There are no lies in what I posted. They come from the same press sources available to all of us.
I am particularly interested in this issue because I think it reveals a seriously disturbing moral decline in the conservative movement and also a really unpleasant willingness to use exactly the same tactics we accused the Dems of having used during the Clinton and other investigations (vicious assaults on witnesses or victims, “my Clinton right or wrong,” etc.). One of these, tactics, of course, is attempting to obliterate anyone who disagrees with your point of view, and I have seen a lot of that on these threads.
The number one principle in all of this should be “innocent until proven guilty”. You seem to want the opposite.
I don’t have a problem with coming to ones defense against what may be baseless accusations. Presumption of innocence is the correct default position. However, I think one needs to mount a defense with a bit of caution. My main complaint is that the defense by the talking heads on our side is bordering on being over the top. Nobody can really know the real truth here based on what is actually known so far. All we have is speculation either way. Our talking heads need to be careful in case this comes back to bite them.
The other truth here - justified or no - is that this will at the very least linger over the head of the Cain campaign from here on out. Hope no further revelations are forthcoming especially if he becomes the nominee and it close to election time.
My other point is that there are enough issues with Cain to question whether he is ready for prime time. This scandal doesn’t help.
If you want more fodder - just as one example - replay the Lincoln-Douglas style debate with Newt. Twice Cain had to take a pass when the questions required a little more there there than canned campaign slogans and prepared responses. That should give anybody pause and that stuff isn’t going to fly when Cain gets on the stage with Obama and the whole nation is watching.