Cain passes lie detector test

[Xavier_Onassis]

Perhaps Cain simply has a taste for a specific sort of woman. Perhaps others acceded to his demands.

A woman who has been hit on as Bialek was would probably not go along with the "innocent until proven horndog" bit. There are more of these than you suspect.

We shall see how this works out. I say he loses.

[sirs]

<<But as I told him, I'll ask the police officers, in my ride along, if finding the truth is not a part, if not an integral part, of what the Police do, and I'll report back on the answer>>

Your question as phrased is totally worthless, as I previously informed you, and on the GIGO principle, any answer to that question will be equally worthless.

The hell its not....."But that is exactly what you just don't seem to understand.  It is not necessary for them to find out what the truth is.".  Your whole line of irrationalization, in an attempt to discredit lie detectors, and law enforcement using them, is that the Police don't need, actually not even even neccesary to ascertain the truth

So, I will ask them.....is it or is it not necessary for the Police to find out what the truth is, and who is or isn't telling them the truth.  Your claim is that it is not.  I'll find out directly from the source, if you are right, or the rest of the rational world is

[BT]

A woman who has been hit on as Bialek was would probably not go along with the "innocent until proven horndog" bit. There are more of these than you suspect.

My guess is they wouldn't be voting in a GOP primary. Women who judge men as a group would probably be Democrats.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Why would Democratic women judge men as a group and not Republican women? That makes little sense.

The results will be seen in the primaries.

Cain might lose for reason other than being a horndog. There is rather a lot to dislike about him.

[BT]

Because Republicans view people as individuals wheras democrats lok as people as members of a group.

I see Herman Cain as a conservative who is black.

You see him as a traitor to his race, an Uncle Tom sellout. The only way that happens is if you slot him in a group and have expectations of behavior from that group.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Because Republicans view people as individuals whereas democrats look as people as members of a group.

Gimme a break! All I ever here in here is "you Liberals" this and "you Liberals" that.

I do not oppose Cain because he is an uncle Tom. I oppose Cain because he is a blowhard who could never get along with Congress and a crackpot whose 999 plan would raise my taxes and those of all save the wealthiest. I do not want to listen to Cain blow off in every evening news show about how people will not go along with his crackpot ideas.

People of all political persuasions regard people they do not know as members of a group: to some degree this is accurate: Germans like drinking beer: Norwegians like eating lutefisk: Jews often avoid eating shrimp. It is not accurate to suppose that all stereotypes are 100% accurate.
We will learn whether Republicans want Cain to be their nominee in the promaries. We MAY learn how women voted, if there are a sufficient number of exit polls.

Every pollster of every party divides voters up into groups and and subgroups makes assumptions about what will appeal to each group and major subgroup, and advertises accordingly. They do this because it works, and it works as accurately for Democrats as for Republicans.

 Some people learn to recognize that each individual is an individual and does not march in lock step with a group. But this is pretty much useless as a campaign tool.

I see Herman Cain as a Black guy who calls himself a conservative who thinks he wants to be president who is also a blowhard and a crackpot.

[BT]

So he is no longer considered an Uncle Tom, by you?

[Michael Tee]

<<A woman who has been hit on as Bialek was would probably not go along with the "innocent until proven horndog" bit. There are more of these than you suspect.>>

Any attractive woman (and my take on Bialek is that she was more likely than not a real looker back in the day) has been hit on multiple times in her life by horndogs just like Cain and knows the score.  Even semi-attractive women get hit on.  She knows that two women got about 80K in settlement after the Perv was gone, she knows that four accusers all launched at him from the same company where he was CEO.  She knows he lied four times in two days before lawyering up.  She knows some quack junk scientist professed to distinguish truth from lies by studying videotaped speech and she knows that 's bullshit.

I'm with XO on how most women will vote on this Perv.  Everything BUT the VSA shows him to be guilty, nobody is going to allow some bullshit quackery to throw them off that easily.

Why didn't he get nailed at his other job locations?  Was he CEO?  Was he just feeling his way into power?  Maybe he only started his career as a perv when he felt more secure in his position.  Maybe the women he harassed in his other jobs didn't have the courage to come forward.  Just look at the hatchet job the Tribune did on Bialek if you want to know why women don't come forward.  Half of it was pure bullshit (the anonymous quotes from a "friend,"the ludicrous claims that she was poor, harried by creditors and forced twice into bankruptcy.  Welcome to the club, only most people aren't lucky enough to see their fortunes splashed across the front pages of the nation AND the blogosphere.

He's scum, and I think most women are savvy enough from their everyday experiences to realize that.

[Xavier_Onassis]

I might vote for a Black man considered an Uncle Tom by at least some Black people. In fact, I am sure that there are many who consider Obama to be an uncle Tom. That is not really a big deal with me.

Let's just let the primaries decide whether he gets to make it to the Bigtime. Maybe we will learn how women voted. I am not a woman, so I can only speculate.

[BT]

How do we know there were 4 accusers?

How do we know that Bialek is not counted twice?

[Xavier_Onassis]

So there are three or four.

It really makes no difference, since there will be no trial.

Let the primary voters decide.

This matter is getting boring.

[BT]

My post was directed towards Mikey since he was the one making the claim.

I know what your position is and ultimately i agree that GOP primary voters will make the final decision.

[Michael Tee]

XO's quite right, three is more than enough to hang the guy.  It's hard enough to get one woman to come forward (witness the hatchet job on Sharon Bialek) two would seal the deal and three is icing on the cake.

We know there were four because Bialek said she was coming forth for the first time, whereas the third accuser came forward at the same time as the two who settled but decided not to make any claim, undoubtedly out of fear of being treated by the press the same way as Bialek.  It's very daunting to be subjected to shit-smearing attacks featuring anonymous "friends" and their quotes plus your whole personal financial history laid out for inspection.  Disgusting is the word for it, but not surprising coming from that sleazeball perv.

Four witnesses or three, a pack of lies coming out of the Hermster and an 80K settlement, plus Cain's ass out the door in under three months.

Common sense alone tells you his chances of being innocent are down under one per cent, which is where the  "Hail Mary" quackery of a gratuitous VSA comes in.  At this point, what's the dumb schmuck got to lose?

[BT]

We know there were four because Bialek said she was coming forth for the first time

Bennett had appeared on The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell last night and mentioned the phone call from the mysterious “Sharon.” “I had contact with a woman named Sharon in Chicago the last five days. I don’t know if it’s the same Sharon because I never got her last name. The Sharon I had contact with left a voicemail in my office one night indicating she had been harassed by Herman Cain while he was with the National Restaurant Association,” Bennett said. “When I called her back the next day, she said she had decided not to pursue it further. I then called her again yesterday to advise her that she could give her information confidentially if she wanted to. She said she’d think about it and let me know. I have not heard from her since then. It may be the same woman who spoke out today.”

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/sharon-bialek-evades-question-of-whether-shed-previously-called-lawyers-of-other-cain-accusers/

These calls came around the same time the AP reported about the anonymous 3rd person.

[Michael Tee]

OK so it's three.  Three women in one company with the same story, one who didn't want to come out fully when the other two launched claims, now deciding to come forward when Herm the Perv starts slagging the first two.   

I don't think there's going to be a real woman in the country (apart from Coulter-type columnists, politicians and GOP functionaries) who are going to be fooled by Cain - - and that's just plain common sense.  They'll look at the women complaining, look at Cain's 4-lies-in-3-days performance, look at the 80K settlement that Cain wasn't even left long enough in office to approve and put all the pieces together.  Good luck, horn-dog - -  let's see now if you've got that Clinton Teflon or not.