Posted on 11/07/2011 5:41:39 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Via Todd Starnes of Fox News, is it still a “so-called story” when you have a woman making accusations on TV under her own name? If The One were suddenly facing a bunch of similar claims from his community-organizing days, including one from a named accuser, I’m thinking … yeah, story.
When in trouble, trust in the magic formula to firm up support: Media-bashing + “outsider” authenticity (“I won’t play by the establishment’s rules”) + vagueness on the particulars.
Unfortunately, the media-driven process by which one must seek this opportunity is fundamentally unserious. I have touched on this before – the emphasis on “gaffes,” gotcha questions and time devoted to trivial nonsense – and everyone knows the process only became further detached from relevance this week as the media published anonymous, ancient, vague personal allegations against me.
Once this kind of nonsense starts, the media’s rules say you have to act in a certain way. I am well aware of these rules. And I refuse to play by them…
Another reason I refuse to play by these rules is that, by doing it my way, I’m getting much better results. My fundraising has skyrocketed since all this nonsense began. Just this weekend, the Washington Post has come out with a new poll – taken since all this started – showing me in the lead nationally, with my numbers on the rise…
But the process by which we choose our presidents has become so warped that, when something like this happens, the media and political strategists start grading you on whether you play an absurd game by their absurd rules.
A few things. One: The reason there’s been an emphasis on “gaffes” in his case is because all too often the gaffes have to do with significant policy matters. Go watch the clip here again if you missed it earlier. Two: He says later that the witnesses to these alleged harassment incidents are all conspicuously anonymous. Not true, though. Chris Wilson put his name on the record. Three: He makes the point that he’s had thousands of professional conversations over the years, so some people were bound to be rubbed the wrong way. Right, but of course so have Romney and Perry and no one’s accused them of harassment, let alone four people.
Here’s Allred talking to Wolf Blitzer tonight about the charges. She says Bialek won’t accept money for this story and, more noteworthy, claims that she has sworn affidavits from two people who say Bialek told them about the alleged incident with Cain around the time that it happened in 1997. She won’t reveal their names — yet — but she did supposedly read the affidavits to reporters after today’s presser. Oh, and according to John Nolte of Big Hollywood, it turns out Bialek is indeed a registered Republican and that she did in fact attend “Teacon” in Chicago last month, as she claimed. Stay tuned.
I am a serious person, seeking the opportunity to do a serious and very important job. Our nation has very serious problems, particularly of an economic nature, and Barack Obama does not have the skill, knowledge or will to solve them.
I do.
Unfortunately, the media-driven process by which one must seek this opportunity is fundamentally unserious. I have touched on this before – the emphasis on “gaffes,” gotcha questions and time devoted to trivial nonsense – and everyone knows the process only became further detached from relevance this week as the media published anonymous, ancient, vague personal allegations against me.
Once this kind of nonsense starts, the media’s rules say you have to act in a certain way. I am well aware of these rules. And I refuse to play by them.
There are several reasons for this. One is that, lest anyone forget, we actually have serious matters to talk about. Since the media went bananas over this so-called story, my schedule has not changed in the slightest. I have continued to make all planned public appearances. I have continued to answer questions about my 9-9-9 tax reform plan. I have continued to do everything else that our strategy proscribes.
Another reason I refuse to play by these rules is that, by doing it my way, I’m getting much better results. My fundraising has skyrocketed since all this nonsense began. Just this weekend, the Washington Post has come out with a new poll – taken since all this started – showing me in the lead nationally, with my numbers on the rise.
The media may be obsessed with this business, but the voters are not. And I am not.
But there’s another crucially important reason I refuse to play by these rules: These rules stink. Can the process by which we pick the leader of our nation be any more absurd? I’m not talking about the primary process or the role of the electorate. There is nothing wrong with that. I am talking about the media’s trivializing of such an important matter.
Consider: I held various executive positions in corporate America for several decades. I had thousands of employees working for me. I can’t even begin to recall how many conversations I had with people during that time, how many directives I gave, how much friendly banter might have taken place.
I also had to make tough decisions during these years. I turned around a poorly performing region for Burger King, then turned around a struggling Godfather’s Pizza organization. At some point during a career like this, someone will not like things you do, or how you do it. Someone will complain.
That is just the nature of things if you’ve ever done much in your life.So once the editors of Politico started looking for people who would make claims against me, their chances of finding a few takers were probably about 100 percent. These people will not give their names. The so-called “witnesses” who purportedly corroborated their stories also will not give their names. That’s about what you would expect when people are engaging in a “hatchet job,” as it’s been described by Joseph Fassler, who was chairman of the National Restaurant Association board when I was there.
It’s easy to make accusations when, by virtue of your anonymity, you don’t have to be held accountable for the claims you’re making. It’s easy to publish them when, like Politico, you don’t follow basic rules of journalism by naming your sources or giving any details whatsoever about what supposedly happened.
But the process by which we choose our presidents has become so warped that, when something like this happens, the media and political strategists start grading you on whether you play an absurd game by their absurd rules.
When someone stops you on the street and hits you with an accusation like this, they subsequently write a story about the look in your eyes, and how many seconds it took you to speak some words in response.
They go to “crisis management experts” who offer the usual sage wisdom about “getting all the information out” – as if you can get any “information” out (aside from telling them nothing happened, which they don’t want to hear) in response to allegations that are unsourced and nonspecific.
Then, when you haven’t “calmed the firestorm” – if only because the people wielding the blow-torches have no intention of putting them out – more experts are put on the air to say this proves you are “not ready for prime time.”
Maybe that would matter if I was trying out for the cast of Saturday Night Live. But this should be a slightly more serious undertaking than that.
Contrary to the belief of experts, so wise and learned in the ways of politics, I do know what the established rules say I am supposed to do. I simply refuse to do it. That’s because the rules are ridiculous, and they produce leaders like Barack Obama, who play the political game like experts but govern like complete incompetents.
The nation needs its tax structure reformed, its spending brought under control, its debt reduced and its overall governing structure made far more responsive to the needs of the people. The nation needs many other problems addressed. If it’s OK with the American people, I would like to address them.
If the media want to continue talking about nonsense, that’s fine. I’m not going to join them. It doesn’t look like the citizenry plans to join them either.
“I was unfamiliar with Allahpundit.”
Think Little Green Footballs or the Brock guy (Anita Hill).
Palin is not running for President.
Palin was not married at the time the so called affair occurred. Don't think the basketball player was either (think the guy was in college at the time and not yet in the NBA). There was no wrong doing in the gossip about Palin. Even if it were true, it wouldn't matter at all.
Cain was married at the time these things supposedly took place - and I think a minister as well.
If some woman went on TV and accused me of such things and none of them happened, I would happily go out and shoot down each and every one of her specific allegations. Cain is not doing that. Instead he is just attacking the media and trying to change the subject. That strategy will not work because even conservative media will continue asking about it until he addresses the specific things this woman has accused him of.
I see no sexual harassment in these allegations even if they are true. But it would mean Cain doesn't take his marriage vows very seriously and, if true, would seriously damage him among conservative primary voters.
If you believe that Cain can get away with just blaming the media here and not addressing this woman's claims you are kidding yourself and living in fantasy land.
All were gloating how the real nominee is going to be Romney. Yet, Romney won't accept the “hot seat” on the show.
Despite my dislike for Juan Williams, he has been the only one to stand up for Herman Cain.
Fox Insiders only have their TV gig because they are all Beltway Boys.
They also have bullied Rush and I hope Rush spends time to expose this whole thing to his millions of viewers and urges them to support Herman Cain against the GOP Establishment Elites!
GO HERMAN - WE GOT YOUR BACK!
But Aldred did not become a high powered attorney by working pro bono - and she will demand a lot of money for her services to whomever.
Spurned and stupid or Romney supporter which implies really stupid?
This is not just a smear against Herman Cain.
It's a smear against the Tea Party and Conservatives.
I will go down fighting and supporting Cain.
Sarah Palin needs to come out and support Herman Cain if she truly knows what the MSM can do to ruin the life of an individuals compassion for their Country, their Fellow Americans and their Family!
NO WAY AM I SITTING THIS FIGHT OUT!
Sounds weird. I doubt the CEO is investing this much time in hiring run of the mill employees. Unless she was trying to get an executive position, which it doesn’t see would be likely.
One of two things here: Either this is a blatant fabrication, or Cain is a massive womanizer who used his position regularly to chase women. The evidence is not fit with the later at this point, as he has a 40+ year career and thousands of people contacted, but only during this one couple year period, all these things happened. Not likely.
How many ways and times does he need to proclaim his innocence in the wake of serial “she said he said” stories with Zero legal standing in any of them?? Seriously, what is the man supposed to do? He HAS addressed them and it IS appropriate to move on.
You’re sick. Truly sick. Get away with what? Be precise if you can.
What would you exactly do if you were in Herman Cain’s shoes?
What action would you take if a woman made these allegations against you and they were false?
He already specifically denied this “stuff”.
I guess no woman has ever come on to you?
Men can be faithful to their wives and still have a bimbo wanting to jump in the sack with them. I’ve been there!
My husband, who seldom watches news channels, was watching Fox today and he said, that Shepherd guy is really a jerk, isn’t he?
And he looks like he’s at death’s door. What’s wrong with him?
THERE IS NOTHING LIKE A WOMAN'S SCORN.
How many of you guy's out there have a problem EX?
“If you believe that Cain can get away with just blaming the media here and not addressing this woman’s claims you are kidding yourself and living in fantasy land.”
During the Clinton years, we were told that lying about sex is no big deal. Have the rules changed?
“The only position she seems qualified for is horizontal.”
Not to get real technical, but in this woman’s case I think the proper position might be SUPINE.
I thought this was a pretty good defense statement by Cain.
The media can take anybody down, apparently.
WHAT?
She's embarrassed?
She has the cajoles to call him, tell him she's getting a room at the Hilton, wants together, goes to dinner with a married man, and then waits 12 years to “help” other women who are victims of this kind of violence?
I'm thinking, who harassed who? Who assaulted who?
Now the bimbo's going to be on all the morning shows and she only tells her live-in boyfriend on Friday about the Cain Attack?
How long has this been in the making?
GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
That's because she can only remember what she and Herman were wearing, 14 years ago, just like she was scripted to say.... as if it was yesterday.. She clearly remembers Cain wearing a suit and his shirt was UNBUTTONED. Can you believe that, his shirt was UNBUTTONED. What a cad. Suit, unbuttoned shirt = serial sexual predator.
Cain is doing precisely the right thing. I keep asking the same question of people like you: How do you defend a charge that never happened?
Lets get real. If I was to persuade someome (who didn’t like you) to say that 15 years ago you slept with Mr. Cain for a promotion how exactly would you defend it? Oh yes, there is a witness that saw you and Cain enter his corporate suite alone. But we won’t name that person because he/she is afraid of retaliation). The assumption here is that you once worked in the same building with Cain somewhere.
I'm sick for pointing out that Cain is not going to be able to make a blanket condemnation of the media and not address this woman's specific allegations? Seriously? Even the conservative media won't let that go. Cain will be hounded by this until he specifically answers questions about this woman. There is just no way around it. My guess is he will do this within the next few days.
Easy to defend:
I did not have dinner with this person.
I did not give this person a ride anywhere.
I did not discuss a potential job with this person.
I have never been alone with this person.
Simple.
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.