PDA

View Full Version : Herman Cain: The Attacks On Me Are Racially Motivated



Rockntractor
11-01-2011, 10:43 PM
On FOX News' "Special Report" tonight presidential candidate Herman Cain told the panel, after being asked, that he believes the charge of sexual harassment against him has to do with his race.

Charles Krauthammer: "Mr. Cain, when Clarence Thomas was near to achieving position of high authority, he was hit with a sexual harassment charge. You contending for presidency, the office of highest authority, leading in the polls for the Republican nomination, all of the sudden get hit with a sexual harassment charge. Do you think that race, being a strong black conservative, has anything to do with the fact you've been so charged? And if so, do you have any evidence to support that?"

Herman Cain: "I believe the answer is yes, but we do not have any evidence to support it. But because I am an unconventional candidate running an unconventional campaign and achieving some unexpected unconventional results in terms of my -- the poll. We believe that yes, there are some people who are Democrats, liberals who do not want to see me win the nomination. And there could be some people on the right who don't want to see me -- because I'm not the
'establishment candidate.' No evidence."

"Relative to the left, I believe that race is a bigger driving factor. I don't think it's a driving factor on the right. This is just based upon our speculation," Mr. Cain also said.
More at link>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/11/01/herman_cain_the_attacks_on_me_are_racially_motivat ed.html
True or not, I wish he wouldn't go down this road.

djones520
11-01-2011, 10:44 PM
Yeah, this has got to be his weakest, and most dissapointing point, in my eyes.

He should just leave race at the door. Don't even bring it up, and if someone else does, just tell them it's not something he's there to talk about.

marinejcksn
11-01-2011, 11:36 PM
Here's where I disagree with some: I think Cain is a big enough man to leave race at the door...but I admire him for bringing up the hypocrasy of the leftist morons who place race into every conversation. The idea of a (dreaded) BLACK republican candidate! The Horror! :rolleyes:

I could care less about race/color/creed/religion/sexual preference/etc, etc, etc. I'd vote for an Albino Chinese Athiest Lesbian if they were a principled Conservative/Libertarian. But in beating the Left at their own game, I SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO hope Cain is our man, not only because he's qualified but for the simple fact that it'll cause lefty heads to explode when the Tea Party bangs the drum for a black man! :eek:

Starbuck
11-02-2011, 12:07 AM
I join the group who wishes he had not gone down this road. It would be better if he simply had said he had no idea what motivations were behind it. Because he doesn't.

txradioguy
11-02-2011, 03:18 AM
What's wrong with pointing out the 500lb gorilla in the room?

This has EVERYTHING to do with race. Just like it did with Justice Thomas.

If Cain had been a Liberal this would have never come up.

But here you've got what the Dem establishment looks at as an "uppity Negro" who has dared to stand against the two "icons" of the Democrat Party Bill Clinton and Barack Obama on two separate occasions.

The so called tolerant big tent Libs can't let this act of insubordination stand so they've got to try and put Cain in his "place".

There is no other explanation for why this is happening.

The Libs always attack that which they fear the most. If this was such a big explosive issue...why didn't it come out when Cain was just declaring his candidacy or at any other time in the last year when he wasn't considered a serious threat?

Why wait until he's ahead in the polls leading in the key states to do this?

This is a hit job the "high tech lynching" that Cain said would happen and that he was ready for.

Don't be scare to point out that race has something to do with this...do the same thing to the Dems that they did and do to us when we criticize Obama....

Call them racist.

linda22003
11-02-2011, 08:41 AM
Last night a black man (sorry, don't know who he was) from the Family Research Council said he couldn't condone "playing the race card" by a conservative any more than he could by a liberal. This may be the first time I've agreed with someone from the Family Research Council. :p

fettpett
11-02-2011, 09:03 AM
I don't see him "playing the race card" as much as he's pointing out the fact that the left is against him. Have you guy's listened to the crap that has come out of the MSM this past weekend and since the "story" about the sexual harassment? It's pretty disgusting, crap like "He's a black man that knows his place". What he should have done is pointed directly to these comments and named names on WHO is saying them. Then say that this crap has no place in American Politics in 2011. Then people might wake up and see the hypocrisy of the left (not that I see the MSM changing their tactics at all)

txradioguy
11-02-2011, 09:07 AM
I don't see him "playing the race card" as much as he's pointing out the fact that the left is against him. Have you guy's listened to the crap that has come out of the MSM this past weekend and since the "story" about the sexual harassment? It's pretty disgusting, crap like "He's a black man that knows his place". What he should have done is pointed directly to these comments and named names on WHO is saying them. Then say that this crap has no place in American Politics in 2011. Then people might wake up and see the hypocrisy of the left (not that I see the MSM changing their tactics at all)

QFT

Rockntractor
11-02-2011, 09:08 AM
I don't see him "playing the race card" as much as he's pointing out the fact that the left is against him. Have you guy's listened to the crap that has come out of the MSM this past weekend and since the "story" about the sexual harassment? It's pretty disgusting, crap like "He's a black man that knows his place". What he should have done is pointed directly to these comments and named names on WHO is saying them. Then say that this crap has no place in American Politics in 2011. Then people might wake up and see the hypocrisy of the left (not that I see the MSM changing their tactics at all)

What he has said so far is minor and if it goes no further than that it doesn't matter.

fettpett
11-02-2011, 09:23 AM
What he has said so far is minor and if it goes no further than that it doesn't matter.

true, but there is plenty of evidence, all they have to do is pick through the quotes that Rush plays and then lay them out.

I'm just sick of GOP candidates pussyfooting around this stuff and not taking the fight directly to them. I do admire Cain for standing up to the stupid harassment and saying there was nothing to it in the way he did.

On this subject though the MSM is doing exactly what they accused the Right of doing in 2008 and the TEA Party since then. It's crap and needs to be addressed by the candidates, especially Cain who it's being directed toward

Odysseus
11-02-2011, 09:32 AM
Four lily white people beating up a black guy for looking at women the wrong way? Sounds like a classic lynching to me. :D

noonwitch
11-02-2011, 12:53 PM
I join the group who wishes he had not gone down this road. It would be better if he simply had said he had no idea what motivations were behind it. Because he doesn't.


Politics and money are likely the motivations behind the attack. If the people attacking him are doing so for racial reasons, it should be exposed as such. But my guess is that this is coming from the campaign of one of the other GOP candidates. Probably Romney's campaign, since Perry and Bachman are toast, and Cain has made a lot of gains in the polls over Romney of late.


I am not making judgments on Cain and these allegations based on what I have seen and heard so far, other than to note that he has changed his story at least once that I'm aware of. The Today Show reported this morning that one of the women involved can't tell her story because part of her settlement involved a confidentiality clause.

Molon Labe
11-02-2011, 01:02 PM
True or not, I wish he wouldn't go down this road.


Yep. More likely to be politically motivated than racially. I'm really disappointed he's trying to play the race card.

Arroyo_Doble
11-02-2011, 01:39 PM
Yep. More likely to be politically motivated than racially. I'm really disappointed he's trying to play the race card.

To be fair, the card was placed on the table by members of the right-side punditry.

fettpett
11-02-2011, 01:45 PM
To be fair, the card was placed on the table by members of the right-side punditry.

again, you didn't listen to anything said by the left-wing punditry either who have basically been calling Cain an "Uncle Tom"

Odysseus
11-02-2011, 04:31 PM
Cain is getting it from both the left and the moderate wing of the Republican Party, but given that the left has a history of virulent racism, it's hard not to see this as a typical attempt at "putting him in his place".

:mg::DDsmilie_panic:http://forum.mpacuk.org/images/smilies/other/rocketwhore.gif


November 2, 2011
Four Lily White Liberals Smear a Black Man
By Peter Heck

Just as Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain predicted, he has become the most recent victim of the race-baiting left's high-tech lynching of prominent, conservative black men. Days before the Cain sexual harassment smear emerged from the sewers of liberal trash journalism, MSNBC's Martin Bashir hosted contributor Karen Finney who proclaimed that conservatives only liked Cain because, "they think he's a black man who knows his place." As Bashir actually thanked her on-air for making such an offensive and ignorant remark (far from being a submissive position, conservatives are supporting Cain in his effort to ascend to the highest office in the land), Finney granted, "I know that's harsh, but that's how it sure seems to me."

That's an interesting moment of candor since it now sure seems to any American paying attention that Finney and her fellow liberals dislike Cain because they think he's a black man who doesn't know his place. Diversity of thought amongst minorities -- particularly blacks -- is forbidden in the church of liberalism. Having constructed their entire political kingdom on the back of the dollars-for-votes dependency model, self-made black men who stray from the liberal plantation and threaten to carry the empowering message of personal (not government) reliance to throngs of minorities currently under the left's spell of entitlement, must be dealt with severely. Destroying them professionally and personally is a small price to pay to keep the plantation thriving.

And so, with that greater good in mind, four lily white liberals (Jonathan Martin, Maggie Haberman, Anna Palmer and Kenneth Vogel) authored a hit piece on the prominent conservative businessman in a desperate attempt to smear him out of contention for the Republican presidential nomination. This gutter politics is proof positive of what I've held for a long time: if you want to catch a modern day glimpse of old school white-on-black racism, behold the way white liberals treat black conservatives.

The racial motivations in this particular story cannot be missed. This is, after all, the same political movement that scolded anyone who dared suggest that the serial infidelity and alleged sexual assaults committed by white liberal Bill Clinton were relevant to his pursuit of the presidency.

And this is the same political movement that was so disinterested in the adultery of white liberal John Edwards who fathered a child with a campaign worker while his wife was losing her fight with cancer, that the National Enquirer tabloid out-scooped them. And even as late as June of this year, while Edwards faced criminal indictment for his attempts to illegally cover-up the scandal, fellow white liberals like Chris Matthews continued to defend him, suggesting that his prosecution was, "one of those [politically motivated] things you read about in third world countries."

And this is the same political movement that yawned at the sexual predilections and cell phone dalliances of white liberal Anthony Weiner, eagerly defending him from the "savagery" of conservative media types like Andrew Breitbart.

Yet this same movement that had to catapult itself over mountains of evidence in order to ignore the indiscretions of those white liberals enthusiastically skewered a black conservative based on the flimsy and unsubstantiated testimony of undisclosed sources. The case against Cain was so weak that after bringing the accusation, the lead author of the smear, white liberal Jonathan Martin, hilariously suggested on national television that it was Cain's responsibility -- not his -- to explain the accusation. This embarrassing performance didn't earn him skepticism and scorn from his fellow white liberals like Chris Matthews. Rather, Matthews congratulated him on breaking the story.

Martin's colleague at the now forever tarnished website Politico, Mike Allen, only added to the pathetic transparency of this racial attack when he appeared on another MSNBC program, "Morning Joe." Asked if Politico could cite any evidence beyond the allegation that Cain had made gestures "that were not overtly sexual but that made women uncomfortable," Allen ecstatically announced that their story had, "48,000 mentions" on the social media rumor mill Twitter. The anatomy of a smear: the evidence is irrelevant...all that matters is that the accusation spreads.

The attack on Cain certainly isn't the first of its kind. The original high-tech lynching of conservative Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas for the same stereotypical allegations, the constant attacks on "Uncle Tom" economists Thomas Sowell and Walter E. Williams, the belligerent nastiness directed at self-proclaimed welfare brat turned conservative champion Star Parker, and the persistent threats faced by tea-party Congressman Allen West all stand as stark depictions of the regard liberals have for blacks who dare to think differently than them.

If nothing else, at least we now know what PBS's Tavis Smiley meant several months ago when he promised this election would be "the most racist in the history of this Republic." The left is seeing to that.

Peter is a public high school government teacher and radio talk show host in central Indiana. Email peter@peterheck.com, visit www.peterheck.com, or like him on Facebook.


Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../2011/11/four_lily_white_liberals_smear_a_black_man.html at November 02, 2011 - 12:56:31 PM CDT

Lanie
11-02-2011, 04:51 PM
He should just deny the allegations and move on unless he's declared guilty.

In light of the history with Clinton and Thomas, I believe this could blow over quickly if it's allowed to.

Lanie
11-02-2011, 04:54 PM
What's wrong with pointing out the 500lb gorilla in the room?

This has EVERYTHING to do with race. Just like it did with Justice Thomas.

If Cain had been a Liberal this would have never come up.

But here you've got what the Dem establishment looks at as an "uppity Negro" who has dared to stand against the two "icons" of the Democrat Party Bill Clinton and Barack Obama on two separate occasions.

The so called tolerant big tent Libs can't let this act of insubordination stand so they've got to try and put Cain in his "place".

There is no other explanation for why this is happening.

The Libs always attack that which they fear the most. If this was such a big explosive issue...why didn't it come out when Cain was just declaring his candidacy or at any other time in the last year when he wasn't considered a serious threat?

Why wait until he's ahead in the polls leading in the key states to do this?

This is a hit job the "high tech lynching" that Cain said would happen and that he was ready for.

Don't be scare to point out that race has something to do with this...do the same thing to the Dems that they did and do to us when we criticize Obama....

Call them racist.

I do agree that if he was a Democrat, then liberals might not say anything. However, somebody might have. Remember Bill Clinton? Suddenly he got accused before his second election. Conservatives were big on pointing it out. Liberals were not. I think this is the same in reverse. The difference is Cain only has one or two people while Clinton probably had the entire female gender accusing him.

Rockntractor
11-02-2011, 05:09 PM
I do agree that if he was a Democrat, then liberals might not say anything. However, somebody might have. Remember Bill Clinton? Suddenly he got accused before his second election. Conservatives were big on pointing it out. Liberals were not. I think this is the same in reverse. The difference is Cain only has one or two people while Clinton probably had the entire female gender accusing him.

Cain never touched anyone, Clinton was dipping his cigars in women.

Starbuck
11-02-2011, 05:14 PM
I do agree that if he was a Democrat, then liberals might not say anything. However, somebody might have. Remember Bill Clinton? Suddenly he got accused before his second election..........
Without looking up the dates and so forth to pinpoint exactly what accusation you reference I feel I must call for a time out:

Actually, he got convicted. And disbarred. And saved from removal from office by one vote.

He was "accused" like Richard Nixon.

OK...........http://media.wiley.com/Lux/29/283429.medium.jpg......Game continues:)

Articulate_Ape
11-02-2011, 06:27 PM
Cain never touched anyone, Clinton was dipping his cigars in women.

And Obama has raped every man, woman, and child in America for generations to come, and the witnesses are not anonymous.

Lanie
11-02-2011, 10:44 PM
Cain never touched anyone, Clinton was dipping his cigars in women.

How do we know Cain never touched anybody?

I'm for innocent until proven guilty, but don't assume he's innocent just because you like him.

Like I said earlier, this will all blow over soon enough.

Lanie
11-02-2011, 10:45 PM
Without looking up the dates and so forth to pinpoint exactly what accusation you reference I feel I must call for a time out:

Actually, he got convicted. And disbarred. And saved from removal from office by one vote.

He was "accused" like Richard Nixon.

OK...........http://media.wiley.com/Lux/29/283429.medium.jpg......Game continues:)

That happened after he was elected the second time. Before he was re-elected, the accusations were already coming out. I remember hoping it would hurt his chances at re-election (didn't like Clinton back then), but it didn't. I don't think this is going to hurt Cain.

Rockntractor
11-02-2011, 10:51 PM
How do we know Cain never touched anybody?



Nobody has accused him of touching them.

Lanie
11-02-2011, 10:58 PM
Nobody has accused him of touching them.

I just read a related news story. It looks like you're right. That just shows how little this liberal cares.

Rockntractor
11-02-2011, 11:01 PM
I just read a related news story. It looks like you're right. That just shows how little this liberal cares.

It doesn't fit your narrative.

Novaheart
11-02-2011, 11:56 PM
What he has said so far is minor and if it goes no further than that it doesn't matter.

He was leading up to this though. In the last debate (I think that's where it was.) I heard him as much as say, "You guys are picking on me." and he wasn't being funny.

I really thought he would manage to keep himself from invoking racism, even if I thought his flunkies would do it for him from the fringes.

txradioguy
11-03-2011, 04:48 AM
He should just deny the allegations and move on unless he's declared guilty.

He already has.


In light of the history with Clinton and Thomas, I believe this could blow over quickly if it's allowed to.

The only one of the two names you've mentioned that has gotten any kind of free pass on allegations is Billy Jeff. And he's the only one of the two that there was any credible proof/evidence that he had indeed comitted sexual harassment if not outright assault on more than one occasion.

Starbuck
11-03-2011, 08:59 AM
........... I heard him as much as say, "You guys are picking on me." and he wasn't being funny...........

But that's not what he said.

Might be better if you quoted him and then offered up an analysis of meaning. That way those who may disagree with your analysis may form their own opinion.

fettpett
11-03-2011, 09:12 AM
How do we know Cain never touched anybody?

I'm for innocent until proven guilty, but don't assume he's innocent just because you like him.

Like I said earlier, this will all blow over soon enough.

he rescued himself from the investigation, THREE different investigations cleared him of wrong doing

Novaheart
11-03-2011, 09:15 AM
But that's not what he said.

Might be better if you quoted him and then offered up an analysis of meaning. That way those who may disagree with your analysis may form their own opinion.

CAIN: I feel like -- it's quite an honor to be beat up on, when you have a good idea, and you have a plan, and they really don't have a good plan. They've spent more time talking about what's wrong with my plan than they did talking about their plan. That suggests they don't have a real convincing plan.

fettpett
11-03-2011, 09:17 AM
CAIN: I feel like -- it's quite an honor to be beat up on, when you have a good idea, and you have a plan, and they really don't have a good plan. They've spent more time talking about what's wrong with my plan than they did talking about their plan. That suggests they don't have a real convincing plan.

and he was right...NONE of them had come up with a plan at that time, only Perry has come up with once since then. Including Bachmann with her asinine comment