Cain Accused, or, Show Me the Money

It has been about two weeks since the story - or, more accurately, the non-story - of leading GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain allegedly having sexually harassed two unidentified women was foisted on the American public. Cast as legitimate news by the liberal magazine Politico.com, the ugly story violated the most basic canons in journalism: you don’t publish anonymous accusations, especially those for which there is no corroboration. But there it was in Politico, screaming for all the world to hear: Herman Cain was guilty of sexual harassment. It was a political firebomb in the guise of a news story.

Now, I will be the first to acknowledge there are situations in which prudence dictates that accusers remain anonymous. For example..accusations leveled by a citizen at a vicious dictator may well lead to the accuser's arrest, detention or even murder. But we don't live in Ceaucescu's Romania or Assad's Syria and the anonymous accusers faced no retaliation here. No, they just did not want to be embarrassed, said their lawyer, Joel Bennett.

Sorry. That doesn't pass the smell test.

As egregious as it was for Politico to publish anonymous charges against Mr. Cain, the magazine compounded its violation of basic journalistic standards by failing to produce any corroboration. Journalistic canons call for two corroborating witnesses before publishing an accusation. Politico had none. (It should be noted that several days ago, it was announced that there was one witness who would come forward, on the condition that she, too, remain anonymous.)

So here is where this story stood: Two anonymous complainants (not plaintiffs - there have been and will be no legal charges) and one anonymous witness are utilizing the media to accuse Herman Cain of sexual harassment more than a decade ago.

Now, there are those who say there is no such thing as sexual harassment. I beg to disagree. I believe it is both real and widespread and can be very serious indeed - especially when it involves the demand or pressure for sexual favors in return for promotion or even just keeping one's job. Pressure for sex, especially when it comes from someone higher on the corporate ladder can create a tense, hostile environment.

But sexual harassment has been stretched and expanded to include words or actions that make a person, usually a woman feel "uncomfortable". This expansion of the term trivializes sexual harassment and transforms it from specific acts or utterances into unspecified - and unspecifiable - feelings of emotional discomfort. In a recent case, a woman charged sexual harassment. The offending act? A co-worker had placed a photo of his wife in a bathing suit on his desk. The charge of course, is utter rubbish, but in our PC environment it was taken seriously.

In the case of the accusations against Herman Cain, it turns out that one of the accusers felt uncomfortable and that she was being sexually harassed when Cain commented that she was about the same height as his wife.

Excuuuuse me, but in any sane world this is not sexual harassment. It is not even water-cooler conversation. It is trivial chit-chat: Nothing more, nothing less.

In the last week, two more accusers have emerged. One, who made her accusations anonymously, has been described by the news media as a high-level official in the Obama administration. The other is a carefully-coiffed, fifty-something blond named Sharon Bialek, who reportedly maintains an off-shore bank account despite not having held a job since 1998. Seated next to her attorney, Gloria Allred, Bialek described an alleged incident she claims took place more than 14 years ago. For the record, in most jurisdictions, the statute of limitations for charges of sexual harassment is six months.

It is not clear why Bialek would even need an attorney, unless - and this is just a wild guess - Allred, a high-profile Democrat activist, was there to hype the story and - could it be? - sell it for six or seven figures.

For his part, Cain denies all of the allegations categorically and has even offered to take a lie-detector test if his accusers take one as well.

It appears that the attacks on Cain have been orchestrated by the Democrats since the charismatic candidate emerged as a genuine threat to win the Republican nomination. A quarter century ago, Clarence Thomas accurately described the experience as a "high-tech lynching". In the last two years, former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin and Rep. Michelle Bachmann were the targets of vicious campaign smears that effectively derailed their fledgling presidential hopes.

Politics is almost always dirty, but the attacks on Cain, Bachmann and Palin have already taken the 2012 presidential campaign beyond the pale. There is a reason why these attacks have been so vicious, but that is a blog for another day.

Posted by Phillip W at November 11, 2011 4:32 PM
Comments
Comment #331814

You are absolutely correct Phillip W; the liberal MSM are injecting their selves into the Republican primary and whoever is in the lead will be attacked and evidence be damned.

To continue along the same line of making statements without proof I will include this statement made by Stephen Daugherty in the blue column and I responded with the question of where was his proof and Mr. Daugherty declined to offer proof. So I will repost it in this column in hopes that Mr. Daugherty will offer the facts to support his racist statements. I call them racists because he never made these accusations about white sexual deviants, so therefore he must be saying them because Cain is a black man.

“As a merely practical matter, if you didn’t have those two settlements on the record for those sexual harrassment cases, I’d think it was pretty weak sauce myself, but with those two settlements, I think it becomes pretty obvious that something was going on, and it wasn’t good.”

I responded with this question:

“Well Mister Facts, perhaps you could provide the link to the court records showing these “two settlements on the record for those sexual harassment cases”? Or is this just another attempt to play on words?”

Herman Cain accused the Democrat machine of being behind the personal attacks, including the liberal MSM. I tried to deal with this charge in the blue column, but the left does not have the mental ability to be able to understand. It doesn’t take much common sense to see that the liberal MSM have a goal of bringing down Republicans. The most recent debate is proof of the liberal news people trying to create the “gotcha” question.

Posted by: Frank at November 11, 2011 5:28 PM
Comment #331816

Well written and logical post Phillip. Until some proof is offered it is a non-story except for the weak minded and political types who attempt to further their careers at the expense of another’s good character.

But then, we must expect that from liberal socialists as they can only deal in negativism. They promote their programS with class envy, wealth envy, intelligence envy, patriotic envy, God envy, work ethic envy and success envy.

They covet what they themselves can’t achieve or accomplish.

HAPPY VETERANS DAY TO ALL WHO HAVE SERVED HONORABLY IN OUR ARMED FORCES. GOD BLESS YOU ALL.

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 11, 2011 5:51 PM
Comment #331829

phx8, why would he want to delete my post? Is that what you do? Delete any post you can’t or won’t answer. My post merely reinforced what Phillip said; that the liberals have no proof, only personal attacks.

Saul Alinski’s rules for radicals:

“RULE 12: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” I cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. I go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.”

“(This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)”

“According to Alinsky, the main job of the organizer is to bait an opponent into reacting. “The enemy properly goaded and guided in his reaction will be your major strength.”

So it doesn’t matter if an attack is true or not; just make the claim and let the one attacked try to figure out how to clear his/her good name.

Saul Alinsky was Obama’s idle.

If you want to read all the rules, I add this link:

http://www.theobamafile.com/_associates/Alinsky.htm

One can see how the left has used the rules.

Posted by: Frank at November 11, 2011 7:56 PM
Comment #331830

The source of these Anti-Cain claims is more likely to be a supporter of one of his primary opponents and not from the Left.

Posted by: Warped Reality at November 11, 2011 7:59 PM
Comment #331831

Are the Republican candidates now using the socialist Saul Alinsky’s rules of personal attacks? I don’t think so, but perhaps you have proof; like SD’s proof of court settlements against Cain.

Posted by: Frank at November 11, 2011 8:16 PM
Comment #331856

Warped, I wouldn’t be so sure, Obama opponents tend to have their lives destroyed while going up against him…

Posted by: Rhinehold at November 11, 2011 10:42 PM
Comment #331866

Frank,
You misunderstand. I was suggesting Phillip delete my comment after editing his article, NOT your comment. I’m just trying to help Phillip format his article.

Posted by: phx8 at November 11, 2011 10:49 PM
Comment #331872

Frank, so your latest attempt to defend Cain is the liberal media is trying to bring him down! Lets face reality a bit Frank, How many conservatives or other extremist that would vote for Cain in the general election read and believe the liberal media? So then how can the liberal media bring him down? He is doing it all on his own. This conspiracy to bring Cain down is the doings of the Democrats machine! Why because the dems would rather see the only sane repub candidate in the bunch win the nomination? And you accuse others of not having the mental horsepower to “understand”, go figure.


I think Reich has it right in this opinion piece.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/why-we-may-be-in-store-fo_b_1089333.html

Posted by: j2t2 at November 12, 2011 12:12 AM
Comment #331875
Obama opponents tend to have their lives destroyed while going up against him…

Until Cain becomes the GOP nominee he is not yet Obama’s opponent. If the people behind this had nefarious purposes, one would think they would keep it under wraps until next year. It would have made for nice October surprise.

Posted by: Warped Reality at November 12, 2011 3:54 AM
Comment #331876

warped

“one would think they would keep it under wraps until next year. It would have made for nice October surprise.”


maybe, maybe not. if you were facing the very real possibility of having a republican president, who would you as a liberal prefer that to be? someone like romney or huntsman, who are considered more moderate, or in huntsmans case a rino, or herman cain who i think most on the left consider far more cosevative. i think they call that nipping it in the bud.

i think we’ve only just seen the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the politics of personal destruction. i expect this election cycle to raise the bar for nasty personal attacks. it’s a shame campaigns can’t be run strictly on issues, and the differences between the candidates, but i suppose that’s just the way it is.

Posted by: dbs at November 12, 2011 7:38 AM
Comment #331881

Why on gods green earth would we attack any of these rodeo clowns? The more they talk the more ignorant the republicans show themselves to be.

Posted by: Jeff at November 12, 2011 9:22 AM
Comment #331882

dbs, With Huntsman or Romney their is no real choice between parties. Obama will face much tougher competition from either of them. With Cain their is a choice and most would prefer Obama over Cain. Were it the dems, which is laughable on it’s face, “creating” the illusion of Cain’s unwanted sexual advances why would they not wait until October, or at the least after he wins the nomination?

You guys on the right need to stop listening to the TRC’s and realize it is the time for repubs to battles repubs for the nomination. Yet you cannot conceive of the fact that it is fellow repubs leaking the info in a timely manner for their own gain.

These silly conspiracy theories you guys come up with to spin the real issue amazes me. Instead of proving or disproving the Cain issue the movement leaders spin it and blame the Dems whilst you guys eat it up without question.

Posted by: j2t2 at November 12, 2011 9:34 AM
Comment #331884

j2t2

“These silly conspiracy theories you guys come up with to spin the real issue amazes me. Instead of proving or disproving the Cain issue the movement leaders spin it and blame the Dems whilst you guys eat it up without question.”


i for one don’t know for sure who the source of these leaked accusations actually is. i was responding to warped, and his comment. my response was designed to show a different angle. whether you choose to consider it or not is your choice.

as far as the accusations against cain, the burden of proof lies with those making the accusations, if they choose not to step up, identify themselves and provide concrete proof, then they carry no wait, and are nothing more than a distraction.

i find it interesting that after the first round of accusations seemed to yield no real results the MSM seemed disturded. it was not long after that the newest accusation surfaced. as usual with the left it is not the evidence but the seriousness of the charges that rules the day. question the credibility of the accuser, and you are racist or a sexist.

i say prove it, or shut up.

Posted by: dbs at November 12, 2011 9:57 AM
Comment #331885

“If the people behind this had nefarious purposes, one would think they would keep it under wraps until next year. It would have made for nice October surprise.”

Posted by: Warped Reality at November 12, 2011 3:54 AM

Warped, the goal of the liberal MSM is to set the agenda for the general election. Dbs is correct; this election cycle will be one of unprecedented personal attacks. As in the 2008 election, any attacks on Obama will be declared as racist attacks by the Democrats and the liberal media. If Cain were to be the Republican candidate, the race question would immediately be taken off the table; therefore the left would certainly not want Cain to run against Obama. Personal attacks on Cain in the general election would also be considered race attacks, so Obama would not have the advantage. So get him out now!

“Why on gods green earth would we attack any of these rodeo clowns? The more they talk the more ignorant the republicans show themselves to be.”

Posted by: Jeff at November 12, 2011 9:22 AM

Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals”, Rule #12; personal attacks to destroy your opponent. The link is in an earlier post.

J2t2, I’m not sure where to start with your comments; so I will begin with the socialist Robert Reich on your link to the socialist Huff Post:

You say, “Frank, so your latest attempt to defend Cain is the liberal media is trying to bring him down! Lets face reality a bit Frank, How many conservatives or other extremist that would vote for Cain in the general election read and believe the liberal media? So then how can the liberal media bring him down? He is doing it all on his own. This conspiracy to bring Cain down is the doings of the Democrats machine! Why because the dems would rather see the only sane repub candidate in the bunch win the nomination? And you accuse others of not having the mental horsepower to “understand”, go figure.”

It will take more than conservatives to vote in a president; 40% of Americans identify themselves as conservative, 40% as moderates or independents, and only 20% as liberal. The goal of the liberal media is to affect the support for Cain, especially the moderates; even though conservatives know what the liberal press does, they also practice Saul Alinsky’s RULE 10: “If I push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” Or repeat something enough and people will begin to believe it; or in terms you might understand, throw enough shit at the wall and some is bound to stick.

Robert Reich, from your link said:

“But Republicans don’t like Romney. His glib, self-serving, say-whatever-it-takes-to-win-the primaries approach strikes almost everyone as contrived and cynical. Moreover, Romney is the establishment personified — a pump-and-dump takeover financier, for crying out loud — at the very time the GOP (and much of the rest of the country) are becoming more anti-establishment by the day.
At this point neither the Republican right nor the mainstream media wants to admit the yawn-inducing truth that Mitt will be the GOP’s candidate. The right doesn’t want to admit it because it will be seen as a repudiation of the Tea Party. The media doesn’t want to because they’d prefer to sell newspapers and attract eyeballs.
The media are keeping the story of Rick Perry’s cringe-inducing implosion going for the same reason they’re keeping the story of Herman Cain’s equally painful decline going — because the public is forever fascinated by the gruesome sight of dying candidacies. With Bachmann, Perry, and Cain gone or disintegrating, the right wing-nuts of the GOP have only one hope left: Newt Gingrich. His star will rise briefly before he, too, is pilloried for the bizarre things he’s uttered in the past and for his equally bizarre private life. His fall will be equally sudden (although I don’t think Gingrich is capable of embarrassment).
And so we’ll be left with two presidential candidates who don’t inspire — at the very time in American history when Americans crave inspiration.”

By Reich’s own statement, the reason the left has attacked all conservative candidates with such zeal is because they fear the excitement that a conservative candidate would bring. According to Reich, Obama is facing lack of support and excitement from his base and if you add to that an excitement from the right for a conservative, Obama faces real problems. Socialists like Reich understand this and the liberal MSM understand this; and yet the left on WB still deny it.

Yes, I do question your (the left’s) mental abilities, and by you quoting a socialist from a liberal link (proving my point), I rest my case.

Posted by: Frank at November 12, 2011 10:14 AM
Comment #331913
Yes, I do question your (the left’s) mental abilities, and by you quoting a socialist from a liberal link (proving my point), I rest my case.

Of course you do but then I would venture a guess that it is due to the lack of critical thinking skills so prevalent in conservative movement followers. You guys automatically defend the conservative candidate who has had to buy the silence of those he trespassed upon with nothing more than blaming the “liberal mainstream media” for his actions. It is the fault of those that report the news not the man that paid off the women to remain silent. What kind of mental capabilities is that Frank?

The goal of the liberal media is to affect the support for Cain,

The goal of the liberal media Frank is the same as the goal of the conservative….well maybe not, the goal of the liberal media is to sell their newspapers and magazines Frank. By reporting news on people in the news.

Reich said “because the public is forever fascinated by the gruesome sight of dying candidacies.” Not “By Reich’s own statement, the reason the left has attacked all conservative candidates with such zeal is because they fear the excitement that a conservative candidate would bring.” Yet despite your inability to read and comprehend what was said you accuse liberals of some sort of lack of mental abilities!

Frank You make the claim that it is the liberal media fault but offer nothing in the way of proof to support the often repeated mythinformation of the conservative propagandist. You seem unable to see that it is you using the TRC talking points to defend Cain. Right down to attacking Reich as a socialist as if that proves your point. It doesn’t.

Posted by: j2t2 at November 13, 2011 9:34 AM
Comment #331919

j2t2

“You guys automatically defend the conservative candidate who has had to buy the silence of those he trespassed”


and you condemn him with nothing more than heresay provided by anonymous victims, and repeated by the media. the only one to actually have a name just happens to be someone with ties to the obama administration. nothing questionable about that eh. once again burden of proof lies with the accuser. just repeating it over and over again doesn’t make it true. without names, and legal documentation it is nothing but propaganda designed destroy an opponent.

“It is the fault of those that report the news not the man that paid off the women to remain silent.”


it is also the the job of any reputable news agency to do thier homework to prevent printing inaccurate, or misleading information as actual news. please provide concrete proof.

Posted by: dbs at November 13, 2011 11:28 AM
Comment #331922
Warped, the goal of the liberal MSM is to set the agenda for the general election. Dbs is correct; this election cycle will be one of unprecedented personal attacks. As in the 2008 election, any attacks on Obama will be declared as racist attacks by the Democrats and the liberal media. If Cain were to be the Republican candidate, the race question would immediately be taken off the table; therefore the left would certainly not want Cain to run against Obama. Personal attacks on Cain in the general election would also be considered race attacks, so Obama would not have the advantage. So get him out now!

Whoa! You actually believe this crap? Can you actually provide evidence for the statement “As in the 2008 election, any attacks on Obama will be declared as racist attacks by the Democrats and the liberal media”? The Right certainly spent a good amount of time attacking Obama in 2008, but accusations of racism from the Left were few and far between. I’d like to see where this fantasy comes from (that “in 2008 any attacks on Obama were declared as racist attacks”.

I’m still dumbfounded, you actually think Cain is a better GOP nominee simply because his African ancestry will somehow shield him from attacks? You are seriously deluded; you should probably stop hanging out in the Right Wing echo chamber and come back to the real world for a change. I doubt you’ll take my advice, however I tell you that I give very little credibility to the sorts of people who believe in these conspiracy theories.

Posted by: Warped Reality at November 13, 2011 11:55 AM
Comment #331930

“Cast as legitimate news by the liberal magazine Politico.com”

Really? Since when is Politico a liberal magazine? That’s what I’d like to know. I know that the facts have a well know liberal bias but in this case Politico was reporting the facts: Cain was accused of harassment and there was a settlement.

“It appears that the attacks on Cain have been orchestrated by the Democrats since the charismatic candidate emerged as a genuine threat to win the Republican nomination.”

As many have pointed out there is no logic to the Democrats needing to target a person who was barely leading a few polls in a clown car primary that hasn’t even started voting yet. Cain doesn’t have the money or the ground structure it takes to mount a serious campaign but somehow you think this was enough get Democrats to put down the popcorn and go into attack mode instead?

Posted by: Adam Ducker at November 13, 2011 1:28 PM
Comment #331962
and you condemn him with nothing more than heresay provided by anonymous victims, and repeated by the media.

I haven’t condemned Cain, dbs, based upon hearsay or anonymous victims. I have called into question his lack of character because he refuses to admit the payoffs made on his behalf, that have proven to be true, were for a reason. Because the women have accepted money in exchange for their silence doesn’t mean they are anonymous, It just means he has paid them for their silence.

it is also the the job of any reputable news agency to do thier homework to prevent printing inaccurate, or misleading information as actual news. please provide concrete proof.

Concrete proof of a deal with 2 unnamed sources that he has paid to not provide proof? The lawyer of one has spoke out about the deal, what else do you need?

BTW how funny it is, now you bring up reputable news agencies when in the past you have supported Breitbart and Faux. I think you lost the reputable news source privilege a a while back.

Posted by: j2t2 at November 13, 2011 8:25 PM
Comment #331994

The funny thing about Republicans talking about Alinsky’s rules is that there’s a good argument to be made that they’re already living by them themselves.

Also, to be perfectly blunt, they aren’t these diabolical hints and tips for anarchy, they’re pretty much just pragmatic notions for how to leverage small but vocal demonstrations and actions into more powerful political results.

As for Herman Cain? Bialek’s ex-boyfriend is coming to her defense. When somebody’s flat lying to your face about whether he knew an accuser, despite the evidence, it’s a bad time to come to their defense.

As for that offshore account, I’ve yet to find any source to substantiate the existence of the account. If we’re going to do things that way, we may as well talk about the possibility that Herman Cain has an offshore account filled with five million dollars in drug money.

I mean, I’m not saying that Herman Cain has an offshore account filled with five million dollars in drug money, but we can’t really rule it out as a possibility, now can we?

Herman Cain should have to prove to us that this is a silly accusation, and that he does not have an offshore account with five million dollars in drug money in it.

After all, if Herman Cain had an offshore account with five million dollars in drug money in it, surely that would mean he was a terrible liar.

;-) all kidding aside, especially about the surely false notion that Herman Cain has an offshore account with five million dollars in drug money in it, I’m seeing a ridiculous number of links showing up making accusations at Cain’s accuser about being paid off, about the nature of her separation from the company she was working for, and about her character in general, and some of it’s being repeated verbatim, which in my experience means somebody’s artificially pushing a story by getting the talking point out in multiple places at once.

Herman Cain wants to play the victim here, wants to play the hostile media card. This despite the fact that he got more positive press than Obama did.

Republicans want to believe that people, rather than facts are against them, but inevitably, we all end up in a place where we’re the ones who are wrong, and what we believe isn’t right. If your only explanations is that somebody screwed you, instead of your screwing something else, you won’t take care of the problems that might end up threatening your credibility and political strength as they fester.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at November 14, 2011 5:15 PM
Post a comment