Sex, Smears, Speculation – Herman Cain Stumbles


Or is it, “bumbles”?  Or is it, “about to tumble?”

You know what?  I was once a big Cain supporter, back when he was still fairly low in the polls.  I forget what it was that he did that turned me off, but I haven’t found a reason to go back.

I don’t dislike the man at all, I just felt that he didn’t have it together enough for the run.  And I mean geez, it’s not as though the whole “running for President” thing just snuck up on him, and he didn’t have time to prepare.

So now we have all the latest revelations about some ladies, and our gent disagreeing about proper deportment – which apparently occurred back in 1999.  Do you notice that I do not say “allegedly”?

Rush Limbaugh needs to hear this part:  I do not say “allegedly” because the complaints did happen, the settlements were made.   What actually occurred between Cain and those women is truly only known to them – unless there were credible witnesses.

Why did I mention Rush?  Because he has devoted the past couple of days to trying to distill this issue down to a stupid-simple, “Well, of course he (Cain) couldn’t talk about it, he signed a “confidentially agreement”.  

That supposedly explains why Cain’s camp first came out with the flat denial of such complaints and settlements.  Right?  And they did it TEN FRICKEN DAYS after they got the heads up that this was coming out.

Cain’s campaign, which Politico says declined on multiple occasions over the past 10 days to directly address the allegations prior to the story’s publication, scrambled Sunday evening to deflect – and then deny – the report, spinning it as a politically-motivated attack aimed at marginalizing the candidate.

“Fearing the message of Herman Cain who is shaking up the political landscape in Washington, Inside the Beltway media have begun to launch unsubstantiated personal attacks on Cain,” the campaign said in a statement. “Sadly, we’ve seen this movie played out before – a prominent Conservative targeted by liberals simply because they disagree with his politics.”

That statement appeared to avoid directly denying the report, something a number of outlets – including Politico and The Daily Beast – quickly pointed out. But in a follow-up interview with the Associated Press, Cain spokesman J.D. Gordon went one step further, answering “yes” when asked explicitly whether the campaign was denying the report.

Gordon told Politico prior to the publication of its story that Cain was “vaguely familiar” with the allegations and that the trade group’s lawyers had resolved the matter.

Cain should have manned up, as any savvy, well educated, gentleman of good character would do.  He should have addressed it honestly and forthrightly, and simply.   My answer to Rush; Cain could have spoken out and explained that the two settlements were known to him, but that since the parties all signed the confidentially agreements, he was unable to discuss particulars.  Also, that he could state that the claims were found to be baseless.

Is that so damn difficult?  I don’t think it is.  Yet when a caller on Rush’s show tried to make the point that what really has conservatives upset, is that Cain has this whole “evolving” storyline thing going on.  Rush launched back into the weak meme that it was “probably” because of the confidentially agreement.  No, Rush, it isn’t.  You see, it seemed clear that Rush simply wasn’t up to speed on all of the layers of this particular onion. 

Had Cain settled on a particular version of the story, and stuck with it, things would have been fine for him.  Unfortunately, Cain is his own worst enemy.  The way I see it is that Rush, Hannity and Savage are giving Cain a pass – because the press release is a political style attack.  What they brush aside is that Cains response and subsequent actions are terribly problematic, dishonest and not the action of the kind of man we have though Cain to be.  So, politically motivated attack it may well be, but just because Cain is a really nice man, and very likable, we can’t just give him a pass when he mishandles something so badly.  Because, yes, it is a look into how he might handle things were he elected.  Politician or not, Cain’s character is the focus.

Here is the reason Cain gave for the shifting sands of his many hued responses to the questions about this harassment revelation:

Herman Cain says that the reason his story continued to change throughout a series of media appearances Monday was that he was able to “gradually recall” the details of what happened.

*sigh*  So having ten days prior to the story going to print was not sufficient for his recollection process, but he was able to recall more and more over the 48 hours after the story hit?  This is the sort of thing that Rush’s caller was talking about. 

There was the playing of the race card, and then the cherry on top, blame Rick Perry.  Oh, they didn’t just suggest – they accused Perry outright.  Even called Perry despicable. 

Cain on Wednesday began blaming Perry’s campaign for being the ones to provide Politico with the tip behind its investigative story that uncovered the sexual harassment claims against Cain. (According to the Georgia business man, he had briefed Curt Anderson, who at the time was one of his advisers but now is part of Team Perry, on the existence of the accusations in the past.)

“We now know and have been able to trace it back to the Perry campaign that stirred this up, in order to discredit me and slow us down,” Cain reportedly told supporters by phone Wednesday evening, shortly after his campaign began floating the possibility to a number of media outlets.

I just heard Cain tell Hannity that the bread crumbs lead to Perry releasing the info to Politico.  This after he said that he thinks he told Curt Anderson about his harassment “problems” back in 2004 when he made a run for office.   Curt Anderson states that Cain never revealed that information to him.  Cain’s statements about it on the Hannity show were………odd.  Some jumble about how” that shows how people can misremember things, but that he was pretty sure he told Anderson.”

Here is a rough and tumble breakdown from RedState on the accusations against Perry:

The Cain Campaign has made it official. It believes the Rick Perry campaign is behind the allegations about the women. This is stupid, if not retarded, for a number of reasons, chief among them is that if the Cain campaign believes Curt Anderson is responsible (something Anderson denies even to the Politico, which would give the Politico reason to out him if it were him, and they have not done so), then the Cain campaign has known about these accusations since the campaign started and still bungled the response.

Bizarrely, by the end of the day, the Cain camp was not only blaming Rick Perry, but sources close to Cain were claiming the Democratic Mayor of Chicago, Rahm Emanuel, relayed the story to the Perry campaign, though somehow Curt Anderson is also involved. Huh?

(update) Well now,  someone should get this out to Rushbo – I just heard Cain state that he PERSONALLY DID NOT SIGN A CONFIDENTIALLY AGREEMENT.

This is making my head ache.  But wait, there’s more.

Adding to the ongoing Herman Cain sexual harassment controversy, two sources have now confirmed to PJ Media that a female employee of the National Restaurant Association told associates she had been brought by Mr. Cain to his Crystal City, Virginia residence where she alleged “he had taken advantage of me.”

According to both sources, Mr. Cain and the woman had been with a large group for a long evening of food and drink at the Ciao Baby Cucina, a restaurant near NRA headquarters in downtown Washington, D.C. This was a normal routine, as the trade association worked with the food and beverage industry. Afterwards, Mr. Cain allegedly took the woman by taxi to his apartment, where she spent the night and woke up in his bed.

Balance at link:

I wonder………………..the timing seems about right……………………

The little blue pill that could cure male impotence was a startling discovery when it was launched in a storm of publicity in 1998. But while it has transformed the relationships of millions over the past decade it has also contributed to the breakdown of many more.



~ by ladysforest on November 3, 2011.

18 Responses to “Sex, Smears, Speculation – Herman Cain Stumbles”

  1. My husband listened to the first part of Hannity while he was out and about working. Hannity starts off with, now, folks, get your kids to leave the room because I’m going to reveal a first-hand account of someone who was at the table with Cain and knows what this is all about (not exact words, just the substance of what he said, please understand).

    Then he says that someone at the table with Herman heard exactly what started this off. Cain said to one of the ladies at the table, in front of everyone there, darling, spice that tea up for me, will ya?

    Of course, Hannity was jokingly saying, tell your kids to leave the room. Heck, one lady calls up and told Hannity, I live in the South, and we all talk that way to each other, meaning calling each other darling, sweetie, etc.

    And I live in TX, and we have always talked that way too. It’s meant as terms of endearment, not sexual harassment. Most older folks (including me) talk to others this way.

    I’m sick of our nation right now. Everyone is looking to sling mud on someone without all the facts being known. Politico came out and just told him that they were running a story, no info on who said it, paperwork or anything. Just said, we’re gonna run this story, bye! Oh, you were involved in a sexual harassment thing, and that’s it.

    Anyway, what’s happening is that others are forgetting to show other people kindness. Sooner or later, it’s going to get worse because people are going to be afraid to help anyone, going to be afraid for parents to show their children natural affection and caring to strangers.

    Love your neighbor as yourself, and that’s a big thing. Our nation is forgetting this, which is why we’re in trouble.

    • Actually kittycat, Politico gave Cain ten days to respond. He would not. I can understand not giving them a interview on the topic, but Cain KNEW all the details, having been involved, so he was not ambushed. I frankly was very surprised to learn that Politico gave him that much time before they ran the story. No one slung mud on Cain, Cain simply mishandled it. Maybe there are other shoes that will drop, and that is what he was worried about if he went on record with the Politico. I didn’t see this sort of thing coming, but I do believe he could easily have handled it much better.

      • True, it’s our understand also that Politico gave Cain 10 days to respond, but they didn’t give him much more info on the why. My husband told me that Rush was talking about it, then someone else that he can’t remember presently, so I’m going to take a wait-and-see stance on this mess.

        I don’t trust Politico anyway. I really do feel that Cain had mud slung at him, but that again is my opinion. I know that I wouldn’t want to run as president and am not planning to, nor would I ever.

  2. Extremly disapointing. I really like him as VP.

    What is REALLY disapointing, but believable, is this could damage him, and they totally refuse to bring up one of bo’s MANY , Major issues.

  3. I’m just totally sick and tired of the whole mess. Reminds me of how much that I hate politics to begin with, which makes me want to move off to a cave somewhere (without bats, of course, or snakes).

    In my honest opinion, BO’s issues with Larry Sinclair were never settled, but they were just kind of pushed under the rug.

  4. What I was saying was, my life has not been too clean in the past, and even though I have repented from it, the sharks would tear me apart. It’s just the way that it is. And I’m meaning that I went through the hippie generation, so you know what that was like.

    • I was a bit young for the full hippy experience……….which I am grateful for, but I do know what you mean.

      Everyone has “stuff” they hate about their past. It’s how you deal with things like Cain’s current problems that define who you became.

      • Well, as it says here in Psalms, which David loved Yahweh even though he was a sinner and knew it, he was a man after Yahweh’s own heart (mental heart; mind).

        Psa 25:7 Do not remember the sins of my youth, or my rebellings; according to Your mercy remember me for Your goodness’ sake, O Yahweh

  5. 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.

    • Thank you for supplying that. I just wish Cain hadn’t waffled all over the place from the start of this.

  6. It could be that he was following the advice of his lawyer(s) and wasn’t given good advice. He himself is not an attorney so maybe he didn’t want to get himself into legal trouble. Consider this allegation:

    Where did the big leak come from? I think it can still be traced back to whomever Cain trusted, maybe not directly. My hunch is that the woman was drunk and doesn’t remember what happened at all. The facts are hazy. He doesn’t seem to be a serial sexual harasser.

    We’ll see how it pans out.

  7. Boy, I am all over the place today. I wasn’t asking where the “doctor my tea” comment came from. I guess the woman was offended that he expected “the woman” to wait on him.

  8. Very good post.

    • Sorry Charo, you went to spam.

    • The thing is that Cain signed nothing. Nothing. He admitted it on Hannity yesterday, and today the NRA came out and made the same statement. Also that Cain was aware of the particulars of the complaints.

      Cain was not under any restraint. Cain could ask the NRA for permission to reveal his side of things as long as he leaves out the women’s names. I am waiting for him to do it. The NRA did release the one woman from the agreement, but she does not want to be out in the public forum. Frankly, after some of the threatening things I have read from some Cain supporters, can’t say as I blame her. They are treating these women as though they are Casey Anthony.

  9. LF,

    Have you seen this? Very interesting analysis but I think thye do good work over at WTPOTUS: [not sure you want to post the whole thing]

    Miri | November 2, 2011 at 12:24 pm | Reply I’m copying this here because I think you might be interested:

    “So I go to the Web and search for Jane Kiano. She’s AMERICAN and a graduate of Stanford. Just remember that for future reference. I find a snippet from Peter Firstbrook’s bio of BHO Sr. Hold on to your hat and consider this passage:

    “Within a very short time of meeting Ann in September 1960, Obama senior was dating her–although he did not tell her about Kezia back in Nairobi, nor about his son and newborn daughter. His friend Leo Odera claims that Obama senior had been getting reports that Kezia had been seen out and about, partying in a manner that did not suit a married woman and mother: [ODERA speaking:]

    ‘He was still writing back home until some friends of Obama’s wrote to tell him that Kezia had been seen in public, at dancing places and whatever, as well as having two children. [Miri: They would be Malik and Auma.] And later on she conceived a third one (by another man). He wrote (to me), [BHO Sr. speaking:]

    “She has disappointed me because she is expecting another child.”

    [Back to Odera:] ‘It is this that put the final nail in the marriage, and he decided now to look for another.’”


    Kezia 3 months pregnant with Auma when BHO Sr. leaves for Hawaii. Auma born about January, 1960.

    The following Sept. (1960) BHO Sr. starts dating Ann almost as soon as he meets her.

    Before the following February (1961) BHO Sr. learns that Kezia is preggers BY ANOTHER MAN, back in Kenya. He decides to look for another wife. That Feb. 2, he and Ann marry.

    Stanley Ann wrote to her friends that she didn’t have to marry to have children. She could adopt. Wrote to them from Hawaii, while at school there. They were back in Seattle.

    Some indications are/have been found that Barry was born EARLY in 1961, not in August. This partially based upon the ORIGINAL memories reported to the media by his babysitter, Mary Toutonghi, who changed her story when the discrepancy was pointed out to her. Not likely she’d forget the age of her OWN child when she was babysitting that BIG baby Barry.

    Under Kenyan law, who would be NAMED the father of Kezia’s child, regardless of the identity of the biological father?

    A conundrum in Kenya. Kezia’s husband KNOWN to be not in Kenya when her child conceived. What to freaking do?!!!!!

    According to Firstbrook, the US did not recognize polygamous marriages and so, he implies, the Ann/BHO Sr. marriage was not legit and neither was their “son”.

    That is, if they had one. If not, then who is he? Kezia’s? Does that explain WHY he did not or could not share in an inheritance from his “father”?

    Or are there two sons (one born in the US; another born to his WIFE in Kenya, but not his biological son)?

    Did something happened to the one born in Hawaii, to be replaced by the one born to Kezia in Kenya?

    Barry passed through Sarah’s hands as an orphan. She said so.

    Who’s the father of Kezia’s child? Who IS Kezia’s child? [The next child that we KNOW OF is Abo, born 1968.)

    Did she have twins? What happened to that child conceived via a man other than her husband?

    Must have been born before BHO Sr. returned to Kenya and within 9 months of his marrying Ann.

    What did Kezia NAME her child? That child? Why is Barry so oddly fond of Auma and Kezia, btw? Why were Ann and Kezia such good friends, btw?

    Would such information be “embarrassing” to that child? Info that had to be cauterized? Did the state of Hawaii allow him to get a new bc and the original sealed? We do know that his original records are SEALED. Only ways I can imagine that happens is adoption or witness protection/refugee status.

    I don’t know if this link will work:

    btw, Firstbrook shortly afterwards goes into his “debunking” of the “birther” conspiracy, so he’s an apologist. Notice he calls Ann’s son “Barack Obama JUNIOR”.”

    Our discussion of and more research developments ON this issue begins here:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: