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 ...
Well, he could start by explaining and addressing the employment complaints. He could “clarify” why his story on it changed several times. He could also make it clear that he does not approve of the character assassination of the victims and witnesses, instead of encouraging it, as he seems to be doing, and even almost making it into a taunt.
He could offer dignified leadership instead of working with his advisers to keep a media circus going.
I have said from the very start that if he had just come out, admitted the existence of the two complaints and the fact that they were settled, and then offered an apology for any real or perceived misconduct, none of this would have happened. It would have been an episode in his campaign and never would have gone any further. Instead, the whole GOP campaign is being dragged down by this issue.
You are so damned set on defeating Cain yet believing these women it is disgusting. Take you biased poop elsewhere. It’s sickening to think humans can be so vile.
Make no mistake... I’m definitely in the Not Romney crowd...
I keep hearing you and others (Mona, for example) saying this. It has me bewildered, frankly, as I read all these Cain threads and don't see any supposed conservatives proclaiming any such thing.
Are you referring to FReepers? If so, could you kindly point out a link where you "heard" this? I mean not a defense of Mr. Cain in regards to whether this happened or not, but specifically where conservatives said they didn't care if the charges are true, because Bill Clinton did it....
In this country, one is innocent until proven guilty. When these ladies bring forth some evidence, I'll listen. Until then, STFU.
Not what happened.
Cain once passed the ball to Gingrich in their good-natured back and forth relationship during that debate.
The question was directly in Gingrich’s beltway area of expertise, and Cain wisely let Gingrich talk which Cain - while expertise is business leadership - thought through his answer.
Probably something, Perry should have considered doing recently.
I liked that Cain / Gingrich moment, and the two of them together. It showed they get along well, it showed Cain doesn’t crave the spotlight.
And it showed wisdom.
You took a 3-year hiatus from Free Republic, only to return to spread doubts about the leading Republican candidate.
Did you hijack TBBT’s account? Where ya been?
Outbreaks ONLY in those three years and ONLY with women residing in Chicago with links to either the Democrat party or a Democrat operative.
Seems political to me. Nothing there as far as I can tell.
All these morally-impaired FReepers are in two categories: 1) They have no clue about big-time college athletics, and/or 2), they haven’t read the evidence.
OK, there’s third category: They approve pederasty.
sorry typo
” - whose”
Stick it to the jackals, FRiend! Jab their snouts!
Like bad dogs they prance around stinking offal, instead of leading the hunter to his fallen game. They disgust all.
Sorry. No idea how that last post ended up on this thread!
It’s obvious you’re here to pick fights. I nowhere said you should come to me (or anyone) for an opinion. The fact is, you give far more credence to allegations than you do the defense against them. That’s disgusting. I know you’ll think what you “like” because I’m starting to believe you have issues that cause you to be so biased against the man (no, I’m not referring to race).
They were not "his" attorneys. They were either in-house NRA attorneys, representing the interests of the NRA, or -- more likely -- attorneys selected by the insurer and paid by the insurer. I would guess that NRA's in-house lawyers are corporate law types, and that the insurer probably worked with a number of attorneys/law firms that specialized in sexual harassment and other employee-related issues.
See my 151.
Prove the charges. With BJ Clinton they were provable. Don't make moral equivalencies. It makes you sound foolish.You are absolutely right. Any attempt to say that the PROVEN LIES that Clinton made UNDER OATH are somehow equivalent to the allegations of Gloria AllWhore and her Roving Band of Lying Scumbag Whores is absolutely ridiculous.
Pay off for what? There was no settlement to the harrassment claim. The only "pay out" associated with a separation agreement, which many companies offer.
And how do you know Cain "lied" as you claim? Or do you just like making accusations with no evidence?
LOL! No problem.
It happens.
I don’t have a candidate yet. I’d actually like to wait it out and see what the candidates say about policy and not have to worry about their personal activities.
Some of the ones I liked have already washed out or didn’t run to begin with. Of the existing ones, I don’t think Perry has a chance and I don’t think GOP Central would ever support Gingrich. The minor ones (Bachmann, Santorum) are pretty much gone. I’d never vote for Romney because he’s a statist, and now I honestly wouldn’t vote for Cain because he has handled this so terribly that whether he did these things or not, it has made the GOP look ridiculous and sordid. So I really don’t know what is going to be happen come Election Day.
Evidence that he lied?
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.