Comment

Comment by Patti Henderson on November 8, 2011 at 12:07pm

First of all, there were no lawsuits; in fact, the atty. did not even remember the case, saying that it was probably handled thru a phone call or by fax, since he has no record.  Plus, after NRA released her to talk publicly, she declined...hmmm.  Comparing this to Obama admitting cocaine use is a non-issue.  The liberal press has never gone after BO; they've enabled him and covered up for him, and none of them ask the hard questions.  Cain probably wishes he had divulged what he knew earlier; however, it probably would have made no difference in the end.  A pack of media hounds/whores changes everything.

Comment by Steve Tikas on November 8, 2011 at 11:29am

Mrs. Choate you bring up a good point.  Now-a-day if you just come out and say I did this, this, and this and put it into a book or something you pretty much get a free pass on it.  Look at Obama and his cocaine use it didn't even get brought up in the discussion about him.  Just spill your guts about your past and then you know everything is out.  I wonder when politicians will learn that honesty will win over a lot of people and hiding parts of your past will lose people.

 

 

Comment by amanda choate on November 8, 2011 at 11:23am

Mr. Cain has the mike and the opportunity to put this behind him fully.

He should address this fully.

Lumping all four women in the same heap is wrong.

Blaming the media is wrong.

If you are running for president, and there have been lawsuits against you claiming sexual harrassment, then you should expect that it will be a topic of discussion during your bid.

Consternation about this being an issue confounds me. If he is guilty, does that reflect on his character at all?

Two weeks ago I blogged here that Mr. Cain needed to plainly state what happened and how it was remedied. That is still the best plan. Then let the public reach their own conclusions.

His story has changed throughout. Knowing this was out there, a smart man would have divulged it himself, thereby owning the story and the way it would be told.

His handling of this has been at best ham-handed. We deserve better.

Comment by Farris K. O'Neal on November 8, 2011 at 11:11am

  For me, I like Herman Cain and will stand with him until it is proven.  Of course, these days you are guilty until you can prove you are innocent.  It's a shame our country has come to this kind of ridicule.

Comment by Ron Ogletree on November 8, 2011 at 8:55am

Steve,

Thank you.

Comment by Steve Tikas on November 8, 2011 at 8:41am

Ron you are right I have a bad tendency to get off topic.  I will stick to Herman and his current issues from now on.  To the group I'm sorry I got us off topic.

Comment by Steve Tikas on November 8, 2011 at 8:40am

Mrs. Love-I was not trying to accuse you of having a black/white mindset and if you took it that way I'm sorry that was not my intention.  I was just trying to say that we need to beat them with ideas and claims of racism take away from the time we have to talk about the issues.  We have better ideas as them but if we allow ourselves to be dragged down into name calling they will win they have more experience, and are more efficient, at it then we are.

 

Mr. Cain knew that these things were in his past and he also had a ten day warning before the story broke so the idea about it being a surprise doesn't hold any water to me.  Even if these things were untrue running for President you have to know they are going to be brought up and you should prepare for them.

 

You are talking about the court system and we are not in the court system when we are talking about these things we are in the court of public opinion which doesn't have the same burden of proof that our court system does.  I'm not saying I think it is fair or right but the truth is in the court of public opinion you don't have to be able to prove anything.  In a case like sexual harassment that we are dealing with there is not going to be proof it is a matter of he said she said and who you believe.  The lady from yesterday says she has two witnesses but they are not real witnesses in the traditional sense of the word because it was something that she told them after it happened.  In a real court case they wouldn't even be admissible so we are back to who do you believe.  I listened to her last night and I will say that I think she is lying threw her teeth and nothing about her story rings true but again that is my opinion. Think about it what other proof can you give especially after this many years. 

Comment by sally higgins on November 8, 2011 at 8:37am

I don't believe Gloria Allred's client.

Comment by Ron Ogletree on November 8, 2011 at 8:32am

Steve,

With all due respect, please start your own thread about Ron Paul.  We need to get this thread back on topic please.  Much has to be aired about the accuser and her history that is extremely eye opening and everyone needs to focus on this because it is the tact that will be used against all candidates who may challenge the Obama smear machine.

Comment by Steve Tikas on November 8, 2011 at 8:28am

Mrs. Parrett you also said something about a retired military man saying no one is supporting Ron Paul after his view on DADT.  First off as someone that was in the military I can tell you most of the people I served with didn't care about DADT and we all knew who was gay and who was straight regardless of DADT.  Second you saying that one man said that no military is supporting Ron Paul is a bit simplistic.  So you are telling me that since DADT was repealed this man has spoken to all military men and women.  Come on at least be honest and say that him and his group of military is not supporting Ron Paul.  I don't understand how I can drop three links from news sources into the chat and your comeback to that is one man you claim speaks for the entire group.  Does this one man who speaks for the entire military have anything he can back it up or are we to just assume that he word is good enough to contradict the latest FEC filing and multiple new services.  He might be right but we won't know until the next set of FEC filings are made and we find out who the military is giving their money to.  I'm going to guess when that happens it will still be Ron Paul but I could be proven wrong only time will tell.  Until then unless I see something more substantial then this one guy said it I'm going to continue to talk about him getting the most support from the military. 

 

Mrs. Parrett you also mentioned how Ron Paul hasn't gotten past 7-8% support in most of the polls.  I would like to remind you that until recently Herman Cain couldn't get past 4-5%.  All of that changed with one event and things could change in Ron Paul's favor at some point.  I'm going to vote for the person I see as the best for the job regardless of poll numbers and I would tell anyone else to do that same.  Don't vote based on polls vote based on who is the best one for the job.

 

Also someone, and I'm sorry I forgot who said it, said that Ron Paul bussed people into all of the straw polls and that was how he won them.  I still haven't seen anyone drop a link to any story.  I know about the value voters summit but other then that I have seen no story about him busing people in for other events. 

 

I would like to add that the three people that are in here that have voiced support for Ron Paul have not insulated anyone even after being called trolls and some other choice insults.  Funny how that works when we are supposed to be the mean and spiteful ones in the group according to some.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 9
• 10
• 11
• 12
• 13
• …
• 25
• Next ›
• Page