Herman Cain must truly have a lot of people worried.

Yesterday, high-profile camera-hogging attorney Gloria Allred introduced a 4th contestant in the brand new game show, “Herman Cain Sexually Harassed Me”.

According to Contestant #4, Sharon Bialek, who appeared in a joint Press Conference with Attorney Allred, Herman Cain reached under her skirt and pushed her head toward his lap in 1997, when she went to him, seeking his help in landing a job.

The alleged incident is supposed to have happened in a car as they were on their way to what she thought was an office building.  Cain was still president of the National Restaurant Association at the time.

According to Bialek, when she asked Cain what he was doing, he said:

You want a job, right?

Bailek says that she did not file a workplace complaint at the time because she was unemployed.

Bialek also said:

I want you, Mr Cain, to come clean… just admit what you did, admit you were inappropriate to people.

The Cain Camp replied that he never sexually harassed anyone.

Who is this woman?  Well, besides the fact that she looks like Stifler’s Mom in the American Pie Movies, per ABC’s Chicago affiliate, WLS-TV, Channel 7:

The Chicago-area woman has an extensive corporate and personal history in the area going back to the early 1990s.

It was her hope for a new job that Bialek says brought her to Herman Cain that day in 1997. Bialek’s resume and a trail of public records indicates that changing jobs has been a regular occurrence for the Chicagoan. She has worked for at least nine different employers over the past 17 years and appears to have struggled financially.

The public record on Bialek begins in 1991 when she filed personal bankruptcy for the first time while living in Des Plaines.

Between 1993 and 1996 Bialek worked for four different companies in promotion and marketing positions.

In 1996, and part of 1997, Bialek was at the National Restaurant Association. After being let go from that job in mid-1997, she says that she went to Washington, D.C., to meet with Cain, president of the association, because she needed a job.

In 1999, Bialek’s son Nicholas was born and a paternity lawsuit was filed by the father, a media executive.

In 2001 came Bialek’s second personal bankruptcy, filed after sizable legal bills. That year she was hired by WGN radio where she worked until 2004 when she took a marketing job and then a job at WCKG radio.

Along the way, according to her attorney, Bialek also held positions with Revlon and Easter Seals.

Bialek currently lives in Mundelein with fiance Mark Harwood.

“She’s of the same political persuasion as Herman Cain,” Harwood said. “There was no money on the table to go and have an interview. This is truly about an American girl who’s got a big heart and wants to do the right thing.”

Yeah.  14 years later…

Well…how about Gloria Allred?  I’m sure that this respected member of the legal profession has nothing but the warm glow of altruism guiding her…Yeah, right.

Per answers.com:

She has achieved notoriety and name recognition through staged press conferences and demonstrations publicizing and dramatizing the cause she is championing at the time. She also accepts controversial cases that naturally attract media attention. During her years in practice, she has successfully sued Los Angeles County to stop the practice of shackling and chaining pregnant inmates during labor and delivery; put a halt on the city of El Segundo’s quizzing job applicants about their sexual histories (Thorne v. City of El Segundo, 802 F.2d 1131 [9th Cir. 1986]); represented a client who was turned down for a job as a police officer after a six-hour lie detector exam that included questions about her sex life; and sued a dry cleaning establishment for discrimination because it charged more to launder women’s shirts than men’s. She also successfully sued on behalf of two lesbians who had been denied entrance to the “romance booth” at a Los Angeles restaurant (Rolon v. Kulwitsky, 153 Cal. App. 3d 289, 200 Cal. Rptr. 217 [Cal. App. 2 Dist. 1984]). The owner of the restaurant vowed to close the booth if Allred’s clients won. They did, and he made good on his promise.

Allred relishes confrontation, and her showy tactics have earned her both praise and criticism. Defending what many have called self-promoting publicity stunts, Allred says she is aware of the impression she makes, and contends that it is exactly the effect she wants.

…Asked whether she is an activist or a lawyer, Allred replied that she is an “activist lawyer.”

And she never met a camera she didn’t like.

The remarkable thing about this obviously staged “Bimbo Eruption” against Herman Cain, is that it’s not having the effect that whoever is pulling the strings wanted it to.  Gallup.com announced yesterday that:

Herman Cain now ties Mitt Romney as the leader for the GOP presidential nomination in USA Today/Gallup polling on Republican preferences conducted Nov. 2-6. Each receives 21% support from Republicans nationwide. Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry follow, with 12% and 11% support, respectively.

Additionally…

Fifty-three percent of Republicans are inclined to believe that the charges are not true, with most of these hedging their bets by saying the charges are “probably not true” rather than “definitely not true.” A little more than a third (35%) say the charges are probably or definitely true — again, with most of these in the probable rather than the definite category.

Republicans with an opinion are inclined to say Cain has done a good job (45%) rather than a bad job (36%) of handing the charges, although almost one in five don’t have an opinion.

About half of Republicans are following the news stories about the sexual harassment allegations against Cain very or somewhat closely. This level of attention is lower than the average attention all Americans have paid to news stories Gallup has tracked over the last several decades. The group following the news very or somewhat closely is about as likely to believe the charges against Cain are true as are all Republicans more broadly. At the same time, this group is slightly more likely to be critical of Cain’s response, with 47% saying Cain is doing a good job and 48% a bad job of responding.

Perhaps Americans are smarter than whoever’s behind this thought that we were.

On January 21, 2009, Barack Hussein Obama was inaugurated as the 44th President of the United States of America.  He spoke these words concerning the state of the nation’s economy:

The state of our economy calls for action, bold and swift. And we will act, not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth. We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together. We’ll restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology’s wonders to raise health care’s quality and lower its cost. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age. All this we can do. All this we will do.

Now, there are some who question the scale of our ambitions, who suggest that our system cannot tolerate too many big plans. Their memories are short, for they have forgotten what this country has already done, what free men and women can achieve when imagination is joined to common purpose, and necessity to courage. What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them, that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply.

The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works — whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end. And those of us who manage the public’s dollars will be held to account, to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day, because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.

Today, one year away from the next Presidential Election,  after 3 years under the stewardship of President Obama, where does America’s economy stand?

The London Daily Mail reported on November 3rd, 2001 that:

Shocking figures revealed today that one in 15 people in America is now living in poverty.

The number – a record high – is spread widely across metropolitan areas as the country’s economic troubles continue to bite.

And almost 15 per cent of the population are also now on food stamps, it emerged yesterday.

The ranks of the poor applying for food stamps increased by a worrying 8.1 per cent over the past year to make a total of 45.8 million.

The increase in poverty is believed to have been caused due to the housing bust pushing many inner-city poor into suburbs and other outlying places and shriveled jobs and income.

‘There now really is no unaffected group, except maybe the very top income earners,’ said Robert Moffitt, a professor of economics at Johns Hopkins University.

‘Recessions are supposed to be temporary, and when it’s over, everything returns to where it was before. But the worry now is that the downturn — which will end eventually — will have long-lasting effects on families who lose jobs, become worse off and can’t recover.’

Well, Dr. Moffitt, until it ends, it’s average Americans who are suffering.  Unemployment is still high, despite the following “gains” which the Labor Department is bragging about:

The nation added 80,000 jobs. That was fewer than the 100,000 that economists expected, but it was the 13th consecutive month of job gains. Fears of a new recession that loomed over the economy this summer have all but receded.

The unemployment rate nudged down, to 9 percent from 9.1 in September.

“Those are pretty good signs,” said Michael Hanson, senior economist at Bank of America Merrill Lynch. “We’re hanging in there.”

No one looking at Friday’s report from the Labor Department saw an end anytime soon to the high unemployment that has plagued the nation for three years. The jobless rate has been 9 percent or higher for all but two months since June 2009.

The problem is that newly-unemployed will continue to join the ranks of those who have been on the dole so long that they have run out of benefits.

Per foxnews.com:

The jobs crisis has left so many people out of work for so long that most of America’s unemployed are no longer receiving unemployment benefits.

Early last year, 75 percent were receiving checks. The figure is now 48 percent — a shift that points to a growing crisis of long-term unemployment. Nearly one-third of America’s 14 million unemployed have had no job for a year or more.

Congress is expected to decide by year’s end whether to continue providing emergency unemployment benefits for up to 99 weeks in the hardest-hit states.

If the emergency benefits expire, the proportion of the unemployed receiving aid would fall further.

The ranks of the poor would also rise. The Census Bureau says unemployment benefits kept 3.2 million people from slipping into poverty last year. It defines poverty as annual income below $22,314 for a family of four.

Yet for a growing share of the unemployed, a vote in Congress to extend the benefits to 99 weeks is irrelevant. They’ve had no job for more than 99 weeks.

They’re no longer eligible for benefits.

Mr. President…you’re the CEO.  You’re being held to account.

The “books will be audited” on November 6, 2012.

As the made-for-the-internet National Soap Opera starring Republican Presidential Hopeful Herman Cain drags on, the latest development involves Cain’s former employers, the National Restaurant Association.

The Los Angeles Times reports that:

The National Restaurant Assn., the trade group at the center of the Herman Cain sexual harassment furor, said it has received a request to allow one of Cain’s accusers to release a public statement detailing her version of events and will respond Friday.

The group was contacted by Joel Bennett, a Washington lawyer who helped negotiate a settlement with the association on behalf of one of two women who complained about Cain’s conduct while he was its president and chief executive. Bennett has been seeking to lift a restriction in the deal that bars his client from talking.

“Our outside counsel was contacted by Mr. Bennett today and was asked to provide a response to a proposed statement by tomorrow afternoon. We are currently reviewing the document, and we plan to respond tomorrow,” said Sue Hensley, a spokeswoman for the association.

Bennett said his client is reluctant to speak publicly about events that occurred while she worked for Cain in the late 1990s, so he has asked the association to instead approve a statement by her for public release.

Cain is not a party to the agreement, Bennett said, meaning that he would only need the consent of the association in order for the statement to be released.

If the Association lifts the agreement, two things will happen.

a.) The woman will sell the rights to her story.

b.) She will be paraded around to every left-leaning television “news” program in existence.

You’ve heard the old saying, “politics makes strange bedfellows”, haven’t you?  Myway.com reports that:

Republican candidate Newt Gingrich is decrying media coverage of the sexual harassment claims against rival Herman Cain and says that Cain’s tax plans deserve more attention.

Gingrich has told WSB radio in Atlanta on Wednesday that he thinks it’s “disgusting” that the news media has started what Gingrich described as a “witch hunt” against Cain. It was revealed this week that Cain’s former employer, the National Restaurant Association, settled in the 1990s with two women who claimed that Cain had sexually harassed them.

A third woman has told The Associated Press that she considered filing a sexual harassment complaint but never did.

Gingrich says Cain is trying to help a country that’s in trouble and has gotten more coverage for what Gingrich termed gossip than for Cain’s tax policies.

Considering Newt’s romantic past, I would say that the man knows what he’s talking about, when he refers to the damage gossip can do.

Let’s assess the Cain boondoggle, shall we?

So far, the only thing we know, is that some women received some money from the National Restaurant Association, and years later, somebody snitched to Politico about it, who are now in the process of using the knowledge in an attempt to bring down the candidacy of a Black Conservative.

This whole,  ludicrous situation inspired me to write some new lyrics to a popular song.  I hope you enjoy it.

Ode to Herman Cain (with apologies to REO Speedwagon)

Politico heard it from a snitch who, heard it from a snitch who

Heard it from another that Cain was messin’ around.

They said there was a settlement,

A confidential agreement.

And the women walked away with some cash.

But I know Politico

And toward the Left is where their viewpoint goes,

And innuendo is definitely their stock and trade.

But I’m warning you, friend, that it may not be true, friend,

And even if it is, keep this in mind:

You take it with some salt, buddy

And if you want to believe it, buddy

You’re either a Lib or a Moderate.

I don’t believe it, not for a minute

Cain is the man and the Libs have a plan.

They’re coming up with more girls

The rumors are beginning to swirl

They say girls have been hurt, but they won’t say who.

But the stories keep on coming and the headlines keep on running

And they’re trying to put Cain down for the count.

You take it with some salt, buddy

And if you want to believe it, buddy

You’re either a Lib or a Moderate.

I don’t believe it, not for a minute

Cain is the man and the Libs have a plan.

You take it with some salt, buddy

And if you want to believe it, buddy

You’re either a Lib or a Moderate.

I don’t believe it, not for a minute

Cain is the man and the Libs have a plan.

Politico heard it from a snitch who, heard it from a snitch who

Heard it from another that Cain was messin’ around.

They said there was a settlement,

A confidential agreement.

And the women walked away with some cash.

The Herman Cain Sexual Harassment Boondoggle is beginning to resemble the chase scene at the end of the Benny Hill Show.

What’s got me puzzled is:

1.  If Politico did let the Cain Team know 10 days ahead of time, why didn’t they get out in front of this?

2.  Is this a case of “friendly fire” or a Democrat derailment scheme?

3.  Or is it, as a friend has suggested to me, a plan by Cain and his team to keep him in the headlines , and suck all the oxygen out of the room? After all, until yesterday, when Cain’s team accused them, have you read any stories in the MSM about Romney and Perry this week?

Regarding the question of who is really behind the Politico story, the suspect list is growing.

As of last night, washingtontimes.com reported that:

Herman Cain’s campaign is revealing suspicions about who is behind the story regarding the former unidentified employees who accused Mr. Cain of sexual harassment in the late 1990’s.

According to a source who is friends with the Cain campaign, not only is the Rick Perry campaign involved but also the Mayor of Chicago and former Obama White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel is likely involved with the sexual harassment accuser attacks. A friend of the Cain campaign believes a National Restaurant Association (NRA) employee out of the Chicago office leaked the story to the Perry campaign via information and influence from Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s office.

According to Politico’s Jonathan Martin, Curt Anderson, the Perry advisor who the Cain campaign is accusing of leaking the damaging information, is denying the charges:

“I’ve known Herman Cain for about 7 years. I was one of several consultants on his Senate race in 2004 and was proud to help him. I’d never heard any of these allegations until I read them in Politico, nor does anything I read in the press change my opinion that Herman is an upstanding man and a gentleman. I have great respect for Herman and his character and I would never speak ill of him, on the record or off the record. That’s true today and it’s not going to change.”

The way these anonymous accusers have been coming out of the woodwork, one would think that Herman Cain is the second coming of Bubba Clinton.

Yesterday, abcnews.com wrote that:

A third woman considered filing a workplace complaint against Herman Cain at the National Restaurant Association over what was termed aggressive and unwanted behavior, with invitations to his corporate apartment, according to a report in the Associated Press. Meanwhile, a radio host in Iowa said that the candidate had made “awkward” and “inappropriate” comments to staffers at the station during a visit earlier this year.

Cain has already denounced the two previous allegations of sexual harassment against him as false, and suggested at least one of the women was a poor worker. But an ABC News investigation found that both women are highly respected professionals who have gone on to successful careers in and around government.

One woman in Maryland has worked for years as a public spokesperson for various agencies of the federal government.

Her case appears to be the one Cain has described in his round of interviews, saying she was a writer working in the trade group’s communications department.

Cain has said that all he could recall was making an innocuous gesture to this woman while she was in his office with the door open and his secretary just outside. “I referenced this lady’s height and I was standing near her, and I did this saying, you’re the same height of my wife, because my wife is five feet tall and she comes up to my chin,” Cain explained. “This lady’s five feet tall and she came up to my chin. So obviously she thought that that was too close for comfort. It showed up in the actual allegation.”

A lawyer for the woman, Joel Bennett, later called CNN to dispute Cain’s version of events. “To the extent he’s made statements that he never sexually harassed anyone,” said Bennett, “and there was no validity to these complaints, that’s certainly not true with respect to my client’s complaints.”

Bennett said his client was upset at how she was being characterized in Cain’s comments and might want to speak out. He contacted the National Restaurant Association on Wednesday morning to see if his client could be released from her confidentiality agreement. According to a statement from the NRA, the group referred Bennett to call its outside counsel. “Mr. Bennett indicated that he would do so tomorrow, after he met with his client,” said Sue Hensley, a senior vice president of public affairs for the NRA.

So the accusers are not just anonymous, they’re well-respected and anonymous.

Yeah, right.  And I’m a 22 year old  blonde Dallas Cowboys Cheerleader named Buffy.

If  Cain’s Team is staging all of this, it’s a brilliant scheme.  Not only are they keeping his name in the headlines, they managed to plant fish hooks in the mouths of the gullible Main Stream Media and damage their competitors campaigns and the opposition party all of the same time.

If the Cain Team is not responsible for all this, then Cain is being Thomasized…or as he said:  We are witnessing a high-tech lynching.

Either way…politics is a dirty business.

Asthma is a disease of the lungs in which the airways become blocked or narrowed causing breathing difficulty. This chronic disease affects 20 million Americans. Asthma is commonly divided into two types: allergic (extrinsic) asthma and non-allergic (intrinsic) asthma. There is still much research that needs to be done to fully understand how to prevent, treat and cure asthma. But, with proper management, people can live healthy and active lives.

-Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America, aafa.org

Yesterday, the Senate placed appeasing environmental wackos in front of the welfare of American citizens with Asthma…again.

Fox News reports:

Sen. Jim DeMint blasted the federal government Tuesday after the Senate voted down a proposed amendment that would have protected a popular over-the-counter asthma inhaler from a Food and Drug Administration looming ban.

The FDA plans to take an epinephrine asthma inhaler known as Primatene Mist off the shelves. The product is currently the only FDA-approved over-the-counter inhaler and is being banned because it uses chlorofluorocarbons, or CFCs, as a propellant. The substance is considered harmful to the ozone layer.

DeMint’s proposed amendment — which would have cut off funding for the implementation of the ban — failed by a vote of 44-54.

“Fifty-four Senators voted to appease extreme environmentalists by banning inhalers that millions of Americans depend on to breathe,” DeMint, R-S.C., said. “This ban won’t do anything serious to help the environment but it will force asthma suffers to spend two to three times more on prescription inhalers, leading many low-income Americans to seek less effective remedies.”

He added: “Once again, Washington is willing to put Americans at risk in the hopes of appeasing special interests.”

In October, DeMint’s office noted that CFC emissions from U.S. inhalers make up just a tiny fraction of total CFC emissions.

The FDA push to regulate the chemical in inhalers has been under way since 2006. It stems from an international treaty signed under the Reagan administration.

In lieu of Primatene Mist, the FDA has suggested users of the product get a prescription for sanctioned inhalers, such as those that use an “environmentally friendly” propellant known as HFA.

But with the clock ticking, the phase-out has raised concerns. The FDA has acknowledged it’s been a challenge to get the word out about the looming change.

As I previously wrote, this is not the first time our government geniuses have done this.

From an article posted at pharmacist.com on April 1, 2005:

FDA has announced that albuterol metered-dose inhalers (MDIs) using chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) propellants must no longer be produced, marketed, or sold in the United States after December 31, 2008. The federal agency took the action through publication yesterday of a final rule in the Federal Register.

The agency said that sufficient supplies of two approved, environmentally friendly albuterol inhalers will exist by that time to allow the phasing out of similar less environmentally friendly versions.

The manufacturers of three environmentally friendly albuterol inhalers are implementing programs to help lower income patients obtain these albuterol MDIs. These programs include MDI giveaways, coupons for reducing the price paid, and patient-assistance programs based on financial need.

CFC-containing albuterol MDIs, as with other CFC-based MDIs for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (which includes emphysema and chronic bronchitis), were previously exempted from a general ban of CFC production and importation under an international agreement established through the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer and the U.S. Clean Air Act.

This little move did away with inhalers which cost $10-$20 a piece, replacing them with a brand costing $35-$45.

You haven’t seen anything, yet.  In February 2010, in my home state of Mississippi:

The governor of US state Mississippi, Haley Barbour, has signed a bill restricting the use of over-the-counter (OTC) drugs containing pseudoephedrine.

Pseudoephedrine is a sympathomimetic drug of the phenethylamine and amphetamine chemical classes, which is used as a nasal/sinus decongestant and stimulant.

The drug is also, however, a important ingredient in methamphetamine, a highly addictive and dangerous street drug that increases levels of dopamine and norepinephrine in the brain.

The statute, House Bill 512 received overwhelming support and passed through legislature within a week. The new rules will take effect from 1 July and will require a doctor’s prescription for products containing pseudoephedrine, including popular nasal decongestants such as Sudafed and Advil Cold and Sinus.

Basically, they punished Sinus sufferers in their attempt to try to make it harder for Meth Heads to kill themselves.

Every day in America:

40,000 people miss school or work due to asthma.

30,000 people have an asthma attack.

5,000 people visit the emergency room due to asthma.

1,000 people are admitted to the hospital due to asthma.

11 people die from asthma.

Suffering from Sinus problems is not exactly a picnic, either:

Sinus disease is a major health problem. It afflicts 31 million people in the United States. Americans spend more than $1 billion each year on over-the-counter medications to treat it. Sinus disease is responsible for 16 million doctor visits and $150 million spent on prescription medications. People who have allergies, asthma, structural blockages in the nose or sinuses, or people with weak immune systems are at greater risk.

Especially for Asthmatics, Sinus problems can lead to Asthmatic Bronchitis and a trip to the doctor, or worse, a stay in the hospital.

It’s a shame that the federal and local governments have made it so expensive and inconvenient for those Americans who suffer with these conditions to get relief.

It’s enough to take your breath away.

The Internet was busting at the seams yesterday, filled with stories about an ill-defined scandal, involving a 15 year old Sexual Harassment Claim filed against Republican Candidate for President Herman Cain.

Politico.com broke the nebulous story:

During Herman Cain’s tenure as the head of the National Restaurant Association in the 1990s, at least two female employees complained to colleagues and senior association officials about inappropriate behavior by Cain, ultimately leaving their jobs at the trade group, multiple sources confirm to POLITICO.

The women complained of sexually suggestive behavior by Cain that made them angry and uncomfortable, the sources said, and they signed agreements with the restaurant group that gave them financial payouts to leave the association. The agreements also included language that bars the women from talking about their departures.

…Cain was president and CEO of the National Restaurant Association from late 1996 to mid-1999.

Cain explained the situation on Greta Van Susteren’s show on Fox News last night.  Byron York of the Washington Examiner reports:

Cain told van Susteren that he remembered one woman who was a writer in the Association’s communications department. “I can’t even remember her name, but I do remember the formal allegation she made in terms of sexual harassment,” Cain said. “I turned it over to my general counsel and one of the ladies that worked for me, the woman in charge of human resources. They did investigate…and it was found to be baseless.”

Van Susteren asked Cain how often he saw the woman. “I might see her in the office because her office was on the same floor as my office,” Cain said. Van Susteren asked whether the woman traveled with Cain, who spent a lot of time on the road speaking to restaurant associations around the country. “No, never,” Cain said.

Cain said the woman was “younger than I was,” but he could not recall her age. Pressed, he said, “It would have had to have been late 30s, early 40s.”

Van Susteren asked what Cain did that led to the accusation. There were reportedly more than one accusations in the complaint, but Cain said he recalled just one incident. “She was in my office one day, and I made a gesture saying — and I was standing close to her — and I made a gesture saying you are the same height as my wife. And I brought my hand up to my chin saying, ‘My wife comes up to my chin.'” At that point, Cain gestured with his flattened palm near his chin. “And that was put in there [the complaint] as something that made her uncomfortable,” Cain said, “something that was in the sexual harassment charge.”

Van Susteren asked whether the woman complained at the time. “I can’t recall any comment that she made, positive or negative.”

Cain also offered new information about the settlement of the case. Politico, which broke the sexual harassment allegation story, said that the woman received a money settlement “in the five-figure range.” When van Susteren asked about that, Cain said, “My general counsel said this started out where she and her lawyer were demanding a huge financial settlement…I don’t remember a number…But then he said because there was no basis for this, we ended up settling for what would have been a termination settlement.” When van Susteren asked how much money was involved, Cain said. “Maybe three months’ salary. I don’t remember. It might have been two months. I do remember my general counsel saying we didn’t pay all of the money they demanded.”

In 1997, businessweek.com ran an article titled, “Avoiding a Time Bomb: Sexual Harrassment”.  Here is an interesting excerpt:

These days, business owners who fail to deal with the issue of sexual harassment are running big risks. Companies of all sizes increasingly face lawsuits, lawyers say. Since Anita Hill testified in 1991, complaints to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission have more than doubled, to 15,342 in 1996. Unfortunately, many are frivolous; last year the EEOC found ”no reasonable cause” for action in 38.8% of cases. Management lawyers say it has become common for terminated employees to fire back with sexual-harassment claims. ”Some people call it the whiplash of the 1990s,” quips Nancy E. Pritikin, a management lawyer at San Francisco-based Littler Mendelson. And small businesses are more vulnerable to ”these after-thought claims,” she says, because they have fewer formal procedures.

While some forms of sexual harassment are obvious–a demand for sexual favors, for instance–the law defines it as any ”unwelcome sexual conduct” that creates a ”hostile work environment.”

That leaves room for interpretation that could prove fatal, even to a company as large as California Acrylic Industries Inc. Despite $125 million in sales, the Pomona (Calif.) hot-tub maker was so debt-laden that its net worth stood at just $5.9 million when it was hit with a $1 million sexual-harassment verdict in 1993. The company was saved only because a court cut the award to $350,000, says Mary Maloney Roberts, Acrylic’s Oakland (Calif.) lawyer. Fear of crippling verdicts propels most small companies into settlement talks long before trial, says Roberts, even if they’re convinced the allegations are baseless.

A nebulous story from 15 years ago, filled with unsubstantiated accusations, released by a political website known for their Liberal slant , in order to influence the 2012 Presidential Election.

To quote Captain Renault from the classic movie, “Casablanca”:

I’m shocked.  Shocked, I tell you.

Yesterday morning, four of the Republican Presidential hopefuls made appearances on Sunday Morning Talk Shows:

Rep. Michele Bachmann was on ABC’s “This Week” with Christiane Amanpour, Herman Cain went on CBS’ “Face the Nation” with Bob Schieffer, Rep. Ron Paul appeared on CNN’s “State of the Union” with Candy Crowley, and Texas Governor Rick Perry was interviewed by Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday.

GOP Elite-proclaimed frontrunner Mitt Romney was nowhere to be found.

Not that he hadn’t been asked. During Fox News Sunday, Chris Wallace looked straight at the camera and said:

With Gov. Perry’s appearance, we have now interviewed all the major Republican candidates in our 2012 one-on-one series except Mitt Romney. He has not appeared on any Sunday talk show since March of 2010.

We invited Gov. Romney, but his campaign says he’s still not ready to sit down for an interview.

How…brave.

On NBC’s Talk Show Meet the press, White House Senior Adviser David Plouffe said the following about the former Massachusetts Governor:

Mitt Romney continues to have 75, 80 percent of his party looking somewhere else. And so it’ll be interesting to see if he can turn that around.

Host David Gregory then asked:

Will he be a diminished candidate if he’s the nominee?

Plouffe replied:

Well, here’s–we’ll see what happens in the primary. I’d make, I’d make two points about him. One is he has no core. And, you know, every day almost it seems to be we find another issue. You know, he was supportive of doing things like a cap and trade agreement, now he doesn’t think that, you know, climate change is real. He was to the left of Ted Kennedy on gay rights issues, now he wants to amend the Constitution to prevent gay marriage. He was an extremely pro-choice governor, now he believes that life begins at conception and would ban Roe v. Wade. So you, you look at–issue after issue after issue, he’s moved all over the place. And I can tell you one thing, working a few steps down from the president, what you need in that office is conviction, you need to have a true compass, and you’ve got to be willing to make tough calls. And you get the sense with Mitt Romney that, you know, if he thought he–it was good to say the sky was green and the grass was blue to win an election, he’d say it.

The sad thing is, Plouffe is right.

Newspaper Columnist George Will, seen by most Conservatives nowadays as a voice for the “Establishment Republicans”, wrote the following in his nationally syndicated column, “Must Conservatism Settle for Mitt Romney in 2011?”, published yesterday:

A day after refusing to oppose repeal of Kasich’s measure, Romney waffled about his straddle, saying he opposed repeal “110 percent.” He did not, however, endorse the anti-mandate measure, remaining semi-faithful to the trans-Appalachian codicil pertaining to principles, thereby seeming to lack the courage of his absence of convictions.

Romney, supposedly the Republican most electable next November, is a recidivist reviser of his principles who is not only becoming less electable; he might damage GOP chances of capturing the Senate. Republican successes down the ticket will depend on the energies of the Tea Party and other conservatives, who will be deflated by a nominee whose blurry profile in caution communicates only calculated trimming.

Republicans may have found their Michael Dukakis, a technocratic Massachusetts governor who takes his bearings from “data” (although there is precious little to support Romney’s idea that in-state college tuition for children of illegal immigrants is a powerful magnet for such immigrants) and who believes elections should be about (in Dukakis’s words) “competence,” not “ideology.” But what would President Romney competently do when not pondering ethanol subsidies that he forthrightly says should stop sometime before “forever”? Has conservatism come so far, surmounting so many obstacles, to settle, at a moment of economic crisis, for this?

Excellent question, Mr. Will.

The answer is:  NO.

Despite the wishes of the Main Stream Media, the GOP Elite sitting on their bar stools up in the Northeast Corridor, and all those “fiscal” Conservatives anonymously blogging from their Moms’ basements, Conservatives in America’s Heartland have had their fill of “settling”.

If you doubt my words, please reference the 2010 Midterm Election results. 

And, despite an all-out assault of insults, inferences, innuendo, and false comparisons to the Communist-sponsored Occupy Wall Street protestors, by the aforementioned miserable life forms, Tea Partiers are still alive and patiently waiting to pull the lever in the voting booth at their polling place on November 6th, 2012.

In 1996, Conservatives were told that we had to settle for Bob Dole as the Republican Presidential Candidate.

In 2008, Conservatives were told that we had to settle for John McCain as the Republican Presidential Candidate.

And now, we’re being told that we have to settle for Mitt Romney as the Republican President Candidate.

For those that want to “settle”, go ahead.  I agree with this American:

We’ve got a slam-dunk here to have a meaningful conservative candidate with a landslide sweep, which would mean a mandate to do serious rollbacks of what’s happened the last two and half years, the last 50 years. This is no time to be electing moderates. This is no time to be electing mishmash.

– Rush Hudson Limbaugh 10/18/11