PDA

View Full Version : The pushback against Sharon Bialek begins...



marv
11-08-2011, 11:24 AM
http://legalinsurrection.com/2011/11/the-pushback-against-sharon-bialek-begins/
(snip)

Despite Cain’s rise in the polls for weeks and the Politico accusations floating around since October 30, Bialek just told her fiance about it shortly a day or two before she got on a plane to fly to a press conference with Gloria Allred? Hmmmm........

(snip)


“[Sharon Bialek] was fired from her job, and her [unemployed] boyfriend suggested she contact Cain in hopes he could help her find employment.”.

In this particular incident she was fired for falsely accusing her boss of sexual harassment, a charge denied by co-workers, as well as being pretty much a pain in the ass to work with.

“I remember her as a time-waster, and rabble-rouser. If she didn’t get her way she cried about sexual harassment”. A former co-worker, a female no less, emailed me. “She was trouble with a capital “T”.

(snip)
I had a similar false charge run-in with a female co-worker at the Department of the Interior in Denver. It was quite silly, and no "upskirt". But that's another story.

From [u]MacsMind (http://macsmind.com/wordpress/2011/11/07/sharon-bailek-remembered-by-a-co-worker-as-a-time-waster-and-rabble-rouser-if-she-didnt-get-her-way-she-cried-sexual-harassment/):

(snip)

But that brings us to the story of that day, 1996-1997, the sexual harassment case of Paul Jones vs. Bill Clinton. You’ll remember that the media vilified Paula Jones, they tore her to shreds. They did the same to Jennifer Flowers, Monica Lewinsky. But the media told us that these charges – rape in the case of Juanita Broaddrick- didn’t matter. That Clinton was the victim of a vast right wing conspiracy and witch hunt and that he should be left alone to run the country.

Bialek’s tale is unsourced – outside her already discredited past, whereas the Juanita Broaddrick case had actual evidence, as did the Jones case. But don’t let the media do the digging for the truth. They have a lynching to attend.

(snip)

Adam Wood
11-08-2011, 12:41 PM
Who is this MacsMind? Anyone know anything about this blog? Is there any credibility there?

marv
11-08-2011, 01:05 PM
Who is this MacsMind? Anyone know anything about this blog? Is there any credibility there?

A radio talk show host IIRC. Check his http://macsmind.com/wordpress/ site.

Tipsycatlover
11-08-2011, 01:16 PM
I've known women who made accusations of sexual harassment a part time job. Especially in the 90s, it was as common as fake accusations of child molestation in the 80s.

Adam Wood
11-08-2011, 01:18 PM
A radio talk show host IIRC. Check his http://macsmind.com/wordpress/ site.Yeah, I looked around it a little bit. Not a whole lot there, unfortunately. I would feel a lot better if he had some very serious sourcing in there somewhere.

Rockntractor
11-08-2011, 01:19 PM
Yeah, I looked around it a little bit. Not a whole lot there, unfortunately. I would feel a lot better if he had some very serious sourcing in there somewhere.

Was what he said false?

Adam Wood
11-08-2011, 02:20 PM
Was what he said false?That's not at issue. What's at issue is being able to convincingly prove what his source said is true. Any ol' body can just send an e-mail to someone and say something. I could send an e-mail to Rush Limbaugh and claim that you're a lazy bum at work, but that doesn't prove much. Do I work with you? For how long? How often did I observe you being a lazy bum? Can I demonstrate that I worked with you? What's my name? What's my history?

The same sort of questions need to be asked of the person making these claims. Who is she? When did she work for the Association's education department (or whatever it was where Bielick worked)? Did they share a cubicle? Who was this boss against whom she made false allegations? How did the co-workers all know they were false? Etc., etc., etc. You know: all the common-sense journalism that Politico didn't do when they trotted out the anonymous claims against Cain in the first place.

It's not that I'm accusing someone of lying here; it's that I want to be able to prevent someone else from claiming that it's all made up.

Rockntractor
11-08-2011, 02:26 PM
That's not at issue. What's at issue is being able to convincingly prove what his source said is true. Any ol' body can just send an e-mail to someone and say something. I could send an e-mail to Rush Limbaugh and claim that you're a lazy bum at work, but that doesn't prove much. Do I work with you? For how long? How often did I observe you being a lazy bum? Can I demonstrate that I worked with you? What's my name? What's my history?

The same sort of questions need to be asked of the person making these claims. Who is she? When did she work for the Association's education department (or whatever it was where Bielick worked)? Did they share a cubicle? Who was this boss against whom she made false allegations? How did the co-workers all know they were false? Etc., etc., etc. You know: all the common-sense journalism that Politico didn't do when they trotted out the anonymous claims against Cain in the first place.

It's not that I'm accusing someone of lying here; it's that I want to be able to prevent someone else from claiming that it's all made up.

You aren't familiar with Paula Jones, Jennifer Flowers, Monica Lewinsky and Juanita Broaddrick.

txradioguy
11-08-2011, 03:09 PM
"Why would she go to hear him speak a month ago at the Teacom convention? She went up and hugged Cain after the event."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ts-emerge.html

Adam Wood
11-08-2011, 03:32 PM
You aren't familiar with Paula Jones, Jennifer Flowers, Monica Lewinsky and Juanita Broaddrick.I'm not intimately familiar with them, no, but that's still not at issue here. Bill Clinton is not on trial here. This has to do with Herman Cain and this woman's allegations and, in particular, how credible she is. If this story is true about her getting fired before for making false claims about sexual harassment, then it goes a mighty long way in showing that she's not credible. Unlike the Left, though, I prefer to deal with some actual solid facts rather than just running around in a circle flailing my hands in the air screaming "he did it! he did it!"

Rockntractor
11-08-2011, 03:42 PM
I'm not intimately familiar with them, no, but that's still not at issue here. Bill Clinton is not on trial here. This has to do with Herman Cain and this woman's allegations and, in particular, how credible she is. If this story is true about her getting fired before for making false claims about sexual harassment, then it goes a mighty long way in showing that she's not credible. Unlike the Left, though, I prefer to deal with some actual solid facts rather than just running around in a circle flailing my hands in the air screaming "he did it! he did it!"

Be specific in the first place rather than going after the messenger, this was like playing where's waldo.

txradioguy
11-08-2011, 03:42 PM
I'm not intimately familiar with them, no, but that's still not at issue here. Bill Clinton is not on trial here. This has to do with Herman Cain and this woman's allegations and, in particular, how credible she is. If this story is true about her getting fired before for making false claims about sexual harassment, then it goes a mighty long way in showing that she's not credible. Unlike the Left, though, I prefer to deal with some actual solid facts rather than just running around in a circle flailing my hands in the air screaming "he did it! he did it!"


Psst...Adam


http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?t=45713

Adam Wood
11-08-2011, 04:09 PM
Be specific in the first place rather than going after the messenger, this was like playing where's waldo.I didn't "go after" anyone. I was quite specific from the start.

Rockntractor
11-08-2011, 04:31 PM
If this doesn't squash Cain, they will pull another victim out of their hat and then another, proof or specifics will not matter, it is all about their narrative. Cain is to conservative for liberals to allow and apparently he makes many Republicans nervous as well.

txradioguy
11-08-2011, 04:34 PM
If this doesn't squash Cain, they will pull another victim out of their hat and then another, proof or specifics will not matter, it is all about their narrative. Cain is to conservative for liberals to allow and apparently he makes many Republicans nervous as well.

Dems have had a narrative for decades that the "seriousness of the accusation" is more important than any actual crime.

Like with Justice Thomas...the fact that what Anita Hill accused him of was a lie doesn't matter to Dems...it's the accusation and how much mileage they can get out of it that counts.

Rockntractor
11-08-2011, 04:38 PM
Dems have had a narrative for decades that the "seriousness of the accusation" is more important than any actual crime.

Like with Justice Thomas...the fact that what Anita Hill accused him of was a lie doesn't matter to Dems...it's the accusation and how much mileage they can get out of it that counts.

If you relentlessly repeat the lies and beat the names of the victims into the minds of the public, the damage is done. it isn't about facts or truth any longer, it is about numbers.

marv
11-08-2011, 04:49 PM
If this story is true about her getting fired before for making false claims about sexual harassment, then it goes a mighty long way in showing that she's not credible. Unlike the Left, though, I prefer to deal with some actual solid facts rather than just running around in a circle flailing my hands in the air screaming "he did it! he did it!"

Circumstantial my dear Watson, circumstantial. Murderers have been convicted on circumstantial evidence. Now consider Bialek's documented history of legal and financial problems. Gold digger? Looks like a very real possibility here.

Companies pay token settlements to make cases go away to avoid the more expensive courtroom litigation route. Insurance companies do it all the time with claimants.

And women can also be predators when the "sexual harassment" checkbook is laid upon the table. Women also make passes at men. That's happened to me during several decades of working in mixed gender offices, although I looked at it as rather flattering.

AmPat
11-08-2011, 05:50 PM
Where are the Wiener photos? Any Semen stained dresses? Any witnesses? Corroborating evidence?

Klintoon was innocent with the left even after the proof of his deviant actions, Cain is guilty in the complete absence of any proof. :rolleyes:

djones520
11-08-2011, 06:05 PM
Where are the Wiener photos? Any Semen stained dresses? Any witnesses? Corroborating evidence?

Klintoon was innocent with the left even after the proof of his deviant actions, Cain is guilty in the complete absence of any proof. :rolleyes:

Why does it matter if he's guilty to the left or not. What should matter is if he is guilty, period.

I personally feel that he is innocent, but all this "deflection" to how the left reacts about this just makes it seem like we're trying to cover things up.

CueSi
11-08-2011, 07:05 PM
"Why would she go to hear him speak a month ago at the Teacom convention? She went up and hugged Cain after the event."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ts-emerge.html

That's what makes my head scratch. I can't even be in the same ROOM as the cousin who molested me nearly 20 years later, much less run up for a hug.

~QC

Starbuck
11-08-2011, 07:11 PM
That's what makes my head scratch. I can't even be in the same ROOM as the cousin who molested me nearly 20 years later, much less run up for a hug.

~QC
I hear ya. Anyway, Cain went on TV and said he didn't know her; never seen her before; it never happened.

And in the end, if you want a job, you call up the guy and ask a favor, don't you? You don't really go to Washington DC to a "penthouse suite" and "Italian Restaurant" and all that nonsense.

NJCardFan
11-08-2011, 08:00 PM
Before we start pointing fingers at the left here, I'd start looking at the other GOP contenders first and more specifically the Romney camp. This is a bit too soon for the dems to trot something like this out. This is more October surprise stuff which is a year away. My guess, Romney is scared and he knows that aside from Cain, there is no other to stand in his way so if he can remove his top competitor now, it makes things all the easier.

AmPat
11-08-2011, 08:40 PM
Why does it matter if he's guilty to the left or not. What should matter is if he is guilty, period.

I personally feel that he is innocent, but all this "deflection" to how the left reacts about this just makes it seem like we're trying to cover things up.

Point
_________

djones
:rolleyes:

No deflection. If he is guilty, provide PROOF! This is not news, it isn't credibly sourced. It is simply another high tech lynching of a Conservative by the lame Stream Media.

I was pointing out the hypocrisy of the media and the left (same thing here), in the reporting of the non-story. If and or when PROOF is provided, I will give the matter due attention.

3rd-try
11-08-2011, 10:32 PM
That's what makes my head scratch. I can't even be in the same ROOM as the cousin who molested me nearly 20 years later, much less run up for a hug.

~QC

That is a very insightful perspective most of us can't personally relate to. It casts even more doubt on this story.
Cain's statement left him no loop holes, no wiggle room. He can't "nuance" his way out of what he said UNLESS he's telling the truth. That alone makes me tend to believe him.

Kay
11-08-2011, 10:55 PM
This is a bit too soon for the dems to trot something like this out.
This is more October surprise stuff which is a year away.

Yeah, that's what I've been saying. If this is all coming from the left,
you'd think they would have saved it and let Cain get the nomination,
THEN release it to discredit him in the general election.

CueSi
11-08-2011, 11:51 PM
That is a very insightful perspective most of us can't personally relate to. It casts even more doubt on this story.
Cain's statement left him no loop holes, no wiggle room. He can't "nuance" his way out of what he said UNLESS he's telling the truth. That alone makes me tend to believe him.


I think he may have met her but not enough to remember her. If I had to remember every customer in a one month period, I couldn't. Maybe one or two regulars or heavy hitters, but that's about it.

~QC

marv
11-09-2011, 02:08 AM
Something is being ignored here. Sharon Bialek claims to be a victim, but produces no evidence.

Let's turn this around. While she says it happened, he says it didn't. The burden is on her to prove her claim. Maybe Cain is the real victim here.

She has two prestigious attorneys but isn't going to file any charges in court. Maybe she wants to intimidate Cain for whatever ends. Maybe she thinks that she might need defense if Cain charges her with slander.

Michael Walsh at National Review describes what might be going on here......
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/281883/return-whipsaw-michael-walsh
(snip)

First, posit the existence of a “story” as defined by Politico’s editors — doesn't matter whether it’s true, relevant, or even recent.

(snip)

Second, ambush the candidate (in this case, a novice unused to the poisonous ways of the Washington press corps) to get him on the record regarding the “charges,” which establishes the baseline reaction narrative...

(snip)

Third, attack any subsequent statements as that most ominous of developments, “changing the story.”

(snip)

Fourth, watch with pleasure as the victim's allies edge away from him (after all, it’s not the truth that matters, it’s the seriousness of the charge), and he starts to founder,...

(snip)

txradioguy
11-09-2011, 05:19 AM
Why does it matter if he's guilty to the left or not. What should matter is if he is guilty, period.

Doesn't matter to the left if he's guilty as long as the allegation is out there. It SHOULD matter to us because if any of this is proven we don't want to send the GOP version of Billy Jeff to D.C.


I personally feel that he is innocent, but all this "deflection" to how the left reacts about this just makes it seem like we're trying to cover things up.

How the hell is a presentation of the facts in the case...and it seems the conservative media has found far more to discredit these allegations than the MSM has provided proof...a defelection?

newshutr
11-09-2011, 07:03 AM
Cain's newest accuser...Krausharr


steady yourself...

Filed a complaint at her next job...

(http://news.yahoo.com/ap-exclusive-accuser-filed-complaint-next-job-080946066.html)

She's got a part time job..with her lawyer..filing complaints..

Odysseus
11-09-2011, 09:28 AM
I've known women who made accusations of sexual harassment a part time job. Especially in the 90s, it was as common as fake accusations of child molestation in the 80s.
We see it in the DOD all of the time. I knew of one officer who spent far more time accusing her superiors of various forms of discrimination than she did doing her job, which was why she filed the accusations in the first place. Eventually, they put her out, but not before she had either racial or sexual bias complaints against everyone in her chain of command. Another Soldier, an NCO, used to hook up regularly with senior officers. Whenever she got into trouble, they could be counted on to prevent anything happening to her because of what she had on them. She cost a good friend of mine his career when he tried to counsel her about doing hers, and she filed false charges against him. The entire chain came down on him like a JDAM strike. False sexual harassment claims are a way to move up, or simply stay put. In fact, the Tailhook scandal was an example of it on a grand scale, but ultimately, when the smoke cleared, there was no truth to the allegations, but that didn't prevent the destruction of numerous careers. Tailhook cut a swath of destruction through Naval aviation, resulting in a shortage of trained pilots for several years afterward.

If this doesn't squash Cain, they will pull another victim out of their hat and then another, proof or specifics will not matter, it is all about their narrative. Cain is to conservative for liberals to allow and apparently he makes many Republicans nervous as well.
Clearly, you are a prophet. Another one just came out yesterday.

That is a very insightful perspective most of us can't personally relate to. It casts even more doubt on this story.
Cain's statement left him no loop holes, no wiggle room. He can't "nuance" his way out of what he said UNLESS he's telling the truth. That alone makes me tend to believe him.
I hate to play devil's advocate, because I do believe Cain, but Clinton did pretty much the same thing with Lewinsky, and kept it up until the DNA evidence proved that he was a liar. Of course, Clinton was counting on the press to shield him, and they did their best to do so, whereas Cain cannot. If Cain is pulling a Clinton, it would be suicidal, and he doesn't strike me as having a poltical death wish.

Cain's newest accuser...Krausharr

steady yourself...

Filed a complaint at her next job...

(http://news.yahoo.com/ap-exclusive-accuser-filed-complaint-next-job-080946066.html)

She's got a part time job..with her lawyer..filing complaints..

Can you say "Modus Operandi"?

Tipsycatlover
11-10-2011, 08:01 PM
So far Cain passed his lie detector. She however was lying through her teeth.

I knew that immediately. Just watching her, it was obvious that she was lying.

http://www.cbsatlanta.com/story/16002149/investigator-herman-cain-innocent-of-sexual-advances

Kay
11-10-2011, 10:05 PM
Very interesting Tipsy! Thanks for the link.
That's the next best thing to calling in Cal Lightman.

marv
11-10-2011, 10:39 PM
Lin Wood, the lawyer who introduced Cain at his presser, is a libel and defamation lawyer. Wood was hired by Cain, not his campaign.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/10/us-usa-campaign-cain-accusations-idUSTRE7A97I020111110
(snip)

If the women accusing Cain hold a joint news conference, Wood said "I'll be watching carefully" and respond to it.

He said in general, anyone considering making public accusations of wrongdoing against another person should carefully consider the wisdom and potential consequences in taking such action.

"Anyone should think twice before you take that type of action. And I think it's particularly true when you are making serious accusations against someone running for president of the United States, but I think it's equally true if you are making those accusations against your next door neighbor."

Asked to respond to Wood's "think twice" comment, Kraushaar's lawyer, Joel Bennett, said: "I have not heard his statement, but statements of that nature could intimidate or discourage women from reporting sexual harassment."

Wood said he was retained by Cain and not by his campaign. He said he feels strongly about "guilt by accusation" cases. "I have seen how it has devastated the lives of other clients of mine and I would hate to see it happen to Mr. Cain."

Hmmmmm.........

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/11/10/first-on-cnn-kraushaar-wont-do-news-conference-without-other-accusers/
(snip)

"[Kraushaar] still would like to have a press conference with all four women" who have accused Cain of sexual harassment, the source said, but it has not yet come together.

Thursday morning, Kraushaar's attorney, Joel Bennett, told reporters that she has called the two anonymous accusers, but they have not returned her calls.

(snip)

UPDATE 4:06 pm: The attorney for [Kraushaar] who accused Herman Cain of sexual harassment in the late 1990s said Thursday his client is not prepared to hold a news conference about the allegations until other victims agree to join her.

Looks like things might be unraveling...wonder how David Axelrod will distance himself from all of this...

Elspeth
11-11-2011, 01:37 AM
I'd be careful judging Cain's guilt or innocence on a single piece of software applied at a distance. I'd much rather see Cain sit down at a lie detector.

There are too many settlements from the National Restaurant Association for nothing to have happened. The fact that the NRA put the gag order (confidentiality agreement) in place means that, ultimately, these women were paid for their silence. Considering that there are 4 of them, that means that there is likely something to be silent about. They also weren't paid a lot, especially in legal terms. These were low level employees who only took away a year's salary and lost their jobs in the bargain.

Now, as to Gloria Allred's client, I can't tell you. She seems to have come out of the blue. I'd like to see what paperwork and proof Allred has about this woman. A lie detector test in this case would also be appropriate.

It doesn't help Cain's case to have threatened the women from the National Restaurant Association, however. He just looks like a bully beating up on women and intimidating witnesses. At this point, I am hoping that Newt Gingrich starts revving up his campaign because I will not even consider Cain any more.

patriot45
11-11-2011, 01:45 AM
I'd be careful judging Cain's guilt or innocence on a single piece of software applied at a distance. I'd much rather see Cain sit down at a lie detector.

There are too many settlements from the National Restaurant Association for nothing to have happened. The fact that the NRA put the gag order (confidentiality agreement) in place means that, ultimately, these women were paid for their silence. Considering that there are 4 of them, that means that there is likely something to be silent about. They also weren't paid a lot, especially in legal terms. These were low level employees who only took away a year's salary and lost their jobs in the bargain.

Now, as to Gloria Allred's client, I can't tell you. She seems to have come out of the blue. I'd like to see what paperwork and proof Allred has about this woman. A lie detector test in this case would also be appropriate.

It doesn't help Cain's case to have threatened the women from the National Restaurant Association, however. He just looks like a bully beating up on women and intimidating witnesses. At this point, I am hoping that Newt Gingrich starts revving up his campaign because I will not even consider Cain any more.

You libs do really turn yourselves inside out to try to be right! So Cain is only a serial groper at the National restaurant association? Do the math. Any other allegations from his other 63 years iof life? I can't hear you!!!

Elspeth
11-11-2011, 02:27 AM
You libs do really turn yourselves inside out to try to be right! So Cain is only a serial groper at the National restaurant association? Do the math. Any other allegations from his other 63 years iof life? I can't hear you!!!

There are 4 financial settlements with confidentiality agreements. You can't get away from that. If there were only 1, it might be a fluke, but 4 financial/confidentiality settlements are too many to be a fluke.

The lack of previous settlements doesn't mean Cain never harassed anyone. It can mean that either no one complained or no one's complaints got taken seriously. Many women are sexually harassed at work in varying ways and either don't report it or don't get taken seriously.

Perilloux
11-11-2011, 09:18 AM
There are 4 financial settlements with confidentiality agreements. You can't get away from that. If there were only 1, it might be a fluke, but 4 financial/confidentiality settlements are too many to be a fluke.

The lack of previous settlements doesn't mean Cain never harassed anyone. It can mean that either no one complained or no one's complaints got taken seriously. Many women are sexually harassed at work in varying ways and either don't report it or don't get taken seriously.

4? I read that there were only 2. Could you please post a link that verifies there were 4 financial/confidentiality settlements?

Tipsycatlover
11-11-2011, 10:09 AM
These kinds of claims usually happen in a cluster. That's why there are NO claims at any other business Cain worked in. What happens is that some woman makes a buck by a fake claim, others see how easy it is and do the same thing.

AmPat
11-11-2011, 10:18 AM
Interesting that it all comes out now. Hmmmm??? I wonder if it has anything to do with him being a threat to the liberal god of Marxism currently usurping our freedom? That Marxist In Chief that cannot run on his one and only record that he couldn't hide, run from, or seal behind mountains of legal red tape?

Naw! These women merely seek justice after all these years. :rolleyes:

Starbuck
11-11-2011, 11:50 AM
Well, that's the thing. Back when Mr. Cain only garnered 4% of the vote, these women 'didn't remember' him. Now, it seems, they dream about him;)

Adam Wood
11-11-2011, 12:20 PM
I'd be careful judging Cain's guilt or innocence on a single piece of software applied at a distance. I'd much rather see Cain sit down at a lie detector.

There are too many settlements from the National Restaurant Association for nothing to have happened. The fact that the NRA put the gag order (confidentiality agreement) in place means that, ultimately, these women were paid for their silence. Considering that there are 4 of them, that means that there is likely something to be silent about. They also weren't paid a lot, especially in legal terms. These were low level employees who only took away a year's salary and lost their jobs in the bargain.

Now, as to Gloria Allred's client, I can't tell you. She seems to have come out of the blue. I'd like to see what paperwork and proof Allred has about this woman. A lie detector test in this case would also be appropriate.

It doesn't help Cain's case to have threatened the women from the National Restaurant Association, however. He just looks like a bully beating up on women and intimidating witnesses. At this point, I am hoping that Newt Gingrich starts revving up his campaign because I will not even consider Cain any more.
There are 4 financial settlements with confidentiality agreements. You can't get away from that. If there were only 1, it might be a fluke, but 4 financial/confidentiality settlements are too many to be a fluke.

The lack of previous settlements doesn't mean Cain never harassed anyone. It can mean that either no one complained or no one's complaints got taken seriously. Many women are sexually harassed at work in varying ways and either don't report it or don't get taken seriously.So now you're just making shit up? OK.

Well, at least we know what the future holds: make up more and more stuff and hope that it sticks.

txradioguy
11-11-2011, 12:30 PM
There are 4 financial settlements with confidentiality agreements. You can't get away from that. If there were only 1, it might be a fluke, but 4 financial/confidentiality settlements are too many to be a fluke.

Four settlements of nuisance claims that Cain was not a part of.


The lack of previous settlements doesn't mean Cain never harassed anyone. It can mean that either no one complained or no one's complaints got taken seriously. Many women are sexually harassed at work in varying ways and either don't report it or don't get taken seriously.

There was more evidence...and subsequently more denial of proof by you Libtards and the MSM over the proven and verified sexual harassment and adultery charges leveled against your hero Clinton than there currently is against Mr. Cain.

Yet the rush to judgement by the left and the spineless RINO's over baseless accusations...the details of which we don't even know yet...is sickening.

Perilloux
11-11-2011, 01:06 PM
I'm gonna call BS on the '4 financial settlements with confidentiality agreements' claim until it's backed up with a link. I've only read about 2 financial settlements w/ confidentiality agreements, & then after all the publicity from the initial leaks, the other 2 made accusations. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Adam Wood
11-11-2011, 01:38 PM
I'm gonna call BS on the '4 financial settlements with confidentiality agreements' claim until it's backed up with a link. I've only read about 2 financial settlements w/ confidentiality agreements, & then after all the publicity from the initial leaks, the other 2 made accusations. Correct me if I'm wrong.You're not wrong at all. Two pried settlements out of NRA, one didn't even file a claim, and one, Bielick (sp?), never even worked for Cain.

Elspeth
11-11-2011, 03:43 PM
Apparently conservative women are reducing their support for Cain:

http://www.salon.com/2011/11/11/herman_cains_gender_gap/singleton/




....Cain’s dip seems to be primarily the result of defections from female supporters. In the last CBS poll, which was released Oct. 25, he actually enjoyed more support from women (28 percent) than from men (22 percent) and led the GOP pack with 25 percent. But now, after more than a week of intense news coverage of sexual harassment allegations, only 15 percent of female GOP voters say Cain is their top choice, while 21 percent of men are still with him.

....At the same time, though, there have been some prominent conservatives who have broken with the Cain victimization narrative — including some influential women. For instance, Penny Nance, the head of Concerned Women for America, called Bialek’s allegations “credible” earlier this week and pronounced herself “very disturbed” by the details. That view is apparently shared by a significant chunk of female Republican voters; according to the CBS poll, 38 percent of them say that the accusations against Cain make them less likely to support him. Among men, that number is only 23 percent.



The difference between men and women irrespective of party is that women know what it is like to be sexually harassed and abused at work. I've had it happen to me twice and it involved inappropriate touching and a vicious working environment when I told the bosses in question to stop. Cain needs to prove to women voters that these suits are baseless, and threatening women if they come forward makes him look like a bully trying to keep his misdeeds secret.

If Cain wants to stay in the race, he's going to need more than Rush and Sean defending him. He needs to open up these cases, let us see what they are about, and demonstrate that the settlements were just "nuisance suits". The more he keeps the lid on it with threats, the more he makes it look like there's some really bad stuff there.

Starbuck
11-11-2011, 04:32 PM
Apparently conservative women are reducing their support for Cain:.....

Apparently true, but the rest of your post becomes nonsense when you recall the fact - and it is a fact - that after Bill Clinton was shown to be a womanizer the women just lined up to vote for him because he was 'cute'. He beat Bob Dole by 57 to 34% in 1996, and in 1992 turned in similar numbers against Perot and Bush. He failed to ever get 50% of the vote.

No. Women vote for the sexiest candidate. They forgive everything else.

Odysseus
11-11-2011, 04:58 PM
Apparently true, but the rest of your post becomes nonsense when you recall the fact - and it is a fact - that after Bill Clinton was shown to be a womanizer the women just lined up to vote for him because he was 'cute'. He beat Bob Dole by 57 to 34% in 1996, and in 1992 turned in similar numbers against Perot and Bush. He failed to ever get 50% of the vote.

No. Women vote for the sexiest candidate. They forgive everything else.

They lined up to do a number of things for him. :D

txradioguy
11-11-2011, 05:25 PM
Apparently conservative women are reducing their support for Cain:



Try not to sound so happy when you type that.

It's from Salon anyway...not exactly the bastion of Conservatism.

Tipsycatlover
11-11-2011, 08:55 PM
Salon might be wishful thinking, but in reality Cain is still leading.

Odysseus
11-11-2011, 09:01 PM
Meanwhile, at a press conference somewhere else...:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Yw6n1_yMKLw/TrmAPCfGgYI/AAAAAAAADog/SiadKxOSFpA/s640/Expert%2BOpinion.jpg

txradioguy
11-12-2011, 05:52 AM
http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/6835/backrow.jpg

AmPat
11-12-2011, 01:00 PM
Cain needs to prove to women voters that these suits are baseless, and threatening women if they come forward makes him look like a bully trying to keep his misdeeds secret.
First, Cain doesn't need to prove a thimg. The accusers need to prove their case.
Second, Where has Cain done anything that makes him a "bully?" He is doing what any sane and reasonable person would do in the face of these all out vicious lies and liberal attacks on his character.:mad:

txradioguy
11-12-2011, 05:14 PM
First, Cain doesn't need to prove a thimg. The accusers need to prove their case.
Second, Where has Cain done anything that makes him a "bully?" He is doing what any sane and reasonable person would do in the face of these all out vicious lies and liberal attacks on his character.:mad:

QFT


Typical Liberal tactic....make the accusation then put the onus on the accused to prove it's not true.

Odysseus
11-12-2011, 06:06 PM
QFT


Typical Liberal tactic....make the accusation then put the onus on the accused to prove it's not true.

If this were just a court of law, then the onus would be on the accusers, but this is a political campaign, and the onus is on the candidate to convince people to vote for him. Cain doesn't necessarily have to disprove the accusations, which is impossible in the first place, since there is no way to disprove it to the satisfaction of people who will refuse to vote for him anyway, but he has to demonstrate that he can handle the controversy and react to it in a way that doesn't weaken him as a candidate. He's done pretty well at this, with one glaring mistake, which was blaming Perry's people for the leak. He should have stuck to his denials and let the VRWC do the work of uncovering the plot, which appears to be happening, as the Axelrod connections are coming to light with a vengeance.

Rockntractor
11-12-2011, 06:43 PM
http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/6835/backrow.jpg

Nom nom nom nom!!!:)