Another, "I didn't do it!"

[Reba]

If it's proven that Cain sexually abused, attacked, or harassed any woman, then he's toast as a Presidential candidate, and I would not support him.

If and until such time, why should he be thrown under the bus?

(For the sake of disclosure, I haven't yet picked my candidate anyway. I'm not even close to deciding.)

 

[saywhatkid]

Apparently you did not read the full article as well. Here is another one that is written by Yahoo News

Is the lousy economy Obama's fault? Ask Joe Biden... - Yahoo! News

And if you throw a spin on Biden remarking that Obama made the economy better - just remember that the administration you are propping up caused the very first credit downgrade in our national history.

What
does
this
have
to
do
with
Cain
and
sexual
harrassment?

 

[jillio]

If it's proven that Cain sexually abused, attacked, or harassed any woman, then he's toast as a Presidential candidate, and I would not support him.

If and until such time, why should he be thrown under the bus?

(For the sake of disclosure, I haven't yet picked my candidate anyway. I'm not even close to deciding.)

So, he is automatically believed, and the women are automatically looked at as liars. Thank you for reinforcing the point I was making.

 

[Reba]

Distraction.

Yes, that's what the whole jump against Cain is. He was coming up too far, too fast. Gotta put him in his place.

Witnesses do not come into play in this case. This is the case of a man being accused of sexual harrassment by 4 women, and the assumption that their credibility needs to be questioned while his doesn't.

As I posted before, the credibility of all parties (alleged victim, witnesses, accused) must be considered.

 

[jillio]

Yes, that's what the whole jump against Cain is. He was coming up too far, too fast. Gotta put him in his place.


As I posted before, the credibility of all parties (alleged victim, witnesses, accused) must be considered.

Ahhh...so it couldn't possibly be that he had a skeleton in his closet, these women have told the truth, and he is guilty of trying to hide it?

 

[Reba]

So, he is automatically believed, and the women are automatically looked at as liars. Thank you for reinforcing the point I was making.

It's the principal of innocent until proven guilty. Nothing has been proven one way or the other.

Why should the accused be automatically looked at as a liar?

We don't even know what the other women said, so no one has called them liars.

There's simply a question about the one accuser. Some of the things she's said and done don't make sense.

 

[saywhatkid]

It has virtually nothing to do with the topic of this thread. I will tell you again: you are free to go create a bash Obama thread on your own. This thread is devoted to the topic of innappropriate behavior in the form of sexual harrassment as applied to Herman Cain.

Stop trolling this thread with your Obama hatred and nonsense. Stick to the topic or I will begin reporting your posts as trolling.

Amen. Seems every topic becomes open warfare on Obama, because they don't know what else to do. They can't find a decent candidate, and when they do, it ends up like this. How about a Cain/Palin ticket? That way, Palin can have a wild weekend with him, then write a book.

 

[jillio]

It's the principal of innocent until proven guilty. Nothing has been proven one way or the other.

Why should the accused be automatically looked at as a liar?

We don't even know what the other women said, so no one has called them liars.

There's simply a question about the one accuser. Some of the things she's said and done don't make sense.

So, do you apply the same "innocent until proven guilty" in terms of whether these women are telling the truth about their encounters with Herman Cain?

No one has called them liars? You might want to scroll back in this very thread.

 

[TXgolfer]

So you automatically assume that because he is a man running for the Repub candidacy, he is credible, but because she made an accusation against him, she isn't crediible. Some people don't question her credibility until there is reason to do so. Why is it that she is not assumed to have credibility until proven otherwise just as Cain is? And declaring bankruptcy does not speak to her credibility in beeing honest regarding an event that was sexually innappropriate.

You questioned the credibility of the two women who filed formal complaints and were paid hush money, as well. The fact is, you are assuming that Cain is innocent, and all 4 of these women are lying. Why would you be so quick to assume the women are lying and the man isn't?

BTW, he isn't running for President yet.

I'm making no assumptions about Cain or the women. When people make accusations without proof their credibility comes into play. It's that simple

No assumptions, just waiting for proof. The only assumption I have seen is your conviction of Cain as a "sexist pig"

 

[TXgolfer]

If it's proven that Cain sexually abused, attacked, or harassed any woman, then he's toast as a Presidential candidate, and I would not support him.

If and until such time, why should he be thrown under the bus?

(For the sake of disclosure, I haven't yet picked my candidate anyway. I'm not even close to deciding.)

Neither have/am I

 

[jillio]

I'm making no assumptions about Cain or the women. When people make accusations without proof their credibility comes into play. It's that simple

No assumptions, just waiting for proof. The only assumption I have seen is your conviction of Cain as a "sexist pig"

Oh, so you didn't play into the "OMG, she had a tax lien! OMG, she declared bankruptcy!" game? Right.

The very minute the news broke, you began looking for any reason you could find to discredit the accusers. Speaks for itself.

 

[Reba]

Ahhh...so it couldn't possibly be that he had a skeleton in his closet, these women have told the truth, and he is guilty of trying to hide it?

Anything's possible but we don't have all the facts. It's also possible that he didn't do anything wrong.

Sometimes women do lie. I'm not saying it about these women. Remember Tawana Brawley and Crystal Gail Mangum (Duke lacrosse team)?

 

[TXgolfer]

So, he is automatically believed, and the women are automatically looked at as liars. Thank you for reinforcing the point I was making.

Shorter: Innocent until proven guilty

 

[saywhatkid]

The very minute the news broke, you began looking for any reason you could find to discredit the accusers. Speaks for itself.

Reminds me of the OWS thread.

 

[TXgolfer]

So, do you apply the same "innocent until proven guilty" in terms of whether these women are telling the truth about their encounters with Herman Cain?

No one has called them liars? You might want to scroll back in this very thread.

Can you point to a post that called the women liars?

 

[Reba]

So, do you apply the same "innocent until proven guilty" in terms of whether these women are telling the truth about their encounters with Herman Cain?

Like I posted, question everyone involved.

No one has called them liars? You might want to scroll back in this very thread.

I didn't call them liars. I'm not responsible for other people's posts. I'm not the posting police.

 

[jillio]

Anything's possible but we don't have all the facts. It's also possible that he didn't do anything wrong.

Sometimes women do lie. I'm not saying it about these women. Remember Tawana Brawley and Crystal Gail Mangum (Duke lacrosse team)?

Possible, but not very probable given what we do know and the number of women who have made the same accusation.

Sometimes women do lie. Sometimes men lie. The whole point is the assumption that the man in this case is telling truth, despite the fact that he has recovered some memories he claimed not to have had when the case first broke, and despite the fact that 4 women have made accusations strikingly similar. Still, the questions are all in regard to the credibility of the women, not to the credibility of the man. Fact is, it is just as likely that the man in this case is lying.

 

[Reba]

Can you point to a post that called the women liars?

It's not even necessary to scroll back (very time consuming). That's what the "Search this Thread" function is for.

 

[jillio]

Like I posted, question everyone involved.


I didn't call them liars. I'm not responsible for other people's posts. I'm not the posting police.

Ah, but you said, "no one". I was simply replying that they have been called liars, both by implication and description.

 

[jillio]

Can you point to a post that called the women liars?

Read your own posts. The implication is glaring. Why would you even bother to question credibility if you did not intend to imply dishonesty now?