Skip to comments.Are we going to let Obama get rid of Herman Cain the same way he got rid of Jack Ryan?
Posted on 11/30/2011 7:48:10 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
The smear campaign against Herman Cain is the exact same kind of smear campaign the media ran against Jack Ryan. Had Jack Ryan not been taken out, we would never have had a Senator Obama, and without a Senator Obama we would never have had a President Obama.
Ryan married actress Jeri Ryan in 1991; together they have a son, Alex Ryan. They divorced in 1999 in California, and the records of the divorce were sealed at their mutual request. Five years later, when Ryan's Senate campaign began, the Chicago Tribune newspaper and WLS-TV, the local ABC affiliate, sought to have the records released. On March 3, 2004, several of Ryan's GOP primary opponents urged release of the records. Both Ryan and his wife agreed to make their divorce records public, but not make the custody records public, claiming that the custody records could be harmful to their son if released. On March 16, 2004, Ryan won the GOP primary with 36 percent to 23 percent against Jim Oberweis who came in second. Obama won the Democratic primary, with 53 percent to 23 percent against Dan Hynes, who came in second.
On March 29, 2004, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Robert Schnider ruled that several of the Ryans' divorce records should be opened to the public, and ruled that a court-appointed referee would later decide which custody files should remain sealed to protect the interests of Ryan's young child. The following week, on April 2, 2004, Barack Obama formally established his position about the Ryans' soon-to-be-released divorce records, and called on Democrats not to inject them into the campaign. The Ryan campaign characterized Obama's stance as hypocritical, because Obama's alleged backers had been emailing reports about the divorce records prior to Judge Schnider's decision.
In May 2004, two polls were conducted statewide where the Chicago Tribune poll found Ryan trailing Obama 52% to 30%  while the Sun Times reported that he was trailing Obama 48 percent to 40 percent in the U.S. Senate race, according to a new Daily Southtown poll of 500 likely Illinois voters   On June 22, 2004, after receiving a report from the referee, Judge Schnider released the files that were deemed consistent with the interests of Ryan's young child. In those files, Jeri Ryan alleged that Jack Ryan had asked her to perform sexual acts with him in public in sex clubs in New York, New Orleans, and Paris. Jeri Ryan described one as "a bizarre club with cages, whips and other apparatus hanging from the ceiling."
The decision to release these files generated much controversy because it went against both parents' direct request, and because it reversed the earlier decision to seal the papers in the best interest of the child. Jim Oberweis, Ryan's defeated GOP opponent, commented that "these are allegations made in a divorce hearing, and we all know people tend to say things that aren't necessarily true in divorce proceedings when there is money involved and custody of children involved."
Prior to release of the documents, Ryan claimed he had told leading Republicans that the divorce file could cause problems for his campaign. After the documents were released, GOP Chair Judy Baar Topinka said of Ryan's comment "It may have been somewhat misleading." Topinka said after the June 25 withdrawal that Ryan's "decision was a personal one" and that the state GOP had not pressured Ryan to drop out. Ryan's campaign ended less than a week after the custody records were opened, and Ryan officially filed the documentation to withdraw on July 29, 2004. The same party leaders who called for Ryan's resignation chose Alan Keyes as Ryan's replacement in the race; Keyes lost to Obama, 27% to 70%.
You have confirmed what I long suspected. Cain haters are almost universally nasty, and irrational by nearly the same percentage.
In the amount of time you’ve wasted with me, you could have easily gone to the thread YESTERDAY AND THIS MORNING and shown everyone here how I smeared Cain. Why can’t you do that simple task? Why the attempts to change the subject? Why the attempts to move the goalpost? Just point to the post. I did earlier to one of my own posts. Surely it would be simple to prove to everyone you’re right.
Last part of Page 2
On this very thread I’ve written several replies to you that I put some very real time and thought into. There’s no evidence you read any one of them. You certainly never responded to them in an engaged, intelligent way. Yet you demand that I read and respond to you regardless. There is a word for that: hypocrite.
I’ll check it out. Thanks for posting the link.
See posts 145, 149, and 154.
YOU are not the topic of this thread. Why argue about your intentions with people whose only intention is to argue? They make no valid points or arguments. They just wish to stop you from making any sense. They do not want you to post facts or to make valid arguments, they want you to spend your time defending yourself.
Don’t fall for it anymore.
Is this the statement, or am I missing it?
“Rather, this appears to be an accusation of private, alleged consensual conduct between adults - a subject matter which is not a proper subject of inquiry by the media or the public. No individual, whether a private citizen, a candidate for public office or a public official, should be questioned about his or her private sexual life. The public’s right to know and the media’s right to report has boundaries and most certainly those boundaries end outside of one’s bedroom door.”
If so, it sounds like basic lawyer-speak to me and not a direct statement from Cain himself. I want to see the content of the texting and the ‘to’ and/or ‘from’. If Cain is innocent in this, he should fire his attorney.
See posts 124, 145, 149, 154, and 157.
I was never on he Cain train, so the “how long will it take you to abandon the next flavor-of-the-week” comment is a nonsequator.
I TOTALLY agree with you that the Obama media will viciously go after the eventual nominee. It ain’t fair, but if our nominee is going to have any chance to save us from the worst president ever, they’ll need to have the ability to effectively deal with the eventual media onslaught (Regan did this with grace & humor, remember his “there you go again” comment).
Cold hard fact is that none of the recent flavors of the month (Perry, Cain and Bachman) have this capacity at the level they would need to unseat Obama. It’s ironc that the MSM is doing us a favor in testing our pool of candidates to see who is good under fire.
If there is a brokered convention, it means that the GOP elite have lost control of the situation, and therefore of the outcome.
Lawyer speak for sure, but approved by the Candidate.
Cain picked this man to represent him. Who would he pick for Attorney General?
These are the proving grounds of a President, these primary fights. They make or break them. It is where their metal is proved. A President will be attacked all over the world. How he reacts affects every citizen. Obama showed himself to be a self centered shallow twit, when he stamped his foot about people teasing him about his ears. If Cain can not handle this properly, then he doesn’t need to be President.
I would also like to see the content of the texts. Wonder why she doesn’t release them, and didn’t from the very start?
But, Cain also knows what he said in them. Why doesn’t HE release his texts, which she sent him? It is hinky on both sides. That combined with the statement by the lawyer, and Cain looks bad.
I am very upset about it. I have been getting calls all day, from those who I have talked to about Cain. Some to gloat, some to commiserate. It is a sad day for America, in my opinion. A sad day.
A brokered convention would be excellent. Anything to get power away from the Inside the Beltway Ruling Class works for me. If we go w another Establishment type this time around, we’ll be screwed for the foreseeable future.
Republican convention is the week of August 27. Two months seems to be a real short amount of time to nominate someone new and get them running against Obama and win. Plus, while it’s happened in the past, I don’t think many people in the country would be real happy with a candidate that none of them got a chance to vote for. The idea of having more than a year of debates, elections, etc. just thrown out and someone new named as the candidate would probably rub a lot of people the wrong way.
Give me a break.
Most people already don't get to cast a meaningful vote for the nominee.
The caucus/primary system is completely controlled by aparatchiks. Obama proved that by having ACORN steal all the caucuses from Hillary.
The only way we would get to choose the nominee would be a series of runoffs until somebody got more than 50% of the vote, and that will never happen.
My state's primary is less than meaningless.
Your solution is to keep it in the hands of the apartchiks.
Yes, he picked his attorney and I understand what you’re saying there. I’ve seen a number of bad decisions/choices on his part. But I keep hearing that everyone wants a candidate who is not a politician. Apparently we don’t, because the minute his inexperience shows we gang up on him. But we see some of the same stupid goofs and gaffs from so-called experienced politicians, so what the heck?
Not everyone keeps their texts. But if he didn’t delete them, and they could exonerate him, then he should release them by all means. On the other hand, if he knows they’ll prove he did what she accuses, he should just say as much and drop out.
However, since she’s the one accusing, the normal thing would be that we should expect her to produce the proof - and if she’s unwilling to do that she should be treated with skepticism from everyone, but especially conservatives.
You are correct. The candidate is chosen by the time it gets to my state also. Ditto many if not most of the states. A minority of voters even participate in the primaries, and a smaller minority picks the candidate—via help from the Establishment Ruling Class, that allows Independents and in some cases Dems to vote in ***our*** primaries. I know of no conservative who is happy w the status quo. A brokered convention would be a godsend, and if they chose wisely, it could engender a tidal wave of enthusiasm.
"Yeah, I should just let someone accuse me of smearing a candidate and then repeatedly refuse to actually back that up. Hmm, where have I read people complaining about accusations without proof?"
LOL! That was the best point you made today! 'Course it is not about Cain...but, I still appreciate it very much.
Same thing we did when they shoved Bob Dull down our throats?
Same thing we did when they shoved George W. Bush down or throats?
I'm all for a brokered convention. If you aren't, I don't care, and nobody else does either.
You certainly make sense. She should have to show more “proof” of an affair. And I think if she had it, it would be all over the news.
And you are right, we say we don’t want a politician, but then it seems we critisize Cain when he doesn’t act like one!
Actually, I just want Cain to show his skills as a businessman. A successful businessman must do much of the same things a politician does. They are selling a product: Herman Cain, in this case.
Successful businessmen know how to pick great people to work for them, and how to “outsell” their competition. To be successful, they have to have the ability to promote their products better than their competitors, and instill confidence in their shareholders. Cain has not shown those skills in this situation.
You seem to believe you’re the spokesman for the universe, so I thought I’d just throw it back in your face, Skippy.
Care to point out where I said or implied that, sparky?
“Cain has not shown those skills in this situation.”
I do wish he had better advisers and spox folks, but he was running on a tight shoestring budget until very recently. However, the fact that he’s gotten this far going up against some who believe it’s their turn, their right, to be elected POTUS in 2012 says a lot for his skills.
And as far as not handling things with the slickness of a career pol - again, isn’t that what we want? Didn’t we do our best to vote out experienced pols and replace them with average Joe’s in 2010?
Whatever happens with all this, we need to keep something in mind —
This isn’t just about Herman Cain. The establishment know-it-alls and dems will stop at nothing to demoralize us and choose our candidate and I’m not playing their game. If Cain drops out for whatever reason, they’ll be all over the next one in line like white on rice, all the way down to the wire come November 2012. You know it’s true.
Wow—you said that well. Thanks for putting the situation into perspective. The Ruling Class has gotten totally out of hand. If they win this one, the way they won w McCain last time around, it could be the end. You can’t have institutional corruption as deep as it runs in congress—BOTH parties included—and go on indefinitely. The out of control spending is just one symptom. The pandering to illegals, while middle-fingering the rest of us, is another. The *legal* insider trading for congress persons alone, that’s enriching them beyond calculation at our expense.... The list goes on and on. We really need to get it right this time. Cain is part of the solution, not part of the problem. Can’t say the same for Newt.
There's already hoardes of FReepers helping them.......
The only Jack Ryan I know is Clancy’s.
He saved the world a couple of times.
Alan Keyes is a deep thinker, and he seems an honorable man. Unfortunately, he proves that neither is necessarily electable.
As for Cain....none of these allegations have stuck with merit as of this point. We can wait for another shoe to drop, or we can give the man the benefit of the doubt. I choose the latter.
The allegations are insignificant, since I already have policy reasons for opposing him: quasi pro-choice, constitutionally uninformed, foreign policy novice (infant actually), advocate of a new tax revenue stream, and loser of other election campaign(s).
Hi. Thanks for your comments. It seems quite a few are bent on helping to bring down Herman Cain based on nothing but accusations.
I can’t believe conservatives are falling for this - and are actually propagating “it’s the seriousness of the charge that matters” spiel.
But that basically sums up way too many of the comments I’ve read lately. There seems to be no critical thinking/reasoning whatsoever on their part - just take the accusers at their word - and Herman Cain should quit.
I fear the media and political machines are winning. Very disheartening. How will we beat obama if we turn on our own? How will our country recover?
I couldn’t have said it better. We are really at the cross roads. The corruption is DC is all but irreversible already. The GOP alone is so rotted, it’s hard to find anything worth saving. The old tortoise McConnell has enriched himself shamefully on insider trading, all the while playing footsie with the Dems on issues critical to our future—and that’s just the tip of the iceberg.
If we let the MSM destroy yet another good conservative w an actual chance of changing DC for the better, we may as well hang it up. Newt can’t wait to work in a ‘bipartisan manner’. He said so. It will be business as usual—which means flushing America down the drain. Cain is our best hope—lets pray he weathers this storm and comes out all the stronger for it. Our country needs him.
Agree, DC is full of corrupt good ole boys on both sides. I thought the anger of 2010 sent a message but apparently not.
I’ve been working too much and haven’t kept up on the insider trading this week, didn’t know about McConnell [LOL at old tortoise]. I did hear a blurb where someone [might have been McConnell ?]was defending pelosi’s virtue today. Ha! Whatever. She’s one of the worst, and with everything we know about her, I can easily believe she’s involved.
And more of the same is all we’ll get if we don’t wise up fast. Praying Cain wants to stay in badly enough to fight this. Praying hard for our country.
Good golly, I totally agree with this post. Imagine that!
Reading through some of the posts on FR it seems that apparently it DOES take a rocket scientist to see this is slander. Thank goodness we have a few here on FR to plow through the muck and put words to truth. There are also those who do realize this is slander, but see it as an opportunity to advance their candidate. Pretty shameful. Then there are those who do not support Cain, but do have the decency to call this out for what it is...good for them.
Another homer! I will be on the lookout for your post in the future. You have a way w words, and say things I definitely want to read.
I don’t know if it was McConnell who defended Pelosi. It wouldn’t surprise me. They are both up to their necks in insider trading, and their portfolios have exploded upwards. [Though to be fair, Pelosi profited more than McConnell, which is typical. The Republicans consider themselves chaste if they wallow in the same muck as the Dems, but come away covered w only half the mud stuck to them.]
It’s amazing that 2010 meant so little to the GOP leadership. If we don’t send twice as strong a message in 2012, there likely won’t be another chance. We need Cain in the WH, and tea party conservatives in leadership positions. Only then will the DC ‘business as usual’ mentality be broken.
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.