Honestly? With this crap again?
National Review Online published an impossibly stupid article on the travails of one Herman Cain and the sexual assault and harassment allegations that are stacking up against him. It’s a rambly tl;dr piece that says nothing and makes no recognizable effort to try. It’s the literary equivalent of the tiny puffs of gas that my dog unwittingly excretes while he sleeps.
The author, some clown who calls himself Victor Davis Hanson, purports to discuss the difference between Cain and President Obama: “Cain’s authenticity vs. Obama’s metrosexual cool” (Get it, wingnuts? The Sheriff’s a
Hanson’s “article” is a pathetic piece of Cain propaganda that attempts to resurrect a golden-child simulacrum of Herman Cain that never existed in the first place, and was merely a figment of the GOP’s addled collective imagination. Where Hanson sees “Black authenticity as defined by Southern mannerisms and darker complexion, amplified by conservatism or traditionalism,” I see unabashed incompetence and the human embodiment of Idiocracy.
You see, Herman Cain is, incontrovertibly, a fool: Continue reading
Rock you like a Herman Cain
Herman Cain’s press conference yesterday was a farce. And it was treated as such.
[chirpstory after the jump]
“I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative.”
The screenshot below tells you pretty much everything you need to know about Herman Cain’s supporters and why he is actually doing pretty well in the polls and with fundraising right now.
The screenshot is from his PAC. The title of the post is “Herman Cain Accuser Karen Kraushaar works for Obama and she’s ugly”
The comment with the photo of Kraushaar says “Ew, gross! Who the hell does this ugly b1tch think she’s fooling? Just to be clear, Karen Kraushaar is the one on the left.”
Click for a larger version
This was literally on the front page of his PAC’s webpage for a time, though it has now scrolled off. Still, they haven’t chosen to take it down.
“I don’t even know that lady!”
Cain went all in during his press conference today, claiming that dirty Democrats are behind this scandal. He further claimed that he does not know Bialek, didn’t recognize her face or her voice, and categorically denied the allegations.
Throughout the press conference, Cain repeatedly referred to the allegations as “anonymous” before finally claiming that the allegations came from “both anonymous and non-anonymous sources.” He also blamed Democrats: “The Democrat machine in America has brought forth a troubled woman to make false accusations.”
Right — because Politico is the bastion of liberal journalism.
When trying to explain his initial flip-flopping regarding whether he recalled any settlement agreement, Cain tried (and failed) to walk a tightrope and draw a distinction between a “settlement” and an “agreement.” He claims that at first, he didn’t remember there being a settlement agreement, but then later that day — “after all those years” — he recalled that there was an agreement — emphasis on agreement:
I’m running out of popcorn.
Herman Cain is gearing up for his big press conference this afternoon during which — if I’m reading the tea leaves correctly — he will deny that he knows what that crazy bitch is talking about, after which he’ll yell “look over there!”
What Cain wants you to look at is Bialek’s tawdry past — a tawdry past that actually is not tawdry at all.
Today, the Cain camp released a statement about Sharon Bialek, and it is nothing more than a sad attempt to drag Bialek through the mud. And when I say “sad,” I mean sad.
The press release points out that Bialek has been a defendant in several lawsuits, three of which were brought by the same plaintiff — a company called Broadcare Management.
Cain also points out that Bialek has worked for nine employers over the course of seventeen years, and that she filed for bankruptcy twice. Shock! Horror!
Cain then poses some questions, the answers to which are both readily available and entirely irrelevant.
Here’s the text of the press release: Continue reading
Sharon Bialek, the fourth woman to come forward alleging that Cain sexually harassed her (and the first to report what sounds like assault) is not only the latest “alleged” victim of Cain, she’s the latest victim of Cain’s conservative apologists.
To be fair to Cain, it’s possible that this sexual harassment scandal (or four) is nothing more than the usual blowback any politically powerful man should expect from a disgruntled former co-worker (or four), and that the claims (all four of them) are indeed, as Cain believes, nothing more than the political handiwork of a disgruntled fellow presidential candidate – Rick Perry.
At this point, it doesn’t really matter. Cain has no intentions of admitting publicly that any of this took place. It does not appear likely that he will apologize to these women, let alone acknowledge their claims. (And why should he? It was the ’90s, after all. Everybody was doing it!)
The media circus surrounding this scandal isn’t likely to fade. More women are likely to come forward, and Cain will likely continue to protest how journalists do their jobs. But Cain, and the (four) victims of his extra-marital sexual proclivities, his advances, harassment and apparent assault are not the only story.
As disgusting as these accusations are, the conservative media’s response is almost worse.
She cain’t tell a lie.
The CainTrain is screeching to a halt:
Herman Cain accuser Sharon Bialek, appearing on three morning shows Tuesday, pushed back against the candidate’s denial that he had groped and sexually harassed her in 1997, saying Cain could “end this” by admitting to the alleged transgressions.
“He can step forward and just end this — just end it. I don’t want to be here. I don’t think anyone wants — just end it,” Bialek said on “Good Morning America.” “Let’s move forward — but unfortunately I don’t think that’s what’s going to happen.”
Bialek also emphasized that her decision to come forward was not politically motivated. On CBS’s “Early Show,” she said that she would at least “think about” voting for Cain if he admitted what had happened, while on “GMA” she said Cain would be fit to be president once “he tells the truth.”
“I don’t despise the man; I actually did it because I wanted to give him the platform to come clean, to tell the truth,” Bialek said on the “Early Show.”
From a PR standpoint, Bialek is the perfect “victim” (if there can be such a thing): She’s pretty, well-spoken, and — let’s get real — blonde. Moreover, she doesn’t appear vindictive or bitter; after all she would “think about” voting for this fool if he simply told the truth.
Of course he didn’t and won’t:
[video after the jump]
Like sands through the hour glass, these are the Cains of our lives.
The slow drip of allegations continues, folks. It’s turning into a soap opera.
A fifth woman, former USAID worker Donna Donella, has come forward and claimed that after Herman Cain gave a speech in Egypt in 2002, Cain asked her to ask some other woman (an audience member) to have dinner with him. (Presumably, he did not ask Donella to pass a note to the audience member, asking “Do you like me? Check the box — ‘yes’ or ‘no.’ No ‘maybe so’!”)
When Donella declined to play matchmaker, Cain asked Donella out to dinner. (If at first you don’t succeed, try again, eh Hermy?) When Donella declined, two other women jumped in and defused the situation by suggesting they all have dinner with Cain… together. In response, Cain probably flashed his creepy grin, thrilled that he was going to tap all those asses at once. Sadly for Cain, no asses were tapped that night (that we know of).
From Politico: Continue reading