Posted on 12/01/2011 7:04:57 PM PST by Nodems2000
Well what does everyone think after the Hannity interview? I've listened carefully to all his interviews and even though I liked Herman very much, I believe he was involved with these women, even if they are scumbags. First, has anyone noticed how he seems to "prey" on women who are vulnerable and bogged down with financial and legal issues? Second, he has said repeatedly "my wife loves me so much" but he's yet to say "I love MY wife so much". Doesn't that sound very egomanical? Third, he said his wife would never tell him not to run. I'm suspecting she wouldn't dare tell him not to run because she's riding the Cain Train too - the Cain Money Train. If you watched her interview she sure didn't seem to be madly in love with him from things she said. And now he's going to "analyze" the phone bills to see if they match up with hers and he and his attorney will do an investigation. When Sean suggested he could get the info to clear himself very easily, such as videotapes in hotels, plane tickets, etc., etc. he suggested Sean wanted him to play detective! Well, sorry Herman, but it would take all of ten minutes to pick up the phone, call the Ritz downtown Atlanta and ask for videotapes on such a date and at such a time! That would end it once and for all. Him and his "analyzing". God help the 3 a.m. phone call - God forbid the red phone goes off for a missle coming our way - by the time he got done analyzing we'd all be bar-b-que!
Me too.
Your post represents my ideas completely, so once again here is your post;
(Herman Cain represents my conservative views better than most everyone on the stage today. When the character assassins in the media, and on this forum, unjustly stab him in the back, they stab me in the back. I am as Tea Party America as anyone and I take it personally. I’m tired of being stabbed in the back. I won’t help any candidate achieve victory over Herman Cain in this way. False allegations, accusations, and innuendo change my opinion of him not one iota. They only make me further detest the establishment and the candidates the establishment would lord over me. I stand with Cain.)
We all tend to judge others by ourselves. If you are honest, decent , faithful and loyal you think others are the same as you are until they prove themselves to be otherwise.
If you are devious, selfish , a gossip and tend to sneak around a bit, you think others are the same. Usually others don’t stick around you long enough for you to form a true opinion about hm or her.
These women seem to fall into the latter category.
I know. We’re convicting Cain on the most minimalist of evidence. If we were the jury, he’d be getting the chair.
When those emails are released, and they eventually will be. We’ll know better as to whether he’s fit for office or not.
Cain has shown that hes not the deepest guy, perhaps not deep enough for what is expected for a presidential candidate, but to convict him for what hes being accused with the available evidence, is not right.
Agree 100%
(He lied when he admitted that he was sued but said that it was investigated and found to be baseless and dismissed. We then found out that in fact she was paid a settlement.)
Please show proof where he was “sued” and the outcome. Otherwise your credibility is zerol
I still have doubts that he is guilty, as I do believe the left wants to take Cain out to retain the 98% black vote. We already know that the left will stop at nothing. What bothers me is this: where was his wife? Why doesn’t she attend functions with him? Why would he take women out for dinner alone? As a CEO, and as a pastor, there are things you just don’t do, for the sake of showing that you are above board and have no intention of getting into a scandalous position. I think, if he is not guilty, he probably understands that now, but he played it a little loose for someone of his stature.
Personally, I think that if he’d not said he had no skeletons in his closet, there’s be none of this, but once those words were out, the creeps all come out of the woodwork after you. He should’ve been savvy enough to know they could NOT leave THAT unchallenged. It is why I continue to believe that he is probably innocent, but made some unwise decisions meeting with female colleagues or people working for him for dinner, or trying to help them out. He should’ve told his wife, kept his wife with him, informed her of people asking for help in whatever manner. It would’ve saved him a lot of trouble later. 20/20 vision is always after the fact, isn’t it? They tried this with Nicki Halley in SC as well, and she flat-out denied it and told them to put up or shut up. It worked.
Cain’s answers have left a number of people feeling a little unsure. If he is not guilty, he should just say that there are no scandals he has been involved with and these women need to put up or shut up, too! You notice how the stories change. As an educator, I know what this means. Lies. They have to keep trying to make it more believable, so it gets changed a little here or there. Pretty soon it looks so incredible and it all falls apart. Seems like these do too! Who is paying these women? George Soros?
And that destroys Cain's credibility.
Investigator: Herman Cain innocent of sexual advances
Yes, I know. The media didn't spend two weeks 24/7 trying to get this prof of Mr. Cain's innocence out to the public like they spent the two weeks 24/7 trashing him did they?
And it's not because they didn't know about it, because I spend several days emailing the link to the truth every where I could think of. They didn't even try to clear his name they just slowly stopped mentioning it until this new accusation came up and then they gleefully piled on Mr. Cain again. Sad that some find soooo much pleasure in throwing stones, but find it too big a task to pick them back up.
I'm with you! I stand with Cain too!!!
obviously most of the GOP outside FR does not
precisely what Mrs Wardaddy said tonight sitting by the fire after we got the rugrats and other critters to bed...and she was a big Cain supporter...I confess I never was and I have never failed to admit that
I wasn't a big Newt supporter either in this race though I am old enough to place him with Magnus and Rush as part of a threesome of biggest influences for conservatism since WFB and Barry lit the torches 50 years ago...Sarah almost made membership...sad really..she coulda been a contender. She has that same "it" factor the others did/do.
I now support Newt and have since Perry collapsed but I never expected it. He has simply prevailed ..warts and all. I at least know he is capable and will fight and does have a good nose for political winds which are frankly now solidly behind our sails like I have not seen since early fall 1980.
He said the POLITICO story http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/67194.html "Herman Cain accused by two women of inappropriate behavior" was a hit piece with no truth in it. When the story broke his first response was that the story was false and that he was never accused of sexual harassment.
That was a lie. He was accused of sexual harassment at least twice while at the National Restaurant Association.
After those facts surfaced he said that 'yes he was accused of it, but it was investigated and found to be unfounded and no settlement was ever paid'.
That was a lie. There were at least two women who were paid settlements that amounted to a years salary for both of them.
Cain was screwed no matter how he answered the question. If he had said that he knew them, it’s basically an admission that he had intercourse with them and had them bear his children, as far as politics goes. Even if he had only known their first name and nothing else.
He should have told the truth when the story first broke. The truth being that he was accused by two women while he worked at the NRA and they were both paid a settlement by the NRA.
At that point he could have spun it however he wanted and would have been credible but instead he lied twice by the time all the facts came out so what he said after that was no longer believable.
Without context, the admission of knowing somebody means nothing. She said she sent him the texts. She didn’t say that she received any texts from him. Once the info on the texts is released, we’ll have a better basis for evaluating as to what happened.
http://www.myfoxatlanta.com/dpp/news/ginger-white-claims-affair-herman-cain-20111127-es Go to the link, you can watch the video or read the transcripts. Her cell phone bills show text and calls out going and incoming. The sex doesn't matter, what matters is that he hid it from his wife for 13 years, he has admitted that himself. It shows poor judgment for a man, who has at least twice been sued for sexual harassment, to engage in another relationship with a woman he met while working putting himself in a situation that could get him sued again. For the sake of the argument let's both say he never had sex with any of the women. That does not change the fact that he lied to the American people twice and did not have enough sense to avoid putting himself into a relationship that could hurt his wife, himself and his employer.
I have a few women who text me all the time, I don’t send any suggestive texts. They are casual friendships. According to you, I can’t be a Republican unless I admit knowing these women and if I did admit knowing them, I can’t run because my admission of knowing them automatically means I’m sleeping with them. At least according to the Republican standard of accepted behaviour, as defined by many Freepers.
Are you hiding it from your wife? Because if the answer is yes then I would question your judgment too and wouldn't vote for you either.
I swear, Jesus Christ himself could not run as a Republican, if you were to hold Him to this impossible standard.
My standard is not to lie to the American People and not to engage in secret relationships that are harmful to you, your family and people who trust you.
Your Republic wouldn’t even have gotten off the ground if you were to hold the Founding Fathers to the same standard, I guarentee that.
It was held to that standard, it worked out pretty damn good.
Get real, it's all over the media he has even acknowledged it. Two Women who were employed by the NRA retained council and filed suit against the National Restaurant Association naming Herman Cain and the NRA as defendants. Either you've been living in a cave or you don't understand the legal terms.
He is the Statement From the NRA about one accuser:
The allegations against Cain are quite different.
If they have such dirt on Gingrich as has been accused of Cain...settlements, severance, quid pro quo, giving money to a mistress for years without telling wifey...all that and his notion that he did not recall at first even though it was proven he sure recalled in 2003 which caused him to change his tune pronto
sorry...not exactly the same
just for arguments sake if half the Cain stuff is true..in order of marital malfeasance I'd go Newt, Cain and Clinton in order of severity from least to worst with Newt a 1-2 and Cain a 3-5 and Clinton an 11
but don't fret, there is plenty to attack Newt over besides that comparison
and for some of it I don't have a defense and will concede....he has a long track record...a lot of good, some not so good and some I did not agree with at all
I am unaware of any politician I have ever agreed with all the time...not even Palin or Magnus or Helms etc....I even disagreed with Clarence Thomas once over cross lighting and Scalia a few times.
I have disagreed with Rush and Hannity and Savage a lot the past few weeks.
It happens.
I hate to break it to you but Cain is done and I am of the opinion it was self inflicted and not just over the women or the denials but some stumbles in debates and interviews too.
I still have doubts that he is guilty, as I do believe the left wants to take Cain out to retain the 98% black vote. We already know that the left will stop at nothing. What bothers me is this: where was his wife? Why doesn’t she attend functions with him? Why would he take women out for dinner alone? As a CEO, and as a pastor, there are things you just don’t do, for the sake of showing that you are above board and have no intention of getting into a scandalous position. I think, if he is not guilty, he probably understands that now, but he played it a little loose for someone of his stature.
Personally, I think that if he’d not said he had no skeletons in his closet, there’s be none of this, but once those words were out, the creeps all come out of the woodwork after you. He should’ve been savvy enough to know they could NOT leave THAT unchallenged. It is why I continue to believe that he is probably innocent, but made some unwise decisions meeting with female colleagues or people working for him for dinner, or trying to help them out. He should’ve told his wife, kept his wife with him, informed her of people asking for help in whatever manner. It would’ve saved him a lot of trouble later. 20/20 vision is always after the fact, isn’t it? They tried this with Nicki Halley in SC as well, and she flat-out denied it and told them to put up or shut up. It worked.
Cain’s answers have left a number of people feeling a little unsure. If he is not guilty, he should just say that there are no scandals he has been involved with and these women need to put up or shut up, too! You notice how the stories change. As an educator, I know what this means. Lies. They have to keep trying to make it more believable, so it gets changed a little here or there. Pretty soon it looks so incredible and it all falls apart. Seems like these do too! Who is paying these women? George Soros?
by all means if Cain is still around when your primary is on then vote for him
that is the primary season..one’s choice and time to express it
my tagline explains my progression
Bachmann ideologically would be my first pick
Of big names I also like DeMint but he enjoys being conservative kingmaker in the safe Senate seat
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.