Posted on 11/11/2011 5:56:26 AM PST by TBBT
I think I understand why the audience at Wednesday’s CNBC debate booed Maria Bartiromo’s question to Herman Cain about sexual-harassment allegations. They don’t believe there is any truth to them. They suspect, along with the candidate, that the women concerned are part of a liberal lynch mob out to smear another strong, conservative, black man. They know that accusations of sexual harassment are often nebulous and PC. If I guess correctly, they also believe — with considerable justification — that the press is less interested in the dry details of policy than in salacious tales of misbehavior. They resent being dragged into another smutty distraction.
Yes, but. As someone who was well-disposed toward Herman Cain as a public figure (if not as a potential president), I cannot help recalling the response of Democrats to revelations about Bill Clinton. “We know all about it,” one exasperated reader wrote to Newsweek magazine, “and WE DON’T CARE.” In fact, the majority of Americans did not care — and it was not our finest moment as a nation. Liberals, who professed to be appalled by the one accusation against Clarence Thomas (just one non-contemporaneous accusation — not four or five), dismissed Bill Clinton’s behavior as no big deal. Stuart Taylor noted at the time that even if everything Anita Hill said about Clarence Thomas were true, it would not be nearly as serious as the allegations against Bill Clinton. Conservatives argued at the time that character mattered. Liberals replied, in effect, that it didn’t...
Read the rest here: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/282909/booing-character-issue-mona-charen
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
My wife is an “ordinary” woman. If someone made sexual advances to her they’d be hospitalized. She’s livid over these accusations against Cain. And that’s all they are; accusations.
For the record, Cain was not a party to the NRA agreements. He was already gone from that organization. And they weren’t payoffs but termination settlements. There’s no reason why he’d have knowledge of them. In fact, he disputed the charges (For those in Rio Linda such as others on this thread, knowing the charges is separate from knowing what’s in the agreement).
We continue to support Cain because we see an honorable man being politically murdered through innuendo. For all of you who believe “where there’s smoke there’s fire” or, “all these women mean there has to be something to this”, are you really so naive to think the opposition, whether democrat or republican establishment, wouldn’t stoop to these tactics to ruin a challenger to their anointed one? Think again.
If anyone among us is shameful and base, it’s those who won’t give a person the benefit of the doubt when “allegations” are all there is; whether because of political calculation or just meanness.
At some point worries about “hurting the conservative movement in the long run” will result in communists taking over our country.
Winning matters.
Propaganda in the news......The left gets the woman's vote anyway. These same women probably still adore Bill Clinton and John Edwards. It all depends on boxers or briefs (and I don't think Cain would look that good in tighty whiteys.)
.
So where does the “character issue” leave you? If not Cain, then who? Gingrich? His “allegations” aren’t allegations at all; he really did cat around. Then if not Gingrich, will you support Romney? You might as well vote for Obama. You can either get bent out of shape by unproved accusations, or you can see this for what it really is: A dirty trick by the GOP elites to get the TEA Party folks back onto the reservation.
How about instead of engaging in the usual Leftist style sleazy politics of personal attack and lies at Cain, you quit wasting our time and try making a case FOR your candidate instead?
Wait a minute. Livius’ behavior has been neither “filthy” nor “shameless.” There is nothing filthy or shameless about holding different views from yours. The only people who would demand that, in fact, would be out and out fascists.
I’d also add that Livius has also been nothing short of respectful in expressing these different views. I’ve never once seen this person call names, or demand complete lockstep in the views Livius holds. This is more than I can say of a lot of people, on both sides of the issue. (And that includes me.)
Well he should be. I thought of pinging Jim on my post but decided not to be the bad guy. He deserved it, IMO, for what he said about FR and Jim.
I’m calling in the Kitties...! Thanks.
>> If Cain’s denial of any such occurrances of which he is accused is enough for you, then so should Bill Clinton’s and Anthony Weiner’s denials have been accepted at face value and no further questions should have been asked. >>
I’m sorry, but after reading your posts, I can’t get out of my mind that you are A: a prude and B: have zero experience being in charge of anything. And I say that because you equate all sexual situations as the same. You know, to you, sex with an intern = making a pass and putting your penis on the internet = making a pass. All Cain has been accused of is making a pass and accepting the no politely.
So even if it’s true - and I doubt it is - its not anywhere near the level of what Clinton and Weiner did.
And B, business people deal with so many BS lawsuits and such that they do become background noise after a while. You let your “legal department” handle them and they are doggoned easy to forget, at least, easy to forget the details. Ask anyone who’s been in the business world more than 15 years and you’ll get the same reaction.
“I see Mona is still pimping hard for Romney.”
Sexual harassment is so overblown today it is ridiculous. There are a lot of status quo forces working against Cain. Vote Cain!
And not surprisingly, the left is using one of the most virulent racial hatred images... An oversexed Black man who forced himself on the virtuous white, blonde woman. As I posted on another thread, this could have been written by Harper Lee, because it's right out of "To Kill a Mockingbird."
And I believe that Mr. Cain is just as innocent as the suspect on trial in the book.
Mark
I’m guessing there will be an erosion of women’s POLLING answers toward Cain. Short term.
Balanced by a slow at first, silent, completely unreported movement of black American men, into the Cain camp.
They’ll get it. Quietly. Politely even.
But they’ll get it.
Conservative babes (like me, heh, heh, heh, ) take other matters into account.
(but that doesn't mean we can't LOOK at the menu).
Did I say anything about rejecting Cain? I did not. I said, keep an open mind. Do you have something against waiting until the facts are in?
Paula Jones could and did testify about Clinton’s Peyronie’s Disease, which — if not totally probative — was certainly indicative!
1. A 15 year old charge that was investigated and settled with NO finding against Cain. No finding means NO FINDING. If you got a charge against you and the charges were dropped, you have been found NOT GUILTY. That means you didn't do the crime, so quit acting like you have been found guilty.
2. The woman that showed her face with Gloria Alred accused Cain of assault, not a work related crime. She chose not to press charges. Once again, 15 years ago. She stalked him to the Tea Party event to have her picture taken with him. Is she going to claim Stockholm syndrome? If you don't press charges at the time, why would I believe you 15 years later? It must not have been that bad, or it's something you can't prove. I'm not going to ruin a man that has a distinguished record over nothing.
3. The 3rd one is anonymous and very vague. A risque email,.....get real! I heard the email and couldn't even see the problem and I don't consider myself dumb.
4. I haven't heard the problem of a supposed 4th person, other than there is an alleged 4th person. Put out the charge or shut up!
Now if we look at a long and distinguished career, and all of the sudden we have these charges from 15 years ago after a man starts to run for office, we have to weigh the charges against his known past. His church evidently has no problems over the years. His fellow workers from the Navy years, Pillsbury years, Burger King and Godfather years, and Fed years, seem to have no problem. Only in the NRA years, he must have lost control. A sexual predator never changes and will continue until they are caught. He's had 15 years of perfect behavior. The only one of my "rules" I will have to leave out is his wife wouldn't have stayed with a creep for 40 years if she couldn't trust him, but after Clinton, I have to withdraw that one.
I find him not guilty unless someone can come up with some proof. The Dems could line up another 20 women, but they better have more than what they have now, which if you look at it, is NOTHING!
I'm still voting for Newt, however. Perry is my Governor, and I warned people here he would find a way to let you down. Romney is a NE liberal in a RINO suit and the others aren't on the radar. If Newt can't close the deal, I'll vote for Cain and feel perfectly comfortable that my wife would be safe alone with him.
I have utter disgust for the Clinton enablers. They knew what he did; and supported him anyway
There are other quality people we can support if Cain did this stuff. If he did do it; he could have brought it out years ago and made amends for it.
To come here and posture as some sort of beacon of morality is hyprocitcal. He fails to live up to that standard every single day
Amen. a lot of stupid women (and some men) already bailing on Cain without any evidence if the polls are to be believed. Hey they were told a white women called him a monster so what’s a gal to do but believe her?
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.