Sharon Bialek accuses Herman Cain of groping her

[Rockstar]

Lets see here we have allegations, no proof, sex, race and a guy running for POTUS...what more could you want?...cha ching! What media outlet is the least bit concerned about truth, guilt or innocence. When Cain is no longer worth it, big media will cut bait and he'll slowly sink to the bottom... then on to the next Big Story!

I'll say this, one thing is certain when the dust has settled. Cain will have become an unfavorable candidate in the eyes of women voters. Mission Accomplished

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Lets see here we have allegations, no proof, sex, race and a guy running for POTUS...what more could you want?...cha ching! Not one media outlet is in the least bit concerned about truth, guilt or innocence. When Cain is no longer worth it, big media will cut bait and he'll slowly sink to the bottom... then on to the next Big Story!

I'll say this though, out of all of this media hype and sensationalism one thing is certain. Cain will have become an unfavorable candidate in the eyes of women voters.

But why? Why would big media want to sink Cain? Who is behind it?

PS...women still love Bill Clinton.

[tater]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

But why? Why would big media want to sink Cain? Who is behind it?

PS...women still love Bill Clinton.

I don't think there is a conspiracy in the press. I think reporters are always gunning for "their side." The vast majority of reporters are well left of the US center. I know several reporters, all would agree (at the NYT, NPR, the local paper, and Bloomberg). (I found an msnbc report of political contributions by reporters... you can read the full list, but counting the Rs vs Ds is left as an excercise for the reader (you have to wade through many Ds to get to a single R) http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19113455.../#.Trmp-GBlp7J ).

I think that if the majority were right of center, coverage would be slanted to the right. All news is biased.

It should be possible for someone that knows how to do story counts (there are systems in place to do word, story, etc counts on the news media) to compare the volume of coverage on Cain vs, say, Obama's association with domestic terrorist Bill Ayres. Or Obama losing all his records from his time as a lawyer and state rep. Or his lack of college transcripts, etc, ad nauseum.

I'm fine with digging up dirt on ALL OF THEM, as long as it is done with equal fervor.

I think some of the Cain crap sounds fishy, but I also think too many and it starts smelling of a pattern on his part, too. I am not a Cain defender, I just want equal digging. Look at the number of reporters sent to turn over rocks in Alaska vs Palin (who I actively dislike, BTW). She was getting more "investigation" to try and cut her off at the knees than Obama got running at the front of the ticket***8212;and WAY more than Biden ever got (and they needed to do nothing at all to smear Palin other than let her open her mouth and make some dumb statement out loud).

[AVGWarhawk]

I agree Tater. For me this is a railroad job. Were is the paperwork showing settlements? The seed has been planted in the heads of the voters. His campaign will be on a thread.

[Dread Knot]

A more recent and blatant example would be former democratic presidential frontrunner John Edwards. The story of his relationship (and child) with a staffer was aggressively squelched by the mainstream media and press (including the New York Times). Edwards was their boy. It took the National Enquirer of all media institutions to bring the story to light. He's political persona non grata now.

[vienna]

I think some of the Cain crap sounds fishy, but I also think too many and it starts smelling of a pattern on his part, too. I am not a Cain defender, I just want equal digging. Look at the number of reporters sent to turn over rocks in Alaska vs Palin (who I actively dislike, BTW). She was getting more "investigation" to try and cut her off at the knees than Obama got running at the front of the ticket—and WAY more than Biden ever got (and they needed to do nothing at all to smear Palin other than let her open her mouth and make some dumb statement out loud).

I also believe in equal digging. But, as you pointed out, there appears to be a pattern emerging. Some troubling aspects have also arisen. One of the women involved in this story actually had to get a waiver on a confidentaility agreement signed as part of her settlement with the Restaurant Association to be able to make a statement about her case. She then made a statement through her attorney affirming the incident, but made the statement anonymously and has stated she has no intention of pursuing the matter either in the media or in the courts. This is a highly unusual occurance and lends credence to her allegations as she appears to merely be affirming the facts as she experienced. She has no known connection to any "enemies" of Cain and it doesn't help Cain that she is also a registered Republican.

Then there is the matter of Cain's handling of the reports. First he denied it ever happened at all. Then he said, well, something happened but no claims were filed. Then he said, yes there were claims but no settlements. Then there was money paid, but it was severance, not a settlement. Then It wasn't really severance, it was a settlement, but for a small amount. Then the amounts were actually substantial. Then he said.... and it goes on and on... Cain's memory seems to switch on and off faster than he can think up his next excuse. The situation has gotten to the point where he is verging into Clinton-esque "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is." parsing of his version of the (no pun intended) affair.

The question that really needs to be asked by anyone thinking of voting for Cain, or any other candidate, for that matter: Is he/she really an outsider and a "breath of fresh air", or is he/she just another political wanna-be carrying the poltical stench of duplicity, opportunism, and business as usual? As the Who song says, "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss"...

[August]

Originally Posted by vienna

I also believe in equal digging. But, as you pointed out, there appears to be a pattern emerging. Some troubling aspects have also arisen. One of the women involved in this story actually had to get a waiver on a confidentaility agreement signed as part of her settlement with the Restaurant Association to be able to make a statement about her case. She then made a statement through her attorney affirming the incident, but made the statement anonymously and has stated she has no intention of pursuing the matter either in the media or in the courts. This is a highly unusual occurance and lends credence to her allegations as she appears to merely be affirming the facts as she experienced. She has no known connection to any "enemies" of Cain and it doesn't help Cain that she is also a registered Republican.

Lend credence? If she is anonymous then how do we know if any of her claims are true? How could anyone know who she is connected with, or how she votes? She is a phantom as far as i'm concerned.

Then there is the matter of Cain's handling of the reports. First he denied it ever happened at all. Then he said, well, something happened but no claims were filed. Then he said, yes there were claims but no settlements. Then there was money paid, but it was severance, not a settlement. Then It wasn't really severance, it was a settlement, but for a small amount. Then the amounts were actually substantial. Then he said.... and it goes on and on... Cain's memory seems to switch on and off faster than he can think up his next excuse. The situation has gotten to the point where he is verging into Clinton-esque "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is." parsing of his version of the (no pun intended) affair.

The question that really needs to be asked by anyone thinking of voting for Cain, or any other candidate, for that matter: Is he/she really an outsider and a "breath of fresh air", or is he/she just another political wanna-be carrying the poltical stench of duplicity, opportunism, and business as usual? As the Who song says, "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss"...

I agree. This is the only credible bad mark against Cain so far imo. I think it shows a serious lack of character not to have come clean right away, not to mention extraordinarily bad judgement. Now even if he is getting bad advice, which seems obvious, I expect my president to be better than that.

[vienna]

Lend credence? If she is anonymous then how do we know if any of her claims are true? How could anyone know who she is connected with, or how she votes? She is a phantom as far as i'm concerned.

Well, lets see...the Restaurant Association doesn't dispute the settlement and her lawyer doesn't seem to be the Gloria Allred type so there seems to be some substance to the phantom...but, wait, There's More!!!...


This Just In! The Phantom Speaks!:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_1...bialek-claims/

Bialek is the fourth woman to claim that Cain has acted inappropriately with her -- but the first to do so publicly. The identity of another of Cain's accusers, 55-year-old federal employee and registered Republican Karen Kraushaar, was revealed by iPad newspaper The Daily on Tuesday. A number of media outlets, including CBS News, had previously withheld Kraushaar's name at her request.

Kraushaar's attorney said last week that Kraushaar "stands by the complaint that she made" of "inappropriate behaviors and unwanted advances" by Cain, though he did not get into specifics.

After her name was revealed Tuesday, Kraushaar told CBS News that she is interested in holding a press conference with all of women who claim Cain sexually harassed them.

This sound familiar to anyone?:

"The Democrat machine in America has brought forth a troubled woman to make false accusations," said Cain, who did not offer support for the claim that "the Democrat machine" was behind Bialek's decision to go public. Bialek says she is a Republican and member of the Tea Party.

[Bolding is mine...]

Hmm...
Doesn't this have the faint scent of another phrase, oh... I don't know...maybe something along the lines of "...a vast right-wing conspiracy.."? Seems the GOP mocked her for being alarmist and weak (you know, just like a woman..) at the time she uttered those words. Has Herman Cain abandoned emulating Bill Clinton and has taken up the lead from Hillary? If the wheels haven't fallen off the Cain Cart, they are seriously wobbling...

As Jimbuna noted in a previous post in this topic:

Crap and fan come to mind.

[magicstix]

This will be my get rich quick scheme. A Republican touched me inappropriately. Now can I have gobs of money and attention?