Comments on: Romney Calls Allegations Against Cain “Particularly Disturbing”

By: Kevin Lee

Kevin Lee — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 22:41:29 +0000

I have to disagree with you, David. The skeletons in the closet ought be examined closely. Reason being, the presidency for the United States of America should only be occupied by a person of utmost moral character. That definition is more elusive these days, but if former president Bill Clinton can come close to impeachment for his sex scandal then I see no reason why Herman Cain should not stand to answer accusations of sexual harassment. He was the president for the National Restaurant Association and more than one woman was paid settlement for their complaints. Now if those accusations were groundless then why weren’t they dismissed? If the only thing that saved Herman Cain was money and the machination of a corrupt system then what is going prevent the same from happening with him in the oval office?

By: David Wainwright

David Wainwright — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 21:24:40 +0000

To Mariann Pepitone: I’m no fan of Herman Cain, but I don’t think we can ban people from running for President because they have skeletons in their closet. To disqualify from office anywho who has ever been arrested, sued, or divorced would eliminate a lot of good candidates. I think what is more important is full disclosure of a candidate’s past, and then the public can decide who they want to vote for.

By: William Inman

William Inman — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 20:17:03 +0000

Didn’t I read a story the other day about a man who started shooting at citizens, his reason being that women wouldn’t have anything to do with him? A little convoluted, maybe, but understood by every man of reproductive age. Any man who comes to Washington without his wife either starts shooting at people or finds other solutions to his needs. Did Cain have motive? Yes. Did Cane have opportunity? Yes. Was the described modus operandi a common one? Yes; typical of Washington. Were the repeated accusations all consistent with a single offender? Yes. Were they likely to have been successful on some occasions? Yes. Poll the jury.

By: AmyAnne

AmyAnne — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 19:44:08 +0000

Yes, the allegations are serious and should be treated seriously! Conservative talk radio has waged an unfair assault against these women. The answers need to come from Cain, not talk radio.

By: Mariann Pepitone

Mariann Pepitone — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 18:59:19 +0000

I don’t know if she is telling the truth or not. The first two woman were telling the truth and were paid by signed agreement not to discuss openly the accusations. I would not have signed an agreement. Of course if they didn’t sign they probably would not get paid but Cain could have been fired. I always believed that a presidential candidate should have a clean slate and apparently Cain does not. And that’s before he decided to run for the presidency. There should be a law passed that a person cannot run for the presidency if there are any altercations. And why is Cain’s wife living out of town? She should be living with him. I am aware that he has no experience in the political field and would need a few advisers to help him run the country if he was elected president. He answered a few questions wrong in his debate with Gingrich which means he needs training in foreign policy. It is my opinion that the best two qualified candidates are Rick Perry and Mitt Rommney.

By: pt

pt — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 18:32:41 +0000

Could it be Cain’s own people put her up to this as sort of a double-cross. People will think the democrats are up to something but if this women is proven wrong it may make cain look better. Just a theory…. Either way, I don’t think Cain is qualified to be POTUS. Huntsman seems to be the only qualified GOP candidate that doesn’t have major flaws.