the fact Perry wants to give illegals visas and make them legal which is a lot closer to Obama’s game plan than any real conservative would endorse.

            You state I am not voting conservative when it is you who is endorsing a liberal lite immigration policy. Then you start with the ” your guy lip service” stuff when I have plainly stated I don’t have a guy. I haven’t found one I can support at this time. Unlike you I want to vote for a real conservative. I haven’t found one yet I am comfortable with.

            But I am sure not settling for liberal lite like you are. But then that isn’t surprising since you repeatedly use the typical liberal ploy when you are losing the argument to start calling names and infering you know what someone else thinks or will be voting instead of addressing the issue.

            But if you want to talk about lip service—-Perry has repeatedly said he doesn’t want a fence. He gives lip service to securing the border just like Obama does but the facts are the border will never be secure until the rewards for coming here illegally are ended. And instead of ending the rewards he wants to add more.

            You don’t stop the feral cats from occupying your doorstep by feeding them. You just get more of them. And you have to clean up the cat poop and trash they create. And sooner or later one of them is going to turn on you or your child and injure or kill you. But “Who cares?”

          • retire05

            work permits, and ITIN numbers are already issued to illegals? You are aware, are you not, that those work permits, confirmed by Janet Napolitano in recent Congressional hearings, allows the illegal to move back and forth over the border?

            Obviously, you were not aware of those things, and they are no different that giving a “visa” that allows the same except that “visas” have an expiration date that is ususally shorter than a work permit.

          • mbrown2517

            And that is exactly why I won’t vote for Perry. He is too much like the current administration. We don’t need more go arounds we need enforcement. Period!

            I am a tax preparer who has to deal with ITINS all the time. Funny some of those jobs Americans won’t do net hundreds of thousands of dollars every year. An ITIN allows an illegal to receive the Child tax credit which amounts to $1000 per child per year that taxpayers are paying for. Most of them have enough children they pay no taxes. I am forced by law to give them your money if I like it or not. They have drivers licenses, bank accounts, and can fly anywhere in the U.S. at will.

          • jrmax13

            If Perry ever did make it to the WH — it would be interesting to see which direction he would actually take in the area of immigration. But since he is clearly La Mesias to his disciples, then I’m sure his omnipotence would prevail.
            WWPD
            Perry/Crist 2012 !

          • intensity

            …or everytime Cain opens his mouth, he self-destructs even more

            Perry/Anybody 2012

          • aggie91

            I’m talking about the conservative voters that will vote in the general election not the primaries.

            Cain supporters, for the most part, are conservatives first. Every candidate has its bots.
            But ultimately when the primary voting starts, the fiscal and social aspects of a candidate will be assessed. Right now Cain is failing miserably in the social side of that equation.

            Dishonesty is not a reflection of solid conservative core values.

            When the ad wars really heat up in (IA, NH, SC, FL) The social conservative are going to be very turned off by his handling of this story. Not the charges, but the lying about them is what is going to cost him.

          • tngal

            your posts here correctly, you’re saying its all right for Perry people to stay home if Cain is the nominee. The Perry bots can get a free pass.

            But the cain people will all just magically appear to pull the lever for Perry if he is nominee?

            Oddly enough, as you say there are numerous reasons why Perry people don’t like Cain. But you have to be willing to accept the fact that many of us have serious concerns with Perry.

            Cain may drop in the polls true. But the question remains, what happens if/when he doesn’t?

            Streiff made clear his preference. Just as there are the streiff’s in the Perry world, there are those in the cainsphere who would do the same thing. There are those in every camp who would do the same thing. That was the point of my post.

          • aggie91

            I was talking conservatives in general and specifically those that are more inclined to make a decision from a social rather than fical point of view.

            The 2 problems I have with Cain:
            1. No track record of ‘governance’. CEO’s are basically benevolent dictators. That is not an attractive leadership style for a representative republic.
            2. The has lost his moral compass when he needed it most. These responses have been dishonest from the get go. Makes me sad. He was my #2.

            If Cain was the nominee, even now, I would march into the voters booth and gladly pull the lever for him. Anything, warm or cold spit included is better than Obama.

            Cain has significantly damaged himself. This damage will not show up until the ad wars really start in earnest (IA,NH,SC,FL). He will not be able to respond to them because he has a ton of poorly worded responses on the record in regard to this whole episode. Make no mistake about it. Perry is a master at campaigning, his boneyard of political foes is quite impressive. Perry’s allies will use Cain’s statement against him and Cain will have no rebuttal.

            Perry’s negative will disappear (if past performance is indicative of future results).

            I’m a conservative first, a Perry supporter second. I will vote for the most conservative candidate ‘in my opinion’ that is still in the race come the first week of March. Then I will toil and sweat, an eventually vote for the ‘R’ on the ticket.

            Hopefully all the Perrybots and Cainiac will do the same. Afterall we have a country to save. Not a cult of personality to uphold.

          • romansdaughter

            The lying he keeps doing,..why didn’t he just tell the truth at the beginning?? That is wrong!

          • carolynr

            If he would not support Perry, supported TARP, supported Romney in 2008…what makes him Conservative? That does not take into account the STUPID answer he gave concerning ProLife

          • tyman

            I just thought of something regarding Cain’s support of Clinton in ’92.

            Clinton is obviously PRO-CHOICE. Why would someone who is ardently pro-life EVER support Bill Clinton? I don’t think they would…it’s just that clear cut. You would vote for someone like Slick Willie who would appoint the justices that he did? When was Herb’s epiphany to be conservative and pro-life? Clinton was a disaster for the Supreme Court and we’ll probably be paying for that for years to come, as well as Obama’s appointments. Sorry, I don’t want another guessing game about how what kind of justices Herb will appoint.

            You can find my posts about Cain supporting Clinton, so I don’t want to rehash all that, but it is worth thinking about. Actions speak louder than words.

            Plus, regarding Mrs. Cain, with the way that she has voted in Democrat primaries for the last 7 years, you really have to wonder. If he can’t convince his own wife to vote Republican, I just don’t know.

            I just don’t buy into the fact that Herb is so conservative. Anybody can say anything to get elected. Remember Clinton talking about the middle class tax cut on the campaign trail? What actually happened? He raised taxes on everybody (including raising taxes on Social Security benefits by 90%)! Which, by the way, I’m happy to see that Gov. Perry is the only one who gets that Soc. Sec. benefits should NOT be taxed! Now, seniors can afford their own prescription drugs!

            If it’s true about Romney attacking Rick Perry with robocalls in Iowa (that’s right, he still has to attack Rick Perry at 6%), you have to wonder why Romney has to go after Perry and not Cain. I think Cain’s always been a spoiler for Romney.
            I think it’s rapidly going to come down to Perry and Romney.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            hoo, have you?

      • johnnyoh

        I have been reading these forums here at red state for a while. I find most of the discourse to be engaging and informative. However this last week has made me sick. Last night I finally decided to get a username and post for one simple reason. Bzip you have been nauseating. I am not trying to attack you personally but your constant barrage of postings about Perry Perry Perry Perry is worse then I have ever seen from the most dedicated Paul supporter. You have finally went the last step and said you can’t vote for Cain no matter what. I would encourage you to be careful with your declarations. After all you really seemed to hate that Mr Cain said basically the same thing about Perry. Im begging you as an avid reader of these forums to stop. I can’t believe a mod has not tried to address this in some manner or another. I am never one to stifle free speech but if you continue then I will simply do something else.

        In the interest of full disclosure I punched my radio the day I heard what Mark Sanford was really doing on his time off. I hate these stories. It’s disheartens how many otherwise good men have been taken down as a result of misdeeds with a woman. Even poor David could not overcome their charms. I have waffled back and forth with support for Gingrich and Cain. If it came down to it I would surely choose Perry over Romney but I’m not sure I would vote for Romney over Obama. I’m not ready to carry water for four years. It might be four more years of Obama but when it’s said and done it won’t be conservatives who are outcast because of terrible policies. I say all of this so you know where I stand. I can’t promising that I will keep posting but I imagine others out there feel the same as I. If anything your annoying post have turned me off towards Perry.

        Maybe I’m in a bad mood. I gave it 24 hours and decided I still feel the same.

        • avagreen

          both in blaming the candidate for what’s being said here (no control by him), and for the one or two you disagree with.

          There are plenty of supporters of Perry on this forum, yet you pick one or two to base your opinion on?

          *sigh*

          I hope you feel better tomorrow…….

          • johnnyoh

            I was not saying that I would support Perry because of the post, just that the constant post were leaving a negative taste in my mouth.

        • gator_hoo

          This honestly seems to be a theme for the Cain supporters on this site. I haven’t seen many Perry supporters make similar claims on this or other sites, but I have seen Cain supporters say the same on other sites.

          Frankly, I find myself frustrated with how a number of the Cain supporters here act, in particular the obdurate unwillingness to actually engage on policy positions. (For the record, I aalso find myself frustrated with some of the Perry supporters, and have called out posters on both sides.)

          I don’t plan on voting for Cain, unless it is a two man race between him and Romney, and then I am honestly not sure who I would pick, if either. But none of my positions on Cain are based on his supporters.

          Honestly, flipping a coin is probably a better way of picking a candidate than “I’ll show that Internet commenter!”

          • johnnyoh

            Let me walk back. Im not saying I support Perry any less. Forgive my words. I would point out that I dont post about anything. I would gladly talk about positions, but surely you see this week has nothing to do with positions.

            BTW I was not punishing any candidate by showing the internet man. I have already stated that I was not actively supporting Perry, so being turned off by one of his supporters is not really a negative for him. Bzip’s post were aggravating me to the point of getting an account and waiting 24 hours to respond to them.

          • gator_hoo

            You may have walked into a situation you were unaware of. I accept that. I understand your point as well, and even as a Perry supporter, have asked bzip to tone it down at times.

        • Scope

          You have a big problem with bzip saying he won’t vote for Cain no matter what. Then you say that if Romney is the nominee, you won’t vote for him, and will just live through 4 more years of Obama so you don’t have to carry Republican water for four more years. Do I understand that correctly?

          • johnnyoh

            I was simply pointing out that Bzip considered it a huge problem that Cain said the same thing about Perry. I have no such problem. I’m not voting for someone I don’t support. In all fairness I live in Ga and it doesn’t make much difference at this point.

  • clintonformccain

    What if no further proof is forthcoming and Herman Cain wins the nomination?

    Are you kidding me? Have you seen the way that Cain has handled this train wreck? Lying about the allegations and whether he knew about them and whether he knew about settlements? It’s inconceivalble to me that any Republican could still talk in terms of his being the nominee for President of the United States. Am I the only one who thinks this is serious business — that we aren’t picking the next Hopey the Clown?

    • davesinsanantonio

      will defy all logic in their continued support when that candidate is attacked.

      The term “yellow dog Democrat” comes to mind as well.

      The thing is, when their love affair with a candidate turns sour, they often turn to hatred of that candidate. Emotions are powerful things.

      That is why it is better to choose a candidate based on the logic of record, character, and policy statements than emotion. After all, Obummer’s campaign in ’08 was pure emotion–and look what that got us!

  • http://www.AmericanThinker.com Hammer2008

    Full disclosure, I have contributed to Herman Cain’s campaign.

    One of the many aspects that’s troubling me over this is how Mr. Cain, Mr. Block (chief of staff), and Mr. Gordon (spokesman) have so bungled this crisis. If this is how we can expect Mr. Cain to handle a 3am phonecall and crisis in the White House, it might be time for me at least to reconsider my support. At this juncture, I don’t have any faith a Cain Administration could handle another 9/11.

    On a side note, regarding this party that Mr. Cain and the young woman ( who worked at the NRA) allegedly left for his VA apartment, the onus on fraternization, much less harrassment, falls on the senior person in a senior-subordinate relationship. And fraternization is sometimes a matter of perception.

    • Tbone

      “Excuse me, honey, I think this may be for you. What was your name again?”

    • papabear

      I was planning to. However, I had some reservations because of the seriousness of some of the gaffes. I was waiting to see if he was going to regroup and develop a consistent message.

      This implosion has answered that question!!

      Even if he did nothing wrong with the women, the reaction is inexcusable. Quite frankly, the totality of this fiasco is worse than telling me I don’t have a heart.

      The way I see it, there are only 2 acceptable candidates – Newt & Perry. They both have significant baggage, but they are a hell of a lot better than McCain was in 2008. Any other choice will force me to wear a hazmat suit when I roll into polling station in 2012.

      • Scope

        before Perry got in. Are you offended in any way that Cain has had the best fundraising days in his entire campaign despite the current news? What have we become to glorify a candidate that has definite sexual harassment charges against him, with a payout of $80,000 to keep the accusations quiet, and out of the public view. The NRA paid the money, no one denies that.

        • papabear

          If he had opened up with a consistent story up front, I could understand the support. Support for THIS performance????

        • http://www.AmericanThinker.com Hammer2008

          Cain and Cain’s campaign response was abysmal for the first week… the fact that the campaign defended itself as not being ready for 10 days because they weren’t sure what the exact accusations were is pure laziness or incompetence. That’s why good campaings have concepts of operation and contingency plans, then execute accordingly.

  • bzip

    This isn’t going away. Its getting worse and worse;

    Sources reveal new details about Cain allegation
    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/67581.html

    In addition there is this news due out on Friday;
    Restaurant group to respond Friday to Cain accuser request;
    http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-cain-accuser-friday-20111103,0,1050939.story?track=rss

    Yes, innocent till proven guilty but in the mean time we sure have to live with the mess Cain created (not anyone else but Cain).

    • Leon H. Wolf

      I don’t know about anyone else, but I am certainly impressed by your total lack of any sense of shame.

      http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/282165/politico-tawdry-andrew-c-mccarthy

    • onemovoter

      This is what the media is doing when a candidate doesn’t handle a non-story story well.

      I hate that media does this but it’s the way they get attention they want. I just hope it will be blown over soon.

      • captkirc

        And use the money he’s raised to hire a legitimate top of the line campaign manager. If he were to do that, he would demonstrate he is serious about winning this thing and it would also stop all the headaches that his amateurish campaign staff has repeatedly caused him.

        • clintonformccain

          cover for his total ignorance of foreign policy by surrounding himself with top advisors?

          • davesinsanantonio

            nt

      • davesinsanantonio

        of blowing over???

  • uhangtight

    Thanks for a the voice of reason.

    I think so many are ready to proceed to guilty as charged as they want their candidate on top, which he plummeted from like a meteor. Do meteors rise again? Doubtful. These folks in their inner most selves know this to be true and are venting their frustration through attacking the other candidates in an extremely unreasonable manner. Is Cain guilty? Only God, Cain and the anonymous victims know for sure. So far, to me, sounds like someone was easily offended and was looking for some cash.

    Have a good day and thanks for the thoughtful piece.

  • rightwingmom52

    not only for what you’ve said, but also the way you’ve said it. The entire primary process thus far has been disheartening to say the least.

    I’ve made no secret of the fact that I am a Cain supporter, however, if he is proven to be guilty of actual harassment (i.e., more than a look that made some unnamed woman uncomfortable), I’ll reconsider. Now, I realize the next question some may ask is how could I continue to support him. My answer is that a lot of things can happen between now and March 13 (the Alabama primary). There could be any number of allegations, missteps, gaffes, bad debates, flip flops, or what have you with regard to each and every candidate before I vote. And if that’s the case, I won’t be cheering about it regardless of which candidate might be affected, because in the long run, it hurts us all. Or least the “us” I thought we were.

    And for the record, (1) I agree that Cain’s team has not handled their response properly, and (2) I don’t think Cain should have pointed the finger at Perry’s campaign without rock solid proof. However, two wrongs don’t make a right, and I’m not willing to withdraw my support for Cain based on alleged actions for which I’ve neither heard nor seen proof.

    And the offer that I made to retire05 a while back stands to anyone. If you can find a comment where I have bashed Governor Perry (not criticized or had a difference of opinion, mind you), I’ll make a donation to his campaign, and I’m quite willing to provide proof that I’ve done so.

    • retire05

      many times this question:

      What is there in Herman Cain’s history that tells you how he will govern?

      And you can correct me if I’m wrong, but I bet you were a Palin supporter in the beginning.

      Pick any of the candidate, Santorum, Bachmann, Newt, hell, even Ron Paul, if you don’t like Perry or the Ken Doll. Each one of them have a record, a history and you can pretty much know how they will govern. But Cain is nothing more than a blank slate where nothing is written.

      We [conservatives] knashed our teeth when the Democrats, and independents, elected a guy with almost no federal history. We warned that someone with such a light resume would NEVER be a good president. We were not wrong. Obama will do down in history as the worst president ever. Now you support someone with NO resume in governance, not even a position on a city council. Why? Are you so willing to assume the position of the left who voted for Obama simply on hope and blind faith?

      Until you can answer the above question, you cannot really defend your chosen candidate.

      • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

        would run from it, screaming, as quickly as he could. We had had plenty of opportunity to see how John McCain governed as a US Senator, and still almost nominated him for president in ’00, and DID nominate him in ’08. Sometimes, given the choices, a blank slate can actually be the best choice. Could Cain actually govern any WORSE than the man we have in the White House right now?

        I’m with RWM: let’s not convict a man on scant (if you can EVEN qualify it as scant) evidence. I’ll grant you that his initial responses have not been well thought out, but we may get a better chance to see what he is made of through this “trial” than we have had of any of the other candidates running. How many of the others have had to face this kind of adversity in any of their governing?

        • retire05

          about one of the women being a bad employee; about the NRA finding all the accusations “baseless”; about Perry’s campaign being behind the leak. When do you put the burden of proof on Cain?

          How do you know Cain would be better than Obama? By all the wise advisors Cain has already surrounded himself with? If his campaign manager is any indication of the “wise” people Cain is going to surround himself with if elected, we might as well stick with the devil we know.

          When in all our nation’s history, have we ever elected someone like Cain with absolutely NO governing experience? When?

          • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

            At least that’s how the U.S. judicial system worked, last I checked.

            How do you know Cain would be better than 0bama?

            I don’t. But how do you know that Perry, Gingrich or Romney would be any better? Based on past performance, Romney would have signed Obamacare into law; Gingrich was all for a health insurance mandate when he was speaker and then there’s Perry’s Gardisil executive order. While all these positions can be defended by their respective supporters, there is no guarantee that any candidate would govern better than The One. My gut instinct, which is a better indicator than all the political analysis you can do on ten fingers and ten toes, is that ANY one of the R candidates would do better than Zero-man.

            How do you know Cain would be better than Obama? By all the wise advisors Cain has already surrounded himself with? If his campaign manager is any indication of the ?wise? people Cain is going to surround himself with if elected, we might as well stick with the devil we know.

            If you are so inclined, you can stick with the devil that you know–I’m going to vote Republican, no matter who the Republican nominee is–even if it’s a gay wiccan.

            When in all our nation?s history, have we ever elected someone like Cain with absolutely NO governing experience? When?

            George Washington, Ulysses S Grant, Dwight D. Eisenhower. All had military experience; none had governing experience. In all three cases, we needed someone with military experience in the White House to deal with: GW: aftermath of a war with an occupying force; USG: aftermath of a civil war; DDE: aftermath of WWII, a current war with North Korea, and the beginnings of an arms race and space race with the Soviet war machine.

            Right now, we are facing an economy on the edge of a cliff with stagnant job growth. We need someone with business experience. That’s either Cain or Romney. Romney would tell you that the sky was green if it would get him elected. I don’t trust him. That’s why I am willing to give Cain a chance to work through this scandal. If you want to throw him under the bus and re-elect the boob in the White House, then do so. I am, as yet, undecided among the non-Romneys, so I will give all the candidates a chance, Cain included.

          • avagreen

            *sigh*

          • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

            Some rebuttal.

          • izoneguy

            Communists or Marxists hanging around with Perry or Gingrich…
            Now Romney I am not so sure about.

          • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

            All the communists are working in the West Wing.

          • avagreen

            First, let my first impressions out of the way.

            I1. I find it interesting that you hold something against Perry for which he’s apologized and taken actions to concerning this issue, but WILL support Cain for something he’s not apologized for. Strange, indeed.
            2. Haven’t seen any remorse from this guy, but lots of finger pointing (at the women), at his accusers (’cause I’m black), at Perry’s campaign (with no proof) (and after Block, his head guy, said the campaign didn’t hold Perry responsible after all), etc. and so on.

            Yet, you seem to be in Cain’s corner, but …….. not Perry’s? How do have any guarantee (I think that’s what you said) that Cain will not continue to act in this manner and in the haphazard manner in which he’s deposed himself so far??

            Now for the apologetics regarding Gardisil:

            Governor Perry issued an Executive Order (EO) (RP#65, February, 2007) which mandated that all Texas girls be vaccinated prior to their admission to the sixth grade. Parents were allowed to opt out of the mandate by filling out an affidavit.

            Perry was rebuked by both houses of the Texas legislature to which he LISTENED AND THEN OVERTURNED his EO by a veto-proof margin. Seeing the writing on the wall, Perry did not sign the law nor did he veto the overriding legislation. He subsequently rescinded RP#65 with another EO (RP#74) and the issue is now dead in Texas. UNLIKE THE CURRENT OCCUPANT IN THE WH, HE LISTENED TO THE PEOPLE, AND HAS SINCE APOLOGIZED OVER AND OVER.

            As of July 2011, legislators in at least 41 states and D.C. have introduced legislation to require, fund or educate the public about the HPV Vaccine and at least 20 states have enacted this legislation, including Colorado, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Virginia and Washington. Source: National Conference of State Legislatures.

            Gardasil was believed to be a way to stop certain types of cancer among young women. Studies appearing in The New England Journal of Medicine in 2007 found that Gardasil was nearly 100 percent effective in preventing precancerous cervical lesions caused by the the strains that Gardasil protects against. Gardasil?s effectiveness increased when given to girls and young women before they become sexually active. Gardasil was found to be extremely effective in preventing several (but not all) of the strains of HPV known to cause cervical cancer and genital warts.

            Cervical cancer is the second leading cancer killer of women worldwide. In the United States, nearly 10,000 women are diagnosed with cervical cancer each year and 3,700 women die.

            In June 2006, The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended administering the vaccine to girls between 11 and 12 years of age, before they become sexually active.

            ?PERRY’S “JUSTIFICATION”
            Perry maintains that the justification for his executive order making the shot mandatory was twofold: 1) that the vaccine offered a chance to save lives that might have otherwise been taken away by cervical cancer and, 2) that insurance companies wouldn?t cover the $360 cost of the vaccine ($120 for each of a 3-shot regimen) when it was simply an optional ?recommended? vaccine. That put it out of the reach for most low-income Texans. This from the Time Magazine article (linked above), ?Some pediatricians and gynecologists are refusing to stock Gardasil because many insurance companies reimburse so little for the vaccine, which costs $360 for the three required doses.?

            When Perry mandated Gardasil, it would have become part of a school-related vaccine package which was then covered by insurance for simply the cost of a co-pay.

            HIS APOLOGY:
            When a voter in New Hampshire confronted Perry on the Gardasil issue, here?s what he said, ?I signed an executive order that allowed for an opt-out, but the fact of the matter is I didn?t do my research well enough to understand that we needed to have a substantial conversation with our citizenry,? he said. ?I hate cancer. Let me tell you, as a son who has a mother and father who are both cancer survivors.?

            Perry said he?d invested government resources in cancer cures, adding, ?I hate cancer. And this HPV, we were seeing young ladies die at the early age. What we should have done was a program that frankly should have allowed them to opt in, or some type of program like that, but here?s what I learned ? when you get too far out in front of the parade they will let you know. And that?s exactly what our legislature did.?
            http://peskytruth.wordpress.com/2011/07/19/rick-perrys-negatives/#comment-1047

          • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

            If you look back through my posts on this site and others, I have adamantly defended Rick Perry, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich and many other R’s who were being attacked for this or that. I was not attacking Perry, I was rebutting retire05′s argument that Cain was damaged goods and would be worse than 0bama. I’m sure that you are familiar with strawman arguments.

            In regard to Perry and Gardasil: if I had a daughter (all my children have been of the four-legged type), she would have received a Gardasil shot at the appropriate age, because I am convinced it is a life saver. Sorry if I my rebuttal gave you any other impression. Also, I am a big supporter of Rick Perry (Texas is my birth state).

            In regards to my comments on Obamacare and Romneycare, I am not against health insurance. I personally have health insurance. But I don’t like a governor or a president telling me that I HAVE to buy health insurance. It’s my choice, not the government’s.

            In regards to my support for Cain, I have been accused of workplace harassment in the past. Not of a sexual nature, but had a co-worker who didn’t like the way I “looked” at him or the “tone” of my voice. I can understand Cain’s lashing out under his present circumstances, and have been quick to say that he’s going to have to make some apologies and mea culpas before this thing ends. But I know what kind of situation he’s in, and I can’t say I would react much differently under the circumstances. I’m not going to condemn him until all the facts are known, and he resolves his current “conflicts.”

            Throwing friends under the bus is something liberals do, and I wasn’t throwing anyone under the bus–I was apparently making a bad attempt at equivocation, and apparently touched a nerve with the Perry/Gardasil comment.

            Again, my apologies.

      • johnnyoh

        Alot of conservatives were concerned because Obama lacked experience in any position public or private. I’m of the silly opinion that Private experience trumps Public experience in 99% of the time.

        I would point to his history in the private sector turning around ailing businesses.

      • rightwingmom52

        Maybe not the first time in your life?

        I like Palin, and I think she was smeared in a thoroughly despicable way, as was Christine O’Donnell (who I agree was not a great candidate). And I agree with the way Breitbart described those who failed to stand up for Palin. She was the reason for any enthusiasm I had in ’08, but I think she made some poor choices along the way. Moot point anyway since she decided not to run, and I honestly don’t know if I would have supported her or not. However, you’ll find no comments here at redstate from me urging her to run, I don’t recall ever donating to her PAC (but it’s possible I did at one time – as pointed out before, I’ve donated small amounts to a lot of conservatives). But that was a nice attempt to paint me as the dreaded Palin supporter who has oft been maligned as empty headed and running on pure emotion. The diary where I posted this comment sums up my thoughts about Palin here.

        As for the Cain/Obama comparison, you don’t speak for me as a conservative. My objection to Obama was that he had no experience except as a community organizer which is quite different from Cain’s resume which is loaded with business experience. Further, I’ve had a belly full of career politicians who know how to reach across the aisle and/or get things done. There’s a long line of presidents who had government experience who have gotten us where we are today.

        I have other reasons for supporting Cain that are more personal and have to do with relationships with very dear friends who I’ve tried to convince for years that conservatism is more in line with their values and presents much better principles by which to live. Cain is the first conservative who has given me an opportunity to break that barrier which is why I have been so upset to see the direction our (generally speaking) disagreements have taken. These are good, hard-working, salt of the earth people – not political junkies, but they pay attention. We are not going to win them over by tearing down our own which is why I’ve tried to be very careful about what I say about any of the candidates. These are folks that I have recommended come to redstate for their political education if you will, and I emailed diaries to them on a regular basis that I thought were particularly good at promoting conservatism, including my own which covered RSG03. Not because of any great pride of authorship in my own writing (I’m not a writer by nature), but because I linked to the speeches of Cruz, Williams and others who represented the big tent and spoke so eloquently about their own path to conservatism.

        Now you may not find these reasons compelling, and that’s fine because I don’t have to defend my reasons to you. I answer to my own conscience and to my family and my God, and right now, I’m confident with my choices. That may very well change before March 13, 2012.

        Finally, you’d better watch it with the “assume the position” phrasing. That kind of talk could get you slapped with a harassment suit. It’s the kind of talk that makes women uncomfortable.

    • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

      around these parts has picked up a pitchfork yet. Leon put into words what I have been feeling the past few days, and, yes, this entire process has been extremely disheartening.

      Yes, Cain and his team have some ‘splainin’ to do, and some apologies to make and some crow to eat, but let’s leave the pitchforks and the torches for the real monsters, and give this situation a chance to reveal itself in totality without making rash judgments.

      • rightwingmom52

        I agree 100% with your post upthread, although I have to admit I’d have a little trouble voting for a gay wiccan.

        • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

          Be careful whom you stereotype. Sometimes they might surprise you.

          • Melody Warbington (a/k/a rwm52)

            I used to work with a self-proclaimed wiccan, so perhaps I am a bit biased.

      • aggie91

        Will that be good enough for you?

      • aggie91

        Will that be good enough for you?

        • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

          For now, I’m refusing to throw him under the bus, but it doesn’t mean I’m committing to voting for him either. I’ve seen some very good people fall into the flailing game when they get sucker punched by something like this. At this point, there is possible recovery from said game. It’s going to take some cool heads.

  • Darin_H

    My wife’s company instituted a policy that a supervisor cannot request to be a friend on Facebook with one of their subordinates (they already have a dating/spouse policy in place).

    As for Cain, there is a heckuva lot of smoke billowing around.

  • gator_hoo

    ” I would like to know something about the identity of the people making the complaints and the particulars of what Herman Cain is alleged to have done”

    I think a bigger deal is being made of this than is justified. By this point, it is clear that Cain knows who the women are. If your best defense to the question of “Have you ever been accused of sexual harassment?” is to ask “By whom?” then there is a very strong chance that you should not be the Republican nominee for president.

    • davesinsanantonio

      incidents come out, Cain’s response has been more than troubling. Especially considering that he had ten days advance notice that this was all going to come to light. If this is the best he can do with advance warning, how would he respond to another sneak attack, economic collapse, or natural disaster?

      Very troubling indeed!

  • runner12

    I am a Perry supporter, but I in no way rejoice at these allegations surfacing. My first instinct was that it was just another hatchet job by the MSM and not true at all. Cain’s handling of the situation has had me doubt my initial instincts from time to time. But I have decided to pass no judgment until the truth comes out. These are serious allegations and if they are true, we need to know now. We also need to know if they are false because a man’s political career and personal life are at stake right now.

    As for the story in the conservative news outlet that had multiple corrections, the fact that they had to retract so many of their earlier statements leads me to believe they did not do much fact-checking. This story right now is suspect to me and more details need to emerge before any definitive conclusions can be made.

    My main issue with Cain right now is his baseless attack against the Perry campaign. It is hurting the conservative movement and making our candidates look ridiculous. It needs to stop now and a full apology needs to be made. We have completely lost sight of why we won in 2010 and the principles we fought for. It is disgraceful.

    I will only add that to all some of those Cain supporters who claim they will never vote for Perry based on these false allegations, shame on you. Shame on you for becoming so enthralled with your candidate that you have lost all objectivity. If you do not want to vote for Perry because you do not like his ideas and policies, fine. But do not reduce the election of the highest office in the land to a popularity/personality contest. Conservatives are better than that.

    • congressworksforus

      I don’t buy that anyone on the GOP side who’s spent 15 minutes reviewing Obama’s record would actually not vote for whomever we nominate.

      FWIW, I think the “attack” on the Perry campaign shows that Perry’s got his own problems; the way they handled the attack was attrocious. All they had to do was say “not us” and then talk about Perry’s own platform. Instead they have, again, found themselves embroiled in conversations they didn’t need to be involved in.

      It’s like everyone thinks you have to be squeaky clean to win. Nonsense.

      Really… 15 minutes reviewing Obama’s record… that’s all it takes…

      • runner12

        They said “not us” and moved on. I am not sure what else they could have done. I think theu handled it perfectly, minus the one off the cuff comment by Sullivan regarding Romney.

        Other than that, Perry and Co. have shown a lot of class. Especially Mr. Anderson.

        • runner12

          The only reason Perry was ever involved to begin with was because Cain dragged him into it by making false allegations.

          • kcdude

            radio interview that suggests Cain is not being truthful in his denial of sexual harrasment and Wilson is reported to do work for a pac that supports Perry.

            I look forward to the truth coming out about this entire matter. It will force Cain from the race or strengthen him.

          • runner12

            staff. Running a super-pac for a candidate and being on his campaign team are two very different things. Perry has no control over what Mr, Wilson says to a certain extent.

            Also, in defense of Mr. Wilson he was a witness to an incident. It is not as if he is speaking out based on second-hand information. Criticizing him for speaking out is ludicrous. Questioning whether he was objective in his analysis is a valid question.

          • kcdude

            dragged Perry in. I have no problem with Wilson speaking out as long as he is telling the truth. My comment was that Wilson does work for a pac that supports Perry. I agree that is does not appear to be a direct campaign relationship but it is a connection. There was not another tie to a different campaign identified in the articles I read. Those are the facts as I understand them.

            I wish Wilson had been more forthcoming with exactly what he observed. If Cain has a problem, I would rather it come out now and for all of us to be able to move on – for me it will likely be Perry. If this is a gotcha with no legs, it is unfortunate for Cain but I think he will overcome it.

          • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

            Right now, I am on the fence, with the Ken doll being the only candidate I am not even lukewarm on. Don’t get me wrong: if Romney gets the nomination, he will have my vote in November, but I fully support the rest of the candidates in the primary, and haven’t decided on which horse to place my bet.

            But if this turns out to be a gotcha campaign against Cain, he WILL be my choice in the primary, if for no other reason than that a great many of the left want him out. That tells me that he is the one they fear the most.

          • gator_hoo

            You do know about the rock story, right? The one that Cain jumped on and carried for the media?

            You do know that Texas newspapers have carried ads offering money to people who claimed to sleep with Rick Perry, right?

            The reason that this story got traction is because there are two possible answers.

            1) I have never settled a sexual harassment claim, or

            2) I have settled a sexual harassment claim, it was not an admission of guilt, it was simply the best way to handle the situation. It was many years ago, and the situation is well behind all parties involved. Thank you, next question please,

            Cain has given a train wreck of conflicting accounts, including complete denials, misstatements, and “revisions.”. It’s not because the left hates Cain most that this story got legs, it’s because Cain gave the story legs that it has legs.

          • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

            NT

          • runner12

            That is just not a fact-based statement. The only reason Perry even commented about the story is because Mr. Block, Cain’s Chief of Staff, went on national television and claimed that the Perry campaign leaked the story. I saw it live on Fox. You can get the transcripts.

            Mr. Wilson, according to his interview, chose not to reveal the details because he did not want to say anything until the victim chose to speak out. Was that a little cheeky? Maybe. But if the incident was as bad as he is intimating, he may have felt it was his duty to come forth.

          • kcdude

            working for a pac that supports Perry must not be fact based. Read it for yourself. If you check a timeline, that story came out before Block started his diatribe. FWIW, I think it was both stupid and wrong for the Cain camp to attempt to lay blame.

            I would not call Wilson speaking out cheeky. I would say that it is sort of disingenuous to make the claim in the manner he did. He does make the alleged incident sound bad and that is all the more reason that he could have been more forthcoming.

          • Scope

            are not allowed to contact or communicate with the candidate. That is the FEC rules. Wilson is operating on his own whether Perry likes it or not.

          • kcdude

            campaign disavows Wilson’s actions which I do not think he should do at this point. Perry has been spot on in his response to the entire matter. I am not against Wilson doing an interview and giving facts if he can show that Cain should not be a nominee. I am not now saying nor have I ever said that Perry’s camp orchestrated this. I am just saying that a pac supporting a candidate is a tie to that candidate. I am also saying that I wish Wilson had been more forthcoming.

          • thirstyboots

            “Running a super-pac for a candidate and being on his campaign team are two very different things. Perry has no control over what Mr, Wilson says to a certain extent.”

            I hope you don’t.

            Wilson will do whatever it takes to benefit Perry and hurt his opponents.

          • davesinsanantonio

            For crying out loud, have we not had enough of this liberal crap that we are all to blame for a criminal’s behavior???!!! Now a candidate is responsible for everything anyone says about him??? Or, about some other candidate??? That is just ridiculous!!!

    • papabear

      Consider his first attacks (the multiple statements that he could not support Perry as the nominee). Now add in the recent Perry attacks.

      What is Cain’s game? Is Cain a stalking horse for Romney? Something seems very wrong to me!

      All the questions aside, I can make one early conclusion. As a former Cain supporter, I am deeply disappointed in how he has handled this. I have a hard time imagining how I could ever take another ride on the Cain train.

    • rightwingmom52

      but your statement about voting goes both ways, and I agree with you. However, there are some avid Perry supporters here who have said they would “never” vote for Cain. Shame on them as well.

      I will vote for the GOP nominee in the general, probably even if it’s Ron Paul.

      • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

        Ron Paul every time! He’s not my ideological choice, but if he’s the R nominee? H-E-double hockey sticks YES, Ron Paul would be my man in November.

  • congressworksforus

    Meanwhile, in the first poll done since the allegations broke, Cain leads the GOP nominees (Rasmussen). This is the first time he’s led in this poll.

    I think I might write a diary on this whole thing to underscore to all the self-proclaimed experts on here why he’s leading, why this wont hurt him (short of something really bad — with evidence — coming out), and why he’ll likely win the nomination and win the general election.

    I know, now some of you are huffing and puffing and I am totally crazy…

  • aesthete

    While you only mention it briefly, though, I feel that it is relevant to focus on the entirely unseemly and palpable glee that many candidates’ supporters have broken this story. Focusing on RS in specific, several Rick Perry supporters have undertaken the task of letting the world know how good this is for Rick Perry, as well as the even more ignoble duty of tsk tsking Cain supporters for supporting a KNOWN RAPIST!!!!!!! I don’t support Herman Cain. I find his handling of the scandal to be highly disappointing, and his behavior towards subordinates to be highly concerning, considering that he is an unproven candidate seeking an office with much power and little accountability or transparency. In short, I’m not in Herman Cain’s corner. Nonetheless, this behavior on the part of Rick Perry supporters — and to a lesser extent because of their lesser numbers, Romney supporters — is absolutely unacceptable and a disgrace to their candidate, who has wisely stayed mum on the subject.

  • satchman3

    I hope enough details come out so that we can each draw our own conclusions about Cain’s behavior.

    I also don’t buy into the narrative that he has handled it poorly. They were a little slow with denials out of the gate but it didn’t take long. I find the subsequent clarifications to be reasonable as you can’t expect Cain to remember or even know all the details from events so long ago. I think he’s doing a good job of clarifying and denying. If damaging details come out from the women then there’s no amount of PR that can fix it but that hasn’t happened yet in my opinion.

    Good article – nice to see the other side of the coin after a rash of heavily critical front-page diaries.

    • aesthete

      Because the charges are that serious at this point. They are allegations at this point, and by no means do I think that Cain supporters should abandon someone for hearsay — but neither should they be so locked in to their candidate that they will stand by him if these allegations are backed by fact.

      • satchman3

        I’m not a Cain supporter but I hate to see him get tossed aside on unfounded allegations – and I’ll admit I’m a little skeptical of sexual harassment accusations because I’m not exactly sure what behavior qualifies.

        If he raped somebody he should have been prosecuted and jailed – I expect the statute of limitations makes that impossible now but she should file a civil suit and make him pay.

        • tngal

          A Pajama media this that started out huge, but then piece by piece they had to retract.

          Streiff has it up here at RS, and also noted there are corrections now. The sources were switched, there was no varifiable taxi, and there was no bed that can be verified. Its all very silly.

          There was also a story by a guy who did polling for Perry’s superpack who said he saw an incident where Cain ….blah blah..but now cbs has somebody at the same event who says no, there was no harrassment.

          http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57317941-503544/source-disputes-account-of-cain-impropriety-at-va-dinner/?tag=cbsContent;carouselBar

    • Tbone

      “…you can?t expect Cain to remember or even know all the details from events so long ago.”

      Dude, he had 10 days notice to refresh his memory, make up plausible lies, get his team on the same page or front run the deal with honesty. He did none of these.

      Cain is either an egotistical fool or a clueless idiot, take your pick

      • avagreen

        something that’s not being reported widely in this effort to keep this poor man ignorant and innocent of all charges.
        ?Cain, who has been married to his wife Gloria for 43 years, did tell at least one campaign staffer this year about the possibility that claims of sexual harassment could surface, according to the aide. Cain, this person said, described a case in which he fired an employee in 1990s and the woman alleged sexual misconduct or harassment. Cain told the campaign staffer he had beaten the case and that the woman had paid for his legal fees. The aide had no further details?.

        Information about the incidents was apparently closely held, even among association board members. But one woman?s complaint apparently did make its way to at least some figures on the governing board when, at an association event, one board member got word that a female employee had complained about Cain?s advances, according to a source who was at the event.

        The source said the board member asked the woman directly about the episode and was told that Cain had invited her up to his suite at a prior association event.?

        “This year” in this article = 2011 when the article was written.

        • gator_hoo

          Ava,

          Following this link goes to page not found.

  • wbf

    I just listened to the Steve Deace podcast for 11-2-11. He interviewed John Zeigler. He made some pretty strong assertions about why the conservative media wants to protect and promote Herman Cain and why that will help their ratings for the next year and pave the way for Obama’s reelection.

    • izoneguy

      and actually cut down government to size and
      let the job creators loose we might have a chance…

      Of course then Hannity, Rush & Levin would not have
      as interesting shows if they could not slam Obama.

      • avagreen

        Another conservative?

        Darn that Roger Ailes and those that follow him just to keep their flipping jobs.

        • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

          during six years of Republican majorities in both houses of Congress with a Republican in the White House.

          I really don’t think Rush and Sean are all that dependent on libs in power. Libs in general give them plenty of material to rail on.

          • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

            And don’t forget, they’ll still have Ruth Buzzi Ginsburg to rag on.

          • avagreen

            do you think while practically ignoring another until this week?

          • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

            but I’m sure that Rupert and Roger both have their favorite candidate, too. What you have to remember is that we are being fed propaganda from all mainstream media outlets (one of the reasons we all tend to congregate here), and the trick to finding out what’s really going on is to listen to ALL the propaganda from ALL the outlets. Since each has its own agenda, they do not work in concert the way the old Soviet news agencies did. If you hear enough of the propaganda from as many sources as you can, you can actually divine the facts. It’s all a matter of perfecting the bovine scatology detector and using it effectively.

          • avagreen

            I was responding to this comment of yours after comments were made about Fox by me and izoneguy:
            I really don?t think Rush and Sean are all that dependent on libs in power. Libs in general give them plenty of material to rail on.

            Hence, my question about Fox, the subject between me and izoneguy, to which you responded a bit off-keltere with an answer about radio.
            ??
            I see your point about radio and any new org, but still think FOX is a
            <emfox in a henhouse" at the moment that needs for some reason to push anyone but Perry, a conservative, but the push Romney and Cain. Gotta be a reason.

            My answer: Ratings. They are wanting to take MSNBC’s crowd per Ailes wanting to go “moderate”.

            I think it would be hilarious if they lost all their conservative viewers (or a big chunk) to an alphabet news org becasue the coverage there was more fair and balanced, which up to this point is proving to be the case with Perry.

            At any rate, it’s too late to get too involved.

          • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

            I do think that Fox will have to go way past moderate to take MSNBC’s viewership–they tend to be hard left.

            The comments about Hannity and Rush were what put me onto conservative talk radio, since both their radio shows are carried on one of the AM stations here in Nashville. And I could swear my posting was a reply to izoneguy’s posting. I guess I clicked a few inches too far south. That’s okay, it’s been very spirited tonight. Looking forward to discussing topics further.

            Have a good night, avagreen.

  • RebelRoss0587

    Rush Limbaugh went so far today as to read an entire letter on air designed to make people think Gov. Romney?s campaign was behind the leak of the current Herman Cain controversy. Fortunately, Hot Air saw through this ploy and presents a more likely source for the leak. Even Herman Cain?s own campaign is blaming an advisor to Rick Perry for leaking the story. Furthermore, a pollster for one of Rick Perry?s Super PACs is pouring fuel on the fire in an effort to end Cain?s campaign. Rush?s listeners should be outraged that Mr. Limbaugh would stoop so low as to pick up on an obvious smear like this and present it the way he did. http://mittromneycentral.com/2011/11/02/president-obamas-super-pac-priorities-usa-launches-another-round-of-attacks-on-mitt-romney/

    • avagreen

      Furthermore, a pollster for one of Rick Perry?s Super PACs is pouring fuel on the fire in an effort to end Cain?s campaign.

      Link?

      • kcdude

        radio interview on KTOK. They have a podcast of the interview on their site.

        • avagreen

          Cain Campaign Backs Off Blaming Perry Camp for Harassment Story

          epublican presidential contender Herman Cain?s campaign, under pressure within his party to clarify years-old allegations of sexual harassment by the candidate, backed off accusations blaming a rival, Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, for reviving the accusations.

          Cain campaign manager Mark Block said on Fox News today that he accepts the denial of Perry strategist Curt Anderson, who Cain previously said leaked the allegations to the news media.

          ?All the evidence we had pointed to Mr. Anderson being the source,? Block said on Fox News. ?We are absolutely thrilled that he came on your show said it wasn?t him. Mr. Cain has always had the utmost respect for him.?

          As the Perry campaign denied any role in the matter, prominent Republican Party figures, including Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour and political strategist Karl Rove, urged Cain yesterday to lift confidentiality restrictions on two women who accused him of harassment during his leadership of the National Restaurant Association. Cain has said the harassment charges are false.

          Cain?s personal life came under scrutiny as he claimed a lead among Republicans seeking the 2012 presidential nomination, with some surveys placing him ahead of former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney among Republican voters nationally. The resolution of the harassment questions could reshape the party?s contest two months before the Iowa caucuses start the nomination process on Jan. 3.

          Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus said this morning on NBC?s ?Today? show that ?this issue and other issues are going to come and go? and that the controversy wouldn?t harm the party?s chances of winning the White House next year. Referring to Cain?s earlier claim that the tip about the harassment allegations came from Perry?s campaign, Priebus said it wasn?t his role to be the ?referee in here.?

          ?We?re not the Sherlock Holmes of the presidential primary field,? he told NBC.

          In an interview with Forbes magazine, Cain accused Anderson, a former consultant to his unsuccessful 2004 Senate campaign in Georgia, of leaking the damaging information. Cain said he had discussed the charges with then-consultant Anderson during a conversation about opposition research.

          ?I don?t recall anyone else being in the room when I told him,? Cain said of Anderson.

          Anderson said yesterday he had never heard about the charges until they were reported earlier this week by Politico.

          ?I have great respect for Herman and his character and I would never speak ill of him, on the record or off the record,? he said in a statement.

          The Perry campaign also released a statement denying any involvement in leaking the story.

          ?There is not one shred of evidence that any member of the Perry campaign had anything to do with the recent stories regarding Herman Cain ? because it isn?t true,? Perry spokesman Ray Sullivan said in the statement. ?We first learned of the Cain accusations when we read the story in the news.?…

          • circlegranch

            Irony? Cain is in trouble over accusations. He claims there’s no proof and he’s being unfairly and falsely accused. Let’s review: the hunting camp rock issue–without proof, Cain fired off a hateful accusation at Perry. He never apologized. Now Cain accuses Perry of conducting a witch hunt. Another accusation, without proof, is leveled.

            Seems Mr. Cain enjoys making accusations based on his feelings and interpretations but doesn’t allow the same consideration to women at NRA that also had their own interpretations about things he said to them. He claims they didn’t get silence money but rather were simply ready to change jobs anyway, so NRA dished out a year’s salary. How many jobs have you left of your own accord and was gifted with a year’s salary as a ‘thanks for playing’ prize? This seems to fly with the radio talkers but it doesn’t with the average person. There is inconsistency after another from the time this started and he refuses to even admit that he’s bumbled it. I’ve also never heard him say that he’s sorry or offered an apology to the Republican Party, conservative movement and tea party caucus for the unfortunate distraction this has caused and that he was wrong for not addressing it and containing it back when Politico told him what they knew.

            Looks like Mr. Cain likes to set the rules for everybody else but lives by his own version. Support, respect and votes must be earned. I see nothing compelling about Herman Cain that would encourage me do any any, let alone send him money with which he’ll buy copies of his book and give them away on campaign stops.

          • avagreen

            I’m not holding my breath.

            If he does, I’d like to hear about it because I seriously don’t like the guy right now just as much and to the degree that I don’t like the nordic-looking Anderson Cooper at CNN (?).

          • retire05

            when I heard Cain on Hannity today. Cain said that if anyone had any proof of the claims they are making against him, let them give up the documents, etc. that proves their claims.

            WTF? Is Cain not making bunch of claims himself? We know at least one woman involved wants to make a statement through her lawyer, and has asked that the NRA release her from the NDA. Why hasn’t Cain come out and said “I am asking the NRA to release all the documents in these allegations, with the women’s names redacted to protect their privacy, which will substantiate my claims?” But he hasn’t and Mark the Moron, who runs Cain’s campaign said Cain will not make that request.

            Hannity’s interview as a big a softball interview as I have ever had, Did you, Herman, have a corporate apartment? No, Sean, I had an apartment when I was with the NRA, but, but…….. Where was the question from Hannity if the NRA PAID FOR that apartment?

            Cain has accused one of the women of being a bad employee. Where is his proof? He has claimed the accusations were found “baseless.” Where is his proof? He has claimed the Perry campaign was behind the leak. Where is his proof?

            Meanwhile, the Fox bunch carry Cain’s water. Hannity’s show tonight, once again, is all Cain all the time.

          • kcdude

            with a link to the podcast was the first item result. Try www.ktok.com. I wish Wilson had been more forthcoming – if not constrained in some manner legal or otherwise.

          • avagreen

            Cain Campaign Backs Off Blaming Perry Camp for Harassment Story

            see above.

          • kcdude

            from blaming Anderson. He would not back off from blaming the Perry campaign. FWIW

          • kcdude

            Block did say it was time to move on. Not sure anyone can really do that at this point but it is what he said.

          • avagreen

            Republican presidential contender Herman Cain?s campaign, under pressure within his party to clarify years-old allegations of sexual harassment by the candidate, backed off accusations blaming a rival, Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, for reviving the accusations.

            Cain campaign manager Mark Block said on Fox News today that he accepts the denial of Perry strategist Curt Anderson, who Cain previously said leaked the allegations to the news media.

          • kcdude

            to make it easier just watch the Block interview for yourself. If you view it you will see that what I am saying is so.

      • http://www.theconservativereview.com/ mporcius

        http://www.theconservativereview.com/2011/11/02/perry-operative-accuses-cain-of-sexual-harassment-to-politico-of-course/

        • avagreen

          Thinks it’s been clarified that this guy runs a PAC for Perry and is not a spokesman for Perry.

          Here’s the rest of the story on that page which was reported on November 2, well beyond the first story.:

          t?s starting to get pathetic, folks. Now we have Chris Wilson, called by Politico a ?veteran Republican pollster and former National Restaurant Association employee,? running to the Obama campaign anti-Cain news outlet to accuse Herman Cain of sexual harassment….

          But Mr. Wilson, couldn?t you at least confirm who the victim or witnesses were so we can get specifics?

          Wilson said there were at least three other people at the gathering but wouldn?t share the name of the woman for publication.?

          Of course he wouldn?t.

          Oh, and remember how in the title of this post I called him a “Perry operative”? That?s because if you go down almost to the very end of the story, there?s this minor detail:

          Wilson is a Rick Perry supporter and does polling for a Super PAC that supports the Texas governor?s presidential bid.

          Oh really.

          And then there?s this little bit of news?according to Christopher S Wilson Online,

          His political career includes time spent working for KARL ROVE as Executive Director of the Republican Party of Texas when George W. Bush was Governor of Texas.?

          And we all know how much Karl Rove likes Herman Cain.

          My added take: It’s been rumored that Rove is working with……ROMNEY behind the scenes.

          ??

          Besides the fact that all the confusion now since Block (Cain’s guy) has said their campaign no longer blames the Perry campaign.
          http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/BNSTAFF-BNTEAMS-CNG-DCAA/2011/11/03/id/416770?s=al&promo_code=D6CB-1/etc

          And, then Cain right after that is still blaming Perry for it. ??!!!???
          **crazy**

        • http://www.democratsforsale.blogspot.com soonermom

          Chris Wilson does not deserve to be lied about which you just did. The story originally broke on KTOK radio with Reid Mullins not on Politico. He didn’t go to Politico but he had to clear his name after the Cain camp attacked him as a leaker when he wasn’t and granted them an interview. If you had bothered to check you would know he doesn’t work for Perry but for a Perry leaning PAC.

          It was also said on KTOK if the whole story came out, it would be the end of Cain in politics.

          Go ahead and defend Cain and lash at at Wilson but Wilson was there when the people at the table tried to get Cain to stop from harassing a young college graduate. Shoot the messenger and protect Cain. I will take the word of Wilson over Cain any day! I know he is honest.

          • runner12

            I heard the interview on KTOK first, before the national media even reported it.

    • gekster

      well, it has to credible then.

  • gracepmc

    Thanks for the voice of reason. Let’s get the facts as much as possible. There has been enough irresponsible and just plain incompetent behavior to go around — from the initial inadequate reporting, to Cain’s clumsy handling of this, to inaccurate and premature and sometimes almost “gleeful” conservative treatment of this issue. Now, certainly candidates for President should be as close to beyond reproach as possible. Public figures — political or otherwise — are held to a higher standard. That said, we have only to look at Weinergate or the Clinton “classics” to know that standard is often violated. That said, and here is where I will go out on that limb, I am somewhat taken aback that “we” see this as something other than what happens and happens frequently in WDC, in corporations, in organizations — anywhere power or the perception of power is mixed with alcohol and bad decisions. Whatever happened I don’t reasonably think there was abuse of power, rape, or in fact any real fault. Being in and around WDC in the 80s and 90s I have stories that would make this pale in comparison among the powerful, perceived to be powerful, famous and wannabe famous. With willing parties on both sides, albeit with some regret or remorse the morning after. So, while I realize and agree that there are higher standards of conduct and issues of honesty and integrity at stake here, they are truly being transformed in this sludge of politics. I am not assuming any actions on the part or Cain or the claimants. And I should mention, should someone think I am a sexist whatever, that I am female. My 2 cents.

  • clowngirl

    Thank you for the thoughtful piece Mr. Wolf.

    Reading what you wrote, I find that I also would like to know with certainty exactly what Mr. Cain was accused of and see for myself how credible the accusers seem– but at the same time, the likelihood of getting those details seems remote.

    I would think the best that could be hoped for would be a redacted version that protects the identity of the accusers.

    The women didn’t ask to be put in the middle of a National scandal and it seems extremely unlikely that they will want to come forward and be endlessly grilled by the press, recipients of a mountain hate mail, and forever known primarily for being as one of the women claiming to have been harassed by Herman Cain.

    My point being, we are most likely going to have to make a decision about whether or not to nominate Mr. Cain without knowing all the details of the claims against him.

    Another possibility that warrants serious consideration is that we won’t be able to get full details of the accusations during PRIMARY season but that – if Cain were the nominee — there could be pressure on/incentives for the women to come forward with the full story during the general election. Meaning that nominating Cain could be a time bomb of unknown magnitude.

    Unless the pajamas media piece was an outright fabrication, it sounds as though the charges are of a more serious nature than just some irreverent humor (which is what I first imagined — thinking of Cain’s joking about electrified fences and such) and we should be realistic about what can be cleared up with more information. Whatever he may say, Mr. Cain is not likely to be exonerated by the report which comes out. If it was possible to actually prove the charges were not true it seems unlikely the NRA would’ve paid $35,000 and $45,000 respectively.

    What seems likely is that the reports contain enough information to make the claims sound plausible without having actual proof – and we’ll be left in pretty much the same position we are now (though with Mr. Cain probably looking worse)

    For my part, I’ve already decided that I won’t be supporting Herman Cain for President of the United States. When under pressure he showed himself to be a very different man than the impression I previously had of him.. I already was developing some reservations based on his 9-9-9 plan, numerous gaffes, lack of any prior political experience, lack of knowledge in a lot of areas, etc. But I thought somewhat well of him (Romney was previously the only candidate I actually disliked or distrusted- having a positive opinion of the rest to some degree though not thinking they all should be President) But Mr. Cain’s extremely hostile reaction to being vetted, his willingness to lash out and make unfounded accusations, and his utter lack of judgement has thoroughly convinced me he should not be President of the United States,

    There’s a saying that goes something like “You can’t keep people from spreading lies about you, all you can do is live in such a way that nobody will believe them..”

    Herman Cain has not done this — he’s been accused of serially abusing his power — and he’s come across as a man who doesn’t want to be questioned, and who quickly turns nasty when he’s challenged and is not getting his way.

    In short he’s acted, not only like he’s guilty of the charges made– but like someone who *in the present* still has the same character traits.

    He doesn’t have to be proven guilty in a court of law — the burden of proof is on him to convince voters he can be entrusted with the Presidency of the United States.

    He didn’t lose this voter because of some smear — I’ve decided he’s unworthy of support based on his own current actions. (Though Cain was previously only my third choice anyway — and that assuming he could quiet my doubts)

    • bzip

      Really nice post with many good points. I would recommend others read this and use this thought process.

      Thanks for saying it.

      • clowngirl

        I like Rick Perry — but do wish he was a better debater!

        But he’s been a good Governor, great at retail politics, managed to rattle Romney, and his energy and tax plan look solid. And it’s nice to have a Commander in Chief with military experience.

        I’m basically a Newt supporter and am not surprised he’s come up in the polls. But I’ve took basically an Anybody-but-Romney policy and have looked for a second and third choice — and now that’s pretty much been amended to better-be-Gingrich-or-Perry.

        Seems like if you put the two together (and delete the negatives) you’d have the perfect candidate. Whichever of them wins the nomination, I hope the other is the running mate. They compliment each other well.

    • cbartlett

      Your last statement says it all: “I’ve decided he’s unworthy of support based on his current actions.” We don’t need anyone else in the White House with questionable character – we’ve had plenty of those in the past.

      Above all – we HAVE to stop eating our own. We need to concentrate on each candidate’s view on the issues so we can make educated choices. We MUST quit giving the Democrats ammunition and sound bytes to defeat whichever candidate ends up with the nomination. Enough already.

  • bonnman

    Cain is now damaged goods. Continued support and defense of Cain and his questionable actions risks damaging the entire Republican brand. He needs to do the responsible thing and immediately drop out of the primary.

    • tyman

      nt

    • Leon H. Wolf

      If someone accuses Romney of sexual harassment, can we also make him drop out before there’s a vetting of the accusations?

      • wennejunk

        The dropping out part anyways, but the point is spot on.

      • bonnman

        three women that have claimed sexual harassment. Two of them were given cash settlements. Cain has had enough time to answer honestly and explain things, he hasn’t. First he denied it and now just evasively responds with unclear and ambiguous statements. If Romney did the same, then yes, absolutely yes.

        At this point continuing to defend Cain’s actions both past and present looks as if Republicans would rather cover up a pattern of sexual harassment than be denied their candidate and that will damage the Republican brand. And as for “vetting the accusations” this is politics not some personal exoneration quest for Mr. Cain.

    • bzip

      Again thanks for saying what I have been saying.

      I keep getting bashed for saying it. I keep being told I am too harsh, well I see way too many others saying and asking the same things I have been and all of our questions go unanswered but clearly bashed.

      • davesinsanantonio

        Or, maybe that just me.

  • hoosierchristian

    …and my own default position is that these are baseless charges timed because, coming into this, Cain was (a) looking increasingly like the nominee and (b) is a prominent black conservative. I can wait to see – and am eager to find out – just what the specific allegations are and how much merit there may be to them. This is either a cheap hatchet job (a la Clarence Thomas) or something that could legitimately sink Cain’s ambitions for public office, depending on the credibility and seriousness of the accusations.

    That said, I continue to be baffled by the mass of conservatives who prefer Cain to Perry. Cain has no record of conservative governance versus Perry, who has a very strong one and is certainly the most qualified in this respect among the contenders. Cain doesn’t stand up for conservative ideas any more than Perry does. Cain’s 999 is very NON-conservative, introducing a national sales tax without getting rid of the income tax and Cain has demonstrated an alarming naivete (and ignorance of government) in his belief future congresses and presidents won’t raise taxes. Perry’s plan is far more growth-oriented and feasible to pass congress. Whatever Perry’s debate performances have lacked – and he’s been reeling from being ganged-up virtually since his debut – Cain has made a number of unforced errors in debates and Cain’s repeated misstatements and missteps on the campaign trail have betrayed a far more serious lack of judgement and ability than anything Perry has demonstrated, not least of all underlined by Cain’s handling and flubs on these harassment charges.

    Throw in the complete and utter vitriol with which Cain has gone after Perry, while essentially telling voters that if they don’t nominate Cain, the Herminator will be endorsing Mitt Romney. If Cain believes Romney would make a better president than Perry or Gingrich then one must wonder on what basis Cain believes that. Is Cain so willing to sacrifice his allegedly rock-solid conservative credentials? Why not? He’s flip–flopped on the Fed. He’s demonstrated a dangerous lack of knowledge of foreign policy issues this summer/fall, which is shocking for a man who has hosted a conservative talk radio show for the past three years. Rick Perry’s support of Israel won’t be mistaken any more than his bedrock pro-life values. Either Cain doesn’t mean what he says or he doesn’t say what he means half the time.

    Cain also plays the race card when it suits his purposes (i.e. attacking Perry on the “N-word” non-scandal) and accuses others of playing it when he’s the target of attacks (i.e. these sexual harassment allegations). Most disturbing perhaps is Cain’s repeated breaking of the 11th commandment, going for Perry’s jugular, the latest of which is the absurd accusation that the Perry camp leaked the sexual harassment story. In the one corner is a man who speaks out of both sides of his mouth, has no record of accomplishment in public service, displays a shocking lack of knowledge about basic policy issues involved with the job he’s applying for, plays the race card when it’s convenient, and has gone on record as being happy to support the least conservative contender in the race but wholly unwilling to support the only conservative with a record of accomplishment in a publicly elected executive office.

    In the other corner is the best candidate we have out there who has been assaulted for two local policies, neither of which were particularly controversial outside of this primary, both of which are more conservative than the records of the other major contenders, and who is crucified because he doesn’t debate well in a 7 (plus the moderators) against 1 setting.

    If you support someone besides Rick Perry, that’s fine. What is increasingly indefensible to me – and has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not the sexual misconduct allegations prove to be true – is how you can support HERMAIN CAIN ahead of him.

    I’m really curious. Anyone want to make their case because I just don’t see it.

    • tricianc

      This is what I’ve been saying and more.

      • avagreen

        ^^

    • gator_hoo

      I have tried to engage Cain supporters numerous times. There are strong reasons to believe that Cain is actually more moderate than conservative. I’m going to do a diary on it soon, too busy so far. I will try to set aside time tomorrow, since it seems to be necessary.

      Anyway, the point is they won’t engage you on policy. At least I have earnestly tried to get engagement on policy for the last several days, and have been unsuccessful. Your mileage may vary.

      • bzip

        I have seen so many other post like these asking and saying the same things I have been saying.

        Thanks for saying it. It needs saying,

      • libdestroyer

        I ANXIOUSLY AWAIT your upcoming hit-piece. LOL

        pro-life = conservative
        pro-business = conservative
        pro-defending our borders = conservative

        If you want to talk about policy, why don’t you bring up specific reasons why Cain is not a true conservative?

        All you seem to be able to do is say you’re “confused”

        • gekster

          pro lying = liberal
          pro changing his story = liberal
          pro blaming a fellow Republican with no facts = liberal
          pro useing the race card when an acusation is brought out = liberal
          pro playing race card before knowing all the facts = liberal

          • libdestroyer

            Herman Cain is the frontrunner :)
            eat it.

          • libdestroyer

            none of these things you’re talking about makes cain liberal.
            Even if you believed these things the worst you could call him is a bad person.

            His ideology is conservative but you people are too bitter to see that.

    • libdestroyer

      “Cain?s 999 is very NON-conservative, introducing a national sales tax without getting rid of the income tax”

      What’s non-conservative about asking the people who pay NO income taxes to pitch-in? What’s non-conservative about lowering the corporate tax rate from 35% to 9%?

      “Cain has demonstrated an alarming naivete (and ignorance of government) in his belief future congresses and presidents won?t raise taxes”

      Up until now a politician can easily say “hey we’re just taxing those evil rich people” and tax increases are accepted by most taxpayers. What this plan does is remove the class warfare card from the politicians. By simplifying the tax code and removing loopholes, we no longer have GE and other govt. cronies getting off tax-free. THINK ABOUT THIS: Will it be harder or easier for a politician to raise taxes when everybody know it will directly affect them? (answer: harder)

      “Perry?s plan is far more growth-oriented and feasible to pass congress.”

      PURE opinion. BTW, nobody thought Reagan could get the congress to cut the top marginal rates.

      “He?s flip?flopped on the Fed”
      No he hasn’t.

      “He?s demonstrated a dangerous lack of knowledge of foreign policy issues this summer/fall, which is shocking for a man who has hosted a conservative talk radio show for the past three years.”

      That’s why presidents have advisers. If you think candidates know all about foreign policy then it is YOU who is demonstrating naivete. Why do you think so many Presidents change their mind on war policy that they declare as candidates? It’s because the generals and staff brief them on what is really going on.

      “Rick Perry?s support of Israel won?t be mistaken any more than his bedrock pro-life values”

      Uh yeah, so does Cain. Sure I can agree he bungled the abortion topic (he needs work in the PR/Media department), but he has a solid pro-life record that must be acknowledged.

      “Attacking Perry on the ?N-word? non-scandal”

      Most Cain people (including myself) did not approve of this move. He heard from us and promptly dropped the issue. Yes a mistake.

      “Most disturbing perhaps is Cain?s repeated breaking of the 11th commandment, going for Perry?s jugular”

      OOOOOOH so you didn’t watch Perry and Romney go at it in the last debate, talking over each other with constant attacks? Matter of fact that’s ALL Perry has done. Perry wasted an opportunity to talk about his new tax plan to attack Romney once again. Bad move… that’s why Perry has Ron Paul numbers now.

      “In the other corner is the best candidate”

      Definitely your opinion. The man probably walks on water right? No mention of his policies regarding illegal immigration or forced vaccinations. Nono, those were all BASELESS attacks right?

      “who is crucified because he doesn?t debate well in a 7 (plus the moderators) against 1 setting”

      There are 3 big prime-time debates for the general election candidates. If he can’t debate then that is a FAR bigger issue that you are making it out to be.

      “is how you can support HERMAIN CAIN ahead of him”

      1. Because HERMAN CAIN is not a career politician.
      2. He’s run businesses and turned them around, made them profitable, dealt with employees and created jobs in the private sector. He had an ACTIVE ROLE in these ventures (instead of just presiding over them)
      3. He brings a simple, common-sense, positive message of conservatism to a country that’s starving for it.
      4. He’s black and we want to prove we aren’t racists (obvious sarcasm) :)
      5. He’s the frontrunner and therefore has the best chance to beat Mittens Romney.
      6. He’d destroy Obama in the general.

      OK so there are my answers. I’m not sure why you Perry people are so venomous towards Cain. His campaign is over right? At least that’s what the WIZARD OF SMART ERICK ERICKSON says.

  • tricianc

    Now the Cain camp said they might sue Politico. For what? Cain himself confirmed the story as true.

    Also, I believe the whole story should come out now. I believe Cain will not win, he will only split the conservative vote and give us Romney. Also, I do not want to sit through these primaries waiting for that shoe to drop, wondering, wondering if it will.

    But what if Cain does win the GOP nomination? I worry if it doesn’t come out now and Cain wins, this will come back in the General. I’d rather have it now in the friendly fire path of supporters of Republicans than in the bombing of the General with Obama, Independents and Democrats.

    One of the women whose apt the interviewer went to, was full of Obama love. Said Obama pictures and memorabilia everywhere and confirmed she was a Democrat.

  • tricianc

    On both an Atlanta radio show and the Sean Hannity show, Cain blamed Perry again.

    • avagreen

      Or, dementia?
      Poor memory (again?)
      Hoping no one would notice while taking advantage of a worldwide stage?
      Dishonest?
      Left hand doesn’t know what right hand….

      ………….what else do you think?

      • http://www.democratsforsale.blogspot.com soonermom

        I have seen enough of Cain and Hannity bending over backwards to make sure he supports Cain to last a lifetime. Hannity is not honest in his interviews even a little or he would disclose the facts about his connection to Cain.

        This is one Republican Conservative women who will never vote for Cain and if he gets the nomination because our pundits refuse to tell the truth and consider it the women’s fault, then the Republican Party deserves to go down and it will go down hard. Women for the most part are not going to vote for him. The liberals will have a field day with Cain and the Republican Party. If Cain had any ethics he never would have run with this in his background. Guess he figured the women had been paid off to keep their mouths shut. Really stupid.

        When he went after the Perry and his campaign again, I turned off Hannity and Cain for good. Cain cannot seem to tell the truth and if he refuses to allow these women to talk, they should do it anyway. Cain only wants his side heard and not the other. I have had it with him and the pundits that are treating these women like second class citizens because they dared come forward. The lies just keep mounting up and his attacks on Rick Perry, Curt Anderson, and Chris Wilson are totally disgusting.

        Already have been disgusted with candidates blaming the media for gotcha questions but this is way beyond that.

        Tired of the good old boy network that has formed in the punditry except for a few. I don’t like how they immediately came out and backed him without any facts except his word. Just like the liberal media did with Clinton. I don’t see the difference right now. When the lies were found out, they didn’t see anything wrong with it. I hear one more person say the women were misunderstood, I think I will scream.

        Been in the same position as these women except I had men in the office that backed me up against the senior civilian who couldn’t keep his hands to himself and made lewd comments.

        If men treated women like they would want their wife and daughter treated, this would never happen but some men are extremely arrogant and believe they can say and do anything they want. Cain seems to be one of those with his attacks on Perry on the rock which he never apologize and now these attacks. Is he attacking Perry because he knows Perry would never do anything like that and why women have donated to him more than any other candidate?

        • Matthew Morris

          I suggest you listen to a podcast of today’s Mark Levin show… or any of the previous day or two for that matter.

          There are several big issues at stake here. Whatever Herman Cain did back then is at the bottom of the list. Why?

          1) Because nobody knows the truth about the details
          2) Particularly because of #1, those other issues far surpass the the matter in terms of importance.

  • atlracer35

    I agree with much of your article but when you state

    “I find that the way these charges were reported by another prominent conservative website today was irresponsible and reckless.”

    Just go back over the past days and read all the articles from “Streiff”…completely irresponsible and reckless but based on his past articles here, he does what he can to stick it to Cain.

    I know…this is not a “news” site so nothing wrong with opinion pieces…just wanted to point out here at “RedState.com”..I mean “PerryState.com”…you guys did the same thing. Just saying.

    And…honestly….I’ve never seen a bunch of readers falling so easily for allegations from anonymous sources!

    • avagreen

      Just that Perry (supposedly) isn’t the one that leaked it.

      • avagreen

        or maybe they’ve changed their mind again.

        Let’s see what 5 minutes brings.

        • clintonformccain

          My head hurts every time I have to listen to Cain’s incomprehensible answers on that one. Apparently he hasn’t figure out that everyone who hears his answer starts scratching their head. It’s like gibberish.

          • libdestroyer

            doesn’t sound drunk when he speaks.

  • uncmike

    I am for Rick Perry because of his record in Texas, one of the most conservative and prosperous states in the union today, and I like the various plans he has produced since getting in the race. However, let’s review. When Perry jumped in, and rightly noted Social Security is nothing more than a Ponzi scheme, almost all of the rest of the field–particularly the Romney camp–jumped on him as if he’d said something out of this world. And this went on for at least a week. Then at one of Rick’s early debates (maybe his first), he was attacked by Bachmann et al., over the Gardisil issue and the in-state tuition for illegals legislation. Perry had the integrity to admit he hadn’t handled the Gardisil issue well, but Bachmann still used it as a club. As to the in-state tuition flap, whether Perry supported that legislation or not, it would have become law because of the support it enjoyed in the Texas legislature. He and many other voters in Texas favored the law and, at least, he hasn’t backtracked on his stance–again something I consider in his favor. Then, in another debate, Cain and others jumped on Perry because of the nothingburger “rock with the N-word” issue. IMO, Cain pulled out the race card in bashing Perry over this issue dragged out by the WAPO as nothing more than a left wing hit piece on Perry. Then Cain suggested he wouldn’t support Perry should he be the nominee. And now, Cain and Block indict Perry claiming his campaign leaked the story about Cain’s women problems–without any shred of proof whatsoever. No wonder Perry is now where he is in the polls–who should be surprised considering the tarring and feathering the other Republican candidates have administered to Perry. So, the whole Republican race has been a disgrace from the beginning in my view and I’m disgusted by it. I’m especially incensed that Perry, who does have an extensive public record to judge him by has, instead, been judged by a mob sporting torches and pitchforks–a mob consisting of the other Republican candidates. In 2008, I could not bring myself to support McCain so I stayed home. I came out in 2010 because I consider myself of the tea party persuasion. Right now, the only Republican candidate, other than Perry, I would support would be Newt, flawed as he is.

    • clintonformccain

      The Republican field really needs to start giving people a reason to vote for them rather than making us scratch our heads thinking they must all be on crack or something.

      I mean Cain and his campaign manager can’t even mangage to agree on the same lie to explain why the candidate doesn’t know China has nukes. How incompetent can you get?

  • charm2

    Politico came out with these vague accusations about Cain. They didn’t identify specifically what it was that Cain was supposed to have done. They didn’t have an accuser that had come forward. And with that skimpy garbage conservatives started with, “what if Cain did it?” How about starting with, “There they go again. What is Politico, this known smear merchant for Democrats, up to?” and leaving it there till they have something. It is very disappointing to see conservatives turning into henny penny at the least little provocation from liberals. Tell Politico to prove it and stand by conservatives instead of abandoning ship. Stop dancing to the dim’s tune.

    • celador2

      At some point Laura Ingraham has called for a boycott of POLITICO based on a caller who so requested a picket. POLITICO should put up facts or shut up.

      Why are these women who have filed no charges being protected?
      Bill Clinotn had his accusers face to face in media, but Cain accusers are protected.

  • txpat

    Bowed out of Greta interview on Fox scheduled for Friday.
    Wonder why change heart?

    • celador2

      Maybe Gloria is no Hillary or maybe she wants to give the press less power than they have assumed to date. Afterall the press have provided no details in the allegations they call upon Cain to defend. Gloria is not the candidate and need not be on camera pleading for her version of facts as opposed to media and nonspecific accusers.

      Smart woman.

  • celador2

    …..do not meet the standard NOT to back the man. Cain has little understanding of foreign policy nor has he expressed any ideas to the broader public than debate soundbites, I oppse a new sales tax. He lacks a camaign org!

    I see a vote for Cain as a vote similar to the 2008 vote for Obama. No experience seems more competent to fix our ills than exerience.
    But based on the smears and old charges to date the accusers have not met the Bill Clinotn targets ofr sexual harrassment level–recall Jones, Lewinsky, Brodderick or Wiley standard of disclosure. Accusers need be speciifc and have a face. They sure have a loud fog horn monotone voice.

    And our imaginations go wild as we fill in the gaps.

  • darl444

    It really doesn’t matter who leaked the fact that Cain had at least two charges of sexual harassment while at Restaurant Association. It is a fact that there were two, and are relavant to an election, especially a conservative candidate, where personal behavior counts more in the selection process than it would in a liberal contest.

    Cain, and his campaign should have just owned up to the fact that the info was now out in the open and deal with it. I was very disappointed about how Cain, and his campaign staff was not prepared to handle the situation. After all, Cain should have known, this would come out in a Presidential race. Better it be before the Primary, and not after.

    It’s not so much the fact that there were allegations, but the fact that the Cain campaign first reaction was more about blaming someone else for tipping off the media that has reduce my support for Cain.

  • http://www.nucre8ion.org nucre8ion

    with this whole thing. The only “conservative media” personality who makes any sense about this is Rush L! He is the only one so far questioning the source of this fiasco while the rest of you flush Cain down the crapper. If Cain is guilty of any of this and the JURY IS STILL OUT so what? If he raped anyone, where is the police investigation? If he got a woman pregnant, where is the kid? If he said an inappropriate thing to a staffer WELCOME TO THE REAL WORLD! Who hasn’t?
    This is a hatchet job to destroy a man and its CONSERVATIVES who are doing it by validating a NON STARTER.
    Like Rush says, the “victim” (if there is one) woke up alive and without a stained blue dress.
    For a bunch of supposedly “Constitutional” conservatives who espouse the Bill of Rights, where is the innocence until proven guilty?
    If Cain is destroyed by this then ANY CONSERVATIVE can be destroyed by an ALLEGATION. Liberals WIN! America and the promise of our liberty is lost.

    • tngal

      The sex story bombed, the politico crap is still just as thin as it was in the beginning. Maybe they were hoping others would pile on. Who knows. There is a story on Daily Caller from the man who was Chairman of the Board of the Association back when Cain was there and he calls this a hatchet job.

      Don’t get exhausted fellow Cainiac! Keep up the strength! Its needed,

      “To Iowa and Beyond.”!!!!!!

      (Its sounds like to Infinity and beyond, if you hold your mouth just right)

      • libdestroyer

        is being done more to the credibility of Erick Erickson that it is to Cain. How can a man continue to call himself an expert political analyst when he’s consistently wrong on his predictions?

        UPDATE: Herman Cain is still the frontrunner.

    • carolynr

      Let’s just give Cain his story…lock, stock and barrel. What bothers me is that Cain did not tell the truth. He contradicted himself…which is another polite way of saying that he did not tell the truth. That’s the issue.

      Just like Clinton…it wasn’t about the BJ…it was about lying under oath.

  • themarathonman

    the character assassination of Herman Cain is perfectly OK…..

    • libdestroyer

      because they call themselves conservatives that supposedly HATE polished career politicians, yet criticize Cain for not handling this “scandal” in a more polished fashion.

      They want Romney and they don’t even know it!
      :)

  • libdestroyer

    in an otherwise ridiculously biased Perry propaganda blog!

  • rulken

    Herman Cain still have all my support and backing. I believe in him as a man of integrity ! I know nothing, of those staying in the dark throwing stones, except that they are not man, or woman enough, to come forward, step into the light, that would judge you as someone with a competent chariture, capable of accusing such a man as Hermin Cain!

  • mspector

    Cain has not handled this well, and the lack of professionalism in his campaign has hurt him. That said …

    As for the allegations of the NRA employees, if their allegations were all that serious they had the chance to take them to court. They did not. They took money to shut up and go away. End of story. To me it doesn’t matter what they might have said at the time if they were offended enough to pursue the matter; they didn’t, and it’s done.

    PajamasMedia deserves at the very least a pie in the face for thoughtlessly repeating a half-baked account of events that did not happen, and then “retracting” it in the usual manner: having run the hit piece on page 1 they “retract” it in their version of the obituaries.

    I am not interested in liberals being horrified. Someone needs to count the inches of ink and the minutes of media time on this story and compare it to the amount of attention given to Clinton in the week after the Lewinsky story broke, or the amount of attention given to Edwards in the week after the news of his affair while his wife lay ill with cancer broke. I am certain it will be nowhere even near to close.

    Cain’s amateurish bumblings aside, this is a pure high-tech lynching who horrifies liberals because he does not “know his place”, i.e., picking up the crumbs that the party bigwigs drop from the table.

  • spolson

    Politicians and Business Executives should us my fool proof plan of how to approach women. You approach them and say “Tickle your ass with a feather?” If they smile and take your arm your are golden. If they balk and back away you say, “I said “Typical nasty weather?”

    It helps if it is raining or something. Otherwise you have to make it sound like sarcasm.

    Things to avoid: “Here take this cigar”, ” don’t wash that dress it will remind you of me”, “this is just a right wing conspiracy”

  • williamjameson

    that you nor the so called sites if there really is one. Such smear merchants can’t prove anything said if there really is a such a site. I’d be careful going forward trying to manipulate people into thinking you actually have a clue what your talking about.

    This diary is based on several fabrications by a website that has not been disclosed making this diary irrelevant. No sources equals a diary with no credibility not just because there are ZERO facts to back it up but because the so called facts from some website are mostly lies and liberal like second guesses. Using large CAP letters suggests the writer is motivated to smear as well!!

    The Cain story is SO SMALL that smear merchants fabricate stories on other sites in hopes suckers will think small payouts equal a big scandal. Wow, have conservatives become that desperate to promote a less educated candidate like whom, Romney the lying flip flopping democrats dream RINO!!!

    IN FACT, not only were the payouts small, the SETTLEMENT WAS HANDLED OVER THE PHONE AND BY FAX. Any attorney will tell you a major accusation would result in face to face meetings, depositions and the women would be more inclined to speak publicly. The story looks more like the women were more reserved and conservative in nature and took the words and gestures the wrong way. Remember, the PC environment has screwed up the way people think and react, especially blacks.

    • carolynr

      it’s about the fact that he denied it at first or couldn’t remember it…and then told several more untruths about the incident. See…if there were no validity to any of this…why not get it out in the open before the press defines you? The answer…he man lacks the wisdom and at this particular time in history…we need that badly.
      See…Karl…the fact that he couldn’t remember sounds reminiscent of Clinton’s first response to the MSM. The truth is what America wants..not half truths and if the man can’t remember…he shouldn’t be president.

  • williamjameson

    http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/cain-scandal-wife-interview/2011/11/04/id/416910?s=al&promo_code=D704-1

    Wesley Pruden, editor emeritus of The Washington Times, saying, ?If somebody like the Politico reporters would have brought this story to him, he would have thrown them down the steps, and if they survived that, he would have fired them.?

    • williamjameson

      http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/Cain-Limbaugh-Obama/2011/11/04/id/416918?s=al&promo_code=D704-1

      Wesley Pruden, editor emeritus of The Washington Times, saying, ?If somebody like the Politico reporters would have brought this story to him, he would have thrown them down the steps, and if they survived that, he would have fired them.?

  • carolynr

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/03/us/politics/herman-cain-to-review-links-to-a-nonprofit.html?_r=1

    It’s OK Herman that you didn’t know in 2011 that China possesses Nukes. It’s OK that you can’t remember about a settlment in 2003. It’s OK that you have YET to explain your 999 or is it 909 plan to the American people. It’s OK that you have confused your tax plan with a jobs plan. It’s OK that you are giving one group of people a break on your supposed “fair tax” gimmick. It’s OK that you blamed Perry for being insensitive about a rock he had nothing to do with. It’s OK that you have had to walk back just about all your statements…and Mr. Blocks concerning your amnesia with sexual harassment charges.

    However, Herman…it is not OK for you to be president of the United States because campaign finance rules should be followed and your “expert” Mr. Block should protect you…because apparently you don’t know about them. Of course I can understand this, seeing how the money was funneled through Block. And we talk about Chicago politics. tsk…tsk.

    Oh…Folks…while I am at it…where is Romney’s financial disclosure concerning his net wealth…yet to reveal them. Oh well, we the American people are used to “sealed” documents. Another attribute you share with Obama…hiding.