Two women accused Herman Cain of inappropriate behavior

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7386772n

Rice: Cain shouldn’t play the "race card"
She’s right in much of what she says except that it is a gross generalization to imply that criticism of Obama is always “because he’s president”. That’s very obviously not always the case, as this criticism of the “servant of the people” which was widely blogged about and emailed early in his term, could not possibly have been based on comparisons with his predecessors (also pictured): snopes.com/politics/obama/photos/desk.asp

Oh, and that’s just one example for which I have good graphics…
 
She’s right in much of what she says except that it is a gross generalization to imply that criticism of Obama is always “because he’s president”. That’s very obviously not always the case, as this criticism of the “servant of the people” which was widely blogged about and emailed early in his term, could not possibly have been based on comparisons with his predecessors (also pictured): snopes.com/politics/obama/photos/desk.asp
Just as it is a gross generalization to imply that your comments against Herman Cain are a being made just because he a presidential candidate.
 
She’s right in much of what she says except that it is a gross generalization to imply that criticism of Obama is always “because he’s president”. That’s very obviously not always the case, as this criticism of the “servant of the people” which was widely blogged about and emailed early in his term, could not possibly have been based on comparisons with his predecessors (also pictured): snopes.com/politics/obama/photos/desk.asp

Oh, and that’s just one example for which I have good graphics…
If you google “George Bush Chimp” you get over a million hits.

“Sarah Palin whore” gets 3.6 million hits.

Obama has been treated with kid gloves compared to others in the political arena.
 
Just as it is a gross generalization to imply that your comments against Herman Cain are a being made just because he a presidential candidate.
Which comments, specifically? And when did I claim they were?
 
If you google “George Bush Chimp” you get over a million hits.

“Sarah Palin whore” gets 3.6 million hits.

Obama has been treated with kid gloves compared to others in the political arena.
Demeaning insults are not the subject of my post. Unfair criticism (I didn’t see any insults in the email; “servant of the people” is a statement of fact) compared to others in the same position, is.
 
Your entire arguement is obviously motivated by race.
Oh, I see, now we’re down to blanket statements. How does it work, Sam? Someone cries wolf, someone else asks says there’s no wolf and I get accused of animal cruelty for asking them both where the wolf is? Tut-tut, how fair is that? 😉

I have to hand it to you guys: excellent tag-teaming skills.
 
Cain Accuser May Come Forward to Tell Her Side of the Story

Would she be legally allowed to do that?
Yes and no. AFAIK, it would be a civil matter and not a criminal one. So she can’t be arrested or prosecuted by the state. However whatever legal entity she has the agreement with could sue her civilly and demand their money back plus damages. However that legal entity would also have to consider the public relations backlash if they appear to be trying to silence a sexual harassment victim.
I don’t understand, she accepted a settlement, why would she suddenly want to go public. Could she take a moral high ground when she accepted money.
She did remain silent, it was the press that got the story from “several sources” and published it. Now that its out there, if she feels that Cain is lying she might feel morally bound to expose that.
 
Why did you hold back earlier?
Because initially I agreed with you that too often people play the race card on both sides and it was wrong. Then you went on to point out Ann Coulter. I didn’t want to go down that rabbit hole. I don’t think either one of us would have any trouble pointing out numerous such tactics by either side.

The thread was about accusations, not race.
 
I was not hung up on the remarks, I was simply hoping to hear your opinion on those comments. Of course it was more relevant to remind me of totally unrelated comments on race (not at all applicable to these accusations) made by “the left” in the past…I mean, we all know that “the right” makes the rules* only *so that “the left” can be judged by them.
My mind may be slipping but it seems to me you were more hung up on how she said it, and not what she said. Either way, I don’t really care. 🤷

The left has long been talking about how cool it was to vote a black man into office…when one chooses to run as a Republican and one commentator says something it’s all of the sudden ooh, both sides are guilty of playing the race card now.
 
If you google “George Bush Chimp” you get over a million hits.

“Sarah Palin whore” gets 3.6 million hits.

Obama has been treated with kid gloves compared to others in the political arena.
At LEAST THREE women, Juanita Broaddrick, Elizabeth Ward Gracen and Eileen Wellstone, charged Bill Clinton with forcible RAPE, on the record, over the years, yet where were the newshounds then?? :coffeeread: Rob
 
At LEAST THREE women, Juanita Broaddrick, Elizabeth Ward Gracen and Eileen Wellstone, charged Bill Clinton with forcible RAPE, on the record, over the years, yet where were the newshounds then?? :coffeeread: Rob
Bill Clinton wasn’t a black conservative.
 
There is no proof the accusations are true, they are not substantiated, anybody can accuse anybody.
 
At LEAST THREE women, Juanita Broaddrick, Elizabeth Ward Gracen and Eileen Wellstone, charged Bill Clinton with forcible RAPE, on the record, over the years, yet where were the newshounds then?? :coffeeread: Rob
The mainstream media also resisted publishing information on Clinton’s sexual harassment of Paula Jones.
 
The most recent one never filed a complaint.

But it’s news!
He is the front runner and a conservative; that is why its news. I am skeptical of three women who all took a settlement, right? I am curious of the real authenticity of their claims. If somebody had really done something why wouldn’t you go to court, three women you are talking about.
 
There, beside rusting rail lines, is the home of OnMessage Inc., a Republican-leaning consulting firm recently hired to bolster Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s presidential campaign.

One of the firm’s partners, Curt Anderson, worked on Cain’s losing 2004 U.S. Senate campaign. Cain thinks he’s the hired political gun who leaked details to Politico, a Washington trade publication, of alleged “sexually suggestive behavior” Cain is said to have exhibited towards two women while he ran the National Restaurant Association in the 1990s. That story set off a media frenzy which has quickly put Cain’s campaign on the defense…

“I told my wife about this in 1999 and I’ve got nothing to hide,” Cain told me Wednesday. “When I sat down with my general campaign consultant Curt Anderson in a private room in our campaign offices in 2003 we discussed opposition research on me. It was a typical campaign conversation. I told him that there was only one case, one set of charges, one woman while I was at the National Restaurant Association. Those charges were baseless, but I thought he needed to know about them. I don’t recall anyone else being in the room when I told him.”…

Aside from knowing about the alleged sexual harassment accusations, Cain campaign officials point to the timing of Anderson’s hiring by Perry as evidence of his involvement. The campaign announced Anderson’s role on October 24, just a week before Politico broke the story.
forbes.com/sites/richardminiter/2011/11/02/herman-cain-sexual-harassment-leak/

Anderson denied the accusation to Politico, saying he first heard of the harassment charges on Sunday night when the story broke. Over to you, Rick Perry.

🍿

hat tip
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top