swingingglory,

are you mark levin? are you aware you sound a lot like him in your blind defense of cain and the fact you won't even acknowledge the information and facts which are being presented to you in this thread?

you do understand that the cain campaign and cain himself have contradicted themselves numerous times, right? you understand that the cain campaign and cain himself have repeatedly lied and changed their story a number of times, right?

why do you think that might be?

Exactly. One phone call to either politico or the journo himself would have cleared it up. Instead it almost certainly came from someone using google, then reporting it on a place like freerep, then someone on the Cain camp reading it there.

I mean im sure there have been worse run campaigns for President, but Cain's is ridiculously bad. They didnt know this scandal was potentially going to surface, they didnt get ahead of the story at any point, they have never had a clear response strategy including a story to stick to, they will face investigations by the IRS for tax fraud and the electoral commission (whatever the US equiv of one is called) over campaign financing coming from not for profits run by the smoking guy. Oh and that actual video, but they somehow luckboxed it going viral so thats probably a plus.

I'm not overly familiar with Allred... but reading swinging's posts he trashes Gloria (money grubbing, intellectually challenged, lefty) etc. and then uses guilt by association to trash her client.

He certainly hasn't made any case that shows that everything Gloria does is tainted by her insatiable drive to grub money (or that her desire and ability to earn money is different then anyone elses) or that she's intellectually bankrupt.

And we all know that guilt by association is a horribly flawed concept.

Between you and me, his posts genuinely swing of particular partisan bias. They're just really highlighted in this thread. The way he maligns all dems, all the accusers, the media.... he's alleged conspiracies, that anytime a black conservative gets to power there's a democratic plan to fabric allegations of sexual misbehaviour... All of this he offers while giving Cain every benefit of the doubt.

I think its kind of funny and would be a brilliant level. But he seems sincere. He seems completely oblivious of the huge political bias he wears on his sleeve.

I do agree that the notion that "Allred being slimy makes her client slimy" is a terrible argument. It's not like even the greasiest lawyer has some weird "liars only" policy for their practice.

Can you please enlighten me as to what the unassailable facts of the cases are that prove Cain is a serial sexual assailant or sex abuser or sexual harasser.

For example.... do we have any idea of what the now chatty anon #1 even accused Cain of, specifically? Probably not, eh? But he's guilty!!! You know that much.

And I wish I was as smart as the aforementioned Mr. Levin

swingingglory,

please address?

also mark levin is a world class douche

Again, I need someone to explain for me the need for the accuser (assuming she is telling the truth and not interested in a big score) to have any flak, especially Ms. Allred. No matter what wookie says, telling the unvarnished truth about a personal experience cannot get you into legal jeopardy that I am aware of excepting national security matters. And I wonder who is paying Ms. Allred's legal fees? Let me guess.... its pro bono work.

Every single person on this board view things through the prism of their personal biases, partisan or whatever. Some of us are just intellectually honest about them.

Not having Carville Begala and Stephanopolis in one's war room isn't considered proof of sexual harassment.

If you can list "lies" Cain made specifically, I might be able to help you out.

Your opinion is duly noted and just as quickly discarded.

I would really , really like to hear what Ms. now very chatty anon #1 actually accused Cain of at the NRA. Do you have any plausible reason to explain her reticence on this matter?

You don't think that might have anything to do with whether Mr. Cain is a sexual harasser, or is you mind already made up?

Oh good Lord, the situation is worse than I thought...

Herman Cain is being prominently supported by TOM TANCREDO?!? I think I now like Cain even less.

(Though admittedly I'm surprised that Tancredo would openly support a non-white person.)

Tancredo confirmed not racist.

I heard it was confirmed that Mark Block is related to lunatic mises.org contributor Walter Block, who says it's okay to fondle people in the workplace, just like Herman Cain believes.

Pfffft. What a cheap shot of a headline. Whoever thought to write this and whoever put it on the front of their site should be ashamed of themselves and promptly change professions to something that requires less integrity.

http://www.salon.com/2011/11/09/jerr...d_republicans/

Yea that's usually how it works, when you accuse someone you need to present something to back it up.

So you're saying they have no choice but to run for office?

A career in law might suit as well.

LOL

Clearly these women should have known to have video surveillance on Herman Cain so that, for example, they could have evidence of Cain pulling her head to his lap in the car.

What do you expect? You think Cain should be allowed to do whatever the hell he wants to do to whatever women as long as he doesn't leave behind any incriminating forensic evidence, that there are no 3rd party witnesses, and the women aren't recording him? If a woman doesn't have any of these things, she should know her place and keep quiet?

What I think is that ppl should have enough common sense to not just believe anything and everything they want due to their political persuasions.

irony looks like this

You know, perhaps so, but I have a really hard time buying that every lefty in this thread is magically really honest and fair about this and is totally consistent in how they view this vs. how they view similar situations that are less politically convenient to them. All of the finger-wagging at the staunch Cain defenders leaves me really skeptical about those doing the finger-wagging too.

The women involved are both Republicans.

This is true, but you know as well as I do that people constantly line up on stuff like this based purely on how they like the politics of the accused. The politics of the accusers aren't being taken into account.

Sexual misconduct shouldn't be a partisan thing, and anyone who is inconsistent in how they assess matters of these kinds should be ashamed of themselves.

OK.

On the one hand, we have three independent women who we know for a fact received sexual harassment settlements from the NRA for things they accuse Cain of. We know that their accusations met at least minimal standards of credibility and seriousness that the NRA decided to settle. We also have a fourth woman making another more vivid accusation but who did not receive a settlement, nor did she attempt to get one.

On the other hand, we have a guy who has changed his story practically daily if not hourly regarding his response to, knowledge of, and culpability in these charges. Many of his statements about these were outright lies. Not just "misstatements." Not just "oops I forgot." Outright, bald faced, pants-on-fire lies.

Clearly the thing to do is to assail the credibility of the women while trusting every word of the liar.

And even if she has these things and what she has evidence of is being beaten with a belt when she was a child. Besides she was probably asking for it by recording it. A meme that probably works in both sides of the comparison.

But yeah, at the end of the day one sexual harrassment case is a matter of "meh, i can believe it was a nuisance case". Two and im kinda wondering. Three and we have a pattern. Then a fourth person comes forward with a story. And now we are up to five people apparently.

How many unconnected women, multiples of which made their accusations before his run for his fame, need to come forward before they start getting instantly dismissed because they have some children out of wedlock or own horses?