Democrats are insane about Cain

UPDATED: The Herman Cain media background check begins
__________________________________________________

they wont leave a single stone or piece of paper unturned. good for them. for some reason, it took them a decade to uncover john edwards exploits. of course, he was of no more use to the democratic party. The info was more or less common knowledge. they wouldnt print unsubstantiated rumors....oh wait.....

Cain is going to get it good. There is no way the media is going to allow a black man, who could steal some votes from obama, to win the nomination.
 
Here is the truth about politico from just before it started:

"Politico is a news web site that will focus on Capitol Hill politics, presidential election campaigns, and Washington lobbying and advocacy groups. It is set to launch in two weeks (Jan. 23) but has made a splash over the last couple of months by hiring the likes of John Harris and Jim VandeHei from the Washington Post, Martin Tolchin from the New York Times, and Mike Allen from Time magazine, among its other stars. The chief financial backer is Albritton Communications."
The Link
 
What else would you expect Cain and his posse to say about accusations he played hide the pepperoni with his foxy ladies?
 
Good point, Perham. Did anyone expect Cain to just jump out and say, yep, I did it. Of course not. When was the last time a politician took the blame for anything unless conclusively and undeniably proven to be guilty (like splooge on a dress)?
 
Much to my chagrin, I need to apologize for my above post.

I should have said "hide the pepperoni with his stable of foxy ladies." My bad.

This is all crap, imo, just lowly mudslinging by Cain's opponents hoping that something sticks.
 
It's all part of a Vast Left Wing Conspiracy.
wink.gif
 
Politico reporter Jonathan Martin, who co-wrote their article on Herman Cain, told MSNBC this morning that he just isn't "going to get into the details" of what Cain allegedly said, did or "gestured." Martin cites an incident that may or may not have happened where Cain may or may not have invited a woman up to his hotel room. Cain's chief of staff said this morning that these charges are questionable at best. Relevant transcript below:



Politico's Jonathan Martin: "And also, what actually happened to these women as well, we want to be sensitive to that, too. It includes both verbal and physical gestures.

"These women felt uncomfortable, and they were unhappy about their treatment, and they complained to both colleagues and senior officials. In one case it involved, I think, inviting a woman up to a hotel room of Cain's on the road … We're just not going to get into the details of exactly what happened with these women beside what's in the story."
__________________________________________________

so since it isnt really known what happened, why publish the story? i have an idea.....
The Link
 
What up Rpubs, no comment on the sexual harassment? I understandar htat y'all don't keep ukranina nurses, but some statement?!
 
let's see facts.

Who are these women? let's hear from them. Hear their story and then let Cain respond to their story.

If it was serious then we need to know
if it was a scam for money or getting revenge we need to know that as well.
So far it isn't much and IMO Politico looks yellow for publishing the allegations then saying they won't report on when where who and how much

has poltico talked to these women? if it was 5 figures was it 10k or 99.9K HUGE difference to let it hang out there
if it was a settled case what are the odds the woman or women agreed NOT to talk.

too many questions . let more come out
 
If anyone haa a quote from one of these women's claims from back in 1999, please post it. Personally, I have not seen any quotes from any specific person making any allegations along these lines against Herman Cain. Until I do, I am certainly not going to be giving these so-called journalists the benefit of the doubt.

There are established standards for journalistic integrity and journalism. The way this story has been presented is clearly a case study example of how you do not do it.

Shouldn't a person have the right to be accused by their actual accuser? Have we seen anything like that here? I do not believe we have.
 
He is denying sexual harrassment. I think the actual language is 'sexual advancement.' Might be the definition of 'is' 'is.'

Hook'em!!!
texasflag.gif
 
Mich??
did you really post that in response to my asking who what where when and how much?


which question I asked do YOU think was answered in the info you posted?
 
Mich
so YOu did NOT post that as a response to my post even though you referenced it?
OK got it

BTW why should Herman Cain reveal anything?
If Politico or anyone other media have actual facts let them report them.
Then it would be up to Cain to refute. and I would want him to.
 
He's divided America more than any other president.

You might look at his predecessor.


He has the poverty rate at an all time high.

uh, no

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/09/13/us/income-poverty-rate-at-1990s-levels.html?ref=us[IMG]

He has insurance per house hold jumped up 10% in 2011.

And this is his fault because? Do you really think that if the health reform plan hadn't passed that insurance rates would be going down?

The talking points go on and on.
 
Regarding Herman, it appears since he has characterized the payment to one of his accusers as a "severance" she has decided to tell her side of story. Stay tuned.
 
If he did it, I hope the person comes forward. But the charges of changing his story seem pretty weak. The changes could very easily reflect someone who had little or no knowledge of the settlement details (it wasn't as if he negotiated it, as I understand it) and now finding out more specific and accurate information as it has come to light.

Clearly he should have anticipated this and been ready to go. In several responses he has made in various areas, he basically looks like someone whose handlers have really had no idea how to prepare someone for a presidential election. But that certainly doesn't mean he harrassed anyone.

EDIT - btw listened to him in a Laura Ingraham interview, and he says that they knew this would come out beforehand, but they had "made a deliberate choice" not to chase it or get details because they were afraid that they would divulge information that Politico didn't already have. So they didn't want to talk about it blindly.

He then explains the "changes" in the story as him sitting down and trying to recall details more of what happened and having a clearer memory of the situation.

Fine, but at the same time, if you know this is going to happen, why are you waiting until it breaks to "sit down and think about it" to get the facts straight. This is a great example of someone who really doesn't "get" running for office. He should have sat down and gotten the details to the best of his ability so he would be prepared when the story did break.

Stories like this are why I don't think Cain needs to get the nomination. I think he would be a great VP or candidate and I think he could become a serious candidate with more seasoning and experience in foreign policy. But I just don't see him being a guy that's going to win a general election.
 
I'm curious why you and the Ann Coulters of the world want Herman in the VP slot when he's leading in most of the polls?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. The Chiefs and that Swift gal. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top