Herman Cain and the AP, AT&T, Yahoo, CNN and Mainstream media Lirars and Racists (Some of the Most Despicable People Who Ha e Ever Lived)

"Cain says he won't answer questions about harrassment claims"


That is the disgraceful AT&T/Yahoo featured headline this Saturday night. You will note that the headline is a LIE. But waht an yoiu expect from the DISHONEST RACISTS of AT&T/Yahhoo (boycott AT&T and Yahooo) and the Associted Press. The actual story, of course (if read carefuly, as the DISHHONEST people of the AP dhont want you to read it), discloses that the headline is a blatant LIE. What Cain has said, as I advised (if he will only keep to it, and make every "answer" to such a question an ATTAACK on the media) him to say, is that he will answer NO MORE questions about the "allegations". Notice that Cain has been asked NO questions about FACTS, but only about ANONYMOUS allegations He actually answered way too many of those questions, when he should have demanded FACTS from the very beginning--while dentying that he ever "sexually harrassed" anyone. Cain has answered too many totally SPECULATIVE "questionis"" bsed on NO FACTRS at all. See my prvious articles about the attmepted RACIST LYNCHING (figuratively speaking) oif Herman Cain by the mainstream media. I stand by every word I have written (at least those words that were not typos). The people of the mainstream media are some of the most DESPICABLE lpeople who ahve ever lived. Yes, that includes ALL of the epoople of the AP (my Sodom and Gomorrah search for an honest, competent AP reporter still being a complete bust), Wolf Blitzer, Anderson Cooper, KyraPhillips, the truly despicable Gloria Borger, David Gerge, and all of teh rest of the people of CNN, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, CBS, the New York Times, theLos Angeles Times, the Chicago Trib;une, Newsweek, Time, Politico...oh, why g on. You knokw the list. Yep. this includes MOST of the people of the unfair and unbalanced network, whose "coverage"of this NOTHING Cain "scandal" has been an utter diisgrace. That "coverage" alone has fully justified my call to BOYCOTT the unfair and unbalanced network.


Yep. Cain has already ANSWEEWD the "qauestions" about the "allegations". There is nothing he can add at this point. More questiosns lmerely represent an attempt to DESTROY Herman Cain, which this whole ridiculous SMEAR has been (based on NO FACTS, and vague add ANONYMOUS "allegations" of unspecified "inappropriate conduct". The media is trying to make Cain do the imporssible: make Cain PROVE that he is "innocent" of EVERY PPOSSIBLE CHARGE that MIGHT be made (without specifying the "charge" OR the person making it). The hypocriates of the mainstream media, of couurse, apply exactly the OPOPOSITE "standard" for LEFTIST DEMOCRAS: requirring almost ABSOLUTE PPOOF of atual wrongdoing before they will pay much, if any, attention to any "charge". See this blog's articles over the past few days.


You doubt me on this? Never do that. Don'g even doubt me when I say that these (the people of the mainstream media)) are some of the most despicable people who have ever lived (always excluding serial murderers, rpaists, terrorists and the like). All I have to do is pint to the "reasoning" of teh despicable AP as to why Cain shoulld keep answering an INFINITE number of the SAME questions over and over again, making it impossible for him to campaign for the Presidency. And yes, if NEWT were to actually look like he might win the nomination, he would face the same thing about his ADULTERIES in the past even though those things have already been hashed out long ago). The idea here is to DESTROY a candidate the media wants to destory by making his campaign all about IRRELEVANT "charges", instead of about what kind of President he would actually make. You may think Herman Cain would ntot make a good President. But the mainstream media does not want you to even CONSIDER that question. Those RACISTS want to DESTROY Cain with a SMEART, so that he never has a chance to convince the public that he would make a good Preisdent (maybe even SAVING this country--stranger things have heppened, if a person---like, say, Abraham Lincoln---is given a CHANCE to make his case. There was U.S. Grant, DRUNKARD.. It is absurd. These NOTHING "sexual harrassment" ("inappropriate condut") chareges have NOTHING to d do with whether Herman Cain should be President of the United States. As I say, all you have to do is look at the body of the truly despicable AP/AT&T/Yahoo article to ssee I am right.


The AP "reasoning". First, the despicable AP suggests that failure of Cain to address "the allegations" will have consequences for his Presidency. Note that there are still NO "allegations" of FACTS. Waht the despicable AP, and rest of the evil people of the mainstream media, are telling you is that all they have to do is raise ALLEGATIONS (vague and anonymous) against any candidate THEY choose to DESTROY, and that candidate has to "resolve all doubts" about the "allegations". Talk about IMPOSSIBLE. It can't be done, and the dIHOSNET HYPOCRITES of the media KNOW that it can't be done. So help me, these are some of the most dishonest people who have ever lived, as well as being the worst hypocrites who ever lived. And I do NOT exclude politicians from this comparison.


"What "consequences' does the AP say that this (correctt) refusal of Cain to let the media DESTROY him wiht infinite "questions" will have. I already indicated the answer to this. The despicable AP said that Cain's failure to fully answer all "qluestions" will "leave doubts about his candidacy".


What can you say abut people this DISHONEST, and EVIL? Is there any possible way for Cain to "answer questions" (an infitie number of them) in a way to resolve "all doubts" abut his candidacy by people in the AP, CNN, MSNBC and all of the rest? Of curse not. It cannot be done. What "doubts", by the way? WHY does "inapproriate conduct" (unspecified) "raise doubts" about tCain's cnadidacy, even if true.? Is it because the mainstream media is relying upon the RACIAL STEREOTYPE of blakc men as sexual predattors to cause people to read more into these "allegations" than actually is there? I think so. These are RACISTS, trying to appeal to the most base and unfair aspects of people. But you don't even have to agree with that. All you have to do is ask yuurself? Is not the despicable AP, as well as the rest of the mainstream media, trying to DESTROY Herman Cain with "questonis", and does not this AP story ADMIT that is what they are trying to do? If you are a reasoning, fair person, you would have to admit that is true. Cain could spend the whole rest of his campaign for President trying to "reolve douvts" about UNPECIFIED "allegations" for which there is no proof, and the AP/mainstream media would still not be satisfied. "Questions" would always "remain", because Cain is being asked to "prove" a NEGTIVE (as we in the legal profession used to put it), and it can't be done. Cain is even being asked to go beyond that, and "prove' he did not do ANYTHING (not even limited to specifi factual allegations) that could be constured to be some kind of "sexual harrassment" (under the vage definitiong in our laws today). Abusrd. No one could do it. Did Barack Obama every PROVE that he did not agree with Reverend Wright ("God damn America")? Of ocurse he did not. And he stopped answering questioons about it (not that the media kept asking many). Only despicable people make "argumetns" so obviously wrong as the AP asserion that Cain must keep answering questions to not "leave any doubts" about his candiddacy. As I said, and stand behind, what can you say about people this DISHONEST and EVIL as to say someting absurd like that.


Now Cain is at a danger point (well, he has been at one, but this is really his last chance). Cain MUST stand behind this decision. He MUST stop "answering" these questions about mere ALLEGATIONS unsupported by any facts, and about the things he has already answered. He cannot backslide on this. Otherwise, his campaingn is over. Whatever "doubts" there are, and I think Cain should insist that these old , unsppported allegations are NOT an important issue facing this country, Cain cannot do anything about. He can only move on. No, I am NOT being inconsistent when I say Cain should ATTACk the media when asked these kind of questrions, and state that this kind of unimportat media specualation explains why we may not have talented people running for office---at least not as many as we woluld like. Cain should NOT answer any actual QUESIONTS on the "allegations", but he should ATTACk the questin as showing one of the things that is wrong with this country . And if asked whether he is saying that "sexual harrassment" is unimportant, he should ATTACK again. To that one, hes hould say that EVERY business in this country--at least almost every substantial businesss--is faced with all kinds of claims: racial dsicrimination, sexual harrssment, violation of worker rights, EPA vioilations, etc. ONe of the problems with this country is that threre are too many UNFOUNDED claims, and we have not found a way to effectively deal with them in an efficient manner. It is not that these things are "unimportatn". It is that there is now way to evaluate what individual claims have to do with a man's ability to be a good President. Everyone makes mistakes. In business, however, claims are made whether oor not mistakes ahve been made, and the mistakes are often not as werious as those people of all kinds (for instace reporters) make every day. I, Herman Cain, am willing to leave it to the voters to determine whether si should be President of the United States, taking into account EVERYTHING they think is ilmportatn. I can't PROVE I am a perfect human being. Only one man can even make that calaim who has ever lived on this Earth(if you are a Christian). All I can ask is that the voters be FAIR. I don't hink the media is willing to be fair, because they want my cmapaing to be all about this one nebulous subjet. I refuse to let that happen> I have things to offer this nation, in my view, and I want to talk about that. The votters will have to consider whether whatever FACTS actually come out on these spurious allegations are important enough to affedt their vote. I submit they should not be.


Obviously, I don't think Cain should go on like I do above. I am merely throwing out ideas. That has to be the APPROOACH, however: to attack the media as not examinging the MPORTANT issues facing this country, instead of doing endless SPECUALATION on unspecified "allegations". Cain needs to repeat over and over again: I dney I have ever sexaully harrassed anyone, and I have answered all of the questons I intend to answer on that submect. I am ready to tak about the REAL issues facintgg this country. Is the media willing to do that, or ar they just out to get Herman Cain? That is the question.


As stated, Cain MUST stick to this approach, not matter how the question is phrased. No "hypothectivcal questions". No "philosophiccal quesitns" like: "Mr. Cain, do you believe that a person who has committed sexual harrassment should ever be President? And, by the way, when did you stop beating your wife?" Cain jsut has to AVOID any more long discussions on the subject, and HAS to turn any attmept to keep pressing him into an ATTACK on the media/ "Why won't you lwet me conduct my campaign to explain WHY I should be President. If you can give any actual INFORMATIN to the American peoiple, go ahead an give it. I am sure thaehy will know how to evalueate it. But I want to talk about what I consider IMPORTANT to this country. If you don't want to discuss those matters, then we have nothing to talk about." Yep,. If the questions contnue, Cain needs to QUICKLY dismiss every questionsl--including any questions about why he is "blaming the media". In other ords, despite the wordiness here, I am begging Cain to make TERSE, pointed attacks on the media, and then STOP TALKING aoubt his subject. And NEVER answer their direct questions. Thta is what Cain has now SAID he will do. I hink it is a defining moment of ihis candidacy whether he actually does it.


For exmaple, Cann gets this question:: "mr. Cain, don't you think the American people deserve to have you answer the questins about these allegations of sexual harrassment". Cain: 'That question tells me that you are more intrested in harrassing me than in informing the American people. I have already answered too many questins on about very vague allegations made anonymously. Wat is imporatant to the American peopple, and what shold be importatn to them is what candidate will get America poiinted in the right direction. Many people still like Bill Clinton, as a President, because he got results, even though the allegations against him were worse thatn any allegations agasint me, and I deny that I ever sexually harrassed anyone. Whhat the American people want me to talk about is my 9-9-9 plan. They wan tme to talk about my Social Security paln. They want me to talk about my energy plan. They want me to talk about my APPROACH as President. And that is what I WILL talk abuot. If you have any questions on the imporatnt issues facing this coutnry, I will be gald to answer them. Otherwise, I hae wasted toomch time on answereing personal attacks--vague ones--which the American people are tired of in political campaigns. Now about my 9-9-9 plan. Do you think that some allegation of "inappropraiate conduct" on my part, whatever that means and not even attempted to be proven, tells you anything about the merits of my 90909 plan? Neither do I. Therefore, let's discuss the merits of that plan. People understand it. It is simple. It wil cause DRAMATIC grouth in this country. It iwll create enourmous nubmers of jobs. That is what I tthink is imporatnt".


You should get the idea. Cain should get the idea. I am just throwing out rapid fire ways that Cain could pivot on these questions, WIHOUT ANSEWERING THEM (answering something Cain wants to talk aobut, with Cain explaining why what he wants to talk about is impoortant).


The main point is that Cain MUST stand by his vow not to answer any more media questions on this manufacture "crisis", other than to pivot off of the question into what Cain wants to talk abuot.


No. I did not forget the main point of this article, but I was so excited that Cain FINALLY seems to be taking my adice taht I thought I would try to help him out further. The racist AP, AT&T and Yahoo, along with the rest of the mainstream media, would have you belive that Herman Ciakn nshould COOPERATE in his wown dstruction, as they DISHONESTLY try to accomplish that destruction. That is absurd, and tells lyou all you need to know abut these truly deespicable people---some of the most despicable people who have ever lived. Conservatives jsut have to learn waht Michael Crichton proved in his novel, "Airframe": These peole are NOT INTERESTED in "information". They are only interested in agenda. If ou believe otherwise, you are merely playing into their hands. And you can't let them set the agenda. That is fatal. That is just as true for the unfair and unbalanced network as for the rest of the mainstream media.


Oh yes, I still endorse Herman Cain for President of the United States, although I did not do so until this SMEAR cmapaign against him erupted. No, THIS has not raised any "doubts" at all in my mind concernig Herman Cain. My "doubts"--outweighed by, and really the same as, his VIRTUES that I like--about Heraman Cain are the SAME as I have had from day one. He has NO experience in this kind of big time political campaign, or in public office. As Cain ihimself says, that is also his main VIRTUE. The only "doubt" is whether Cain can stand up to the kind of campaign he is gong to have to run to be President of the United States. If he can PIVOTG off of this SMEAR campaign, he will go a long way toward answering that "doubt'. I ha e NO "doubts" abut him actually being President. We HAVE to get away from "politics as usual", and continung to allow the MEIDA to destory politicians they don't like with this kind of junk is the WORT thing that could ever happen to us. Getting a true "outsider" in as President, over media opposition, would be the BEST thing to happen to this country (almost despte any faults that "outsider" mamight have) Nope. Barack Obama was an INSIDER, who was part of teh Democratic MAJORITY in Congress that heled cause the collapse of our economy. He was the KEYNOTE speaker at the 204 Democratic Convention. We need a TURE OUTSIDER in the White House. AT this pint, I even wish I had voted for that "nut", Ross Perot (althoug, really, Bill Clinton--with a Republican Congress--turned out pretty well, to the point that I have often said I would vote for HIM if I had it to do all over again).


P.S. No proofreading or spell checking (bad eyesight).