Herman Cain

#651
#651
MG1968 said:
as a former soldier, I refuse to believe you've never made a pass at a woman that may have broken the boundaries of propriety.

but ok, it's easy for someone who wasn't there to assume they have all the facts.
Click to expand...

I have not groped a woman or touched a woman sexually that I was not in a romantic relationship with.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#652
#652
I am not assuming he did everything of which he is accused.

The fact that he has changed his story so many times on how much and what he remembers, combined with his overly angry defiance, strongly suggests to me that he did at least some of it.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#653
#653
#654
#654
therealUT said:
I have not groped a woman or touched a woman sexually that I was not in a romantic relationship with.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

given what little is known, why is "Cain is guilty" your default position? I can understand LG, but you've always been a lot more intellectually honest than LG.
 
#657
#657
And when I say angry denial, I really mean angry defiance. Cain was refusing yesterday to answer questions about it, insisting he is "getting ... back...on....message." That's not very reassuring -- saying that you simply refuse to answer questions because you admittedly just don;t want to talk about it.

The better approach is to answer those questions and then move people over to the topics you want to talk about. Saying you just won't talk about it suggests that you are not comfortable doing so ....
 
#658
#658
MG1968 said:
given what little is known, why is "Cain is guilty" your default position? I can understand LG, but you've always been a lot more intellectually honest than LG.
Click to expand...

I still do not know if he is guilty. From all appearances it seems that he is not being honest with the public right now; if Bialek is telling the truth, then he has to answer for sexual assault charges.

The hotel records should be accessible; if there was an upgrade paid for by Cain and a tab at the bar, then he is done. He put himself in a situation I would never put myself in (why not just have her make an appointment to come to the office during the day to talk "job prospects").

Cain has not come off as an honest leader throughout this ordeal.
 
#659
#659
therealUT said:
I still do not know if he is guilty. From all appearances it seems that he is not being honest with the public right now; if Bialek is telling the truth, then he has to answer for sexual assault charges.

The hotel records should be accessible; if there was an upgrade paid for by Cain and a tab at the bar, then he is done. He put himself in a situation I would never put myself in (why not just have her make an appointment to come to the office during the day to talk "job prospects").

Cain has not come off as an honest leader throughout this ordeal.
Click to expand...


Bingo. And the more he refuses to answer and the more he changes his story, the worse it gets.

Frankly, I have to think that the Obama folks are praying at this point that Cain is the nominee. Whether this story has legs or not, we've got a pretty good idea of how badly Cain would handle the increased attention in the general.
 
#660
#660
lawgator1 said:
He was lying.



This is not helping your cause here.....
Click to expand...

I think Cain did something wrong, but chick #4 is suspicious.

I just find it funny when you talk about how you know he is guilty because of experiences you have had with Democrats lying about this same stuff
 
#661
#661
VolsNSkinsFan said:
I think Cain did something wrong, but chick #4 is suspicious.

I just find it funny when you talk about how you know he is guilty because of experiences you have had with Democrats lying about this same stuff
Click to expand...


I didn't say anything remotely close to that.

I think he's lying because his reactions were:

1) I'm not going to answer questions from some anonymous accuser.

2) I think this came from the Perry guy because I told him about it in my Senate campaign.

3) I don't even remember there being settlement.

4) (And just two hours later) The general counsel came in and told me about the settlement, the terms of it, etc. It was nuisance value, a month or two's salary, basically like severance pay.

And then it turns out both were about a year's salary.


I think he is lying because he has DEFINITELY, and this is not debatable, lied from the getgo about what he remembers of how the allegations and settlement were handled.

And that was with ten days' warning that the story was coming.

Herman Cain's pants are on fire. So to speak.
 
#662
#662
Cain's press conference was ok except for when he left an opening about a lie detector test and when he mentioned "Democratic machine".
 
#663
#663
LOL, now he says it's the Democrats behind it. Sheesz, is there no end to the contradictions ?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#664
#664
lawgator1 said:
LOL, now he says it's the Democrats behind it. Sheesz, is there no end to the contradictions ?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...
to be fair, he did back off of that later and say there were coincidences in several places.
 
#665
#665
Imagine if Cain had just sent the attorney that gave the opening statement out in front of a camera 10 days ago.

The problem now is that Democrats are hitting him as well as Romney/Perry supporters. Whether he did anything or not, I don't think he can possibly win.
 
Last edited:
#666
#666
GAVol said:
Imagine if Cain had just sent the attorney that gave the opening statement out in front of a camera 10 days ago.
Click to expand...

Yep. The one thing that Newt has going for him is that his dirty laundry is already out. If Cain had gotten in front of this scandal the damage would be far less significant.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#667
#667
lawgator1 said:
I didn't say anything remotely close to that.

I think he's lying because his reactions were:

1) I'm not going to answer questions from some anonymous accuser.

2) I think this came from the Perry guy because I told him about it in my Senate campaign.

3) I don't even remember there being settlement.

4) (And just two hours later) The general counsel came in and told me about the settlement, the terms of it, etc. It was nuisance value, a month or two's salary, basically like severance pay.

And then it turns out both were about a year's salary.


I think he is lying because he has DEFINITELY, and this is not debatable, lied from the getgo about what he remembers of how the allegations and settlement were handled.

And that was with ten days' warning that the story was coming.

Herman Cain's pants are on fire. So to speak.
Click to expand...

So, when exactly did you learn how to read minds? Can you teach me? I mean, if you can tell what someone remembers and can tell if someone is having trouble remembering details or not, then you have some skills I want. I understand how you might suspect that someone is not honest about what he remembers, but to DEFINITELY know beyond debate what someone remembers gives you mad skills.
 
#669
#669
RespectTradition said:
So, when exactly did you learn how to read minds? Can you teach me? I mean, if you can tell what someone remembers and can tell if someone is having trouble remembering details or not, then you have some skills I want. I understand how you might suspect that someone is not honest about what he remembers, but to DEFINITELY know beyond debate what someone remembers gives you mad skills.
Click to expand...


Has nothing to do with my subjective impressions and everything to do with the fact that he said mutually exclusive things just hours apart. He either lied when he claimed he didn't even know there was a settlement or when he said, hours later, that he learned of the settlement when general counsel came and explained it to him.

Both cannot be true.

Ergo, by definition, he lied.
 
#670
#670
lawgator1 said:
Has nothing to do with my subjective impressions and everything to do with the fact that he said mutually exclusive things just hours apart. He either lied when he claimed he didn't even know there was a settlement or when he said, hours later, that he learned of the settlement when general counsel came and explained it to him.

Both cannot be true.

Ergo, by definition, he lied.
Click to expand...

Is it possible he made a statement, then someone reminded him of something he had forgotten and he subsequently made comments based on the remembered information?

Not saying it happened that way, just saying you are acting like your reason is definitive when it is only probable.
 
#671
#671
RespectTradition said:
Is it possible he made a statement, then someone reminded him of something he had forgotten and he subsequently made comments based on the remembered information?

Not saying it happened that way, just saying you are acting like your reason is definitive when it is only probable.
Click to expand...


So many people immediately spotted this glaring inconsistency and commented on it that I am confident that, if this were the case, he'd have said so. The problem, of course, is that would require someone willing to confirm that.

And there is no such person.
 
#672
#672
RespectTradition said:
Is it possible he made a statement, then someone reminded him of something he had forgotten and he subsequently made comments based on the remembered information?

Not saying it happened that way, just saying you are acting like your reason is definitive when it is only probable.
Click to expand...


Wait, wait, wait. Are you suggesting that someone (let alone the CEO of a company) could FORGET being personally accused (on two separate occasions) of sexual harassment and then NOT have any idea how it all shook out?

That's not the sort of thing one forget's the intimate details of. EVER.

Heck, I remember being accused of lifting a blow pop from a 7-11 in 1977.
 
Last edited:
#673
#673
4 different women?

Let's see Bush, McCain, Obama, Kerry, etc all managed to run for President without people coming forward accusing them of sexual harassment.......
 
#674
#674
oklavol said:
4 different women?

Let's see Bush, McCain, Obama, Kerry, etc all managed to run for President without people coming forward accusing them of sexual harassment.......
Click to expand...

Not that it has any bearing on whether Cain did or didn't do something wrong, but each of them had crazy stuff attributed to them in the course of the campaign.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top