Cain accuses former adviser Curt Anderson (Former Cain Senate Campaign Adviser Denies Charge)

Politico ^ | 11/02/2011 | By ALEXANDER BURNS

[mazda77]

Yea, real easy to get ahead of a story when someone calls and asks about charges of sexual harassment and offers not a shred of details to find out what they have to respond to.

You would be wise to hold your biases masked as “justified” indignation just to take out someone who is spanking the daylight out of your favorite, whoever it is right now. It just gnaws at those who cannot get past life without a big government Permanent Political Class overlord to guide you through life.

[napscoordinator]

p on Governor Perry with no real basis only serves the One and his media hacks.

Dumbest statement in history. If this was the general I would agree but this is a Republican primary that is it. It amazes me how you folks forget how ugly the Democratic primary was and the Democrats prevailed anyway. This is the time to fight for the nomination. McCain did not fight for the nomination. The entire republican candidates were WHIMPS during 2008. Boring and that is why nutcase McCain won. They need to want this nomination. Perry and Romney are the liberal part of the group and Cain is the conservative.

[napscoordinator]

You are positively giddy.

I am and have been for awhile. Anytime a liberal like Perry goes down, I could not be happier. I have always thought that Romney was a non starter so I never paid him much attention. My thinking is correct. Romney does not have the support of conservative just like Perry because they are liberal. Cain will be our nominee unless they have pictures of him raping these women.

[pgkdan]

Next we hear that Cain is fingering a former campaign adviser from his 2004 Senate bid who was advised of this potential issue stemming back to the 90’s

Funny...we're supposed to believe that on Monday he misspoke becasue he couldn't recall facts from the 1990's...but NOW he completely remembers a conversation he had about the same incident in 2001 or 2003. I find all of Cain's stories to date just a little too much to believe.

[pgkdan]

DO YOU HAVE PROOF THAT IT WAS RICK PERRY THAT STARTED THESE RUMORS?

Of course not, no one does. This is simply an attempt by Cain to taint Perry with his dirty laundry. Cain's behaviour in this matter is despicable. He should be ashamed.

[kevao]

And then for Perry to turn around and point the finger at Romney....

[AmericanVictory]

As I have pointed out there were dozens of people working for or with the National Restaurant Association, including its lobbyists, staff members, active members, board and committee members and others such as hill staffers and even Congress persons who knew of these accusations and whatever proceedings there were, most likely before a commission. The fact that a couple of people once worked for Cain and now work for Perry is absolutely no proof that either of them was the source for the story on an arm of the One like Politico. More credible is the Washington Times story about Rahm dead fish as a possible instigator. Your obervation that the One in the Oval Office would have no interest in stirring up discord and accusations among Republican primary contenders is astonishingly naive.

[no dems]

The day Perry drops out of this campaign the better America will be.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
That’s the friggin’ truth. But, that was true before the smear campaign ever started.

[AmericanInTokyo]

Just keep connecting the dots. We have a tweet run between an Iowa Gov. Rick Perry staffer, and a leader of the Perry movement in Arizona, nearly two or three days before this broke, saying that "opposition research" had gotten something good and dirty about Herman, that it was coming out soon, and that "it will not be pretty." One of the staffers even said "This is what we are hearing out here in Arizona". So all I say is, a) who benefits the most? b) follow the paper trail, in this case the tweet trail where people are already trying to cover their tracks, and c) you will find the rat or rats responsible for this. Then, as I have always maintained, turn it right around on them and POLITICO and let them know how it feels to be under such a national spotlight. However it should never rise to the point of distracting the general campaign theme and message itself. This should be stuff for other people to dig in to in a supportive, back office manner of support of Herman Cain. Nailing this mudslinging source down and insuring their being fired from whichever campaign they are currently taking money; if their boss does not do it, then that will speak volumes of their boss, IMHO. Politics ain't bean bag. EAGLES UP.

[AmericanInTokyo]

This sounds plausible, Sarah.

[newzjunkey]

You're right, it is odd, but the professional anybody-by-Cain mockers won't acknowledge that.

I'm not impressed with Cain's finger-pointing. Cain has no evidence to back the accusation. It's only he-said-he-said.

The irony is clearly lost on this amateurish campaign.

The irrationally willful stubbornness of those who refuse to acknowledge Cain is not ready for prime time in spite of gaffe after gaffe, restatement after restatement, is just baffling.

Supposed Conservatives, many who decry Obama's inexperience or insisted only Palin could survive because she'd been fully vetted, are simply suicidal in 2012.

[pgkdan]

Too Machiavellian for you?

Not for me. Given Cain's 2008 support for Romney...his fawning praise for him this season and the complete lack of Romney's name in all of this tells me that something is up. Cain was never a serious contender...he was always a stalking horse for Romney and was only running for the number 2 slot on a Romney ticket. I've suspected this for more than a month now and became convinced of it the day following the Nevada debate.