What If Herman Cain Did It?

We still don’t know what Herman Cain did or didn’t do, and there’s a good chance we never will.  But this much is for certain:  the story is no longer what it used to be.

It used to be a story with unnamed sources and unnamed allegations.  What did Herman Cain supposedly do?  Who knows?  Then Sharon Bialek came forward.  Now we have a real person publicly making what she says are real allegations.  If true, this is bad news for Herman Cain.

Unless, of course, his conservative supporters suddenly don’t care about such things.

Herman Cain says it’s all a lie.  And he says it with conviction.  But then, Bill Clinton also said it was all a lie.  And he also said it with conviction.

Back then, liberals, especially liberal feminists, humiliated themselves by either standing up for Clinton or looking the other way — despite allegations that he exposed himself to a low-level state worker in Arkansas when he was governor … groped a married woman in the White House …  raped a respected businesswoman in a Little Rock hotel room while he was the state attorney general.

How could they abandon him?  He was for abortion rights and that, apparently was more important than anything he probably did to those women.  Liberals – a lot of them anyway — took their precious liberal values and threw them in the garbage.   You can’t take people seriously after they do that.

Now, I hope conservatives, who also have values, don’t do the same.

It would be wrong to abandon Herman Cain based on what we know so far, especially given his unequivocal denial of the charge made by Ms. Bialek, whose lawyer is the publicity junkie Gloria Allred, a woman who never met a microphone or camera she didn’t like.  It’s something noble that his friends are sticking by him during his time of trouble. But if it starts to look like Herman Cain did more than he’s so far been willing to acknowledge, then it would be wise for conservatives to stand by their values — not by Herman Cain.  Or else they will be no better than those pathetic liberals who covered for Bill Clinton.

Bernie's Next Column.

Enter your email and find out first.

  • rider237

    someone asked my how i felt about Cain after these accusations. honestly, of all the things that could be claimed, sexual harassment bothers me least.
    why? because it’s a subjective claim. yes, there are guidelines, but it comes down to what a person feels. if you feel you are harassed, you are.

    it drives everyone crazy. i had a boss freak out over something that happened to me, and it was something that i had not given a thought to. as a supervisor in the military, civilian job, and the national disaster relief agency i work for, i have had to deal with the claim more times than i care to remember. let a good old boy from Oklahoma put his arm around a bra burner from New York…and then call her darlin’, and the world comes to a screeching halt while we counsel and generate reams of paperwork.

    sexual harassment does happen. it can be very distressing when it does. however, my experience is that most cases are either due to twitchiness, or the desire to stick the hand into the deep pocket.

  • Adrian Vance

    Our primary sex organ is the brain and there is no greater aphrodisiac than money and power. Especially is this true for very successful black men. Their women are very aggressive and when they find a guy who is as affable as Mr. Cain and is that successful they get one thing in mind. And, anyone who has taken PE in college knows how the black guys are equipped. None of this is an excuse for bad behavior, but isn’t it ironic how the Demcoratics go nuts with the thought of a conservative being sexually generous.

    See The Two Minute Conservative at http://adrianvance.blogspot.com has political analysis, science and humor. Now in the top 2% on Kindle.

  • Wil Burns

    Hey Bernie, Bill O’Reilly’s ‘Lincoln’ book is banned from Ford’s Theatre store, because of ‘mistakes.’ Is there any chance you might ask him about this, at you next ‘Bernie Segment’ on the Factor?

    • Bob Hadley

      Where did you hear this? And what mistakes were in O”Reilly’s book?

      • Wil Burns

        Bill O’Reilly’s ‘Lincoln’ book banned from Ford’s Theatre because of ‘mistakes’


        • Tim Ned

          This is a half truth. The Ford Historical society sells the book in its gift shop. But the park service has chosen not to. I have found direct quotes as to why the gift shop sells it but not why the park service chose not to. If someone can find me a quote directly from a park service book store representative I would appreciate it. I have read many books on the civil war and Lincoln. I have not read O’Reilly’s book but I intend too. I have determined over the study of these two subjects there are many theories, positions, opinions, etc., pertaining to this period in history. If O’Reilly brings up new opinions or theories he is in good company with other respected writers of the same subject matter. I also understand that the book does not use footnotes or references. If this is true I could understand the decision. What’s interesting about this issue is that one organization chose to sell the book and the other didn’t. Decisions both organizations had the right to make.

    • ph16

      `Ah Will Burns, Bernie’s long time detractor, for someone that you don’t agree with at all really, you definitely are one who sticks around here a lot.

  • Paul Richard Strange, Sr.

    I apologize. I mis-spoke. Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky was not child molestation. I thought that my exaggeration would not be taken literally. But, in all fairness to President Clinton, I would not want anyone to seriously think of him as a pedophile, regardless of what I think of him. Again, I was using what I thought to be self-evident hyperbole. In no way would I actually want any citizen to think that even my worst enemy is a pedophile! I apologize.

  • Ron Kean

    I heard something interesting the other day.

    Women who are abused don’t joke and smirk about it. They may want to help others get through similar trauma but don’t wink an eye, dress up (hair over the eye) and advertise their misfortune in the Hollywood manner that we see today.

    They don’t unless there’s another agenda.

    • chuck.tatum

      well put.

      But this particular Gloria Allred client does not necessarily represent the other possible ‘victims’ attitudes or authenticity.

      But she couldn’t have made a worse first impression for this issue or complaint.

  • Ralph Hahn

    Bernie: If attorneys for the women charging Herman Cain with sexual inappropriateness DO persuade their clients to break their confidentiality agreements and join together in a joint news conference, wouldn’t these lawyers, their law firms and anyone else who may have played a part in convincing the women to ‘speak up’,be guilty of “tortious interference” and could be liable for damages whether Cain was lying or not?

    The CBS News/Brown & Williamson case comes to mind, and the Al Pacino/Russell Crowe movie “The Insider,” when “60 Minutes” producer Lowell Bergman was warned by a CBS corporate attorney that if the network had persuaded ousted B&W scientist Jeffrey Weigand to break his confidentiality, and reveal the contents of such an agreement, at the end of the day B&W would own CBS? In this case, couldn’t the women’s lawyers and anyone else who may have co-conspired to break the C.A.’s, be made liable to the National Restaurant Association and perhaps Cain himself? I’m not a lawyer and I don’t play one of TV, but I think this raises a bigger legal issue. And, perhaps this was a reason why the joint news conference hasn’t yet happened, and NOT because the women had scheduling conflicts? What say you?

  • Wil Burns

    Are you people ever going to wise up? Liberals are
    hoping your nominee will be Cain or Perry and especially Bachmann. You’re
    barking up the wrong tree….AGAIN! Look to the direction of GOP operators,
    namely Rove. He’s your culprit.

  • RecknHavic

    Herman Cain can end this and at the same time win the nomination. He should vow to take a lie detector test on live tv and challenge all of these women to show up and do the same.

    This would be bigger than Geraldo’s Al Capone’s vault. Im thinking pay-per-view.

    • EddieD_Boston

      I laughed out load at the Geraldo reference. I remember watching it live and the shock on his face when nothing was there. The amazing part is he is still on TV.

      • RecknHavic

        I make one little lie detector joke and a whole new freakin’ debate starts. Besides Eddie’s right, lets debate Geraldo bein on the air instead.

    • chuck.tatum

      Lie detectors are a LIE!

      • Ron Kean

        I think we should submit you to a lie detector test to determine if you really believe that lie detectors are a lie.

        • chuck.tatum

          Already took one 20 years ago, Ron. I know it didn’t “tell the truth” in my demonstration.

          I know you will not take my word for it, just do a little search on their admissibility in court and total debunking by scientific method for over 40 years. But the myth that a machine was created to uncover a person’s truthfulness was, and is false. And that is no lie.

          • Bob Hadley

            Lie detector tests have been deemed highly reliable, and are used by the FBI, CIA and police depts.

            Lie detector test results are frequently (but not always)inadmissible in criminal cases not because of the reliability factor but because they have been deemed to deprive a criminal defendant of his fundamental constitutional right to a trial by his peers.

            Courts have thought that juries might rubber stamp lie detector results. Because a jury cannot legally convict a criminal defendant based merely on probability, guilt based solely on a lie detector test result is contrary to basic criminal law.

            But, you’re right that lie detector tests can be inaccurate, especially if administered improperly and if not taken seriously by the subject. As with almost any test, there is a margin of error.

          • chuck.tatum

            Bob Hadley- I’m only guessing now, but I’ll bet you are, or know a friend who ever administered such sorcery.

            So what if FBI, police or any investigatory body uses lie detector’s? They also use psychic’s. You think imaginary information has a margin of error too?

            I’m not aware of any courts ever letting in lie detector’s into the courtroom record, unless the crime is the useless theft of one of the devices.

          • Bob Hadley


            First, your guess/bet is dead wrong. I have never administered a lie detector test and, to the best of my knowledge, neither have any of my friends, family members or relatives.

            BTW, your use of the term “sorcery” is misused. Sorcery explicitly involves appealing to the supernatural. Lie detector tests, regardless of its reliability, makes no appeal to the supernatual.

            Read United States v. Piccinona, 885 F.2d 1529 (Fla., 1989). In that case, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals held that lie detector results are admissible under certain conditions, including if administered by a trained professional and if there is a prior stipulation as to admissibility or if the results are used to corroborate or impeach a witness.

            Some jurisdictions are stricter and some are more liberal as to the admissibility of lie detector test results.

            You may be thinking of the Fry v. United States case of 1923. This case was used as per se indmissibilty of lie detector results. Since then, technology, training and case law have developed.

            Yes, police depts. and possibly the FBI and the CIA have used psychics. But this has been more out of desperation for quick leads to crimes requiring quick actions (e.g. missing children).

            These investigatory bodies routinely use lie detectors in hiring practices and conducting internal affairs. If psychics were routinely used in this manner, I doubt the practice would withstand a court challenge.

          • Bob Hadley

            First, your guess/bet is dead wrong. I have never administered a lie detector test and, to the best of my knowledge, neither has any of my friends, family members or relatives.

            BTW, your use of the term “sorcery” is misused. Sorcery explicitly involves appealing to the supernatural. Lie detector tests, regardless of reliability, makes no appeal to the supernatual.

            Read United States v. Piccinona, 885 F.2d 1529 (Fla., 1989). In that case, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals held that lie detector results are admissible under certain conditions, including if administered by a trained professional and if there is a prior stipulation as to admissibility or if the results are used to corroborate or impeach a witness.

            Some jurisdiction are stricter and some are more liberal as to the admissibility of lie detector test results.

            You may be thinking of the Fry v. United States case of 1923. This case was used as pro se indmissibilty of lie detector results. Since then, technology, training and case law have developed.

            Yes, police depts. and possibly the FBI and the CIA have used psychics. But this has been more out of desperation for quick leads to crimes requiring quick actions (e.g. missing children).

            These investigatory bodies routinely use lie detectors in hiring practices and conducting internal affairs. If psychics were routinely used in this manner, I doubt the practice would withstand a court challenge.

            With psychics, the question may be the margin of reliability, although I have heard anecdotally that in certain cases psychics’s accuracy has been more than random. But that’s entirely different from a generally accepted practice within the scientific community.

          • chuck.tatum

            OK, my guess that you knew anyone who practiced this profession was wrong.

            You are also correct, my usage of the word “sorcery” was in error, technically.

            If I threw a deck of cards out on a table and interpreted the results of the fallen cards as some prophesy, should anyone believe me? No. Why is reading human temps or pulse registers scratched out on some parchment any indication of truth? Is any of this falsifiable?

            Oh, how I wish it we so.

            An expert lie detector administrator called me a liar! And truth be my witness, I really did tell the TRUTH neither did he or his machine recognize that!

            And Bob, until I took that test and learned the tester’s interpretation of my answers, I really did believe in the lie detector.

            Bottom line It is my first hand exrience that the science of lie detectors is complete bs.

  • Homer

    When it comes to Clinton, you guys just don’t get it. Values are abstract. Here we’re talking about a real person.

    • David Davies

      Clinton’s values are sure abstract.

  • Paul Richard Strange, Sr.

    Cain is innocent….until proven guilty…I mean, really proven guilty!

    That’s the American (desired) preference.

    I have no use for any person who abuses authority in any company. But, this is a bunch of ridiculous nonsense that has no merit at all.

    Sadly, lies do work. No, Bernie, we’re not in danger of becoming just like the worshippers of Clinton. Conservatives don’t really bond with idols to that degree. If there is ever a shred of objective evidence that these gold-diggers are telling the truth, Conservatives will be asking Cain to exit with a resounding voice.

    That is radically different from the feminist worshippers of Billy Boy the Ole Child Molesting Clintonian!

    • Bob Hadley

      Are you saying Bill Clinton is a child molester? If so, what hard evidence do you have?

      And what do you mean by “really proven guilty”? You mean proven guilty in a court of law?

      If so, all the Democrats are still innocent. Clinton was never proven guilty in a court of law–not with Paula Jones, not with Monica, not with anyone. Also Anthony Weiner and John Edwards were never proven guilty in a court of law. Heck, Lee harvey Oswald was never proven guilty in a court of law, and neither was John Wilkes Booth.

      Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law is for our legal system. But, I agree with you that a public figure (or anyone) should not be subject to the meat grinder, aka the media circus, without hard evidence and just cause. Just because you hate someone or his politics is not just cause to smear him. Doing so only reveals your lack of self-respect.

      The MSM (including Fox News and other conservative media) should adhere to rigorous journalistic standards.

      • Ron Kean

        There is an analogy here. Paul says Clinton is a child molester and the natural reaction is for you to say ‘prove it’.

        In Herman Cain’s case, he is accused of whatever and instead of saying to the women, ‘prove it’, it’s up to him to disprove it.

        It’s like telling you to disprove Clinton is a child molester after everyone assumes Clinton’s guilt because of Paul’s accusation.

        • Bob Hadley

          Ron, Please read my post again. I think you’ll see that I was including everyone (including Herman Cain and Bill Clinton) under one standard. If Paul Richard had accused Cain of being a child molester, my reaction would have been identical.

          BTW, I do NOT think you should have to prove an allegation to air it, but there should be some hard evidence.

      • Drew Page

        Bob — In his above post, Mr. Paul R. Strange, Sr. said “Cain is innocent… until proven guilty…I mean, really proven guilty.” I think Mr. Stange and most others, including myself, would accept an admission of guilt from Mr. Cain as proof.

        Clinton admitted he lied under oath in his deposition for the Paula Jones trial. After pointing his finger in the face of the American public on TV and telling us all “one more time” that he “never had sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinski” and punctuating his sincere denial with the now famous lower lip bite, he ruefully admitted (after the ‘blue dress’ came out of the closet) that he did have a relationship “and it was wrong”. Two charges and two admissions. I think we all agreed that Mr. Clinton was “really proven guilty” by his own admission.

        • Bob Hadley

          The only lies Clinton was “really proven guilty” on were being alone with Monica having an innappropriate sexual relationship with Monica and lying in the Paula Jones deposition.

          And, BTW, he did NOT commit perjury, as confirmed by Judge Susan Wright (the judge in the Paula Jones case) in a later written decision. Clinton’s lies, told under oath, were not material to the Paula Jones case (and, accordingly, NOT perjury), which was dismissed by Judge Wright and the appeal of this dismissal was withdrawn.

          The charges I was refering to were the sexual harassment and rape charges that Bernie refers to above and that Paul Richard alludes to in his denunciation of various feminists.

          BTW, I think that Clinton probably did sexually harass Paula Jones. The rape charge, however, is dubious: Broderick’s story has major inconsistencies and David Mariness, Clinton’s pre-eminent biograhper with no axe to grind, says that rape is not consistent with Clinton’s M.O.

          • Drew Page

            Silly me. Here I thought the definition of perjury was ‘lieing under oath’. I have given depositions in legal cases and I have been told by prosecuting attorneys that such depositions are sworn statements, subject to the penalties of perjury. But what do they know. I’m sure Judge Susan Wright could straighten them out on that point.

          • Bob Hadley


            What the prosecutors told you was correct. ANY testimony or statement given under oath is SUBJECT to the penalty of perjury. But, to actually convict you of perjury, the prosecutor must show that the statement or testimony you gave was 1) factually false; 2) that you knew at the time that it was false; and 3) that it was a material falsehood.

            They typially don’t give you a nuanced explanation because they simply want you to tell the truth no matter what the question and don’t want to confuse matters with legalese.

  • Bette

    When Gloria Allred appeared on the scene, I tuned out everyting from then on. She’s a camera hog and supports just about anyone who’ll get her the coverage she wants. Where were these women when Herman Cain ran for other political offices? Hmmmm…me thinks I smell a rat!

  • Henry

    Did anyone notice when Bialek first appeared on camera she had on a red dress with a plunging neckline which revealed massive cleavage. Last night on camera she was wearing a very conservative black dress which covered everything.

    Maybe it’s just the man in me but I smell a rat…or something worse.

  • Jeannette

    Bernie: I am sick to death of the entire story — or stories.

    Is there a human alive, man or woman, who hasn’t done at least SOMEthing to want hidden from the view of the world?

    I would be willing to bet that every one of the candidates has SOMEthing he (and, of course, I must say she) would not like to come to light.

    This mess will forever be a part of Cain’s candidacy; there is no way to unring that bell now that we’ve all been subjected to some of the details, and it will ultimately affect the way some people vote.

    I still want to vote for someone else. That someone isn’t running.

  • the DA

    I find it amazing that the type of sexual harrassment claims being leveled against Herman Cain would cause even the slightest blip on the Richter scale of scandal. We live in the most blatantly oversexed culture imaginable that operates with nary a discouraging word from anyone. The porn industry holds conventions in Pasadena, CA for Christ’s sake. No-talent, famous-for-being-famous airheads become millionaire icons for having someone post their sex tape on Youtube. Well-respected actors and actresses regularly take off their clothes, and play sex scenes for the sake of “art”. We have become a society beyond any shame whose ex-president engaged in sexual activity that might have landed an ordinary man in state prison. And yet we’re shocked…yes, shocked…that Herman Cain might have misconstrued a come-on from a blond babe looking for a job, and made an awkwardly blatant pass at her. I’m willing to believe it might have happened, but not quite in the context as it has been presented. At least when she said “no” he understood the meaning of the word. Oh the horror!

    • Cmacrider

      to: the DA

      Couldn’t have said it better myself. Thank you for reminding the general public of the feigned shock and hypocracy as they got off the plane from their min vacation in Las Vegas and heard of this latest allegations against Mr. Cain.

  • Drew Page

    It is possible that Herman Cain’s denials are lies. It is also possible that the Ms. Bialek is lieing. Right now, I tend to believe Mr. Cain.

    Mr. Cain is not my preferred candidate, Newt Gingrich is. However, unless it is proven that Cain is guilty of these allegatiopns, I would support him if he won the Republican nomination. If he is proven guilty, I would not support him.

    Unfortunately, politics are conducted in the court of public opinion, where there are no protections provided in a court of law. Accusers can remain annoymous, their accusations can be repeated over and over without a shred of proof, the accused has no right to cross examine the accuser or even know who the accuser is. I would like to see both Ms. Bialek and Mr. Cain volunteer to take lie detector tests. So far only Cain has agreed to do so, albeit under certain “conditions”, which he didn’t identify. As far as I know, Ms. Bialek has not volunteered to take a lie detector test under any conditions. I, for one, would love to see the results.

  • J. Vega

    I think Cain missed an opportunity with the first question in the press conference. He was asked if he would submit to a lie detector test. I think he should have immediately asked that reporter if they had made the same demand of Sharon Bialek, who came out publicly. Then he could have pointed out that in the U.S. we believe in innocence until proven guilty, so asking the accused to submit to a lie detector test but not the accuser shows obvious media bias. Then he could have said that he would submit to such a test if the same were to be given to the accuser first.
    The reporter would have been changed from a person making an attack with that question to one defending himself from an appearance of obvious bias. Cain may have missed a golden opportunity to demonstrate press bias.

  • Steve

    Advice For Herman Cain

    He didn’t ask me for advice, but I feel compelled to share
    some sincere advice with him anyway. You want to be
    president, Mr. Cain? Then there’s only one thing for you
    to do.

    Simply jump ship and join the Democrat Party and move to Massachusetts. Instantly your political troubles will be over.

    You will be hailed as a hero by most Democrats and the media will suddenly stop writing so many articles about what a sex pervert they think you must be. After all, former
    President Clinton was re-elected to a second term after defiling our White House by receiving personal “services” from under the kneehole in his Oval Office desk and leaving
    DNA on a certain blue dress. They went way beyond forgiving him, they elevated him to icon status.

    And just in case it comes out that you actually killed one of those girls years ago, don’t worry. The media will protect you like they did Senator Ted Kennedy. Being the cause
    of death for an innocent young female is no barrier to becoming a media-adored, long-serving senator from Massachusetts and you, too, will soon be revered and memorialized as The Lion of the Senate. Too bad General
    Motors no longer manufacturers Oldsmobiles. Apparently they were the perfect cars to use while slipping away from a party with a young woman who was not your wife. Maybe you could find a used one somewhere.

    Oh yes, to complete your escape from all these silly charges, hire James Carville to make statements like “Drag a hundred-dollar bill through a trailer park, you never know what you’ll find.” A few trashy statements like that from Carville and the aging blond from Chicago will be quickly relegated to Paula Jones status. Don’t remember her? See what I mean?

    I don’t pretend to know what you did or didn’t do. But in order to get by with whatever people think you might have done, you must become a Democrat. After all if you’re a Democrat, cheating on your wife in the Oval Office, no less, and lying under oath are proven ways to not only get elected to the
    presidency, but also to a second term. Killing a female who is not your wife is the road to Senate hero status.

    Mr. Cain, your only problems are that (1) you’re a member of the wrong political party, (2) you don’t live in Massachusetts, and (3) you haven’t hired James Carville to run your campaign. Do those three things and you’re a shoe-in for the White House. Sure, the Republicans and American people of principle (from 49 states) will instantly hate you, but it’s not all bad. You’ll be in the White House and the people of Massachusetts will adore you.

    What more could you ask for?

    • Brad G

      Ha ha…that’s really great advice…and it should work!

  • IndependentLasVegas

    Obama posse loves what’s going on..and Obama’s legions in the media are lynching a black man with BO’s approval.

    My concern is Cain debating skills are horrible and he doesn’t prepare/study..he shows up at the debates and flaps his lips..

    Even Obama without telepompter can out debate Cain. Cain needs to study or drop out , if he is serious. You can only use the CEO, I’m the smart one in the room so many times. He uses the wrong facts and he can’t remember and he wants to be president? Then show us where your brains are at…

  • Bruce A

    Gloria never seems to care much about the facts, just the publicity.

  • Florida Jim

    If Herman Cain says he didn’t do any sexual harrassment, ever I believe him. Gloria Alred is a left-wing radical who will litigate anything just for the publicity.

  • Fred Pasek

    This whole thing is driving me insane, because the damn media is covering this instead of properly vetting the candidates. Mr. Cain was just on c-span to debate Gingrich, and it was clear he doesn’t know a whole heck of a lot about the government. The guy had to deffer on questions and let Newt go first because he had no clue what they were talking about. Yet the media puts a spotlight on this instead. And it’s the “right wing” media that’s at fault here, because they’re the ones the Republican voters depend on to educate them on the candidates. We don’t have press credentials, we can’t ask the candidates questions. People are making their minds up about this guy based on whether or not they believe he did this. That’s absurd.

    In 2008, during the first debate between Hillary and Obama, the moderator gave Hillary just about every question first. She gave long, detailed, thought out responses, and then they move over to Obama, and all he did was nod and say, “Yep, what she said, only I’d do it better.” I knew he was full of crap. Everyone with any political acumen knew it. But the liberal media covered for him and never pressed him to expose his inexperience. The same thing’s happenning with the conservative media and Mr. Cain. He did the same thing. He doesn’t know a damn thig about the government. Electing him right now would be like hiring a football coach who knows little or nothing about football. Yeah, he can say “We’ll be agressive and we know we don’t score many points, so we’ll have to work on that.” But to people who know football, that’s not enough. They’d want to know, who’s he going to hire to advise him. Nobody is asking Herman Cain who he’ll hire to advise him.

    This has to come out now. Not in the general election. We have to know now, and we can’t depend on the liberal media to ask those questions. They’re holding those questions close to their chest because they’re drooling at the possibility of catching Herman Cain the Republican nominee with a series of questions he can’t answer. The more they can ask in a row, the more they’ll play the clips as proof that he is not qualified to be president. Thios media LOVES to smugly point out how brilliant Obama is. They’ll play that up, and then show those clips of Cain in juxtaposition as proof that Obama is sooo much smarter than Cain.

    We have to know now. Who’s going to be advising him. Is it the Koch brothers and their friends? Republicans will like that. Will it be people from the Heritage Foundation? Mark Levin types? Great, let’s get it out in the open now so Republican voters can make an informed decision instead of flying by the seat of our pants. Because, I can’t vote for this guy without knowing who his advisors will be. I know Gingrich will be his own man if elected. I don’t know with Cain. Just ask the Democrats about how surprised they were when Obama pulled Van Jones out of his pocket. Even staunch Dems frowned and threw up in their mouths a little.

    This is absurd. Vet this guy properly!

    • Kathie Ampela

      Excellent point, Fred, I agree 100%. I haven’t been impressed at all with Cain’s debate performances and I’m surprised he’s risen as high as he has in the polls. I’m scared to death of how he will do in a debate with Obama..the liberal press will make mincemeat of him. It’s absolutely absurd to decide on Cain whether these allegations are true or not.

  • Maureen

    It would be terrible to abandon Cain just because some women made allegations. That would embolden the democrats to make “charges” all day long,whether they were true or not. In the case of Weiner,it was proven that he was sending pictures of himself,sometimes to minors. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty and I hate these lousy smears.

    • Ken Hansen

      Remember when Dems used GOP rules to kick Tom DeLay out of speaker position because of allegations, nothing more? Press ignored Dems failure to hold themselves to a similar standard.

  • Blakely1

    I believe that many of us have underestimated the persistence of the Democratic destruction Machine.
    Now , I fully expected them to come up with some Anita Hills, especially when they had no “victim?
    come forward. What surprises me is the caliber of the witness & attorney. Our blonde beauty comes across more like a Mayflower Madame than a respected businesswoman & Allred must be an embarassment to all female lawyers.
    I am not really a Cain supporter, but we should not rush to judgement on the basis of obscure information, that is 13 years old.After all she is unemployed & has a lot to gain. She has been on all the talk shows & there is always that Book posibility.Watch the Democrats when they start to fawn all over her, in order to legitaimize her claim.

    • Ken Hansen

      I fail to see how this turns into anything bigger than an article or a 5 minute video clip, can’t see how she’s gonna profit money-wise. She’ll get some notoriety, but she won’t get her full Andy Warhol guaranteed ’15 minutes of fame’ IMHO.

      • Drew Page

        Let’s wait and see. I think Ms. Bialek sees a payday at the end of all this, from one source or another. As for “hiring” Gloria Allred, Ms. Bialek is currently unemployed, and admits to relying on her fiance` for financial support (who also,BTW, is unemployed). So where does she get the money to pay Gloria Allred? Seems like Ms. Allred limits her ‘pro bono’ work to these high profile “he said – she said” scandals. Anyone know how much ‘pro bono’ work she has done in East L.A. or Watts?

  • Ken Hansen

    Cain’s lone publicly-named accuser lost all credibility when she decided to lecture Herman Cain on what he should do, and her decision to speak for women she doesn’t know, about actions she never witnessed, and her decision to hire Ms. Allred all paint her as a political opportunist, nothing more.

    Add in Bill Kurtis’ views on the matter (lot’s of baggage, roles probably reversed), and her fantastical story (she essentially thwarted a rape in the car by informing Mr. Cain that she had a boyfriend? He attacked her, then she asks for a ride home – and gets it? She couldn’t stop smiling when she was recounting this ordeal? Etc.) and it becomes hard to take her serious.

    If, as alleged, this was a chronic problem while Cain was at the National Restaurant Association, why aren’t staffers spilling out of the woodwork confirming the stories? Is the National Restaurant Association really THAT GOOD at keeping secrets? They have several hundred employees, the lack of leaks is curious IMHO.

    Did he do it! I dunno, but do I find what I’ve been told convincing? Not really.

  • joedee1969
  • Ken Besig, Israel

    I am far more concerned that any woman can come forward over a decade after the alleged sexual harassment event and with the help of a publicity seeking lawyer and the professional media, publicly smear any man whose only defence is that he didn’t do it.
    This is immoral, unfair, and deeply harmful, and it can happen to any man, any time, and anywhere.

  • Sam

    I watched sharon bialek paid to lie through her teeth,in front of all that media&in every interview!!how can u ppl b so f*****g stupid 2 believe what even white females(bec.woman ‘ll never even think of destroying a real man like Mr.Cain!) say anymore ?!!




    • Barry

      So now we know who Obama really fears


    If Herman Cain had been convicted by a jury of his peers in a criminal court of law and found guilty of sexual misconduct, that would be relevant. Short of that standard, I don’t give two flea farts what anybody has to say.

    It’s sleazy politics — nothing more.

  • EddieD_Boston

    Amazing. I was watching CNN at the gym today and it was Cain for an hour straight. Unfortunately, the sound was turned down and I couldn’t hear what they were saying. Did Cain rape Juanita Broderick?

    • Terry Walbert

      No. Cain is black and conservative. That’s enough for a liberal media lynching.

  • Terry Walbert

    I think everyone knows why this “charge” is coming out now. It’s Long Dong Silver, the Coke cans, and the pubic hairs all over again.

    Let the accusers specify what “exactly” Cain is supposed to have done. Until then, I don’t want to hear about it.

    Maybe the radical feminists in Congress should establish a special committee to investigate charges. The first question could be, “Are you now or have you ever been a sexual harrasser?”

  • Ron Kean

    I just caught your clip with Bill O’Reilly and I have one question. Instead of saying ‘those people’ at MSNBC, CNN etc. have no clue, why don’t you name them? You probably know who they are.

    When you say ‘they’ have no clue,… who? If you call them out, would they have more incentive to change? Are there just too many? Isn’t there a central core of muckily mucks and head honchos?

    They just might call you and buy you lunch and ask questions and maybe learn something.

    • Wil Burns

      Ron, Maybe it’s Bernie, that doesn’t have a clue. Ever think of that? Oh, and as for Bill O’Reilly. too bad Sharon Bialek didn’t have a tape recording, like Andrea Mackris did!

      • Ron Kean

        Bernie is one of most intuitive media people today. He single-handedly exposed the media for what we accept is true today. It’s overwhelmingly liberal. Just look at how it’s reporting the disgusting, vile and illegal OWS reality. Sympathetic and encouraging.

        You come back here because you like him and us. Admit it.

        • Wil Burns

          Bernie?? yes…you, not so much!

          • Ron Kean

            :- )

  • Glen Stambaugh

    As a Cain fan in this election, I’m feeling pretty deflated. The old claim was that he was unelectable. Apparently that was false enough to bring out the big guns. Whether these allegations are true or not, the effect is the same: an unelectable Cain. If the charges are true, it’s sad and a loss of great potential, but I will not support such a candidate. If the charges are false it’s beyond outrageous, especially because Clinton survived worse as a candidate on the liberal side.

    • Terry

      What is sad is that you have already allowed this type of media driven character deflamation to affect they way you support or feel about Mr Cain. My question to you is “will you allow your vote to be munipulated by a headline driven media and dirty politics?”

      • Glen Stambaugh

        I’m keeping an open mind, but certainly the new landscape effects my outlook. We can’t pretend his candidacy hasn’t been effected. I wish him the best and hope I can continue to support him.

  • Will Swoboda

    I’m just not too sure of this woman’s motive at this time. If Cain in fact insinuated that if he got laid, she’s got the job, then I stand by my values and believe that Mr. Cain should not be president. But if this turns out to be a bunch of BS, then someone should pay dearly for destroying the character of an apparently good man.
    Will Swoboda

  • Paul Courtney

    Gloria’s newest client does look straight from central casting, so this shouldn’t hurt Herman. Bet it will though, demonstrating once again that no sane person would run for Pres (D or R). Mitch Daniels had to consider what would be said about his family, leaving us “anyone but Mitt” types with one less option, one halting step closer to Mitt. And by every current account, Mitt has no sex scandals in his past. Think that’ll stop Gloria from making one up, say early October, 2012?

  • Kathie Ampela

    I agree with the other post on this thread. I’m highly skeptical of this woman suddenly coming forward after 14 years. Her story sounds outrageously over the top. Now there are supposedly more women coming forward with stories. But I blame the 24 hour news cycle and the internet for the speed that this has caught on. I believe that Bernie’s column is premature. I don’t think Herman Cain is qualified to be President and these allegations have nothing to do with it. But there is a real danger here of assassinating the character of an innocent man before we know what any of the facts are..the story is unfolding too quickly. Anyone can come forward with a b.s. story about anybody and the person will be convicted in the court of public opinion before we even know what happened.

    • Joe noname

      How does one “reach under her skirt” and ” pull her head down toward (his) crotch” at the same time AND drive at the same time?
      Sounds highly implausible.

  • Smorkingapple

    I’m sure it didn’t bother you guys one bit when Allred was on the side of the chick in the Weiner scandal. When she’s involved there’s lots of smoke and almost always fire.

    • Paul Courtney

      I don’t remember Gloria arising in that affair, though I’ll admit to intentionally ignoring parts of the Weiner scandal. Proves the blind squirrel rule, she occasionally gets one right.

    • Kathie Ampela

      Speak for yourself. I thought the media spent way too much time on Weinergate, too. (Summertime, slow news cycle) I don’t trust ambulance chasers like Allred. Another woman has come forward since yesterday (allegedly). Why wait until Cain is at the top of the polls?

      It’s feels like 1998 all over again…a feeding frenzy over a sex scandal meanwhile, a national security situation is blowing past everyone (Iran nukes anyone?) Wonder what would have happened if the MSM ignored Monicagate and paid more attention to Bin Laden and friends, in those days..hmmm…

    • Ron Kean

      Pictures are pictures.

    • Barry

      You must not know much about Allred. When’s there’s smoke there’s almost always a smokescreen and rarely more.

      She operates much in the way of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton but is an equal opportunity accuser for publicity and profit. Shakespeare saw right through her.

  • Waterlyly

    One issue I have is that the one woman who comes forward fits the stereotype that every man of color supposedly wants to bed. Another issue, she stayed quiet for 13 years, why now? And why only after he is up in the polls? It makes it very suspicious. But the biggest issue I have is that Gloria Allred is her counsel. Anyone who goes for Gloria immediately raises the hackles on my neck.

    I hope the allegations are false. Many men in positions of power are charged with sexual harassment usually just because they are men in positions of power. But if they prove to be true, then yes, I stand by my values.

    • Nancye

      Another issue, she stayed quiet for 13 years, why now?


      Indeed! If you waited that long to speak, why now? To besmirch and try to destroy a person, of course.

      Does anyone remember what they wore 13/14 years ago. This bimbo is just that – a bimbo trying to get famous and make a little (?) money by lying like a rug.

      Nice try libs!!! :(

      • Wil Burns

        Nancy, Cain wasn’t running to become president, before. That is scaring everyone…it was time to act!