Posted on 11/05/2011 7:50:32 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
THE WOODLANDS, Texas (AP) -- Republican presidential contender Herman Cain grew agitated with reporters after a debate with Newt Gingrich and is vowing to never answer questions about allegations of sexual harassment a decade ago.
Speaking after a one-on-one debate with rival Gingrich on Saturday, Cain cut off reporters who asked about allegations of sexual harassment and suggested journalists who wanted answers were behaving unethically.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
He is ahead of it. The press is trying to keep the story alive.
Tomorrow morning, Sunday, the TV news shows will try to continue this farce and will fail miserably. Why? The overwhelming number of Ameericans just simply do not care. Sexual harassment charges are like “beauty is in the eyes of the beholder” period. And...if you cannot grasp this fact, please stay out of this game. The mainstream, drive by, lamestream media has flushed itself down the sewer into the ugly cesspool where it belongs. If these fools on the Sunday TV news circuit, think they will continue to fan the flames relative the “Cain” farce, they are sadly and, finally, mistaken!!!! if any of them had an ounce of fairness, common sense and decency, they would tell “Politico”, thank you, but please do not show up come the morning!!! As for Mr. Cain, he continues moving forward, unabated to a higher calling from the folks of this nation. Godspeed, Mr. Cain!!! We, the folks that count get it!!! End of story!!!
IMO, about the best thing Cain could have said is that he has already responded to the baseless harassment accusations, and that the matter is closed as far as he is concerned. He could also mention 0bama, Clinton, Edwards, Dodd and Frank’s sexual wrongdoing as being far more newsworthy.
Cain justifiably is showing frustration with the media's inane use of these types of non-issues to try to smear him, although I believe he could play it a bit cooler and turn the tables on the LW MSM when they bring it up in the future - there is so much bad behavior by Democrats, the only question is where to start.
Not hardly, but it does sound like wishful thinking on your part. LOL!
I am going to watch FOX news only to see what Chrissie Wallace says.
The campaign has already said,”we are done talking about this.” Anyone that doesn’t have new, factual, real information and asks about this crap is not being a reporter or a journalist.
A true journalist may report something like this,” A week ago some unprofessional media outlets reported a False story about Herman Cain and he has said he will not speak to this anymore. So we asked him about 9-9-9!”
Where, and who are his accusers? Cain does well not to dignify anonymously sourced rumors by debating the operatives of the adversarial press.
That’s Joel B. Bennett that has an office in Texas. The woman’s attorney is Joel P. Bennett in Washington DC.
Scroll down to post #28 in the link below if you want to see something really interesting.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2801187/posts
“Let me eat my waffles”
What an excellent point regarding the duplicitous nature of the media.
I suppose "I paid for this microphone!" gave you the vapors.
Reagan said that with a smile. Not anger.
It is not a good thing to show anger in politics or the workplace.
That being said..the accuser has said she doesn’t want to talk about it. Mr. Cain just needs to say...”Case closed.”
But the good Lord knows I am no politician.
“Cain detractors keep saying he handled it poorly, but most people I know felt that his taking it head on, being very visible and not hiding, showed he was trustworthy.”
He was on Hantity (as I call him) last week. Just my opinion, but what he said made perfect sense. His staff gets a call that says some woman from your past has said you acted naughty - what’s your response? The staff begged them for some kind of details and they wouldn’t provide them.
He’s 65 years old, there are a lot of women from a lot of decades of his past - to say ANYTHING would invite trouble. If he said that he NEVER did a thing, they would have run the story with the severance agreements and said he lies.
The way this has played out, there are three women. One of them (the third one) says he bothered her, but she didn’t complain - how does ANYONE know if that really happened. Perhaps she’s simply a liberal that doesn’t want Cain to become president - she can say whatever she wishes - no different than Anita Hill.
The other two have that severance agreement, so something is there. But we know nothing about them. We don’t know if they’ve been paid anything, offered anything, have a history of accusing every guy they run into of doing the same, have a tolerance level that’s insanely low (i.e., ‘nice dress’...ZOT). We do know one of them works pretty high up for the Obama Administration...automatically gives them a reason to push this stuff.
In the end, this whole thing looked silly. Others might not remember, but they tried this with Anita Hill - at first they kept her identity secret, and got nowhere - and then they had to bring her out. So, Cain’s people have to watch for the same thing happening in the general election, but for now, I think it’s over.
And another thing. While the Politico did check on these women (I take them at their word), who says the lawyer this week is REALLY telling the truth when he talks about them...like when he says ‘repeated incidents’ - maybe the lawyer’s simply lost it and needs to keep the story alive.
"Kathleen Willey, a former White House aide during the Clinton administration who accused the former President of sexually assaulting her, says she will support GOP frontrunner Herman Cain in the next presidential election."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2803136/posts
WOW!!! Clinton fingerprints!!!
No, I watched it as I almost fell asleep watching the LSU Ala game. It was not a debate per se, it was billed as a conversation between two friends.
It was at the Woodlands in Texas and orchestrated by Congressman Steve King.
The issues were real ones about social security, medicare and jobs and what they believe to be the problems and what to do with them. Gingrich always has his numerous annecdotal stories which are great for these situation.
The best laugh of the night came at the very end when each candidate was asked by the other a question. Both agreed it would not be a gotcha question. Gingrich went first and asked him a question about the media which Cain hit out of the park and then Cain asked him, Newt, what would you do as Vice President! Newt laughed as much as I had ever seen him do.
Well, you're in a world of hurt!
The only two not pledged to implement lean six sigma are Huntsman and Romney.
They're still going to ask them if for no other reason than to make Cain sound petulant. That's going to drown out whatever point of policy Cain is trying to make. Sort of a no-win situation for him.
Yep. And Podesta was also on Obama’s transition team. So Obama, Clinton, Podesta and Bennett have a connection. And Rahm Emanuel was said to play a role in getting the NRA to release the information.
To some degree, it seems Obama, Clinton, Podesta, Bennett, Emanuel, the NRA, Washington DC, and Chicago are associated with this leak.
And there’s precedent for this. Obama destroys his opposition early in the race and the Clinton’s hide their scandals behind more titillating news. The news media pushes this non story and a lot of things going on in DC are being overlooked by the American people.
Seems to me there’s more DNC fingerprints on this than Republican.
Nope. Reagan was the opposite of Cain in that regard. Cain gets testy and defensive while Reagan laughed stuff like this off. Reagan is exactly the model Cain should follow.
Reagan was hardly ‘laughing it off’ during his “I paid for the mike” moment.
There are times when righteous anger is the correct, and best, response.
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.