So a new Herman Cain sexual harrassment victim has come forward. Now we are up to five.

Guess the total number Cain has harassed? 10? 15? More?

WomenUnited Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So a new Herman Cain sexual harrassment victim has
> come forward. Now we are up to five.
>
> Guess the total number Cain has harassed? 10? 15?
> More?


There is the number that will come forward and then the number he actually harassed.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WomenUnited Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > So a new Herman Cain sexual harrassment victim
> has
> > come forward. Now we are up to five.
> >
> > Guess the total number Cain has harassed? 10?
> 15?
> > More?
>

I must say I'll never understand this. The guy was rich and powerful before, yet no one did anything about his alleged acts. Now he's attempting to get a far less paying (and possibly less powerful) position and they're coming out of the woodwork?

Wouldn't it have made more sense to wait to see if he got the job and then blackmail him for some high paying do nothing position?
>
> There is the number that will come forward and
> then the number he actually harassed.

I am laughing at this woman who "came forward" to talk about her encounter with Cain when 1) she didn't work for him, and 2) was not harassed. It sounds like he thought maybe she was so infatuated with him that he would get a freebie, and then when she strongly indicated she wasn't interested, he took her back to the hotel and left.

They made it sound like she lost her job because of her encounter with Cain, but then when the story comes out it ends up she was already let go for reasons that had nothing to do with him. He even attended a conference with her and never made any inappropriate advances to her there. But of course Gloria Allred tries to make it sound like (in the lead up) that she was let go because of something that happened at the conference.

This was nothing more than Gloria Allred doing a hit job for no reason other than her political affiliation. I hope the lady who came forward was well compensated for her "not wanting to be there except to put a face on the issue"... not that her incident with him had anything at all to do with it.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Cain gave her a free hotel room. What more could a woman want.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I

You have to stop defending Cain and move on.

Seriously.

The spittle is ruining the back of my screen.

4 more years, II Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Registered Voter Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I
>
> You have to stop defending Cain and move on.
>
> Seriously.
>
> The spittle is ruining the back of my screen.

Maybe you should stop following the lead of the MSM comrades who carry water for Obama. Speaking of defending someone - I guess you have the founder's award for that title.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

You know she wanted it. They're all just asking for it.

what a pimp

I heard that there is a sex tape that will soon surface, appropriately entitled "Raising Cain".



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/07/2011 02:42PM by Faggy Bar Mitzvah.

Faggy Bar Mitzvah Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I heard that there is a sex tape that will soon
> surface, appropriately entitled "Raising Cain".

Sure it's not "Long Dong Cain."

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am laughing at this woman who "came forward" to
> talk about her encounter with Cain when 1) she
> didn't work for him, and 2) was not harassed.

Not harassed?

Bialek said the alleged incident in question occurred
down the street from the NRA headquarters. Describing
what happened she said, "Instead of going into the offices,
he suddenly reached over and put his hand on my leg, up my
skirt, and towards my genitals." She recalled that when she
protested the advances, Cain said, "You want a job right?"

Bialek alleged that Cain also "grabbed [her] head and
brought it towards his crotch." She said that she was
"shocked" by the behavior.

After losing her job, Bialek allegedly turned to Cain
for help. Allred said on Monday, "Mr. Cain instead decided
to try to provide her with his idea of a stimulus package."

You laugh at women being harassed? What an asshole you are!

Next time, maybe it'll be your daughter, niece, sister,
cousin, mother, or wife.

> He even attended a conference with her and never made
> any inappropriate advances to her there.

Oh, so it's okay he harassed her this one time, since
he didn't he didn't do it EVERY TIME he saw her?

Woman #4 comes forward. I'm sensing a pattern here, a
pattern of inappropriate behavior. I think the voters
are, too.

Time for you to (literally) kiss Herman good-bye.

Please wait your turn to be a Registered Voter hater. There's a long line.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 4 more years, II Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Registered Voter Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > I
> >
> > You have to stop defending Cain and move on.
> >
> > Seriously.
> >
> > The spittle is ruining the back of my screen.
>
> Maybe you should stop following the lead of the
> MSM comrades who carry water for Obama. Speaking
> of defending someone - I guess you have the
> founder's award for that title.

Wasn't it just Friday that the WSJ (about as MSM as you can get, right?) was A-OK with you for running a story criticizing Obama?

Not only are you a hack, your a hypocritical one too.

Go ahead, change the subject again, asswipe.

______________________________________________
I have had to change the addresses to my retaliatory blogs over half a dozen times.

This is a sad day and a huge setback for rapist everywhere.

The Other Guy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
blah blah blah about something that is not sexual harassment...

> Oh, so it's okay he harassed her this one time,
> since
> he didn't he didn't do it EVERY TIME he saw her?

You need to look up the definition, then see how it applies to this situation. When he "groped" her (which is a better definition of what he did) she told him no, and he stopped, then took her back to her hotel. She didn't work for him, she was not applying for a job to work for him (even though she was looking for his help in finding a job).

Was what he did morally good or bad? I won't judge that - based on what we heard from her so far, it sounds like a bad date more than anything else. She obviously was not that unhappy with him, she still spoke glowingly of him, even when she heard him speak at the Tea Party conference. Possibly a miscommunication of intent on her part, and in the dinner conversation they had when she visited with him? I mean really, she gave the whole unvarnished story about the encounter? Not likely. When he was with her in a professional environment (at the conference) he did not act unprofessional toward her - per her own account. When she came to see him for possible help in looking for a job, it was not in a professional setting either. There is no "there" there as far as I can see from her story.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

fairfaxdude Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Go ahead, change the subject again, asswipe.

Change the subject "Who?" This is about Cain and harassment - what has any story about Obama got to do with it. Speaking of hacks, and changing the subject - so you say King of the Fairies. Try and change the subject again, please - it is so appropriate for you.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Other Guy Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> blah blah blah about something that is not sexual
> harassment...
>
> > Oh, so it's okay he harassed her this one time,
> > since
> > he didn't he didn't do it EVERY TIME he saw
> her?
>
> You need to look up the definition, then see how
> it applies to this situation. When he "groped" her
> (which is a better definition of what he did) she
> told him no, and he stopped, then took her back to
> her hotel. She didn't work for him, she was not
> applying for a job to work for him (even though
> she was looking for his help in finding a job).
>
> Was what he did morally good or bad? I won't judge
> that - based on what we heard from her so far, it
> sounds like a bad date more than anything else.
> She obviously was not that unhappy with him, she
> still spoke glowingly of him, even when she heard
> him speak at the Tea Party conference. Possibly a
> miscommunication of intent on her part, and in the
> dinner conversation they had when she visited with
> him? I mean really, she gave the whole unvarnished
> story about the encounter? Not likely. When he was
> with her in a professional environment (at the
> conference) he did not act unprofessional toward
> her - per her own account. When she came to see
> him for possible help in looking for a job, it was
> not in a professional setting either. There is no
> "there" there as far as I can see from her story.


get a life, fag

The Other Guy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You laugh at women being harassed? What an
> asshole you are!
>
> Next time, maybe it'll be your daughter, niece,
> sister,
> cousin, mother, or wife.

A bad date, yes. Would I let him date my daughter again if he did that to her? No. Does that mean he is unfit to be President? No. Sorry, Clinton set all new lows for that position - and if he was ok with BJs in the WH, and spewing jizz all over another young woman's dress, I don't see how anything so far that has been revealed comes close in comparison.

If Cain was elected (big IF) and he acted like Bill Clinton did in any way shape or form, there is no doubt a Democratic Congress would impeach him.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

I think the number of times Herman Cain harrassed women is roughly double the number of insane posts by Mr. Misery - and that is a LOT of harrassment.

I suppose next grabbing a woman's breasts is out of the question too?

Cain needs to take a class in how to show the proper respect for women. The nearest class is taught at the Bill Clinton/Teddy Kennedy school for womanizers.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When he "groped" her (which is a better definition
> of what he did) she told him no, and he stopped, then
> took her back to her hotel. She didn't work for him,
> she was not applying for a job to work for him (even
> though she was looking for his help in finding a job).

You have no issue with Cain attempting to take sexual
advantage of this woman who came to him for help. I
think it’s reprehensible for Cain to have attempted to coerce
this woman into having sex with him.

> Was what he did morally good or bad? I won't judge
> that - based on what we heard from her so far, it
> sounds like a bad date more than anything else.

Your desire to spin this attempted sexual coercion into an
innocuous “bad date’ is stunning. Herman Cain is a sexual
predator. I wonder if the bible thumpers in the GOP will
change either minds about Cain, or simply see him unchanged
through their hypocritical blind eyes.

> She obviously was not that unhappy with him, she
> still spoke glowingly of him, even when she heard
> him speak at the Tea Party conference.

She said the last time that she saw Cain was at a Chicago Tea Party conference a month ago. Bialek said that when she asked if he remembered her, he was visibly uncomfortable.

“I guess I wanted to see if he was man enough to own up to what he had done 14 years ago,” she said.

That’s hardly ‘glowing’.

You want a job right?
Attachments:

UpSkirt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I suppose next grabbing a woman's breasts is out
> of the question too?


Fuck! It is?

Is there an extradition treaty in place with the Azores?

Time to move......again.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A bad date, yes.

She approached Cain about a job, RV.
She had a boyfriend, she was visiting
his family in DC while she was here.
Their meeting was in no way, shape, or
form a 'date'.

> Would I let him date my daughter again
> if he did that to her? No. Does that
> mean he is unfit to be President? No.

Cain is unfit to be president for many,
many reasons. His behavior towards women
is very telling about his character.
Well, lack-there-of, actually.

> If Cain was elected (big IF) and he acted like
> Bill Clinton did in any way shape or form, there
> is no doubt a Democratic Congress would impeach
> him.

Face it, RV: Cain isn't going to be elected
president because he isn't going to win the
GOP nomination because he's a terrible candidate.

The Other Guy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That’s hardly ‘glowing’.

Maybe you should have listened to the entire story. She still described him a a motivational speaker, inspiring, etc. Notice she made the point of saying to him - "you know I have a boyfriend..." - like what, it would have been ok if she didn't?

Look, I am not saying the guy is some morally perfect person. If he was I doubt he would be running for political office in all honesty. If the "bible thumpers" don't like him, maybe he won't get elected - pretty obvious from your comments that you don't like any GOP candidates so really, who gives a shit what your opinion of him is - you wouldn't like him even if he didn't have stories circulating about him.

He has plenty of other people who say he is a great guy. Proof or STFU basically - right now there is nothing but unsubstantiated rumors - unlike the physical evidence from Monica Lewinsky, and the actual lawsuits brought by women Clinton had been accused of raping/sexually assaulting amongst other things. I mean really, how many "Jane Does" did Clinton have again? And they at least came forward after a while, and had witnesses or other corroborating evidence supporting them (jizz covered dress for instance).

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=19483

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/07/2011 04:02PM by Registered Voter.

JobRight? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You want a job right?

That was funny - I lol'd

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Maybe you should have listened to the entire
> story. She still described him a a motivational
> speaker, inspiring, etc.

Hitler was a motivational speaker and inspiring, too.
Just sayin’…

> Notice she made the point
> of saying to him - "you know I have a
> boyfriend..." - like what, it would
> have been ok if she didn't?

Perhaps it was so he WOULDN’T grope her?

> If the "bible thumpers" don't like him, maybe he
> won't get elected - pretty obvious from your
> comments that you don't like any GOP candidates...

Yeah, I’m partisan. So are you, one of the most
outspoken Obama haters on FFU. So what?

> He has plenty of other people who say he is a
> great guy. Proof or STFU basically...

I haven’t seen much proof he’s a ‘great guy’,
either, so STFU yourself.

> - right now there is nothing but unsubstantiated rumors –

Except for this woman standing before microphones & cameras
saying Cain’s a scumbag.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/07/2011 04:18PM by The Other Guy.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> You need to look up the definition, then see how
> it applies to this situation. When he "groped" her
> (which is a better definition of what he did) she
> told him no, and he stopped, then took her back to
> her hotel. She didn't work for him, she was not
> applying for a job to work for him (even though
> she was looking for his help in finding a job).
>
>

Paula Jones didn't work for Clinton and the sex with Monica Lewinsky was consensual, so what's your point? And if you want to bring up the lying, it's not exactly like Cain hasn't been caught in lies, either.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

RV-

It should also be pointed out that grabbing a woman's breasts and vagina without her consent is sexual assault.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_assault#Definition

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

Registered Voter,

Can we move on to the other GOP candidates. I have a shit load of material on them that is just itching to be posted.

Can you start supporting Romney now... please please please

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> RV-
>
> It should also be pointed out that grabbing a
> woman's breasts and vagina without her consent is
> sexual assault.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_assault#Defini
> tion

Oh sure, absolutely. Note she wasn't pressing charges, suing, etc - granted it was 14 years ago. You would have to agree though, what she describes probably happens a lot more than you would think based on the sense of moral outrage going on here today, huh? As I said, she seemed to only have been surprised by his advance and the timing based on her story - if she didn't have a boyfriend at the time, then what? She could have told that entire story without ever mentioning her boyfriend as a matter of fact - so not sure what the line was on that.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Jones Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Registered Voter,
>
> Can we move on to the other GOP candidates. I
> have a shit load of material on them that is just
> itching to be posted.
>
> Can you start supporting Romney now... please
> please please

I support Romney also - when those stories come out (whatever they are - you all seem to know more about them then I do) then I suppose we will have to go back and forth on those too.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Paula Jones didn't work for Clinton and the sex
> with Monica Lewinsky was consensual,

The sex with Lewinsky was actually in violation of labor policies. If he hadn't been the President at the time he should have been fired - pretty sure the government policies are pretty explicit about having sex with subordinates, in particular interns.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Paula Jones didn't work for Clinton and the sex
> > with Monica Lewinsky was consensual,
>
> The sex with Lewinsky was actually in violation of
> labor policies. If he hadn't been the President at
> the time he should have been fired - pretty sure
> the government policies are pretty explicit about
> having sex with subordinates, in particular
> interns.

There's no law that says two consenting adult can't have sex. Most companies just make you disclose with HR that you are having sex, but no legal grounds for termination.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Paula Jones didn't work for Clinton and the sex
> > with Monica Lewinsky was consensual,
>
> The sex with Lewinsky was actually in violation of
> labor policies. If he hadn't been the President at
> the time he should have been fired - pretty sure
> the government policies are pretty explicit about
> having sex with subordinates, in particular
> interns.


Really? The government was closed, so she wasn't technically employed by the government at the time.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > RV-
> >
> > It should also be pointed out that grabbing a
> > woman's breasts and vagina without her consent
> is
> > sexual assault.
> >
> >
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_assault#Defini
>
> > tion
>
> Oh sure, absolutely. Note she wasn't pressing
> charges, suing, etc - granted it was 14 years ago.
> You would have to agree though, what she describes
> probably happens a lot more than you would think
> based on the sense of moral outrage going on here
> today, huh? As I said, she seemed to only have
> been surprised by his advance and the timing based
> on her story - if she didn't have a boyfriend at
> the time, then what? She could have told that
> entire story without ever mentioning her boyfriend
> as a matter of fact - so not sure what the line
> was on that.


You are trying to dismiss it as not being that big a deal. I'm pointing out that technically the guy committed a crime.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > RV-
> >
> > It should also be pointed out that grabbing a
> > woman's breasts and vagina without her consent
> is
> > sexual assault.
> >
> >
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_assault#Defini
>
> > tion
>
> Oh sure, absolutely. Note she wasn't pressing
> charges, suing, etc - granted it was 14 years ago.
> You would have to agree though, what she describes
> probably happens a lot more than you would think
> based on the sense of moral outrage going on here
> today, huh? As I said, she seemed to only have
> been surprised by his advance and the timing based
> on her story - if she didn't have a boyfriend at
> the time, then what? She could have told that
> entire story without ever mentioning her boyfriend
> as a matter of fact - so not sure what the line
> was on that.

Yeah, I think the "boyfriend" line is super-significant. I'm sure she would have rather said "omg i dont have a boyfriend, and I've been dying to gobble your cock", making everything so consentual. Isn't that the way it plays out in your own Cain cock-gobbling fantasies, RV? You think you'd have the nerve to take the Cain muscle of love up your tight little GOP-repressed asshole too?

Herman Cain just wanted a blowjob. He bought he dinner and upgraded her room. The least she could of done was give him a little sucky sucky.

The line of women Herman Cain has harassed is longer than Kim Kardashian's wedding?

Waht I find the most interesting in all of this is the timing. How long has he been running for president now? He even ran for the Senate before and lost. But now, that he has been leading in the polls for a while, this woman comes forward WITH one of the biggest Democrat attorneys. None of the other women were alleging sexual things, just uncomfortable situations. The whole thing is a little shady to me.

village idiot Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Waht I find the most interesting in all of this is
> the timing. How long has he been running for
> president now? He even ran for the Senate before
> and lost. But now, that he has been leading in
> the polls for a while, this woman comes forward
> WITH one of the biggest Democrat attorneys. None
> of the other women were alleging sexual things,
> just uncomfortable situations. The whole thing is
> a little shady to me.

I could imagine, were I Ms. Bialek, being rather more
annoyed as Cain rose in the polls that he was 'getting
away' with what he did to me. Is revenge her motivation?
That's, at least in part, highly likely. Wouldn't it be
yours, had Cain done to you what Ms. Bialek claims he did
to her?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/08/2011 10:28AM by The Other Guy.

village idiot Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ...this woman comes forward WITH one of the biggest Democrat attorneys...

Lol!

The Democrats, though giggling to themselves at the a-MAZ-ingly horrible Republican line-up, probably couldn't care less about Cain's failures - he's not going to be the competition.

Of course, if miracles actually DO happen and Cain IS the competition, he's not going to be competition!

============
Attachments:

village idiot Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Waht I find the most interesting in all of this is
> the timing. How long has he been running for
> president now? He even ran for the Senate before
> and lost. But now, that he has been leading in
> the polls for a while, this woman comes forward
> WITH one of the biggest Democrat attorneys. None
> of the other women were alleging sexual things,
> just uncomfortable situations. The whole thing is
> a little shady to me.


why was "with" emphasized?

Well, the Bialek story evidently has more issues behind it than in front of it. Her pattern of behavior certainly seems to suggest that even if he did grab her leg in the car, it would more likely been as a result of whatever mixed signals she was sending him. In any case, her past, and the lack of any evidence that anything occurred other than a bad date pretty much sidelines her BS.

'She's a complete gold digger': Murky past of Herman Cain accuser starts to emerge
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2058983/Murky-past-Herman-Cain-accuser-Sharon-Bialek-starts-emerge.html

This one is definitely a woman who see's an opportunity to milk the system for a big payoff.

Cain Sexual Harassment Accuser: 'I Was Not Paid to Come Forward'
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/cain-sexual-harassment-accuser-sharon-bialek-paid/story?id=14901062#.TrlR-nL6uUI
...According to public documents reviewed by ABC News, Bialek has a history of job changes and financial woes over the past two decades.

The 50-year-old Chicago woman has declared bankruptcy twice, and has lost multiple court judgments for debts totalling more than $10,000.

Bialek filed for bankruptcy in 1991 and again in 2001. Among the debts listed in 2001 are over $14,000 in credit card charges and more than $17,000 owed to the lawyer who handled a paternity case.

As of August 2011, she owed the Illinois Dept. of Revenue $4,384. By 2009, she owed the federal government $5,176 in taxes for years 2004 and 2005. There was also a lien for $885 filed against her in 2006 by a company that installed a water heater in her apartment. It was not clear if Bialek has repaid the debts.

In 2000, a judge awarded plaintiff Broadacre Management $4930.77 for unpaid rent, which included court costs. Broadacre was listed as a creditor on her 2001 Chapter 7 bankruptcy filing. Last year Bialek lost a default judgment for more than $3,500 to Illinois Lending, according to Cook County online court records, and in 2005 lost another judgment in a separate case for more than $3,000. ...

So yes, her motives are suspect, as is her "revelation". She may not have been paid to come forward, but you don't go to Gloria Allred with a story like this without some expectation of a big payoff. Based on her past performance, she has been looking for a sugar daddy for quite a while.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ...She may not have been paid to come forward...

No, you're saying she's being paid to lie. Or expecting to be paid to lie.

Uh huh.

The Other Guy wrote
--------------------------
"I could imagine, were I Ms. Bialek, being rather more
annoyed as Cain rose in the polls that he was 'getting
away' with what he did to me. Is revenge her motivation?
That's, at least in part, highly likely. Wouldn't it be
yours, had Cain done to you what Ms. Bialek claims he did
to her?"

Yes, I would want revenge, but I would have started the minute he ran for office. Or even when he ran for Senate.


And to Gonads and Strife - the "with" was capitalized because I find it more than a little interesting who happens to represent her. If she just had some regular attorney like the other women, I would be less inclined to think she is after money, fame, whatever.

Don't get me wrong, where there's smoke, there's fire. I'm sure the earlier stories from the other women have some validity, but this Bailek women and everything around her is shady.

I think her motivation is probably not financial in nature. I could see where she feels the need to come forward now that he is seeking such a public office. As head of the national restaurant assoc, perhaps his actions were more acceptable but as POTUS - hell no. Either way, if the allegations are true, he is dispicable. If true, I just cannot figure out why someone would subject themselves to the political circus with known skeletons in the closet. Does he crave power that much that he thinks he is above scrutiny and/or the law?

Not an Obama or Cain supporter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think her motivation is probably not financial
> in nature. I could see where she feels the need to
> come forward now that he is seeking such a public
> office. As head of the national restaurant assoc,
> perhaps his actions were more acceptable but as
> POTUS - hell no. Either way, if the allegations
> are true, he is dispicable. If true, I just cannot
> figure out why someone would subject themselves to
> the political circus with known skeletons in the
> closet. Does he crave power that much that he
> thinks he is above scrutiny and/or the law?

Maybe he thinks that his attempting to kiss someone on a date/whatever it was she did with him really didn't rise to the level of a "big story". Great, he tried to cop a feel and get her to give him a BJ - maybe he read more into her signals that night, and maybe her recollection of her exact words and his are a bit off. It would have made it more believable if she went into more detail of what they spoke about. She seemed to be the type that would be flirtatious as well, especially if she was trying to get him to help her. While there may be smoke and fire - who is to say she didn't light the match?

EDIT: And sorry, but if she had no financial motivation the last person she would have gone to is Gloria Allred.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/08/2011 12:05PM by Registered Voter.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Maybe he thinks that his attempting to kiss
> someone on a date/whatever it was she did with him
> really didn't rise to the level of a "big story".

Why are you fixated on their meeting being a ‘date’, RV?
There is zero indication that their meeting was anything
other than Ms. Bialek seeking Cain’s help in regaining her
position at the NRA. Besides, would their being on a
‘date’ have excused his abhorrent alleged behavior?

> Great, he tried to cop a feel and get her to give
> him a BJ - maybe he read more into her signals
> that night, and maybe her recollection of her
> exact words and his are a bit off.

Again, there is no excuse for Cain’s alleged behavior,
regardless the circumstance.

> It would have made it more believable if she went
> into more detail of what they spoke about. She
> seemed to be the type that would be flirtatious as well,
> especially if she was trying to get him to help
> her. While there may be smoke and fire - who is to
> say she didn't light the match?

Ah, the old ‘blame the victim’ canard. Gee,
I didn’t see that coming! [Editor’s note: This
last statement is a sarcastic mocking of RV’s
motives] As to Ms. Bialek’s ‘believability’: She
wasn’t being interviewed on Oprah, RV. She read a
prepared statement at a press conference.
Besides, this happened 14 years ago. It’s
understandable that she remembers Cain’s
attempted sexual assault a little better than
the chitchat that preceded it.

maybe allred sought her out, with promises of millions, a shoulder to cry on and an open invitation to caress her inner thighs.

I still get a kick out of the fact that she is a Tea Partier.

Reporter: Mr. Cain. Please use harassment in a sentence.

Cain: The way she moved harassment she wanted my dick in it.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/08/2011 12:49PM by WashingTone-Locian.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Reporter: Mr. Cain. Please use harassment in a
> sentence.
>
> Cain: The way she moved harassment she wanted my
> dick in it.


LOL

You always make me smile, WTL. Thanks!

Do you think Herman ever went by "Hermey"?

I can't wait for RV's insightful defense of Cain's completely fucked up news conference last night.

Did he really say "and there's probably more coming" when asked about the number of complaints against him?

Did he really think "the Democrat Machine" is behind motivating a Tea Party hag and a Republican Communication Director to come forward with their complaints?

Did he really?

RVTheExterminator Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Did he really think "the Democrat Machine" is
> behind motivating a Tea Party hag and a Republican
> Communication Director to come forward with their
> complaints?

THAT undoubtedly was one of his underlings' idea that Cain didn't have the brains nor political experience to decline to use.

4 more years, II Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> RVTheExterminator Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Did he really think "the Democrat Machine" is
> > behind motivating a Tea Party hag and a
> Republican
> > Communication Director to come forward with
> their
> > complaints?
>
> THAT undoubtedly was one of his underlings' idea
> that Cain didn't have the brains nor political
> experience to decline to use.

What, you mean the "Vast right wing conspiracy" argument really is invalid? Cuz it worked for Bill and Hillary didn't it? As a matter of fact, as usual they were "projecting" again - because the "left wing conspiracy" is much more likely than anything the right would muster.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What...

Huh?

Seriously...huh?

LOL Reggie have you lost the plot again?

Or do your regurgitated talking points not work any more?

Cuz that made NO sense.

______________________________________________
I have had to change the addresses to my retaliatory blogs over half a dozen times.

4 more years, II Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Registered Voter Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > What...
>
> Huh?
>
> Seriously...huh?

Exactly. You are so steeped in your own BS you don't even know it.

It is amazing how far the MSM has gone this election cycle to try and make the Republican candidates out to be loons, unqualified, etc. Obama could give a good speech, so yay for him - we now see what happens when we elect a personality versus someone who actually has a clue. His record is abysmal - take one look at his grandiose promises when he was running for office, and the reality, and it is pretty hard to ignore his failings.

Dems have lost the middle - that is the reality. But keep on living in your fantasy, it is funny to watch.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

fairfaxdude Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> LOL Reggie have you lost the plot again?
>
> Or do your regurgitated talking points not work
> any more?
>
> Cuz that made NO sense.

Fairy with the usual "rah rah" for the trolls. Other than being a cheerleader for other folks ideas, what do you have to offer? About the only place you have any merit is in sports talk - maybe you should stick to your strengths.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

LOL And you think YOUR strength is regurgitating Repub talking points and copy/pasting articles into a FFXU post? McSmack kills you in that regard.....

Aside from changing the subject when you're hoisted on your own pitard, what other "strengths" would you claim?

LOL

______________________________________________
I have had to change the addresses to my retaliatory blogs over half a dozen times.

Frankly, I'd rather have a President who harrassed the girls sexually then the fellows. And get real they all have harrassed women, you mean to tell me JFK never harrassed the fair sex or Bill Clinton never was a perpertrator of this type of behaviour. Big Deal.

fairfaxdude Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> LOL And you think YOUR strength is regurgitating
> Repub talking points and copy/pasting articles
> into a FFXU post? McSmack kills you in that
> regard.....
>
> Aside from changing the subject when you're
> hoisted on your own pitard, what other "strengths"
> would you claim?
>
> LOL

McSmack is in the business much more than I am. I am just an amateur in politics - I will readily admit that. That doesn't make you anything other than a hack - still.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

So RV,

Do you think Cain handled the charges correctly? Just completely deny? Do believe Cain is being completely truthful?

Cavell Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So RV,
>
> Do you think Cain handled the charges correctly?
> Just completely deny? Do believe Cain is being
> completely truthful?

I think he screwed up. No, he is not being completely truthful - but at this point it is a he said she said issue. Unless someone has proof (and yes, that is so hard to produce in an issue like this it isn't even funny) of anything it ends up being a voters-choice situation now. Clinton employed that strategy to great affect under his tenure - and his accusers had much more evidence than what these woman have come up with so far.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> fairfaxdude Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > LOL And you think YOUR strength is
> regurgitating
> > Repub talking points and copy/pasting articles
> > into a FFXU post? McSmack kills you in that
> > regard.....
> >
> > Aside from changing the subject when you're
> > hoisted on your own pitard, what other
> "strengths"
> > would you claim?
> >
> > LOL
>
> McSmack is in the business much more than I am. I
> am just an amateur in politics - I will readily
> admit that. That doesn't make you anything other
> than a hack - still.


"In the business" LOL. Ok then. At least you admitted you were just a copy/paster of right wing bullshit. That's a start.

I'm a hack for calling you a hack? LOL OK, again. I get your defensiveness.
So, let's get back to the subject at hand. Are there NEW talking points out today that somehow rationalize Cain's statements last night? And try to make sense this time. Or not, it's amusing either way.

______________________________________________
I have had to change the addresses to my retaliatory blogs over half a dozen times.

fairfaxdude Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> At least you
> admitted you were just a copy/paster of right wing
> bullshit. That's a start.

You can read into it whatever you want - I didn't admit anything of the sort. There ARE a couple of those folks on this site - ferfux and Vince(1)
>
> I'm a hack for calling you a hack?

No, you are just a hack. All you ever do is criticize everyone else because you have nothing to offer otherwise. Must be great to sit back and tell everyone how wrong they are when you really have nothing. About the only place I have seen you offer anything other than a complaint of other people's postings or a regurgitation of an opinion you agree with is in sport's discussions. Which is about all your little brain is capable of handling - either it is an insult, or a sport comment - great range you have there.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Did you just call Vince(1) a right wing copy/paster? No wonder you loved him so much!

fairfaxdude Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "In the business" LOL. Ok then. At least you
> admitted you were just a copy/paster of right wing
> bullshit. That's a start.
>
> I'm a hack for calling you a hack? LOL OK,
> again. I get your defensiveness.
> So, let's get back to the subject at hand. Are
> there NEW talking points out today that somehow
> rationalize Cain's statements last night? And try
> to make sense this time. Or not, it's amusing
> either way.

bwahahaha

once again, RV = FAIL

Given the recent focus on the allegations against Herman Cain, it's probably a good idea for men to re-acquaint themselves with some simple guidelines to follow in regards to sexual harrassment:

http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/sexual-harassment/258532/

(have to wait thru short ad)

what about the two woman that accused him of sexual harassment that remain anonymous .. From what I have read it sounds like Cain or his company settled out of court on that one, after the ladies signed a non-disclosure agreement.

SO when he says , " I have never acted inappropriate or sexually harassed a woman!"

He means , he never did it to women , that you are going to find out about.

4 more years, II Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> You have to stop defending Cain and move on.
>
> Seriously.
>
> The spittle is ruining the back of my screen.

Oh yeah? Well, I'll bet Mr. Herman Cain has not problem with providing his *real* birth certificate when asked. I'll bet Mr. Cain has never attended a service by the Reverend Wright. I'll bet that Mr. Cain would share his college thesis paper rather than hide it in the bottom of some safe.

Being that you're probably some Liberal fuck, why should it matter if Mr. Cain sexually harassed anyone at all. You surely didn't have a problem with it when your boy, William Jefferson Clinton lied under oath ... and then Monica produced her cum-stained dress and ol' Slick Willy had to confess at that point. Sheesh.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm the real H.I.D. If you question my identity, just hit the quote button on one of my posts and look for any of the "L" characters that have been replaced by the uppercase "I" character. That will tell you who the fake is.

"Guess the total number Cain has harassed?"

I'd say about 9.

"why should it matter if Mr. Cain sexually harassed anyone at all. You surely didn't have a problem with it when your boy, William Jefferson Clinton lied under oath"

There is a large difference between consensual sexual relations and unwanted sexual harassment. Furthermore, learn your scandal history-

Just like Pres. Clinton, and every other philander , While in the spot light and the court of public opinion, its not the cheating or touching or even the groping that gets you in trouble, Its the cover-up and the lying.

They didnt impeach Clinton for having an affair.. they got him for lying to congress or lying under oath.

Who gives a shit what two adults do in privacy. Except that unwanted touching or groping is still illegal.