Skip to comments.Witness: Cain accuser hugged him during Tea Party meeting a month ago [Sharon Bialek]
Posted on 11/08/2011 6:11:55 AM PST by justlurking
They hugged each other backstage in a full embrace like old friends.
She grabbed his arm and whispered in his left ear.
She kept talking as he bent to listen, and he kept saying Uh, huh. Uh, huh.
I dont know if what she was giving him was a sucker punch, but he didnt put his arm down while she was talking to him, said the Sneed source.
(Excerpt) Read more at suntimes.com ...
Ugh... well that’s depressing. I’m really surprised, frankly. Thanks for letting me know. I’ll try to go find that interview.
Exactly. Actually the story as I read it was that they did have a prior relationship, she had attended some other events with Cain, including one event where she brought her boyfriend and they all got a little loaded so she and her boyfriend spent the night in Cain’s hotel suite - with Cain still there. Presumably he slept in a different room of the suite, but it is a little freakish.
Clearly they knew each other if that is true. And if she later calls him up, offers to fly out to meet him etc... just who was propositioning whom?
if Cain continues to fight back this good I might have to change my mind on him...well done.
former Palin suppoorter but never a bot...undecided now
WLS-am "The Roe Conn Show" Bill Kurtis- "I'm looking at Sharon Bialek and she speaks well, she's attractive, she has the lock of blond hair sweeping down over one of her eyes and I said "Herman's done. Herman's dead. It's over." And she has details and, of course, it's just up to the edge..." "And I ride in the elevator at work and I hear very quickly a different kind of story." "Let's put Herman and Sharon in the car at the same time and, the roles may even have been reversed given the track record here."
No, I did not see her on Fox this a.m., as I have taken to avoiding watching them now.
I hear her this morning. She believed Bialek, but couldn’t give one good reason why. It sounded like she just wanted to. Either a sisterhood thing or a politics thing.
What she essentially said was it’s because of the multiple claims piling up. Not very intuitive on her part but there it is...
That’s smart, me too usually. We’re both off today, so my husband had it on (and of course, I had to look!)....
Here’s a pic, you don’t have to click on the video or start it, it just took a few seconds to come up for me:
My husband said he can’t even tell a woman her hair looks nice, at his job. He’s not a supervisor or anything, and would be hauled off to Sensitivity School (where I belong too, for the things I joke around with others at work... discussing height even!).
Not intuitive at all. Multiple claims against an average Joe with average means are one thing. Multiple claims against a prominent political figure who suddenly finds himself in the crosshairs of both political establishments is something altogether different. If these charges came trickling in over the course of his campaign, before he became a frontrunner, they’d carry more weight. They didn’t. She should know that.
Not only that but she has past history with the woman. She alludes to that. She should know what the woman is like, from what I’ve read she doesn’t have a good reputation in the Chicago radio industry. I don’t know why Jacobsen is off on this but she sure is.
From what I’ve observed, it’s actually very difficult for a guy to be friendly and sociable with women WITHOUT seeming flirty.(And vice-versa.) This would mean that the potential for misunderstandings is practically built-in whenever men and women interact.
Just my own observations, and I’m certainly no sociologist.
Is the side of her face normally that swollen? She looks like she got punched in the jaw.
I don't agree at all.
If this is what Cain was thinking (and, unfortunately, too many men **DO** agree with you) it is at best an indicator of poor judgment and often an indicator of something a whole lot worse.
This isn't about being “gender-blind soviets.” A man who cares about chivalry will open doors, fix flat tires, let the woman take the cab in the rain, etc., without expecting anything in return — least of all getting the “right” to flirt with her.
If you're married (as most men in positions of power are), you don't get the right to flirt with other women. If you do, you're being disrespectful to your wife and you deserve the consequences at home and at work.
Even if you rationalize your behavior because your wife doesn't care and she long ago decided to put up with your behavior, sooner or later you'll flirt with the wrong woman and she'll either accuse you of sexual harassment or she'll get you into a situation where she can use her relationship against you.
If you're single and you find a woman attractive and she's both single and interested, flirting is fine. If you're both single and willing, then flirt unless she says “no,” and recognize that “no” means “no.”
Of course, if you're in a position of authority over her, that creates complications which may or may not be solvable — if you want to flirt with your cute single secretary or cute single intern or cute single student, you'd better darn well be careful or you're stupid. It's one thing if she really does understand she can say “no” — but how many secretaries, interns, or students feel comfortable with their boss or their teacher asking them out on a date? I'm not saying it can't happen, especially if the two have known each other for years or have pre-existing non-romantic personal relationships outside of work, but it sure is difficult.
This isn't rocket science. It isn't even really Judeo-Christian moral values. It's just plain common sense if you want a happy home and a happy work life.
When men don't understand that, it often says a great deal about their personal character. I know some men are faithful to their wives while flirting with lots of women, but why on earth would someone who is in a position of power and interested in politics want to see how close they can come to the fire before getting burned? At best it shows poor judgment, and often is an indicator of something much worse.
Her gender or her politics. There’s no logical reason to believe any of it.
I don’t know, awful lot of smoke, sure to be a fire... not one not two not three but up to four women now. Like Tiger Woods. (thoughts in minds of American Electorate).
If it is, she’s eating for two lately.
if that picture is from last month, why does she look 100 pounds heavier in her conference?
The website added a caption to the picture after I posted it.
The woman in that picture is actually the woman quoted in the story.
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.