The Media's Cain Mutiny

The Forerunner ^ | November 10, 2011 | Jay Rogers

[jcr4runner]

A forensic expert says Herman Cain is telling the truth while Sharon Bialek is lying.

---

Florida is a closed primary state, so although I am an independent, I registered as a Republican so I can vote in the primaries. I have yet to make up my mind as to who I will support in Florida’s January primary. I find Rick Santorum to be by far the most consistent pro-life candidate. I also consider Herman Cain, Ron Paul, Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry to be acceptable candidates who I would support in the general election. Alveda King (Atlanta pro-life activist and niece of Dr. Martin Luther King) stated that in the Palmetto Freedom Forum, Cain, Bachmann and Gingrich all supported applying Personhood status in the 14th Amendment to preborn children from conception. Ron Paul has made similar statements.

As a Massachusett’s native, I know that although it’s definitely one of the most liberal states, six of the last nine governors have been Republicans, and even Ed King (1979-1983) was a supporter of Reagan and later joined the GOP. That is suprising to many people who don’t know that Massachusetts went for Reagan twice in the 1980s. That being said, the type of Republican that can make it to the governor’s office in Massachusetts must appear to be fiscally moderate and socially liberal. Romney was no different. I have grave concerns that lead me to believe that Romney is a political chameleon and is only pro-life and pro-family in word. On fiscal concerns, every Republican president since Nixon has promised to cut spending and shrink the size of the federal government. All Republican presidents since Nixon have broken that promise once they were elected. I am almost certain Romney will be no different.

Further, we see a sad cycle in the Republican primary process in which either the runner-up or a former vice presidential canidate will get the nomination. This is the case mainly because of Republican governors’ endorsements coupled with the “winner-take-all” rules in many of the later primaries. This has been true for every election cycle since 1960 with only two exceptions.

1960 – Nixon – sitting vice president
1964 – Goldwater – senator from Arizona (exception)
1968 – Nixon – former vice president
1972 – Nixon
1976 – Ford – sitting president and former vice president
1980 – Reagan – runner-up to Ford in 1976 primaries
1984 – Reagan
1988 – George Bush – sitting vice president
1992 – George Bush
1996 – Dole – Ford’s vice presidential running mate
2000 – George W. Bush – governor of Texas (exception)
2004 – George W. Bush
2008 – John McCain – runner-up to Bush in the 2000 primaries.
2012 – ?

Note that the two exceptions were George W. Bush, the son of George H.W. Bush and governor of Texas. Barry Goldwater was a Senator from Arizona. Even here we see a pattern because John McCain was also a Senator from Arizona. So other than the case of Goldwater, the process seems more like a coronation ceremony than a fair process.

In 2008, I was certain that the next Republican nominee for President of the United States would be either Palin, Huckabee, Romney or Jeb Bush. With only Romney declaring his candidacy, I am certain that the rule will hold true unless the pattern of history is broken and another exception to the rule wins out. There is a way that this can happen.

In the early fall, a Florida conservative policy advocate, John Stemberger, wrote an article for Newsmax stating that Rick Perry was the “best hope for a solid conservative in 2012.” Stemberger stated that there were six solid conservative candidates running for the GOP nomination, which I assume are the six I listed above. He mentioned that no one of them is likely to win unless Christian conservatives unite behind one candidate in order to defeat Romney. He then quoted William F. Buckley who used to say that he was not for “the most conservative” candidate, but “the most conservative candidate that is electable.”

In priniciple, I agree with this strategy as long as the “conservative” candidates are true Christians and have upheld biblical principles in the civil sphere.

However, Stemberger went on to say that Rick Perry was the best and most electable conservative. My immediate reaction at the time was that he said much the same about Fred Thompson in the 2004 presidential primaries and supported Bill McCollum in the 2008 primary race for Florida governor — even attacking and damaging Rick Scott, who eventually won the governor’s seat by a narrow margin. However, Perry is another governor from Texas who sounds a lot like George Bush.

I thought, “Well? … Hmmm …”

Since that time, due to abysmal mistakes in the debates, Perry has plummeted in the polls and the “non-Romney” heir apparent is Herman Cain. I began to look more closely at Cain’s 9-9-9 Plan. I am a big fair tax advocate, so at first I was skeptical at having both flat tax on income and a fair tax in the form of a national sales tax. But I soon saw that this was the first phase in getting rid of the tax code on income and that the second phase in 9-9-9 is a fair tax. In fact, the more I learn about it, the more I like about it. It takes a pareadigm shift in thinking to see the beauty and simplicity of this tax code, but I encourage all to check it out at: www.hermancain.com/999plan.

That sold me on Cain as an accepatable candidate. He’s also given over a million dollars of his own money to pro-life campaigns and made his biblical ethics a centerpiece of his 2004 run for Georgia Senate.

Then came several sexual harassment allegations, mostly anonymous, and Sharon Bialek’s claim that Cain sexually assaulted her in a car after a dinner. In watching Bialek’s news conference, my first impression was that she seemed not credible as she batted her eyes and smirked while reading a prepared statement. In contrast, Cain forcefully denied all allegations and seemed to be telling the truth with foreceful conviction.

Someone is a pathological liar. Either it is Cain and he is very good at it or it is Bialek and she is less polished.

Even MSNBC’s Hardball host, Chris Matthews admitted that the allegations were so specific that they knowable. It is possible to go back and either confirm or disprove Herman Cain’s position. Matthews stated that there would have to be something in the body of evidence: “… if this happened, that it did happen. Hotel records, restaurant records, eyewitnesses, people like that, anything that comes along and says he did know her, did have dinner with her, did have drinks with her, did go for a ride …”

On the same program, one of MSNBC’s pundit’s quipped: “But I`m also talking to pollsters who are doing checking and already starting to hear now that his poll numbers are starting to shift.”

One wonders what “inside information” MSNBC had two days ago that contradicts every new poll in the last two days.

The media has assumed that even if many of Cain’s accusers are proved to be liars, that Cain will never be able to prove a negative. In the meantime, they can endlessly predict that Cain’s poll numbers are suffering as a result. They can tell the same lie over and over again until it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

This is, of course, the narrative that the liberal media has concocted is that it does not matter if the charges are true. The real story according to the pundits is how the Cain campaign has mishandled it and how it has damaged his reputation among those who are sympathetic, but don’t want to see a tainted candidate go against the “clean” Barack Obama.

The fact is that Cain’s poll numbers have remained steady – effectively tied with Romney nationally – and have even gone up in some early primaries. He has also surpassed all past donations to his campaign. But facts don’t matter when you are concocting a high tech lynching. The object is not to prove or disprove the allegations, to lay out the facts and discover who is telling the truth. The object is to damage Cain so much that his candidacy is doomed.

So why do Cain’s poll numbers remain strong and even stronger snce the sexual harassment allegations were launched?

CBS Atlanta ran a story yesterday about a forensics expert who analyzed both Bialek’s and Cain’s statements. Cain had earlier said he’d take a “lie detector test tp refute the charges “if it becomes necessary.” The problem with polygraph lie detector tests is that they are only 50 percent accurate. The results are not permissible in a court of law for that reason. However, this text is based on five separate criteria and is considered to be 95 percent accurate. The report specifically cites that this is not a polygraph test rather a VSA test, a method that is used by the FBI and by crime investigators in 43 states.

Cain remains strong as long as the allegations remain unproven simply because he appears to be telling the truth – at least to those inclinced to support him.

In the early 1990s, I videotaped and repeatedly studied Clarence Thomas’ masterful defense of similar charges from Anita Hill. I found it hard to believe that Anita Hill, being a lawyer, did not have the strength to stand up to an alleged attack that consisted of dirty words.

I also remember the joke: Did you about the new Anita Hill doll? You pull her string and ten years later she talks.

In the Senate Judiciary hearings prior to his confirmation, Thomas was asked how he viewed Anita Hill’s story. If it was a lie, how did it originate? He advanced the idea that liberal feminist groups nervous about the overturn of Roe v. Wade concocted a story that would play into “negative white sterotypes” about black men being oversexed. Then they went looking for a willing “witess” who would tell the story. In Anita Hill, they found a woman who had a pattern of pressing sexual harassment charges against employers who once worked in the EEOC with Clarence Thomas.

This is a case in which this sleaze, this dirt, was searched for by staffers of members of this committee. It was then leaked to the media. And this committee and this body validated it and displayed it in prime time over our entire nation.”

He then called the hearing a high-tech lynching.

This is not an opportunity to talk about difficult matters privately or in a closed environment. This is a circus. It’s a national disgrace. And from my standpoint, as a black American, it is a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas, and it is a message that unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you. You will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured by a committee of the U.S. Senate rather than hung from a tree.

Thomas wrote a later column that underscored the “reckless media” and what they will do to stop a black conservative.

I often felt that the media assumed that, to be black, one had to espouse leftist ideas and Democratic politics. Any black who deviated from the ideological litany of requisites was an oddity and was to be cut from the herd and attacked. Hence, any disagreement we had with black Democrats or those on the Left was exaggerated. Our character and motives were impugned and challenged by the same reporters who supposedly were writing objective stories.

Unfortunately, it must have been apparent to the black liberals, and those on the Left that conservatives would not mount a positive (and I underscore positive) civil rights campaign. They were confident that our central civil rights concern would give them an easy victory since it was confined to affirmative action – that is, being against affirmative action. They were certain that we would not be champions of civil rights. Therefore, they had license to roam unfettered in this area claiming that we were against all that was good and just and holy, and that we were hell-bent on returning blacks to slavery. They could smirk at us black conservatives because they felt we had no real political or economic support.

Is something similar now happening to Herman Cain?

The argument that Thomas advanced in 1991 was that since liberals were sure that conservatives would never be champions of civil rights, they felt that their character assassinations of blacks who dared to break ranks would succeed. The liberal assassins believed that – once tarred with a broad brush to the extent that their reputation was damaged beyond repair – few white conservatives would rush to their defense. The character assassination – however unfair or unsubstantiated – could be leaked to a constitutionally protected media in such a way that even if proven to be false, no one could be impugned for libel or slander.

And outrageously, they even had the audacity to openly admit this strategy.

In July 1991 at a conference of the National Organization for Women in New York City, feminist Florynce Kennedy addressed the conference on the importance of defeating the nomination of Clarence Thomas to the U.S. Supreme Court. She said, “We’re going to Bork him. We’re going to kill him politically … This little creep, where did he come from?” (John Fund. “The Borking Begins.” The Wall Street Journal. 1/8/2001).

The National Restaurant Assocation had thousands of employees. It’s likely that someone in the organization over the years when he was CEO had a beef with Herman Cain. The fact that out of those thousands of employees there were two who made such claims in not remarkable. In fact, sexual harassment claims, both valid and baseless, were rampant in the years after the Thomas hearings. It is good that this came about because it forced American corporations to set policies. But as a negative effect, it also gave unstable personalities the idea that they could ruin someone’s career with a mere claim.

One thing for certain is that someone is lying here. Either it is Cain’s accusers or Herman Cain himself. If Cain is lying, he has painted himself into a corner. He has created a balck or white scenario with no shades of gray.

He claims that in all his years as a CEO, he never said anything inappropriate to anyone. Period.

As a fan of Cain’s success story, I am confident of one thing. The main difference between the Thomas hearings of 1991 and the GOP primaries of 2012 is time. And this time, time is on the side of truth. In the Thomas hearings, there were two days of public testimonies and then a quick vote by 100 Senators. In Cain’s case, there are still two months to go before the first primary vote on January 10th.

If Herman Cain is telling the truth, then the lies of his accusers will be exposed in time. There are enough details given in the testimonies now that there is some record somewhere, some hard evidence among the specifics of the allegations that will show the truth once and for all. It may very well be an attempt at a high tech lynching, but the good news for Herman Cain is that communications technology has made it easier to spread the truth.

Mark Twain once quipped: “A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.” The good news is that Herman Cain still has two months to put on his shoes. Then the Internet can do the rest.

If Herman Cain is proven innocent, and he survives one of the most malicious smear campaigns in American political history, it will add to the force of the argument that he is suited to the pressures of the presidency as one who has not only survived opposition and adversity all his life, but as one who has triumphed over it.

[MNJohnnie]

BTTT!

[2ndDivisionVet]

What is it that you find “acceptable” about Ron Paul? His antisemitism? His foolish isolationism? His horde of “9/11 truther” supporters? Or something else?

[Yosemitest]

Michael Savage has offered up a more understandable explanation of the situation than anyone else.

"Is it possible that the human "Bei`allie" came on to Herman Cain, and he rejected her because he's a descent man? Is it possible that Herman Cain is the only man to have turned down oral sex from the human "Bei`allie"
and is this why she remembers his rejection?
Remember, you got to remember this.
"Hell hath no fury like a homely woman scorned."
Now it could be that he's the only man in her entire life that turned down oral sex.
And for this reason, she's waited twelve years to get even.
I'm serious about it. Why should you believe her?"

How many honest, trustworthy women have you know?
Why must every sexual accusation from every woman be believe?
Look at today's society, and look at who's paying for the bills for these lawyers.

As Rush says, "Liberals are 'LIBERAL FIRST' ."
Excerpt from Liberalism Has Crushed Human Nature
"You know, folks, I gotta tell you something. We've had liberalism roaring through our culture for 50 years.
At times it has been sneaky, slow, deliberate. At other times it has roared its way through.
As I listen to earnest journalists in their thirties and forties describe what Herman Cain is said to have done -- no, sorry.
When I listen to journalists in their thirties and forties unable to explain what Cain has done,
but treating it as though it is reprehensible,
I sadly conclude, we're losing this.
Political correctness, which is censorship, has now spread to behavior, not just speech.
It's spread to behavior. And sexual harassment now is a political weapon, and it's anything anybody wants it to be.
You don't need a specific allegation. All you need is the appearance of impropriety."

Liberals for the mostly don't believe in God, hence they have no problem lying.

[skinkinthegrass]

BUMP
great post! :D

[x]

On fiscal concerns, every Republican president since Nixon has promised to cut spending and shrink the size of the federal government. All Republican presidents since Nixon have broken that promise once they were elected. I am almost certain Romney will be no different.

What makes you think any other candidate would be very different? Or that Romney is so different from any other Republican who could get elected president?

George W. Bush is the key case here. When Republicans held the White House and both Houses of Congress they didn't make an effort to hold spending down. Part of that was the wars we were involved in, but there was a general failure in both the White House and Congress to cut or control spending.

I don't see Cain or Bachmann or Palin or Perry or Santorum getting elected and cutting spending very much. The way the country is, it elects a president to do one thing and gives him a Congress that wants to do the opposite.

Further, we see a sad cycle in the Republican primary process in which either the runner-up or a former vice presidential canidate will get the nomination. This is the case mainly because of Republican governors’ endorsements coupled with the “winner-take-all” rules in many of the later primaries. This has been true for every election cycle since 1960 with only two exceptions.

Okay, but where were the other candidates who were better? It's easy to say now that Dole was an awful candidate, but at the time there was nobody in the race -- maybe nobody in politics -- who was at once more conservative and more electable and more competent. Maybe the party would be healthier if its candidates had to fight their way to the nomination, but to the degree that that's going on now it hasn't produced better candidates.

Note that the two exceptions were George W. Bush, the son of George H.W. Bush and governor of Texas. Barry Goldwater was a Senator from Arizona.

That's kind of tricky. Yes, Bush wasn't the heir apparent, but in a way he kind of was. He did have to fight for the nomination, but he certainly did have an inside track.

[Tennessee Nana]

Welcome to FRee Republic n00b...

Did you sign up today to post this from your blog ???

interesting ...

[Valpal1]

There are enough details given in the testimonies now that there is some record somewhere, some hard evidence among the specifics of the allegations that will show the truth once and for all.

I don't think this is true. Businesses and corporations shred documents every year as they age out past legal or tax statutory requirements. Even electronic databases are regularly purged, especially when either software or hardware was updated, all of which rapidly changed over the last decade.

The only records that are still extant seem to be the non-disclosure agreements of the two NRA complaints. One of which wishes to remain undisclosed and the other of which refuses to come forward without a "joint" press conference, which leads me to believe that her file doesn't contain much and she's looking for support in numbers, hoping to make quantity the focus rather than the quality or believe-ability of the allegations.

If there had been any truly verifiable facts they would have led with them in the first place.

[justsaynomore]

“I don’t see Cain or Bachmann or Palin or Perry or Santorum getting elected and cutting spending very much”

Cain plans 10% across the board cuts and deep dives into every agency.

He has a history of cutting - had he not cut poor performing franchises from Godfathers, they would have gone under.

[MrEdd]

There is always his insistence that the use of armored vehicles to clear trench lines in the 90 - 91 war made our troops war criminals.

I wrote him off permanently for that way back then.

Jumping in with trench knives instead seems kind’a stupid to me, and I didn't hear about him showing up to give demonstrations.

[justsaynomore]

Pinganator!

Gloria Cain will be “On the Record” with Greta Monday night at 10PM. Also Herman and the children will be on as well.
http://gretawire.foxnewsinsider.com/2011/11/13/just-interviewed-mrs-herman-cain/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxnewsinsider%2Fgretawire+%28Gretawire%29

The Media’s Cain Mutiny
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-gop/2806866/posts

“Commander-in-Chief” Debate Recap, Winners and Losers
(FYI - written by Kevin Hall who is anti-Cain)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2806735/posts

LEAKED Herman Cain Campaign Ad 1 - Bailout
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-gop/2806781/posts

Sexual Harassment Accusers: Not Automatic Saints Or Sinners
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2806779/posts?page=1

Herman Cain And The Politics Of Race
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-gop/2806713/posts

Herman Cain leading several polls for GOP nomination: 9-9-9 overshadowing gaffes, scandal
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2806695/posts

Herman Cain Laughs at His Desperate Liberal Attackers
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-gop/2806656/posts

Cain: God convinced me to run for president
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2806530/posts

Sharon Bialek’s Fiancé Belatedly Remembers He’s Not Her Fiancé
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2806571/posts

Herman Cain Interview on the Michael Savage Show (Audio)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2806286/posts

HERMAN CAIN – THE CITIZENS’ CANDIDATE
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2806525/posts

POLLS:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2806603/posts
http://www.therightscoop.com/poll-who-won-the-debate-and-who-would-you-vote-for-today/

[justsaynomore]

Cain polling:

http://hermancainexpress.com/activism/polling.aspx

[MNJohnnie]

I don't see Cain or Bachmann or Palin or Perry or Santorum getting elected and cutting spending very much

You get the best chance with Cain or Paul. The election of either is such a 9.9 political earthquake. Electing any of the others is merely sending yet another GOP Establishment politician to DC. Really think the people who profit by the current political system are going to ever do anything to reign it in?

[dforest]

I will be honest, I was not in for Cain earlier.I wasn’t sold on 999. But 999 was a concept and showed Cain was thinking about it.

I hope y’all realize that the tax plan may be different by the time it is done in order to get it passed. So don’t become anal retentive on that.

Then the accusations came in from the women. I was worried. My husband was thinking Cain didn’t have a prayer.

Last Tuesday happened. Herman showed himself to be a man of courage and grace under extreme fire with his defense of himself.

He was calm and exhibited the behavior of an innocent man. I do not beleive for a minute that a man who is guiity of the charges would have ever went on with a campaign if he was guilty.

In honesty, Herman is a business man, not a politician. He has a little learning left to do on foreign policy and security.

Right now, all of that is changing rapidly. If you are not privy to the internals, it is hard to talk about what you would do. I would give all of the people on our side a small break considering the left is all smoke and mirrors.

I am looking for a person that may not be all pure, as long as they have not participated in pay for play deals or been involved in furthering the notions of the left.

I am going to stick with Herman at this time, main reason is he has exhibited strength and courage under what no other candidate has had to do yet.

[Politicalmom]

Can you please provide your source for this? The NRA has only confirmed one allegation.

[GloriaJane]

The first woman is a serial sexual complainant because she also sued her next boss for the same charge that she tried to hang on Mr. Cain. Now she works in the obama admin in the treasury dept... coincidence?

The second woman, (proved not truthful by voice analysis software) lived in the very same building as obama operative David Axelrod... coincidence? I don’t know, maybe, but it would pay for all of us who are Cain’s supporters to keep an eye open for more coincidences they might try to throw at Mr. Cain.

[PhilDragoo]

VSA: giggle, read script, rave about hairstyle, say "genitals"

[GloriaJane]

One of those woman is a serial sexual complainant because she also sued her next boss for the very same charge! And she works for the obama admin in treasury dept. Figure it out.

[ken21]

bump.

[jcr4runner]

I did sign up to post articles. Yes.