I Have Serious Doubts About This!

Ok, so today we have yet another woman who came forward with allegations of sexual misconduct by Herman Cain towards her. She made her debut with Gloria Allred (publicity seeker extraordinaire...) and filled the microphones with her story of how the presidential contender allegedly crossed the line with her sexually.
As I sat listening to the the woman tell her story on the radio, there were a number of red flags that make me have serious doubts about her story.
First and foremost, she waited 14 years to tell this story to anyone with the exception of supposedly having told about it to a couple friends. In my book of logic, if something happened that truly upset her to the point that she is now wanting us to believe, she would not have waited until now to tell her story. Isn't it amazing that this story was not brought to light at any time since it allegedly happened in 1997? Is is purely coincidence that she didn't come forward with this tale until Herman Cain is running as a presidential candidate and is truly a political threat to Obama?? Somehow the timing strikes me as just a little too handy to be strictly a coincidence.
Next, there is the fact that she purposely made excessive mention of her "boy friend" so many times during the press conference. What was the need for this over-use of mentioning her boyfriend? Perhaps she was to try to paint herself in a better light to everyone? She also said that her "boyfriend", who is noted as being a physician, suggested to her that she approach Herman Cain to ask if he can help her get another job after she was terminated by the National Restaurant Association. Now with this in mind, I can honestly say that I don't know ANY guy that would suggest that! In my experience, it would work very differently. I think that the average guy would never suggest that she approach the corporate elite from the very same company that terminated her in order to ask for help securing another job. I truly believe that instead it would be a matter of the guy telling his girlfriend that she doesn't need "them" and that she should look elsewhere for help with employment. This part of the story doesn't ring true to me.
THEN..........she could have made a 30 second to one minute call to Herman Cain to ask for help if that was indeed the case. But that is not what happened. Instead, she made plans to travel from Chicago to Washington, DC, booked a room in a hotel for the night, called Cain and asked where she could meet him and then went to dinner with him. And she did all this to do what could have been done over the phone in less than a minute??? Really??? And the "boyfriend" was ok with all this??? I feel something is amiss here.
Her in-depth description of what each of them were wearing that night also seemed contrived and pointless to me. Was their attire that important to the scheme of things?
Now we come to the part where they allegedly drove past the office building the Association was housed in and parked. According to the "victim", this is where Cain reached over, slid his hand up her leg under her skirt, put his hand on the back of her head, tried to pull her head down to his lap while asking "You want a job don't you?" And the reaction of the victim was what?? According to her account, she stopped him, asked him what he was doing and said that this wasn't what she came to Washington for. Then she asked him to drive her back to her hotel. Now, the ladies that I have known over the years would have acted very differently if the details of Cain's behaviour were accurate. I believe the reaction from most women would have been more vehement and distinctly hostile. They would not have been so calmly measured in their response, would have pushed Cain away and jumped out of the car to get away from him. However, this woman didn't and it strikes me as curious as to why she didn't react the same.
So let's look at the whole puzzle shall we? First, there are no eyewitnesses to this alleged act other than Herman Cain and the "victim". It is strictly a "he said, she said" type of deal. Second, she was apparently not traumatized or offended by the alleged misconduct until 14 years later when Cain is a presidential contender. Third, she contends that it was her boyfriend's idea to contact Herman Cain. Fourth, she made a point of flying to Washington, got a hotel, called Cain to let him know where she was staying and asked where to meet him. Fifth, she allegedly did all this so she could ask him over dinner for help to get another job.....something that could and should have been done over the phone. Sixth, she doesn't react to his sexual advances in a manner that would have been expected.
With all this in mind, I have some questions and observations of my own. I can't help but wonder why she was terminated in the first place. That hasn't been brought out yet. Did this woman have her own sexual agenda with relation to Herman Cain? Perhaps she found him attractive and actually hoped to have an encounter with him.....hence the flight to DC, the hotel room and dinner. What if all this actually worked opposite of what she is saying? What if she wanted to have an encounter with Herman Cain, flew to DC, got the hotel room, let him know where it was (so he would know where to go), went to dinner and then after dinner in the car she made advances on HIM! And what if he fended off the advances after which she asked him to drive her back to her hotel??? As there are no eyewitnesses and the woman's story seems highly suspect, this could well be a possibility!! And now she is using the event as a way to get her 15 minutes of fame and help bring down the biggest political threat to Obama's re-election.
Last but not least, in this this country we are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. But apparently that only applies to those on the left of the political spectrum. There is absolutely no firm evidence of this act supposedly perpetrated by Cain, but the media is blasting him for it as though there is and he has been convicted of some heinous crime. Gloria Allred, in her ever-misguided and camera-hungry mission for publicity is fueling this miscarriage of justice. It is sad but true that in these days a woman can utterly ruin a man's life and career just by spouting the words "sexual misconduct" or "sexual harassment". It can be a completely false claim brought on by greed, revenge for something else or any other in an myriad of reasons. But the one sure thing is that just accusing the man of any wrong-doing will forever stick to him, affect if not kill his career and future and label him in a way that would be akin to branding a scarlet "A" on his forehead! The saddest part of this is that the woman can tell a complete fabrication and not be held accountable while the man, in many cases, is an innocent victim and loses everthing. I believe the media has a HUGE responsibility to protect the alleged victim AND the alleged perpetrator until such time as a thorough investigation is done and the facts are known. If there is no evidence, then the accused needs to be treated fairly and given the benefit of the doubt. Innocent until proven guilty......not the other way around!!!