Posted on 11/01/2011 7:53:42 PM PDT by bullypulpit
If you read between the lines of the various news reports about the Cain operation, the picture becomes clearer to me every day. The latest dust up about the sexual harassment of employees confirms it.
Leading up to the sex scandal, we had the clues. Now I know it to be so, that Herman Cain is an ass, and he's reckless.
The first clue came just after Cain placed poorly in the Iowa straw polls. We heard from disgruntled former Cain staffers:
Jim Zeiler, the regional field director who was one of the five disgruntled staffers who left, explained his decision with a devastating assessment of Cain, saying the candidate was more interested in jet-setting than running a campaign that incorporates traditional grass-roots techniques.
"He’s not inquisitive. He wants to be in front of the adoring crowds, but he doesn’t seem to be interested in the issues," said Zeiler, a former regional field director for Cain’s campaign.
(Source: Politico, "Cain's campaign crash continues at Ames")
Mr. Zeiler was a disgruntled former staffer. This kind of tripe is expected in today's coarse society. No one gets asked to leave, or quits in anger, without throwing the former boss under the bus. If you've ever employed people, you know this. A good friend of mine, an employer in the retail industry, told me that his strategy when interviewing potential new hires is to ask himself "How long will it be before this person screws me," not if he/she will screw me. The "screw" is inevitable.
So, it's easy to dismiss this accusation as the disgruntled ex-employee getting his last jab. The "screw."
Since Cain staffer Jim Zeiler has left, however, we have seen how Herman Cain isn't very sharp on the issues. He certainly isn’t 'presidential material smart.' I only posted five gaffes here. I have 10-20 more. Electric fences, anyone? Do you think he's serious about learning the issues? I don't. My radar was still searching, though.
Next, we hear that Herman Cain doesn't want staffers to speak to him unless those staffers are spoken to them by Cain first. Apparently this rule is enforced when staffers are chauffeuring the candidate around. The New York Times sources that accusation from an intercepted email in the reporter's hands that originated from campaign leadership. Was it from "The Smoking Man"?
For goodness sake, the poor drivers for Cain are probably star-struck young interns or volunteers. Do barely paid, or volunteer campaign workers deserve to be treated that way?
To be fair, Cain explained that he does tell people driving him to shut up when he's preparing for a speech. In this Right Scoop video, he's all chuckles about it. I thought that it was reasonable. Maybe. My radar was honing in, though.
I re-read the Times article tonight, in light of the sex scandal. The article details more arrogant behavior.
Does this sound like someone who should be leading in the GOP nomination polls?
After all of the staff revelations, we now have the sex scandal. Viewing the scandal in a vacuum, it's easy to run to Cain's defense. My initial reaction was that this was Clearance Thomas 2.0, and we cannot let this stand. This is Herman Cain, a conservative black man deserving of our support against the evil marauders in the mainstream media.
However, when viewed through the prism of earlier reports of Cain's egomaniacal behavior, the sex scandal makes perfect sense. My radar locked on.
Cain is arrogant and reckless. He mistreats people working for him. Why would not Cain's penchant for employee mistreatment also include sexual harassment? This is especially true of the powerful, arrogant CEO versus the weak, insignificant female employees.
What is more, regardless of Cain's waffling denials of the sex scandal's ingredients, there are not one, but two incidents. One would think that a powerful, calculating CEO would figure out what went wrong the first time, and avoid a second accusation.
Two accusations reinforces my point, that Cain is arrogant and reckless. He doesn't believe the rules apply to him. Why not invite a young employee to his hotel room?
Radar locked. Fox One!
Herman Cain is not ready to be our Republican standard bearer.
ok
Pro-10th Amendment
Pro=2nd Amendment
Pro-Life
Pro-Business
Pro-Domestic Drilling
Pro-Military
Pro-Lower Federal Regulation
Pro-Patriot who Loves America
Pro-Balance Budget Amendment
Pro-Lowering Taxes
Pro-Smaller Government
Pro-Securing the Border
Against-Amnesty for Illegals
Against-Drivers License for Illegals
Pro-Voter ID to prevent Illegals voting.
Lowered Taxes in Texas * Reduced the State Budget for the first time since World War II
Against-Obama
Against-Obamacare
Against-Obama’s Policies
Has been fighting against Obama for 3 years
Has fought back against Obama AND the EPA
Against-socialism
A 3 term Governor of the largest mainland State. Governor for 25 million people. Oversaw an economy that if it were a country would be the 13th largest economy in the world.
Even during a recession, even with illegals allowed to run rampant by the Fed Gov and even during some huge natural disasters like hurricanes/tornados/flooding/drought/fires.
Served as a pilot in the US Air Force flying C-130’s.
LOVELY First Lady Anita!!!
Has extensive Experience governing and Leading.
Regarding illegal immigration:
Perry has had to deal with an international border that was suppose to be secured by the Federal Government on behalf of all the United States.
Perry has had to deal with Obama Administration that does nothing - except send troops to other countries.
Perry has had to deal with a United States Government that is corrupt and has committed treasonous crimes by running guns into Mexico to criminal drug cartels.
Perry has had to deal with a Supreme Court order that we educate illegals.
Perry has had to deal with a Homeland Security and ICE that will not punish violators, will not deport violators but instead puts them right back on the streets.
Perry knows you cannot build a 1200 mile fence on the Texas/Mexico border that would take 10-15 years to build,
and cost billions.
In-State Tuition law (which would be mute and probably overturned if border was secured)
12 to 16K kids a break of few hundred dollars (yea, I know what Romney said and that dog don’t hunt because the majority of those kids are going to community colleges) that NO ONE not even Texas Taxpayers pay a dime for! It is a fact that the in-state tuition law does not cost Texans one dime. It certainly does not cost US Taxpayers anything. In fact, if the law was reversed today, Texas Universities would lose over 10 million dollars. (I can find that article if you like - it is posted on FR)
It is something that Texas decided - not anyone else - it is a STATE ISSUE. An issue based on what the Fed Gov has allowed to snowball.
Perry, Texans and Texas did not INVITE the illegals into our state. They cost us lots and lots of money and we know it but our hands are tied by the Federal Government who refuse to do their job, who run guns to the drug cartels, who make laws mandating that we pay for the illegals education that they refuse to keep out of our state and that they refuse to deport.
Perry has pushed laws in the legislature but our legislature are afraid they will step on their hispanic votes and will not pass them.
Perry tried to get the sanctuary city law passed, he specified that it was an emergency bill and when our legislature did not pass it, he called a special session and put it right back on the table for them to consider.
They still did not pass it (they will soon be up for election).
Our legislature only convenes every two years.
As Texans: we have no income tax. We have a Governor we like and that is why we keep electing him. His policies have created an environment that results in a better standard of life with as little regulations as he can maintain for us, low taxes, got tort reform through that eliminated the costs that were driving up for Texas businesses.
We deal with the illegal immigrant problem as best we can considering we are fighting at both ends: The Federal Government on our backs and the drug war on the border. With our own money and our own manpower.
We take shit from the Feds every single day of every single week of every single month of every single year.
Yet we still are still the #1 economy in the United States.
Yes Texans had everything to do with that, but we had a Governor who created the environment in which we could do so.
You see, Governor Perry stands firmly on Freedom.
And that is why I will be voting for Perry.
I hope that you will consider him too, but if not, I respect your choice.
Governor Perry:
“It is time to let America be America again. To return freedom to the people. To stand on our founding principles and reject the cynical politics of the Nanny State.
To paraphrase President Reagan, Washington isn’t the answer to our challenges, it is part of the problem. It is time to get Washington out of the way in order to preserve the American Way.”
Lying and laziness tend to go hand in hand. Thanks for showing us your lack of character.
“nativists”?
Wow.
(sorry I inserted that from your quoted text, s/b from 406)
Amazing, isn’t it? This entire thread should have been yanked 12 hours ago, IMO. The OP is not a person of any sort of character.
All this bickering and not one candidate has been raised any higher in electability. But a few posters have exposed their stupidity for falling into this spittlefest. I can just imagine the drag and paste frenzy the left is feeding upon right now.
The difference is I like Rush Limbaugh and he’s way too smart to run for office. He doesn’t need the money.
Cain does need the money. I never heard his radio show.
I don’t trust him or his followers. There’s way too much adoration and worship there, combined with panic that someone else might beat him, resulting in Cain supporters being horribly nasty to Perry supporters.
They would be horribly nasty to Bachmann or Santorum if those people had a chance.
For conservatives in most states, they would give almost anything to be able to move into Texas. I’m sorry you don’t find freedom and prosperity to your liking, or have an irrational fear of a superhighway. No income tax, low government spending, good job situation (it wasn’t always like that, I know, just the past 10 years), a governor who is solidly pro-life, solidly pro-2nd-amendment, who fights the incursion of the federal government into the lives of the people he serves. What’s not to like?
Other than a legislature that near-unanimously decided to let an average of 2000 high-acheiving kids a year who were immigrants, some of them illegal, to pay in-state tuition which fully covered the costs of their education. I know some of you hate that, but not quite enough yet to get the legislature to revoke it.
Oh, and for a few months some of you were scared that you’d have to spend 30 seconds filling out an online form to exempt your daughters from getting a vaccine that would protect them from some forms of cancer. Which never actually happened. And some others of you were afraid that a big road would be built making it easy to drive through the middle of your state, which also didn’t happen.
And there’s the few of you who are upset that your governor let some muslims build a mosque. But they probably weren’t the freedom-loving people who were upset about the gardasil thing, unless they are really confused about what freedom means.
Did I miss anything? Oh yeah, there was that whole “moderate muslim friend” thing with the audacity to want a history class to teach that muslims existed in the middle east and caused a lot of troubles, but weren’t totally evil. Although I haven’t seen complaints about that since it was learned the “lesson plan” people were complaining about wasn’t the real lesson plan, AND since Cain came out and said he thought a lot of muslims were moderates, and he’d have no trouble putting a moderate muslim in his cabinet, and he also thought there were extremist Christians and he wouldn’t put an extremist christian in his cabinet. That kind of took the sails out of the “Rick Perry has a muslim friend, so he’s evil” argument.
Anyway, that’s a long way around to say that I don’t wish to move to Texas. But that’s because I live in Virginia, which also has a reasonably conservative set of laws, a good conservative governor, an excellent jobs situation (OK, partly because we have federal jobs, but also because even under democrats, our legislature is very pro-business).
I would love to live under that “potentate” for 8 years. I’m much more nervous about having an amateur, inexperienced President whose examples of leadership are all in dictatorial positions where he ruled without question, and who has no record of acheivement to judge his words.
Perry isn’t perfect, but having seen his record over a decade, I see that he is quite good at being an elected leader in the public domain.
But every time I look for some sign that Cain doesn’t simply say what he thinks people would want to hear, I instead get Cain saying things like “I believe in the Palestinian Right of Return”, or that he would trade gitmo terrorists to Al Qaeda if they were able to kidnap a soldier as a hostage.
Thank you.
You have a debilitating condition known as “projection.” You need to be professionally diagnosed in order to overcome it.
He’s toast.
Excellent post, thank you. These points are posted time and time again - yet there are those that will still say “why don’t you tell us why we should vote for YOUR candidate, instead of tearing ours down”.
Like always, they will ignore your lengthy list of pro-Perry points and continue tearing HIM down.
Almost always, what they accuse us of doing is a projection of what they do.
Good reply.
Like button here.
As I say, no details, no proof, but only innuendo and supposition.
I’d love to know the truth, too, but I don’t see any facts to back up the story, so it will be given its rightful attention.
“Give me a freakin’ break. I can care less about who you vote for. I am not going to drive your impaired butt to the polls. I am not the Daley vote machine in Chicago. You vote for who you think you ought to vote for, the rest of us be damned. There are some of Perry supporters I don’t like either. Ya think I’d judge Perry by the loons (there are only a few) that say they support him? It’s MY vote, and I’ll vote the way I see fit.
You should too.”
I certainly will but I will also call out bottom feeding Perrybots and Romneybots who smear others.
You didn’t see me trashing Perry for the niggerhead situation, most if not all others. See the difference? maybe you should crawl under THAT rock.
Yes, your reasons boil down to “I don’t like Cain.”
That’s a perfectly legitimate reason not to support him.
But let’s see that understanding extended to everyone, no matter who they support.
Some people just don’t like Perry, for example. They can give all the reasons in the world, just like people who don’t like Cain can give all the reasons in the world. But it all boils down to they just “don’t like the guy.”
That’s the way it is!
To yammer on about how other people SHOULD like a particular guy (as opposed to setting out substantive reasons you think his proposals or his presidency would be a positive for the nation) makes no sense. Nor does it make sense to be offended, or take it personally, when someone doesn’t like the same guy others think he “should” like.
Fine, but the point remains that Herman Cain does have a record.
You can evaluate it, or even dismiss it, all you want. But it is not accurate to say we have no information about his political or social philosophy, his ideas on government, or how he interacts with people and tasks.
What in the world does that prove?
Maybe she wants to try to get a reality tv show or a book deal, who knows.
By trumping this all up, some conservatives are doing nothing but playing into the Left’s hand in the Jerry Springer-ization of politics, at least when it applies to conservatives.
Oh, and let me tell you something about how these type of “celebrity crime” cases work: some fancy lawyer, such as this one (Joel P. Bennet, a Clinton crony who worked on bimbo eruptions way back when) sees these facts developing in the media and the lawyer calls the “victim” and says, “let me represent you” — i.e., let me go on TV and get my name all over the internet blabbering on about how wronged you were, etc. A nice publicity gig if you can get it.
It has NOTHING to do with the merits or equities of the case. It has everything to do with a famous lawyer wanting to insinuate himself into the middle of every public brouhaha that remotely involves his area of “expertise.”
Think Gloria Allred. Do you honestly think all the women she has represented call her? Do you think that Drew Petersen woman had ever even heard of Gloria Allred?
It’s highly naive to read anything into the fact that the woman and a lawyer have hooked up somehow and that she/he is trying to make a hubbub.
My question is: why are some conservatives allowing themselves to be used as PROPS IN THIS LEFTIST POLITICAL THEATER?
Here'a an analogy:
Fifteen years ago you were cited for DUI.
The case was investigated and the judge found there was no evidence that you had been DUI. The citation was dismissed before the case even went to trial.
Moreover, the cop who made the citation against you was terminated, given a severance pay, and he entered into a confidentiality agreement.
Today, fifteen years later, you are running for office. Someone leaks to the press that you were once CITED for DUI. You confirm that you were CITED for DUI. You AND THE MEDIA (in the Cain case, Politico) also confirm that:
1. The citation was dimissed as unsubstantiated.
2. The accuser was terminated.
3. The accuser entered into a confidentiality agreement.
Now the accuser, the cop, wants to be released from his confidentiality agreement so he can "tell his side of the story" -- the same facts (unless he lies) that he told the judge, that the judge found insufficient, and upon which the case was dismissed and you were exonerated.
That means NOTHING in terms of the validity and precedent of the previous findings by the judge upon a contemporaneous investigation into the facts and the accuser's account.
NOTHING real or reliable could come out of the cop being allowed to say, literally, whatever he wants at this time -- no matter how many people he wants to drag into the matter, no matter how impossible it is to collaborate or refute ANYTHING he says.
Why do some conservatives fall for this crap? It's embarrassing.
Again, this is exactly why there are statutes of limitations in legal cases. The law says that after a certain amount of time has passed, the testimony of witnesses is no longer reliable.
Shouldn't we be smart enough -- not to mention politically savvy enough -- to understand how this same rationale applies here?
Again, if you want to ding Cain because someone made a complaint against him, that's your call. But please don't clamor for the debacle of the Jerry Springer-ization of our nomination process. The Left is doing enough to try to destroy conservatives without conservatives going "celebrity crime" crazy over a complaint that was investigated and dismissed more than a decade ago.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.