quote A fourth woman has accused Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain of sexual harassment--this time in public. Sharon Bialek told reporters in a press conference Monday that Cain groped her and exhibited "sexually inappropriate" behavior toward her when he was head of the National Restaurant Association. Bialek, a former NRA employee who worked for the association in between 1996 and 1997, said the encounter occurred shortly after she was laid off from the group's education fund in July 1997. She said she had approached Cain for help in looking for a new job and had traveled to Washington, D.C., where she had dinner with the then-NRA head. She told reporters that upon her arrival in D.C. she discovered that Cain had secretly upgraded her hotel room to a suite. After dinner, the two were sitting in his car when she claimed he "suddenly reached over and put his hand on my leg under my skirt and reached for my genitals" and moved her head toward his crotch. "I was surprised and shocked, and I said, what are you doing? You know I have a boyfriend," Bialek recalled saying. "This is not what I came here for." Bialak claimed that when she protested, Cain replied, "You want a job, right? She told reporters Cain backed off after she asked him to stop, and he drove her back to her hotel. Bialek, who identified herself as a stay-at-home single mom who lives in Chicago and is a registered Republican, said she didn't file a complaint with the NRA in part because she was no longer formally employed by the group--and also because she was "very embarrassed." She was joined at the press conference by her attorney, celebrity lawyer Gloria Allred, who offered sworn affidavits from two friends to whom Bialek spoke shortly after the alleged encounter. "I was very very surprised and very shocked," Bialek said, adding that she had come forward to be a "face" for women who had been harassed by Cain. "I want you, Mr. Cain, to come clean. Just admit what you did. Admit you were inappropriate to people ... I implore you. Make this right." The Cain campaign issued a statement denying Bialek's claims. "All allegations of harassment against Mr. Cain are completely false," the campaign said in a statement. " Mr. Cain has never harassed anyone." Bialek is the fourth woman to accuse Cain of sexual harassment when he was head of the NRA, but she's the only accuser who has spoken publicly.

the bolded part sums up the GOP very nicely, dont it?

I thought the Hollywood Democrats invented the casting couch?

Bullshit.

Gloria, where do you find these girls, funny you have never managed to find one that was hit on by a Democrat.

Time for this lady to take a lie detector test!

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: the bolded part sums up the GOP very nicely, dont it?

Well, I wouldn't have believed it because she said it but I believe you, , .

Anybody else find it just plane laughable when the dems get upset about a possible sexual harassment? I think they are running scared and pulling anything out of their collective asses that they can.

quote Originally posted by Raydar: Bullshit.

I agree. She probably didn't protest! Anyway, Bill Clinton already gave oral sex a free pass.

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: the bolded part sums up the GOP very nicely, dont it?

If he was a Dem, and the fact she attended a Tea Party gathering, you would be pulling out your race card.

quote Originally posted by partfiero: Gloria, where do you find these girls, funny you have never managed to find one that was hit on by a Democrat. ...

There were.
Kathleen Willey. Juanita Broaderick, Paula Jones.

Gloria Allred was informed about Kathleen Willey and asked to take the case. Her answer was, "Not interested".

Now if the media would just check these womens bank accounts to see how much they are getting paid to "come out" with these statements...
Time will tell if there is anything to it...

quote Originally posted by partfiero: If he was a Dem, and the fact she attended a Tea Party gathering, you would be pulling out your race card.

Maybe she is a racist! She might not have protested a white guy....

Going down?

Too bad it happened in the car and not an elevator. Cain could have had a new campaign song!

quote Originally posted by Raydar: There were. Kathleen Willey. Juanita Broaderick, Paula Jones. Gloria Allred was informed about Kathleen Willey and asked to take the case. Her answer was, "Not interested".

Did she bring any of the mentioned forward?
Thought they all had other lawyers before hitting the media?

This is just liberal "Swift Boating" brought forward to the next election.

Nothing to see here...

NEXT: They will be screaming "FOUR MORE YEARS!!" for the anointed one.

quote Originally posted by Raydar: There were. Kathleen Willey. Juanita Broaderick, Paula Jones. Gloria Allred was informed about Kathleen Willey and asked to take the case. Her answer was, "Not interested".

That makes 4 each. I'm thinking Cain is going to win this match. OTOH, if he could get the country's economy back to where it was during the Clinton years, I'd vote for him.

quote Originally posted by partfiero: Did she bring any of the mentioned forward? ...

That's the point. She was approached on behalf of one of them (Kathleen Willey, I believe.) She wouldn't take the case.

quote Originally posted by Raydar: That's the point. She was approached on behalf of one of them (Kathleen Willey, I believe.) She wouldn't take the case.

Now I get it, a little slow sometimes!

Thought it was the girl who turned Gloria down.

Why is this one of those times when there's smoke but no fire?

For whatever reason, Cain's financial supporters seem to like him for these allegations. I guess it's easy to see what they're for:

Sexual impropriety between consenting adults: Bad, bad, bad, pages and pages of bad.

Sexual harassment: Send him more money.

I'm sorry. But this whole thing looks very fishy to me if you ask me. Herman Cain ran for public office about five years ago and nothing was brought up. But run for the President and all of this magically comes out of the woodwork many years later? If he did it, shame on him and he needs to make things right. But it just seems, to me anyway, that it's all just too convenient. Just my opinion though.

------------------
Whade' "The Duck Formerly Known As Wade" Duck
'88 Ferrario

quote Originally posted by JazzMan: Why is this one of those times when there's smoke but no fire? For whatever reason, Cain's financial supporters seem to like him for these allegations. I guess it's easy to see what they're for: Sexual impropriety between consenting adults: Bad, bad, bad, pages and pages of bad. Sexual harassment: Send him more money.

Shades of the Clinton/Monica scandal?
Oh how the left chastised her and stood by the accuser.
Was a right wing conspiracy, so this must be a left wing conspiracy.

WHERE ARE THE CHARGES!? I'm sick of this "why don't you come clean" crap. If these so called witnesses or victims have a charge to press then let's hear it! Either say he did something wrong and be prepared to back it up or S_T_F_U!

No chance this could be coming from another GOP campaign could it? nahhhhhhh

Wouldnt surprise me in the least to find the Democratic Party is doing this. The current administration is running scared and we all know there willing to do anything they can think of to disrupt the oppostion. They might even think Caine is the strongest current opponent and aiming any scheme directly at him. We already know that they totally disregard any laws or the constitution to get it done.

Actually the accusations describe a sexual assault, not harassment.
Sexual harassment is really not all that uncommon in our society.

Nearly half of teens say they have seen or been sexually harassed

Only 9% of those harassed reported the incident.

I highly doubt this is some Democratic conspiracy to take down Cain, but I also doubt it happened anything like mentioned, if anything happened at all. I DON'T doubt that the media doesn't like him, though I can't see why not. He doesn't have the best answers to hard questions--they should love him!

I really hope this comes out to be not true... but there seems to be a lot to it.. I'm afraid it's probably /mostly/ real. I can't vote for someone who would betray their own wife. How can the taxpayers and voters expect to trust him, if he can't even keep the trust of ONE person. I'm really dissapointed... really dissapointed. He was the only one out of all the Republicans that seemed even REMOTELY interesting. The rest of the field is total crap... TOTAL crap. I think we can pretty much asume... we're going to get another 4 years of the same **** .

quote Originally posted by JazzMan: Why is this one of those times when there's smoke but no fire? For whatever reason, Cain's financial supporters seem to like him for these allegations. I guess it's easy to see what they're for: Sexual impropriety between consenting adults: Bad, bad, bad, pages and pages of bad. Sexual harassment: Send him more money.

Since you LOVE it when Republicans do something wrong, but dissapear when a Democrat does something wrong, here is the Democrat Sexual Misconduct List...

http://www.conservative21.com/Media/The_List.txt

Hey, look at that! There's a new entry this month! Gordon Hintz!

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: the bolded part sums up the GOP very nicely, dont it?

and this sums up HER story
http://www.suntimes.com/pho...ing-a-month-ago.html


http://www.suntimes.com/pho...x.html?story=8592168

[This message has been edited by texasfiero (edited 11-08-2011).]

Let me give you a little history recall:

John McCain back in 2008 during his primary run when it looked like he was leaning towards being a front runner:

"On February 21, 2008, in the midst of John McCain's campaign in the 2008 Republican presidential primaries, both The New York Times and the Washington Post published articles detailing rumors of an improper relationship between John McCain and lobbyist Vicki Iseman.[1][2]

According to the New York Times story, McCain, who was a member of the Senate Commerce Committee during the period when Iseman was lobbying the committee, developed a close personal relationship with Iseman.[1] The New York Times came under intense criticism for the article because of its use of anonymous sources and its timing.

In December 2008, Iseman filed a US$27 million defamation lawsuit against The New York Times, alleging that the paper falsely communicated an illicit romantic relationship between her and McCain.[3] The Times said they "fully stood behind the article" and the story was "true and accurate".[4] The lawsuit was settled in February 2009 with no money changing hands between the parties."


Basically they waited until after the election to fess up to their lies.

The story was bunk and it was designed to try to knock out McCain. I sense this is the same with Herman Cain as well.

quote Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: I really hope this comes out to be not true... but there seems to be a lot to it.. I'm afraid it's probably /mostly/ real. I can't vote for someone who would betray their own wife. How can the taxpayers and voters expect to trust him, if he can't even keep the trust of ONE person. I'm really dissapointed... really dissapointed. He was the only one out of all the Republicans that seemed even REMOTELY interesting. The rest of the field is total crap... TOTAL crap. I think we can pretty much asume... we're going to get another 4 years of the same **** . Since you LOVE it when Republicans do something wrong, but dissapear when a Democrat does something wrong, here is the Democrat Sexual Misconduct List... http://www.conservative21.com/Media/The_List.txt Hey, look at that! There's a new entry this month! Gordon Hintz!

You characterize me incorrectly. To correct you, I don't "disappear" when a democrat does something wrong. What I do do is not jump into the mob mentality dogpile that happens on this conservative forum whenever there's a hint that a person, who happens to be a democrat, does something wrong. In fact, a while back I posted about a Democrat but was pretty much ignored, while other threads started by the PFF conservatives blow on and on and on. What I've noticed on this conservative forum over the years is that there's always a huge hulabaloo about some democrat somewhere, no matter what. If not sexual, then some other reason. Tens of thousands of posts basically repeating the same chant of how bad all democrats are because of (democrat of the week being pilloried). I don't do the mob mentality thing, as an outsider I never figured out why you folks behave that way. It's like you checked your brain at the door and stopped thinking, and just egg each other on and on, spinning and ginning up the smallest faults you can find.

For instance, Bill Clinton gets a blowjob in the whitehouse. That generated literally millions of words of hate and derogation here on PFF, for *years*. Here is a person, Cain, just a contender, not even a candidate yet, who has, so far, four allegations of sexual harrassment bordering on assault. If this had been a democrat there would be tens of thousands of words already generated here about how he represents the typical democrat, how all the flip-flopping on "remembering" what happened represents a failure of not only cognitive ability, but morals, how a person like him wouldn't be fit to lead a dog down the road much less lead this great country.

But, Cain's a republican, so what happens? You guys send him millions of dollars and blow off the allegations like they're lies. What's the difference? He's conservative, not democrat. That's the only difference. That's the only reason you use to choose how you guys react. It's not the allegations, the stories, the so-called dirt that's coming to light now that he has a change of making it big time. No, what you do first is ask yourself the question, "Is he conservative or other?" If he's conservative, then the blinders go on and he's a hero no matter how dirty and scummy he is. If he's "other", then bam, the allegations are true, tip of the iceberg, representative of all you feel is the failure of humans that aren't conservative, and so on and so on.

Really?

The political label is the most important thing?

Don't you even think for yourself anymore?

That's my real issue, not the crookedness of politicians, but the self-delusion you inflict upon yourself. Sure there are crooked politicians, and they should be found out (no matter the party) and dealt with. But there are also plenty of good, honest folks of all parties that are there to do a job and help run this country.

You guys are so busy sticking labels on people you can't be bothered to learn anything new. It's like the blind, deaf, dumb monkeys.

So your characterization of me was, and is, wrong. Just so you know. When you say something about someone, and they correct you, and you keep saying the things you now know to be wrong, what does that make you?

A liar.

quote Originally posted by JazzMan: You characterize me incorrectly. To correct you, I don't "disappear" when a democrat does something wrong. What I do do is not jump into the mob mentality dogpile that happens on this conservative forum whenever there's a hint that a person, who happens to be a democrat, does something wrong. In fact, a while back I posted about a Democrat but was pretty much ignored, while other threads started by the PFF conservatives blow on and on and on. What I've noticed on this conservative forum over the years is that there's always a huge hulabaloo about some democrat somewhere, no matter what. If not sexual, then some other reason. Tens of thousands of posts basically repeating the same chant of how bad all democrats are because of (democrat of the week being pilloried). I don't do the mob mentality thing, as an outsider I never figured out why you folks behave that way. It's like you checked your brain at the door and stopped thinking, and just egg each other on and on, spinning and ginning up the smallest faults you can find. For instance, Bill Clinton gets a blowjob in the whitehouse. That generated literally millions of words of hate and derogation here on PFF, for *years*. Here is a person, Cain, just a contender, not even a candidate yet, who has, so far, four allegations of sexual harrassment bordering on assault. If this had been a democrat there would be tens of thousands of words already generated here about how he represents the typical democrat, how all the flip-flopping on "remembering" what happened represents a failure of not only cognitive ability, but morals, how a person like him wouldn't be fit to lead a dog down the road much less lead this great country. But, Cain's a republican, so what happens? You guys send him millions of dollars and blow off the allegations like they're lies. What's the difference? He's conservative, not democrat. That's the only difference. That's the only reason you use to choose how you guys react. It's not the allegations, the stories, the so-called dirt that's coming to light now that he has a change of making it big time. No, what you do first is ask yourself the question, "Is he conservative or other?" If he's conservative, then the blinders go on and he's a hero no matter how dirty and scummy he is. If he's "other", then bam, the allegations are true, tip of the iceberg, representative of all you feel is the failure of humans that aren't conservative, and so on and so on. Really? The political label is the most important thing? Don't you even think for yourself anymore? That's my real issue, not the crookedness of politicians, but the self-delusion you inflict upon yourself. Sure there are crooked politicians, and they should be found out (no matter the party) and dealt with. But there are also plenty of good, honest folks of all parties that are there to do a job and help run this country. You guys are so busy sticking labels on people you can't be bothered to learn anything new. It's like the blind, deaf, dumb monkeys. So your characterization of me was, and is, wrong. Just so you know. When you say something about someone, and they correct you, and you keep saying the things you now know to be wrong, what does that make you? A liar.

Honestly JazzMan, what you write is so ridiculous that I don't even know if I want to put in the effort to respond to all of it. For one, this website resides in Holland, a country that permits prostitution and pot smoking in the red light district. I would hardly call it Conservative. What you've forgotten is that the Democrats are right now in power, so most Democrats are not making the majority of the posts. In the past, under Bush, the majority of the posts were from Democrats complaining about Bush.

Second of all, I'm a Conservative, but I think most here would agree I'm pretty well a centrist. If you seem to think you're so far apart from me in ideology, then that would probably make you a FAR radical leftist. Unless of course you're just using "you" as a general term for everyone on here.

And honestly, it's a joke if you actually think anyone believes that you are "above" the nonsense and that you really see the forest through the trees. As if there was anyone on this message board who was so ridiuclously delusional and fixiated on party label, it's you. You'll find plenty of posts by me on here praising Clinton and JFK... and even a few times when I've agreed with Obama (although, everything else is horrendous so it almost becomes a moot point with him now).

I have a sick fascination with your wierdness, and lack of social graces, so I do read all of your really lame political posts, and I can't remember ever reading a single positive comment you've ever made about a Republican.

quote Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: I really hope this comes out to be not true... but there seems to be a lot to it.. I'm afraid it's probably /mostly/ real. I can't vote for someone who would betray their own wife. How can the taxpayers and voters expect to trust him, if he can't even keep the trust of ONE person. I'm really dissapointed... really dissapointed. He was the only one out of all the Republicans that seemed even REMOTELY interesting. The rest of the field is total crap... TOTAL crap. I think we can pretty much asume... we're going to get another 4 years of the same **** .

You don't like Ron Paul?

I gotta admit it's just as hard for me to find a republican I can get behind as it it for me to find a democrat I can back. I backed goldwater for president and Reagan for governor the first time. I still think goldwater was an honest politition. I liked McCain in the beginning, but he flipped. Throw em all out and do it again when their replacements become corrupt too.

quote Originally posted by spark1: Actually the accusations describe a sexual assault, not harassment. Sexual harassment is really not all that uncommon in our society. Nearly half of teens say they have seen or been sexually harassed Only 9% of those harassed reported the incident.

Well duh.

Try telling a random girl that you like her hair, or that you think her dress is pretty. Some take it and are flattered. Others think they were just "sexually harassed".
Even better, try telling someone you talk to everyday the same, they'll react either well or strangely.

It's idiotic.

quote Originally posted by theBDub: You don't like Ron Paul?

I don't know if I have any other choice? No, he would certainly not be my first pick, but Rice, Christie, and West are not running. I'm not pleased with any of them. The only candidate at ALL that takes national debt seriously is Ron Paul right now... Christie and West are my perfect candidates... they talk about the national debt all the time, and they're serious... but they're not running. while Ron Paul has been talking about it for a much longer time now... he's kind of kooky when it comes to the military. I get the impression he pretty much wants to decimate it. I have a hard time getting behind that.

quote Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: I don't know if I have any other choice? No, he would certainly not be my first pick, but Rice, Christie, and West are not running. I'm not pleased with any of them. The only candidate at ALL that takes national debt seriously is Ron Paul right now... Christie and West are my perfect candidates... they talk about the national debt all the time, and they're serious... but they're not running. while Ron Paul has been talking about it for a much longer time now... he's kind of kooky when it comes to the military. I get the impression he pretty much wants to decimate it. I have a hard time getting behind that.

He ain't kooky. He only promotes going overseas when it is an immediate threat to our nation and he has the support of Congress. Otherwise it basically comes down to economics, and economics is why he wants everything to be home. West is amazing--I would support him in a heart beat. I like Christie less, but still a great candidate. Rice is a great leader and an incredible woman by all regards...... don't know how I feel about her running the country though.

Ron Paul is my perfect candidate; I agree with every stance he's made. I just wish he would learn to explain himself a little better. He always starts off sounding extremely kooky in his first sentence or two, then explains it in the next paragraph and it actually makes LOADS of sense. He just likes to set us back, which is fine, but not the best for votes because the average American won't listen past the first two sentences.

[This message has been edited by theBDub (edited 11-08-2011).]

Oops...

EXPOSED? ONE OF CAIN’S ACCUSERS WORKS FOR THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION

quote Originally posted by fierobear: Oops... EXPOSED? ONE OF CAIN’S ACCUSERS WORKS FOR THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION

Didn't read the link, but if she works for the Obama administration she's obviously a lying whore. (Sarcasm). The last time I didn't state that I had to explain myself over and over.

quote Originally posted by dratts: I like some of Ron Pauls stuff and he does address some things that no one else does. My grandson is a career marine and I support him, but I think that we're going to have to pull in our horns in the rest of the world. We're just pissing them off and anyway I don't see any army threatening to invade us. I also think that we're going to have to downsize the military. Let's not make the same mistake that Russia did in the arms race. It bankrupted them. The biggest worry I have about downsizing right now is that it would add a lot of unemployed to the market. Our only immediate threat that I see is terrorism and I don't think that we are going to have a military solution to that.

Downsizing the military doesn't necessarily have to lead to unemployment, read my thoughts on this exact issue here:

https://www.fiero.nl/forum/F...L/088899-3.html#p104

[This message has been edited by OKflyboy (edited 11-08-2011).]