"I WANT to know if Cain is dishonest.
However, I am not convinced.
My first reaction to this news is
that the first round of allegations didnt get the job done,
and so maybe if they decided to make up a story (lie) that is more unforgivable than the first, it will show up in approval ratings.
And maybe someone thought it would be funny if the newest victim was named Ginger White, just to throw in a subliminal message.
I am so distrustful of the media that I could be making excuses for Cain.
But like I said, I want to know IF its true
because I care about having an honest president."
Either you believe
Herman Cain ... or you don't.
It's just that simple.
posted on 11/29/2011 10:33:55 PM PST
(It's simple, fight or die!)
Trust and varify. Would you consider this believing or not believing?
Either you believe Herman Cain ... or you don't.
It's possible to believe Cain some of the time and not to believe him other times.
I didn't believe Herman Cain when he said that one of the claims settled by the National Restaurant Association was based solely on Cain holding up his hand horizontally to indicate that the woman was about the same height as his wife.
Unless Cain said something like "you must be this tall to ride this ride," or there were other encounters or hand motions, the NRA wouldn't have settled a claim based on that hand motion. They certainly wouldn't have paid $35K or $45K at a time when nuisance lawsuits (not just claims preceding litigation) were being settled for much less. That claim would have been one of the 40% dismissed by the EEOC if the woman had filed a claim with the EEOC - a liberal government body designed to find discrimination and harassment anywhere it could.
There's more to that story than Herman Cain told us.
posted on 11/30/2011 3:41:38 AM PST
(You knew the job was dangerous when you took it)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson