Booing the Character Issue - We should care if the accusations against Cain are true.

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

Here’s the one thing you need to consider about political hits. They always save the worst for the very last minute, when it’s impossible to mount a defense. These could well be warning shot, not the main event. If this is coming from a Republican rival, the big news will come just before the primary. If it’s coming from the Democrats, it will come close to the election. If Cain has skeletons rattling around, this can destroy Republican chances for winning the Presidency.

If any candidate has skeletons it would hurt.

As of right know there has been no credible evidence against Cain (or anybody). If you think we should jettison a conservative candidate based flimsy evidence, it is you who risks destroying conservatism.

It’s definitely the “premier” site for conservatism on the Internet.

That it is.

And it has a truly wide range of people, with a wide range of interests and knowledge. Very interesting place.

And besides all that, it has the best SOFTWARE. I don't know if it's custom or what but I've never been to a forum that has such a logical and well-organized system of carrying out conversations, where the reply button automatically puts the recipients name in the To: box and the posts are all numbered and they automatically fill up at the end (and a bunch of other intelligent features I'm not even mentioning).

Some of the comment pages on some news sites are unbelievably stupid in terms of organization (not even talking about the rank stupidity of their posters).

Anyway, bottom line is FR is the best by far.

If independent thinking were banned here, you’d be gone. Not for your political support but for your obnoxious, anti-FReeper-community statements.

40 posted on Friday, November 11, 2011 8:22:04 AM by bcsco

****************************************************

And poof! sklar was gone!

I never heard of sklar until this morning, BTW.

IIRC, sklar had made reference to independent thinking not being tolerated at FR recently.

After reading sklar's post history here, it seems he was still a Palin supporter who didn't like Cain. He didn't seem to like Cain even a little bit...was still hoping Palin would save her mind

For that, sklar was falsly called a Romneybot.

I have seen much worse posted by people who weren't zotted...and proved the point he was trying to make. A lot of people agree with him on that who don't agree with him politically.

There is little, if any, room for independent thinking on FR these days and you don't have to be a Romneybot to be punished!

I'm probably next for having said that. But...

Today we are honoring the men who fought and died for freedom and NOBODY on FreeRepublic is going to shut me today!

Zot me if it's come to that!

Who cares--I don't-- if you have to watch what you say! My sin is I still support Perry...and I'm NOT ashamed of it!

Yeah, I found that out after I’d posted. Post #237 on this thread broke it, then there was another thread dedicated to it. Interestingly, the video at post #237 is of an interview with her X fiance. He claims she moved out in February and lives in Glenview. I’ve now found an ABC Evening News broadcast from November 9th (which contains some of that same interview) but also contains Harwood’s statement that she owned the Glenview townhouse while she lived with him in Mundelein. And that she’s living off the child support her son’s father provides. No other income for her is mentioned, and Harwood himself is out of a job and consolidating his debts.

This has to be a investigator’s dream...

The charges were NOT provable in the beginning. It took Monica’s blue dress to finally prove them, and that was much, much later. Everything else was he said v. she said, and we took the side of the victims.

At the time, I honestly thought everyone on FR picked that side because it was the good and decent thing to do. Now I wonder if freepers picked that side because Clinton as a Democrat. Now that it’s Cain, suddenly all the accusers are automatically wh*res.

In this case, I cannot really judge the veracity of the accusers, because most of them haven’t really come forward to speak about it. But I am keeping an open mind.

Here's something you ought to consider: there is actually a moral component to the difference between Democrats and Republicans. If you read Rules for Radicals you will be repulsed by the idea of following them. The first edition of Rules was even openly dedicated to Satan!! You will find no, or almost no, Republicans willing to associate themselves with Alinsky - but you show me an activist Democrat and I'll show you someone who is willing to be associated with Alinsky. On Free Republic you find open, frank advocacy of Christianity and of Judaism; if you go to Democratic Underground, you feel like you need to take a shower afterward.
As Rush puts it, "Being a liberal is a gutless choice." I express it differently by saying that "liberals" align themselves with the self interest of wire-service journalism, and profit from the propaganda wind emanating from it. To be a politician who does not avail herself of that wind, you have to have actual principles which you set above going along and getting along.
Take due account of that moral component, and you will be willing to bet that an attack on a conservative politician is likely to be an unfounded hit piece, and an attack on a liberal is quite likely to be the truth. Exceptions duly noted, but they are exceptions, and that's the way to bet them. Clarence Thomas had people lined up around the block wanting to stand up as character references to rebut Anita Hill's depiction of Thomas' character in those hearings.

Herman Cain isn't Clarence Thomas - but then, he's a Baptist minister and he might have been taking that calling seriously over the years. Given Ann Coulter's report that all of the accusers are from Chicago - where Cain has never lived but where David Axelrod does live - and that all refer to a single 3-year stint out of a lifetime career, I'd say the odds are pretty long against the charges being true. Especially when you consider the savaged reputations littering the street behind Obama/Axelrod.
You think that the attacks on Cain are just the opening salvo; I think that it is a bluff intended to intimidate Cain into backing out the way others who ran against Obama have backed down when attacked. Dan Rather thought he could put a hoax over on us, too. We don't have to be pushovers.
The wisest and most cautious of us all frequently gives credit to stories which he himself is afterwards both ashamed and astonished that he could possibly think of believing . . .
It is acquired wisdom and experience only that teach incredulity, and they very seldom teach it enough. - Adam Smith

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.