# Cain's goose is cooked, so who is next for the GOP?



## granfire (Nov 8, 2011)

Now a 4th woman has come forward and accused him of groping. 

Now, the timing of these revelations always amazes me. Why not a month or 2 ago, when he first announced his candidacy....

Will Ken Starr follow the leads? Ok, cheap shot, could not help it.

But I would be amazed if the man can salvage anything past a congress/senate carrier out of this....


----------



## ballen0351 (Nov 8, 2011)

First I dont believe most of whats being said.  Hes been a front runner for a few weeks and been in the news for months and now Alred just happens to find a new "Victim."  However Even if its all true I still dont see any harrassment.  They went to dinner he went in for a little something something and she said no he stopped.  Big deal sounds like every date I went on in high school.  It does a true dis-service to real cases of harrassment and makes real victims just look bad and will cause people to be skeptical of any future complaints.


----------



## granfire (Nov 8, 2011)

I am not putting stake in this either, however, politics is a game of smoke and mirrors. He'd been better of being caught with the hands in the cookie jar though...with this weird morality we got going in the country....


----------



## ballen0351 (Nov 8, 2011)

granfire said:


> I am not putting stake in this either, however, politics is a game of smoke and mirrors. He'd been better of being caught with the hands in the cookie jar though...with this weird morality we got going in the country....


I think it depends on which side of the political spectrum your on.  Al Gore does funny things with massage therapists its no big deal.  Clinton does things with interns and cigars No big deal.  Cain gets frisky on a date and its all over for him.  If we shouldnt care about 1 then none of it should matter.  Id like to know who is beind all this did it come from the Obama people or more likely one of his republican rivals.


----------



## Empty Hands (Nov 8, 2011)

ballen0351 said:


> However Even if its all true I still dont see any harrassment.  They went to dinner he went in for a little something something and she said no he stopped.



They weren't on a date.  She was seeking a job in his institution.  "You want a job, right?"  If you don't think that's harassment then do the world a favor and never become a manager.



ballen0351 said:


> Big deal sounds like every date I went on in high school.



You would try to cop a feel from someone you weren't even on a date with?  Only creeps and perverts do that.


----------



## granfire (Nov 8, 2011)

Considering that the Bush quarter sank McCain's bit with alleged rumors of possible misconduct of the immoral kind, I'd say the GOP rivals are the ones drilling holes in Cain's canoe....


----------



## ballen0351 (Nov 8, 2011)

Empty Hands said:


> They weren't on a date. She was seeking a job in his institution. "You want a job, right?" If you don't think that's harassment then do the world a favor and never become a manager.
> 
> 
> 
> You would try to cop a feel from someone you weren't even on a date with? Only creeps and perverts do that.


First off for it to be harrassment it must be a continuing course of conduct not a 1 time thing.  She said stop he stopped.

She was not seeking a job from him she had been fired by his association 3 months priorto the date. She flew to Washington Dc called asked him to dinner. He upgraded her room at her hotel to a suit and she didnt object if this was srtictly professional she should have objected at that point. They went to a nice italian dinner and then she rode back from dinner in his car. Sounds like a date to me. If it was strictly professional it should have been a meeting in his office during normal work hours. 

As for the pervert commment well guilty as charged


----------



## ballen0351 (Nov 8, 2011)

granfire said:


> Considering that the Bush quarter sank McCain's bit with alleged rumors of possible misconduct of the immoral kind, I'd say the GOP rivals are the ones drilling holes in Cain's canoe....


Yeah I think your right.  I would say its prob the crazy eyed Texan


----------



## granfire (Nov 8, 2011)

LOL, actually I meant to say it would not the least surprise me if the GOP rivals were caught with the drill.  Not putting it on the Texan, now, just because precedence is in his 'favor' :lol:


----------



## crushing (Nov 8, 2011)

granfire said:


> Considering that the Bush quarter sank McCain's bit with alleged rumors of possible misconduct of the immoral kind, I'd say the GOP rivals are the ones drilling holes in Cain's canoe....



If Cain's book sales go up, I wouldn't be so sure that it's the rivals that are leaking the accusations.


----------



## granfire (Nov 8, 2011)

crushing said:


> If Cain's book sales go up, I wouldn't be so sure that it's the rivals that are leaking the accusations.



LOL, now THAT is a sinister accusation! :lfao:


----------



## MaxiMe (Nov 8, 2011)

granfire said:


> Now a 4th woman has come forward and accused him of groping.
> 
> Now, the timing of these revelations always amazes me. Why not a month or 2 ago, when he first announced his candidacy....
> 
> ...


I just heard this morning that she was at a rally for him about 2 months ago shaking his hand and giving him a hug..Something's smelling like a catfish left in the sun.


----------



## WC_lun (Nov 8, 2011)

One accusation and I give Herman Cain the benefit of the doubt.  Politics is a rough bussiness and it certainly is within the realm of possibility that he was being set up. Maybe even two accusations.  However, four accusations is enough smoke to be pretty certain there is a fire.

As for a behaviour being sexual harrassment only if done more than once, that is false.  Ask anyone who is in a human resources office.  Also, apart from how you classify it, some behaviours are just not appropriate.


----------



## ballen0351 (Nov 8, 2011)

WC_lun said:


> As for a behaviour being sexual harrassment only if done more than once, that is false. Ask anyone who is in a human resources office. Also, apart from how you classify it, some behaviours are just not appropriate.


From the US Equal opportunity employment commission:
http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/sexual_harassment.cfm
Although the law doesn&#8217;t prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or *isolated incidents *that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision (such as the victim being fired or demoted).


It happened once and when she said stop he did.  Thats and isolated incident.  And she must not have thought it was serious since she waited many years to mention it.


----------



## ballen0351 (Nov 8, 2011)

MaxiMe said:


> I just heard this morning that she was at a rally for him about 2 months ago shaking his hand and giving him a hug..Something's smelling like a catfish left in the sun.



I read that too she said she went to the rally to see if he remembered her. If you were so upset about being harrassed why would you go to a rally he was attending?


----------



## oftheherd1 (Nov 8, 2011)

First of all, if Cain has committed acts of sexual harassment, or even continued improprietous acts with women, I don't think I want to see him as president. 

Second, I am not favorably impressed with women who say they have been sexually harassed, but only speak anonymously through lawyers.  That's second hand and in court would not be allowed as testimony, being hearsay.

Third, in the case of the 4th woman, I am suspicious of her due to the circumstances of the way she has chosen to report this, that is waiting as she has.  I also was a little concerned by her body language on the news this morning.  But I realize some women can be traumatised to the point they don't always act in ways we traditionally think os as appropriate.  There is also the fact that she may have been afraid due to his power/money, and emboldened by subsequent events.

Since I tend to disregard the anonymous complaints at this time, I can only evaluate this based on the 4th one.  I remain somewhat skeptical, but am certainly open to being convinced.  If Cain is that focused on flaunting law (whether or not all complaints are valid), I wouldn't want to see him as president.  Not even sure if only the 4th can be proven.  It is easy to say he was only responding to what he thought she wanted, but I haven't seen anything that tells me he had signals of her going beyond possible flirting.  

In which case, what he did is sexual assault, absent some indications from her that she wanted to continue toward a more intimate relationship.  I think most women would be more disgusted than anything else, but she is entitled to her own feelings.  I do understand if what was reported in post #7 is true, that does give him some wiggle room.  I just think a real, and prudent, man would attempt to engage in some verbal foreplay, hand holding, and/or kissing, before moving to what #4 reported happened.  Flaunting law, being imprudent?  To much of that in our presidency in the last few years as it is.

If this is all a very cleverly orchestrated smear campaign, with no basis in fact, I hope the perpetrator of the smear can be identified and some punishment can be exacted.  And that Cain can campaign on his own merits whatever they may be.

Bottom line for me is that I don't know yet what to believe.  I can go either way as facts dictate.


----------



## clfsean (Nov 8, 2011)

Oh for ****'s sake... does anybody remember what the rube from Arkansas did in the Oval Office with a cigar & intern? Or the boys from Massachussets?

This is smear work & timing. The other stuff happened before, during & after (I'd bet)...


----------



## granfire (Nov 8, 2011)

clfsean said:


> Oh for ****'s sake... does anybody remember what the rube from Arkansas did in the Oval Office with a cigar & intern? Or the boys from Massachussets?
> 
> This is smear work & timing. The other stuff happened before, during & after (I'd bet)...



Yeah, but that was after they went fishing on his financial affairs and _after_ he was in the big mansion in DC...that the women got dug out and all of that....
Had they found those women before the election Bush Sr would have gotten a 2nd term, I am sure! 

Remember that other guy, you didn't play around but got nixed because he took a picture with a dark skinned baby....it was insinuated that he had been playing around in an extra marital affair of the mixed race kind?! 
Done shot some big holes into his canoe up the Potomac! 

But for the sake of argument: A bit of inter gender hanky-panky disqualifies a guy from office....
While _serious_ offenses, like true skeletons in the past, outright untruth and disregard for all the country stands for gets you in the express line to the top - as long as you have the green backs to float your ride!


----------



## Empty Hands (Nov 8, 2011)

Cain's complete and utter lack of seriousness or intellectual preparation for the job he says he wants makes him unfit to be President.  This sleaziness just makes him an *******.

As for the complaints that the other 3 complainants are "speaking anonymously through a lawyer" - they are not speaking at all, through lawyers or otherwise.  The women are bound by agreements not to speak about the matter.  Others found the settlements and have brought forth knowledge of their existence.


----------



## clfsean (Nov 8, 2011)

granfire said:


> Yeah, but that was after they went fishing on his financial affairs and _after_ he was in the big mansion in DC...that the women got dug out and all of that....
> Had they found those women before the election Bush Sr would have gotten a 2nd term, I am sure!
> 
> Remember that other guy, you didn't play around but got nixed because he took a picture with a dark skinned baby....it was insinuated that he had been playing around in an extra marital affair of the mixed race kind?!
> ...



Don't forget the the politburo controlled press who put out what they want only until it becomes untenable to keep them suppressed. So they change gears from suppression to character assassination & sometimes near defamation. But that's all good too...


----------



## billc (Nov 8, 2011)

Well, if these allegations are true, it simply means that he is now qualified to run as a democrat.


----------



## Steve (Nov 8, 2011)

LOL.  That's true. In order to stay true to the GOP, these would be young, gay men. :ultracool

Seriously, though, guys.  Don't forget that this is politics.  It doesn't have to be true.  It just has to be credible.  And it doesn't have to be substantiated harassment in order to kill his campaign.

But my first reaction was the same as Crushing's.  This entire campaign is a lengthy book hype.


----------



## Carol (Nov 8, 2011)

Steve said:


> LOL.  That's true. In order to stay true to the GOP, these would be young, gay men. :ultracool
> 
> Seriously, though, guys.  Don't forget that this is politics.  It doesn't have to be true.  It just has to be credible.  And it doesn't have to be substantiated harassment in order to kill his campaign.
> 
> But my first reaction was the same as Crushing's.  This entire campaign is a lengthy book hype.



Book -- singular?  How many titles has he published this year?  I found several.

http://www.amazon.com/This-Herman-C...6136/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1320789527&sr=8-1
http://www.amazon.com/Common-Sense-...BM/ref=sr_1_19?ie=UTF8&qid=1320790130&sr=8-19
http://www.amazon.com/They-Think-Yo...6278/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1320789527&sr=8-3
http://www.amazon.com/Leadership-Re...JO/ref=sr_1_23?ie=UTF8&qid=1320790130&sr=8-23


----------



## ballen0351 (Nov 8, 2011)

The last tiny bit of credibility in her story was lost when she admitted to living in same building as david axelrod


----------



## billc (Nov 8, 2011)

Is it true one of the accusers now works in the Obama state dept.?


----------



## billc (Nov 8, 2011)

I know people are saying this was one of the other republicans leaking the info.  However, although it wouldn't be a stretch for it to be one of the republicans, it could just as easily have been the dems.  Why?  Well, one of the most damaging republicans to the democrats in the last election cycle was Sarah Palin.  The odds of Cain winning the nomination are not great, but after the election he will be in the same position as Sarah Palin and he will be a black conservative who isn't afraid to say so.  Obama and the dems have every reason to put a stop to that.  There are apparently possible connections to David Axelrod, Rahm Emanuel has connections to the NRA in chicago and one of the accusers may actually work in the Obama state dept.  Coincidence, maybe, maybe not.


----------



## ballen0351 (Nov 8, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Is it true one of the accusers now works in the Obama state dept.?


Yes apparently that one of the first ones that the case was settled and according to Cain was not found to be true when investigated.


----------



## billc (Nov 8, 2011)

The first accuser...

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/67891.html



> Now the spokesperson for IRS&#8217;s Inspector General, Kraushaar has worked as a career federal government official for different agencies in Washington.



She apparently started working there a year ago.


----------



## billc (Nov 8, 2011)

Thoughts on the Cain story from American Thinker:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/11/cain_accusers.html



> It has been verified that Herman Cain was not a party to the nondisclosure agreement.  He is not bound by its confidentiality provisions.  He did not breach the agreement by addressing it; his accuser may have.
> The Cain accuser, through her lawyer, stoked the controversy by claiming Cain's version of events is not true.  Publicly rejecting Cain's claim that he did nothing wrong may be accurate.  On the other hand, it may have been done to raise the price for her story.  It even raises the specter that she is the original source of the story broken by _Politico_.
> Friday, after the National Restaurant Association released the Cain accuser from the confidentiality of the nondisclosure agreement, her lawyer issued a





> statement that "She and her husband see _no value_ in revisiting this matter now nor in discussing the matter any further publicly or privately." (emphasis added)
> After anonymously stoking the story for good reason or not, which may have been done in violation of the confidentiality [COLOR=#009900 !important]requirements[/COLOR] of the nondisclosure agreement, it is curious that the Cain accuser now sees "_no value_ in revisiting this matter."
> Instead of the inconsistent statement issued Friday by the lawyer, the Cain accuser could have issued the agreement on the spot since the NRA had released her to do so.  The lawyer could have redacted her name.  That would have provided information contained in the nondisclosure agreement without disclosing her identity.  Instead, the strategy used keeps _value_ and a price on the story because it keeps the story open to speculation.


----------



## WC_lun (Nov 8, 2011)

Sarah Palin hurt the Republicans much more than she hurt the Democrats.  The Obama administration believes Romney will be thier roughest competitor and have already focused thier campaign on him.  They would actually love to run against someone like Cain instead.  So I doubt seriously it was Democrats digging up the info on Cain.

The women from the lawsuits are under a non-disclose order from thier settlement.  That is why at least one of them has not come forward personally.  Another says she has no desire to be in the public light, which given some of the nasty stuff being said already is pretty understandable.

After reading more about the 4th accuser, there definitley are some questionable things with her.  However, that still leaves three others. This doesn't disqualify Cain from running, but I do think it should be taken into account.

As far as Clinton goes, most Republicans were ready to tar and feather him after his affair came out.  Now your using him as an excuse of why Cain's misconduct doesn't matter?  Really?!  Seems misconduct is only an issue for some if it is the other side's misconduct.  If it isn't correct behaviour, it isn't correct behaviour, no matter a Democrat or Republican.


----------



## billc (Nov 8, 2011)

They received a waiver from the NRA and have so far decided not to comment further.




> the Cain accuser could have issued the agreement on the spot since the NRA had released her to do so.  The lawyer could have redacted her name.  That would have provided information contained in the nondisclosure agreement without disclosing her identity.  Instead, the strategy used keeps _value_ and a price on the story because it keeps the story open to speculation


.


----------



## ballen0351 (Nov 8, 2011)

WC_lun said:


> However, that still leaves three others. This doesn't disqualify Cain from running, but I do think it should be taken into account.
> 
> As far as Clinton goes, most Republicans were ready to tar and feather him after his affair came out.  Now your using him as an excuse of why Cain's misconduct doesn't matter?  Really?!  Seems misconduct is only an issue for some if it is the other side's misconduct.  If it isn't correct behaviour, it isn't correct behaviour, no matter a Democrat or Republican.



How can you use the other three when you dont even know what happened?  All we were told was "OHHH Cain is a dirty old man but we cant tell you anyhting about it but trust us hes a dirty old man"

And the same people wanting to tar and feather Cain now were the ones saying what clinton did was no big deal.  On MSNBC today they were making stupid comments about the "Black sexual aggression against blond white woman" I mean really.


----------



## granfire (Nov 8, 2011)

ballen0351 said:


> How can you use the other three when you dont even know what happened?  All we were told was "OHHH Cain is a dirty old man but we cant tell you anyhting about it but trust us hes a dirty old man"
> 
> And the same people wanting to tar and feather Cain now were the ones saying what clinton did was no big deal.  On MSNBC today they were making stupid comments about the "Black sexual aggression against blond white woman" I mean really.



On the other hand, the ones who had the tar and fathers ready for Clinton are now defending Cain.

Politics, what a strange animal.

And for some odd reason it's pretty much only here that it matters so much what a guy does in his spare time.....


----------



## JohnEdward (Nov 8, 2011)

granfire said:


> On the other hand, the ones who had the tar and fathers ready for Clinton are now defending Cain.
> 
> Politics, what a strange animal.
> 
> And for some odd reason it's pretty much only here that it matters so much what a guy does in his spare time.....




That is a bullseye! The hypocrisy is getting worse that is for sure.  Those Republicans strongly behind Cain thinking they will get a black man to run against Obama also kills me. Which they were the ones who crowed against the idea of Powell running for President.  The same ones too who condemned Clarence Thomas. It is still about racial and gender political strategy.  They knew when to play that Cain sexual harassment card, he was getting to much attention.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 8, 2011)

Frankly, I am not convinced that ANY of the allegations are true. It is not hard to complile a reponderance of accusers. Nor is such a preponderance any form of actual evidence. Sadly, I doubt that will matter to the public at large. In this country, if you are a public figure, you are guilty until proven innocent. Even if proven innocent, you still have a high likelihood of being perceived as guilty.


----------



## granfire (Nov 8, 2011)

JohnEdward said:


> That is a bullseye! The hypocrisy is getting worse that is for sure.  Those Republicans strongly behind Cain thinking they will get a black man to run against Obama also kills me. Which they were the ones who crowed against the idea of Powell running for President.  The same ones too who condemned Clarence Thomas. It is still about racial and gender political strategy.  They knew when to play that Cain sexual harassment card, he was getting to much attention.



Powell was too good a man for office anyhow.


----------



## JohnEdward (Nov 9, 2011)

It doesn't matter if Cain is guilty. No presidential candidate has ever survived sexual harassment allegations.  It is a matter of their (3 women) word against his. Who do you think has the most credibility?  Something that lends to the allegations are possibly true is the fact others, like Romney, Perry aren't accused of sexual harassment.  Don't forget those candidates who where accused and they where guilty of sexual harassment.  Mostly likely, he is guilty. A political race is dirty, and the way Cain is handling it really is raising more questions then displaying his innocent. What also is highly important is what come out of his mouth, how he handles himself.  So far, it doesn't look good.

And the past sexual activities of politicians also lends public credibility to the allegations. Like, Weiner, and the other dozen or so over the last couple of years. Politics is about public image.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Nov 9, 2011)

Empty Hands said:


> Cain's complete and utter lack of seriousness or intellectual preparation for the job he says he wants makes him unfit to be President. This sleaziness just makes him an *******.
> 
> As for the complaints that the other 3 complainants are "speaking anonymously through a lawyer" - they are not speaking at all, through lawyers or otherwise. The women are bound by agreements not to speak about the matter. Others found the settlements and have brought forth knowledge of their existence.



*The sleazyness isn't yet proven, at least not enough for me.  As I said before, I remain open.  Actually, the 4th woman seems the most believable of all.  But what she describes can be either furtherance of actual or attempted sexual assaults, or simply a man being very clumbsy in his attempts to impress and date women.

But women who aren't willing to speak publicly, hiding behind legal agreements, then saying they don't see reason to talk about it?  Doesn't cut it with me.  In fact, I don't know that they may not have violated their agreements already, even going through a lawyer.  But what is the first waiting for?  A higher offer?  It doesn't help her defend her credibility.

*


granfire said:


> On the other hand, the ones who had the tar and fathers ready for Clinton are now defending Cain.
> 
> Politics, what a strange animal.
> 
> And for some odd reason it's pretty much only here that it matters so much what a guy does in his spare time.....



*Yes.  And I think that is what many Americans are becoming unhappy with.  Politicians of both major political parties, only representing their party and lobbyists, not the people who voted for them.  And certainly not the interests of their country.  At least that is how I am beginning to perceive it.
*


Josh Oakley said:


> Frankly, I am not convinced that ANY of the allegations are true. It is not hard to complile a reponderance of accusers. Nor is such a preponderance any form of actual evidence. Sadly, I doubt that will matter to the public at large. In this country, if you are a public figure, you are guilty until proven innocent. Even if proven innocent, you still have a high likelihood of being perceived as guilty.



Yep, truth in that as well.  But even if he were to be found completely innocent of all allegations, I think I am not getting a warm fuzzy about the way he has (mis)handled his damage control.


----------



## WC_lun (Nov 9, 2011)

The first three women did not come forward on thier own.  They were discovered through thier law suits.  The lawyers were hired to protect thier anonymity, the law suit agreement, and give another side other than Herman Cain's (so far inept) spin on the suites.  Why are you so down on the accuser's?  They are not the ones who came forward and other than the last one are doing what they can in a tough situation.

Here's something else to keep in mind with the fourth accuser as well, if as you say it wasn't a case of harrassment, but rather clumsy attempts to impress and date a woman, he was married at the time.  You have already expressed your distaste at adultery with Clinton's escapade.  Why are you giving Herman Cain such a large benefit of the doubt?  Could it be political party is trumping your morality?  Once again, bad behaviour is bad behaviour, no matter the person's political leanings.


----------



## crushing (Nov 9, 2011)

granfire said:


> On the other hand, the ones who had the tar and fathers ready for Clinton are now defending Cain.



Really can't compare the two until the Cain allegations are shown to be true.  At least one accuser should look in to hiring a body guard.  Harrassment and settlements happen to follow her from one company to the next.  Just goes to show we have a long way to go in the worksplace.

Cain should watch this PSA:  http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/sexual-harassment/258532/


----------



## Steve (Nov 9, 2011)

granfire said:


> Powell was too good a man for office anyhow.


I believe this to be true, as well!

Regarding Clinton, it wasn't the adultery, it was the abuse of his position that bothers me.  In the case of Cain, if true, it would be the same thing.

If Cain wants to cheat on his wife, that's on him.


----------



## granfire (Nov 9, 2011)

Steve said:


> I believe this to be true, as well!
> 
> Regarding Clinton, it wasn't the adultery, it was the abuse of his position that bothers me.  In the case of Cain, if true, it would be the same thing.
> 
> If Cain wants to cheat on his wife, that's on him.


Well, then again Clinton's target was a willing participant. (and it seemed that Cain's position was also relevant and relatively abused)


----------



## Steve (Nov 9, 2011)

granfire said:


> Well, then again Clinton's target was a willing participant. (and it seemed that Cain's position was also relevant and relatively abused)


That just makes it sexual harassment, conflict of interest and an abuse of his authority, and not rape.   I'm glad it wasn't rape.  That would be a much bigger deal.


----------



## granfire (Nov 9, 2011)

Steve said:


> That just makes it sexual harassment, conflict of interest and an abuse of his authority, and not rape.   I'm glad it wasn't rape.  That would be a much bigger deal.



That would have been a real crime.


----------



## Steve (Nov 9, 2011)

granfire said:


> That would have been a real crime.


Exactly!  Remember, he wasn't impeached for getting a BJ, sexual harassment, conflict of interest or anything like that.  It was for lying about it while under oath.


----------



## billc (Nov 9, 2011)

Since no topic is ever really explored until Ann Coulter weighs in, here is her assessing the Cain accusers...

http://www.anncoulter.com/



> November 9, 2011
> Herman Cain has spent his life living and working all over the country -- Indiana, Georgia, Minnesota, Nebraska, Kansas, Washington, D.C. -- but never in Chicago.
> 
> So it's curious that all the sexual harassment allegations against Cain emanate from Chicago: home of the Daley machine and Obama consigliere David Axelrod.
> ...





> Bialek's accusations were certainly specific. But they also demonstrated why anonymous accusations are worthless.
> 
> Within 24 hours of Bialek's press conference, friends and acquaintances of hers stepped forward to say that she's a "gold-digger," that she was constantly in financial trouble -- having filed for personal bankruptcy twice -- and, of course, that she had lived in Axelrod's apartment building at 505 North Lake Shore Drive, where, she admits, she knew the man The New York Times calls Obama's "hired muscle."






> The reason all this is relevant is that both Axelrod and Daley have a history of smearing political opponents by digging up claims of sexual misconduct against them.


----------



## JohnEdward (Nov 9, 2011)

> The reason all this is relevant is that both Axelrod and Daley have a history of smearing political opponents by digging up claims of sexual misconduct against them.



If only Coulter could get those glasses and a straight pointing finger. it is the GOP who is smearing Cain.  Wait, she knows that....she is just blaming the democrats again.


----------



## granfire (Nov 10, 2011)

Steve said:


> Exactly!  Remember, he wasn't impeached for getting a BJ, sexual harassment, conflict of interest or anything like that.  It was for lying about it while under oath.



well, even that was a technicality....everybody knew what happened, and what that factually means, but by definition he didn't....

Politics and legaleze, gotta love it.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Nov 10, 2011)

WC_lun said:


> The first three women did not come forward on thier own.  They were discovered through thier law suits.  The lawyers were hired to protect thier anonymity, the law suit agreement, and give another side other than Herman Cain's (so far inept) spin on the suites.  Why are you so down on the accuser's?  They are not the ones who came forward and other than the last one are doing what they can in a tough situation.
> 
> *Well, as I said, I find it difficult to put any stock in what they say when they aren't open to to questions.  The news has always reported the women have come forward so I wasn't aware of what you said.  As an aside, I wonder who is paying for the lawyers?  And is it worthy of thought that the first they are heard of they already have lawyers?  At least the first I heard of them.  And you are correct, I still think Cain hasn't handled this well.  Whether or not he has in fact been harassing women, or is just inept, I am less inclined personally to want to see him in office.*
> 
> ...



Thanks for your comments.


----------



## Carol (Nov 10, 2011)

Between Rick Perry slurring his speech in New Hampshire and drawing a blank for a painful 45 seconds on last nights debate, the campaign that has been Mitt or Not Mitt is boiling down to Mitt and.....


----------



## seasoned (Nov 10, 2011)

Carol said:


> Between Rick Perry slurring his speech in New Hampshire and drawing a blank for a painful 45 seconds on last nights debate, the campaign that has been Mitt or Not Mitt is boiling down to Mitt and.....



Mitt and........... 

I like Cain, hope he can get past this mess. It seems whom ever is feared the most, gets all the mud.


----------



## Master Dan (Nov 10, 2011)

First if you had listened to the comments on CNN yesterday by the head of a CNN reporting group who had employed one of the latest women to come out in public, that she had hired her for a state department position at the INS and call Cain a Monster her credibiltiy was impeachable. Cain is a meglamaniac that is a serial abuser believing his power and money gives him the right to bend over who he thinks he can and and asking for a BJ seems part of his interview process. 

His answer to any of this is he is to good and the American people are to good to even consider the acusations. The GOP debate was a joke not a debate non of them offered any solutions and the crowd stacked booing even the questions put to Cain about the accusations and they were to chicken **** to pursue it. The whole focus of the GOP is still the same tire montra of we must protect the profits and greed of the 1% in powere and it will some how benefit the ingnorant lazy people at the bottom no matter how they package it it all smells the same as that bag of sh---- set fire on your porch.

Cain is an insult to women an insult to the credibility of sexual harrasement and an insult to his statement of common sense which most firemen will tell you where theres smoke there is fire and its not he said she said but he said they said. What out of thousands of women only 5 have come forward?? what he does not remember? what he's been married 45 years? what a load of horse **** and if this country is stupid enough to elect him or perry or any that propose thier agenda we will be in a depression no credit no housing no jobs unless your making bombs or blowing off legs for the 1%


----------



## JohnEdward (Nov 10, 2011)

The GOP is sunk. UNLESS....someone comes out of the woodwork that has their poop together. I am ready to vote for Anne Coulter at this point.  As it stands now, Romney, Cain and Perry are the three stooges, by their own making. 

Cain is done. Have him sit on the bench with Palin, Bachmann and the other forgettable that dropped out.


----------



## granfire (Nov 10, 2011)

JohnEdward said:


> The GOP is sunk. UNLESS....someone comes out of the woodwork that has their poop together. I am ready to vote for Anne Coulter at this point.  As it stands now, Romney, Cain and Perry are the three stooges, by their own making.
> 
> Cain is done. Have him sit on the bench with Palin, Bachmann and the other forgettable that dropped out.



Ah, it can't ever be THAT bad that we have to pull Coulter out. 

Or do you want to sink her, too?
:lfao:


----------



## JohnEdward (Nov 10, 2011)

granfire said:


> Ah, it can't ever be THAT bad that we have to pull Coulter out.
> 
> Or do you want to sink her, too?
> :lfao:



hmmmm.....let me think about that........:lol:


----------



## WC_lun (Nov 11, 2011)

Coulter running would make my vote ver, very, easy to decide.


----------



## ballen0351 (Nov 11, 2011)

Master Dan said:


> First if you had listened to the comments on CNN yesterday by the head of a CNN reporting group who had employed one of the latest women to come out in public, that she had hired her for a state department position at the INS and call Cain a Monster her credibiltiy was impeachable. Cain is a meglamaniac that is a serial abuser believing his power and money gives him the right to bend over who he thinks he can and and asking for a BJ seems part of his interview process.
> 
> His answer to any of this is he is to good and the American people are to good to even consider the acusations. The GOP debate was a joke not a debate non of them offered any solutions and the crowd stacked booing even the questions put to Cain about the accusations and they were to chicken **** to pursue it. The whole focus of the GOP is still the same tire montra of we must protect the profits and greed of the 1% in powere and it will some how benefit the ingnorant lazy people at the bottom no matter how they package it it all smells the same as that bag of sh---- set fire on your porch.
> 
> Cain is an insult to women an insult to the credibility of sexual harrasement and an insult to his statement of common sense which most firemen will tell you where theres smoke there is fire and its not he said she said but he said they said. What out of thousands of women only 5 have come forward?? what he does not remember? what he's been married 45 years? what a load of horse **** and if this country is stupid enough to elect him or perry or any that propose thier agenda we will be in a depression no credit no housing no jobs unless your making bombs or blowing off legs for the 1%


So you were a Bush guy huh?


----------



## crushing (Nov 11, 2011)

JohnEdward said:


> The GOP is sunk. UNLESS....someone comes out of the woodwork that has their poop together. I am ready to vote for Anne Coulter at this point. *As it stands now, Romney, Cain and Perry are the three stooges, by their own making.*
> 
> Cain is done. Have him sit on the bench with Palin, Bachmann and the other forgettable that dropped out.



What did Romney do yesterday to get thrown in with Cain and Perry?


----------



## CanuckMA (Nov 11, 2011)

crushing said:


> What did Romney do yesterday to get thrown in with Cain and Perry?


He showed up??:lfao:


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 11, 2011)

Am I the only one who is at this point missing the days when Republican sex scandals were all about gay bath houses and underage prostitutes?


----------



## Master Dan (Nov 11, 2011)

Josh Oakley said:


> Am I the only one who is at this point missing the days when Republican sex scandals were all about gay bath houses and underage prostitutes?


 Its comming out in a new pole the reach around deficit spending foriegn policy BJ Jobs bill????


----------



## Master Dan (Nov 11, 2011)

Master Dan said:


> Its comming out in a new pole the reach around deficit spending foriegn policy BJ Jobs bill????


 oh and I forgot the NCAA NFL No Child left behind Penn State program


----------



## granfire (Nov 11, 2011)

Master Dan said:


> oh and I forgot the NCAA NFL No Child left behind Penn State program




:lfao:


That was BAD!!!!
:lol:


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 12, 2011)

Master Dan said:


> Its comming out in a new pole the reach around deficit spending foriegn policy BJ Jobs bill????


WOW. After that, I think I need a shower.


----------

