-
U.S. News: Obama-Kelley Meeting
May 20, 2013 | 0 comments
-
The SPLC: Big Bucks, the FRC, and Jimmy Carter
May 7, 2013 | 6 comments
-
Mark Levin Talks to the NRA
May 7, 2013 | 0 comments
-
POLITICO: RUSH LIMBAUGH MAY PART WITH CUMULUS
May 5, 2013 | 13 comments
-
The Problematic Frank Luntz’s Stockholm Syndrome
April 25, 2013 | 11 comments
The Spectacle Blog
PJ Media, as Robert Stacy McCain has reported below, has a story reporting that a woman found herself waking up in Cain’s bed in his apartment.
Note: PJ Media has now added these corrections:
(CORRECTIONS: A previous version of this story mentioned that a source witnessed Cain and the woman entering a taxi together. This was incorrect.
The previous version also mentioned that the woman awoke in Cain’s bed — the source only claimed that the woman awoke in Cain’s apartment.
The previous version incorrectly attributed comments from one source to the other source.)
In other words:
The source in question now says they did NOT see Herman Cain and this woman entering a taxi together.
The source in question now says that the story of the woman waking up in Herman Cain’s bed is NOT correct and that the woman awoke NOT in his bed but in his apartment.
Which is to say this story and its sources are now unreliable in addition to being wrong.
Sean Hannity had Cain on for a full hour on his radio show today. He never shimmied.
One point: In the world of the Old Media this typical liberal media jihad would have succeeded. Why people bend to the narrative of the liberal media is beyond me. This is the 21st century. There’s no need for it. Herman Cain is getting the chance to make his case thanks in part to interviews like the one today with Hannity. Rush is there to discuss. Levin is there. Fox is there. The New Media is here. Everybody in this new media world knows how the old media template works — and there is no reason to play along.
So this latest twist has PJ Media coming out with a story and properly and quickly correcting when learning new facts.
We are back at Square One. Can we all get back to the issues now?
Bumr50| 11.3.11 @ 6:06PM
Thank you.
That's why he's still up in the polls.
No one that supported him before buys this crap.
buckeyeman| 11.4.11 @ 10:38AM
I supported him before and I don't buy this crap.
But.............. He has simply mangled his response to all of this. He now admits that he discussed the "allegations" in 2003 with a political adviser but his original response was that he didn't remember the incidents. Then he saaid that through the course of a single day he recalled some additional specific facts. Herman's claimed strength is as a CEO - a MANAGER of people and situations. Yet... he hired the haggard and emphysematous Mark Block and permitted him to air a truly offensive ad and then continued to support him. How the HELL did this guy rise to the top of the ladder of a major US corporation???
Bumr50| 11.3.11 @ 6:06PM
Thank you.
That's why he's still up in the polls.
No one that supported him before buys this crap.
Bumr50| 11.3.11 @ 6:11PM
Aside - I don't think that FNC can be considered anywhere near as objective as the talk radio shows or the internet.
They are pretty in the tank for Mittens.
AVCurmudgeon| 11.9.11 @ 2:50PM
Assuming that to be true, all the more reason to give FNC credibility when they air programs supporting Cain against these allegations.
SilentCalvin| 11.3.11 @ 6:30PM
And the fact that a story implying that he was a date rapist has been let loose in the subterfuge? Meanwhile, now Politico is contradicting the PJM story completely - that is if we are talking about the same anonymous sources and the same anonymous women. Or are there now 4 women? Or are there now 4 different versions of unfounded hearsay? Now he is back to just making advances. Meanwhile Cain's reputation gets trashed based on rumors. C'mon, this isn't about getting to any sort of clarity.
Curtis Rasmussen| 11.3.11 @ 7:19PM
If he was a Democrat, the abuse story would have been a qualification on his Curriculum Vitae.
After the election, the old media would quickly and silently bury it.
creeper| 11.4.11 @ 12:54PM
Cui bono?
CalMark| 11.3.11 @ 6:31PM
If all of this was so slam-dunk true and compelling, why didn't the accusers come out and tell their story?
All these people saying, in effect: "I know some terrible, horrible, awful stuff that's gonna ruin Cain when it comes out." Then they don't say it.
Nothing but innuendo, nameless accusers and charges, unclear facts. In short, nothing.
And "confidentiality" has ever stopped Democrats before. See Obama's Republican Senate opponent, 2004: Obama, trailing by double digits, gets Federal judge in L.A. to open sealed Illinois state divorce record, against BOTH parties' wishes.
C Bowen | 11.3.11 @ 6:38PM
"The woman’s parents retained legal counsel and arranged an undisclosed financial settlement."
Hmmm, parents?
This is going to get ugly.
CalMark| 11.3.11 @ 6:40PM
If there's a "there" there, why haven't we heard any hard facts?
You know, "Who, what, when, where, why?" Like the media used to cover?
All we're getting is more anonymous accusers, hazy allegations, and muddy "facts."
C Bowen | 11.3.11 @ 7:50PM
I don't disagree. But when I read parents, its one of two things--a young gal, or a powerful set of parents who found a spot for their...young gal.
Of course this is 'crap', as they say, but such is Corporate America--they are as PC as can be, and Cain (and Romney) are part of that non-conservative culture.
CalMark| 11.3.11 @ 8:11PM
Ah, I see. A visceral Cain hater. "Corporate America" and "non-conservative culture" gives you away.
I say again: if there was anything there, we would have heard loads of juicy, disgusting facts by now. Instead, we got a news story with lots of...er...facts that...um...got retracted.
And now there's have a lawyer preparing to make a statement. Yeah, a real barn-burner. As though confidentiality was ever an obstacle to Democrats (like Obama, losing by double digits, getting a California federal judge to open his opponent's sealed Illinois state court divorce records).
P.S. What makes you think a girl's parents can't be "in on it?"
Clint| 11.3.11 @ 10:06PM
Herman Cain has more trouble.
" Herman Cain's campaign Wednesday called a report of a third former employee claiming he engaged in inappropriate behavior an example of "baseless allegations."
The former National Restaurant Association employee said she considered filing a workplace complaint against Cain, the Associated Press reported. She said that Cain made sexually suggestive remarks or gestures and that the behavior included a private invitation to Cain's corporate apartment, according to the AP. The two worked together in the late 1990s, the report said."
CalMark| 11.3.11 @ 10:12PM
"she considered filing a workplace complaint against Cain"
Oh, OK. Well, I considered marrying someone in 1997, but decided not to. So you're saying I need a divorce if I want to get married now?
So, what's her name? What are the specifics? Who, what, when, where, why?
What idiocy. "I was gonna, but then I didn't because...well, I just didn't."
Riiiiight. This was the Tailhook 1990s, when even the shakiest accusations routinely got six- or seven-figure settlements.
P.S. That report is more than 24 hours old.
Clint| 11.3.11 @ 10:52PM
" The National Restaurant Association is expected to announce on Friday whether it will publish a statement from one of the women who accused Herman Cain of inappropriate behaviour when he was chairman of the organisation.
A spokeswoman for the association, Sue Hensley, said a copy of the woman's statement had been received from her lawyer on Thursday and would be considered overnight.
The decision of the association, which Cain headed in the late 90s when the alleged sexual harassment took place, looks like a lose-lose situation for him. If published the statement could provide the first detailed account of what until now have only been vague charges. If the organisation refuses to publish it will look as if there is something significant to hide."
C Bowen | 11.4.11 @ 6:41AM
You must have miss read my post; of course the parents were in on it.
Corporate America are the wussies who enforce things like racial discrimination against white men; pay for legions of sensitivity trainers; enforce every PC notion; generally pro-immigration, pro-Big Spending...Corporate America are the shock troops of enforcing Political Correctness.
Tell me you haven't noticed this?
CalMark| 11.4.11 @ 3:20PM
I have noticed it, and it makes me sick. You are absolutely correct. Apologies for mis-reading your post.
Yes, Corporate America is a bunch of sissies. Every time some leftie moonbat flings an accusation, they cave and throw money at liberals and Democrats. Talk about extortion!
Meanwhile, veterans (like, for instance, me) can get trashed in interviews for being stupid (you didn't stay in 20 to get your pension!), fraudulent (if you even remotely resembled your resume, the Navy would have kept you--as though I had no free will to leave), and useless (what, you never got shot at? What's your decade in uniform worth, then?) THAT is OK.
burt| 11.3.11 @ 7:05PM
What rumours ?
The facts are NRA had to pay up on TWO out of court sexual harrassment involing Cain and a Female employee / consultant.
What happen is the speculation but these incidents warranted a cash settlement .
bkirkwood| 11.3.11 @ 7:21PM
Big deal! You must not have any idea how many shake-downs people like Cain have to pay off in the course of doing business because the cost of a trial is so much more than making a small payoff-then get-out-of-my-sight to some OWS type he had the misfortune to hire.
Clint| 11.3.11 @ 10:09PM
Herman Cain has another problem.
The Third Woman isn't handcuffed with a confidentiality agreement.
CalMark| 11.3.11 @ 10:12PM
OK, then why hasn't she come out.
Name, facts. Who, what, when, where, why, how. The whole 9 yards. What's stopping her?
Clint| 11.3.11 @ 10:57PM
She might just do that, Cainiac.
Number two may beat her to it tomorrow.
"The National Restaurant Association is expected to announce on Friday whether it will publish a statement from one of the women who accused Herman Cain of inappropriate behavior when he was chairman of the organization.
A spokeswoman for the association, Sue Hensley, said a copy of the woman's statement had been received from her lawyer on Thursday and would be considered overnight.
The decision of the association, which Cain headed in the late 90s when the alleged sexual harassment took place, looks like a lose-lose situation for him. If published the statement could provide the first detailed account of what until now have only been vague charges. If the organization refuses to publish it will look as if there is something significant to hide."
downloader1964| 11.4.11 @ 11:12AM
"What's stopping her?" She hasn't received the check with a digit followed by enough zeros yet. Why didn't she come forward months ago when Cain started his campaign, surely she heard about it. It wasn't until there was a scandal. That's when people start paying big bucks for the dirt.
CalMark| 11.4.11 @ 3:06PM
Oh, I see.
A lover of truth and justice who has to be paid enough money.
In other words, a political whore. Which makes her REALLY trustworthy.
Bumr50| 11.3.11 @ 7:31PM
The more time that elapses, the less credible any ACTUAL accusers story becomes.
Betcha five bucks they're trying to figure out the best possible way to make something questionable sound like something horrible. Because at this point, if Cain didn't do something awful, they're going to get laughed out of the country.
They're probably trying to figure out how much getting laughed out of the country is WORTH.
Jake| 11.3.11 @ 9:44PM
I feel so much better now.
The young woman and subordinate only woke up in his apartment and not his bed.
Whew.
Sexual assault and date rape can only happen in the bedroom, right ?
Why is a married man and CEO bringing a young female employee to his apartment
in the first place ?
To show her his etchings ?
Nice try.
CalMark| 11.3.11 @ 10:15PM
Yep, the "facts" keep changing and the people who published the reports can't even keep their sources straight. This is nothing.
Nice try. Are you an Obamabot, or one a shill for one of the other GOP contenders?
P.S. I'm a Cain guy, but I'd fight such smears just as hard if they were against even Bachmann (who's a scumbag that piled onto Cain without any facts--some lawyer she is; just another stupid phony.) This kind of stuff can't be tolerated.
CalMark| 11.3.11 @ 10:16PM
Notice how nasty and vicious all the anti-Cain posts are? Innuendo, hazy accusations, invisible accusers.
Don't you people think that if there was something juicy there it wouldn't have leaked by now, almost a week later?
Grow up.
Pragmatist| 11.4.11 @ 7:54AM
It is important to remember that what the media has reported - complaints were filed of sexual harassment, those complaints led the employer to pay out $80,000 to two women, a third women has stated that she was harassed but did not file a complaint -- these are all indisputably true and admitted by Cain himself. Hard to see how this is innuendo. Facts are worthy of respect, not scorn.
CalMark| 11.4.11 @ 3:15PM
In the 1990s, "Tailhook!" was still ringing in people's ears, and even shaky "sexual harassment" claims routinely got 6-figure, even 7-figure settlements.
On another thread here, someone familiar with this type of litigation commented that $35K was the minimum starting point for an insurance company to buy off phony accusers with no-merit cases. MUCH cheaper than litigating this kind of case, which costs a fortune, because you're dealing with someone's "feelings."
So $80K for two settlements is in line with insurance companies getting rid of two no-merit complainants. And these were SEVERANCE packages, not sexual harassment settlements. Big difference--legal, moral, what have you--distinction there.
Finally, WHAT "facts?" The identities of the accusers (this is still America, and we still have a 5th Amendment), the actual allegations (as in specifics) of what he supposedly DID are nowhere to be found.
Bottom line, two opportunists got bare-minimum settlements in an era of million-dollar bonanzas.
Clint| 11.3.11 @ 10:58PM
That's what people are sayin' about The Herminator, Caniac.
Pragmatist| 11.4.11 @ 7:50AM
It is very difficult to understand why people "bend to the media line" but if one narrow viewpoint is all you hear all day then you slowly begin to believe it is the truth and stop double checking yourself. Then comes the day when you see a story and say "That's unbelievable!" and immediately choose believe it, rather than verify it.
This, of course, is a perfect description of Rush Limbaugh's audience. There are plenty of sheep on both sides of the pasture.
TLS| 11.4.11 @ 9:24AM
Regardless which candidate you support, I think it would be wise for us freedom-loving people not to lose site of the real goal in the 2012 election: removing obama from office.
A healthy, vigorous debate is a good thing but not to the point self destruction. This does nothing more than weaken our collective resolve all while emboldening and strengthening our enemy.
No doubt that when the election process works its way down to the final two (perhaps more) candidates, that we will stand united. In the meantime, debate constructively, do your due diligence, and continue the good fight to the end.
SpiralArchitect| 11.4.11 @ 11:53AM
Yes, we know the Statists are held to a different standard & judged by a bar set very low. Yet, did anyone really think sex would be truly scandalous for politicians after Clinton?
CalMark| 11.4.11 @ 3:16PM
I think the Obamista "Fake People By Committee" are out in force, sowing hate and discontent.
Bought and paid for with our tax money, laundered through Democrats' innumerable "legal" avenues.