The Philadelphia Eagles slapped the New York Giants around the gridiron for four quarters Sunday evening, treating them like recalcitrant children who shouldn't be playing a man's game, and eventually winning by a touchdown.

Thus the Eagles have kept their dismal season alive, and made the job of reaching playoffs harder for the Giants who now have lost two in a row, which should make Bill Sternberg happy, although I am none too pleased about it.

But this isn't so much about the Giants and Eagles as much as it is about Bill Sternberg and the time I almost was wrong in a blog column.

If you go to the archives on my blog site and dig way back into February 2008, you will find that I wrote about the Giants facing the New England Patriots in the Super Bowl that year. I also mentioned that I had been a Giants fan since my grade school days when Bill Sternberg got me interested in football.

You see, I grew up in a deprived household in that my father, who played semi-pro basketball and baseball, never gave a damn about football - although my cousins and uncles were big fans. Thus, while I could talk Mantle and Mays and Berra, read extensively about Roy Campanella and even could give somewhat of a history lesson on people like Ruth and Gehrig, I knew next to nothing about downs and field goals and halfbacks or even quarterbacks.

Then I heard Bill Sternberg talking excitedly one day in what was probably the 8th grade, about some guy named Y. A. Tittle. Turns out he was the former quarterback for the 49ers, heading to the New York Giants and I figured if he was good enough for Sternberg he was good enough for me.

It has been a very long time since the 8th grade and a year longer since the 7th grade which figures in this and I'll get to it in a minute.

But two weeks ago I received a phone call from another old friend from days gone by, my pal Bob Soloyna, known to those of us who hung together way back then as The Rock. He was called that because Soloyna was and is, strong, very strong, and he eventually fought a bunch of heavyweight boxing matches out in the Pacific Fleet during his many tours to Vietnam with the US Navy.

My understanding is that if he got into the ring someone was going to be knocked out and it wasn't The Rock.

Anyway, Bob, who lives in the same neighborhood where we grew up, only a mile or so from his family home, and about the same distance from Sternberg, called and asked if I would be interested in meeting them at the Red Lion Inn, in Stockbridge, Massachusetts for lunch the following week.

I agreed, called my buddy John, known in these parts as The Duke, and the following Wednesday we took off for Massachusetts.

However, when I was talking with Bob Soloyna he had the phone on speaker so I could also talk with Bill Sternberg, whom I had not seen in about 20 years. Bill said he had heard about the column I wrote in which I attributed my interest in Giants football to him, because even though he wouldn't be caught dead on the Internet, he did have a co-worker who read the column.

As we spoke I said that I remembered him talking about Y. A. Tittle, who was a quarterback first for for the Colts and then the 49ers until the 49ers traded him to the Giants in 1961, the year we graduated from the 8th grade. I said I became a Giants fan due to Bill liking them, a statement that was greeted at the time with silence.

A week later, at the Red Lion Inn the silence ended when Bill said he was never, ever, no way in hell a Giants fan and had been an Eagles fan since the 7th grade! The Eagles! We grew up in upstate New York where we had so many professional sports teams from which to choose that you never had to go further west than Buffalo or further south than Brooklyn, and Sternberg opts to be a lifetime fan of the Eagles! AAARRRGGGHHH!

Oh, before I forget it, if you want a really good meal in really comfortable surroundings try the Red Lion Inn. You can choose from the dining room which is very nice, but not too formal, or the lounge which is done up in dark wood, everywhere, and which we really liked. I got a pint of the Berkshire Brewing Company Extra Pale Ale which was great, and I highly recommend the sausage and cheddar soup.

Anyway, Bill straightened me out on his favorite sports teams, which also includes the Cincinnati Reds, another selection that defies explanation, but hey, this is America after all. And get this, he and Soloyna both remembered that they declared their intentions way back in the 7th grade.

And then they start talking sports history as if it was still 1959, so much so that I could envision my late Dad sitting in the living room doing the same thing while watching his favorite baseball team - the Cleveland Indians! My father came to America from Scotland when he was in grade school, and worked as an usher at Yankee Stadium when he was a teen.

He could tell you the seating layout at Dodger Stadium as well, and was a walking encyclopedia of sports trivia from the New York teams especially, yet when he grows up he becomes a fan of CLEVELAND? What was in the water back then? I mean, I can understand him being pissed at the Dodgers and (baseball) Giants for leaving New York in 1958 and heading out west, but hell, the Yankees are still there!

Anyway, when I got home from lunch I went immediately to my column archives with the sick feeling inside that I had gotten it wrong about Bill and determined to correct a three year old error. Turns out, I didn't have to.

As I reread my column from 2008 I realized that when I wrote it I remembered Bill being the first guy to mention Y.A. Tittle, but never actually saying he liked the guy. And since I wasn't sure whether Bill was actually a Giants fan, I never said he was!

So I don't have to correct an old column, but at least I can correct any erroneous impressions I may have left behind.

I also want to make a point about my favorite teams. I like the Giants and even though they brought their "B" game to the field the last two weeks, I still am wearing one of my Giants sweatshirts as I write this. But I also have a second tier of teams that I usually don't get to see on Sundays but generally keep an eye on just because they have certain something about them.

These include the Green Bay Packers, Oakland Raiders, San Francisco 49ers, even though they don't like the Raiders and vice versa, Da Bears, and the Buffalo Bills. They are all good teams who play hard, tough football, and have legions of loyal fans, of which the Cheeseheads in Green Bay really stand out.

And I should point out that I have family in the Philadelphia area, some of whom obviously have been brainwashed and don't see me enough because they too are Eagles fans - although my daughter enjoys going to Eagles games wearing a Giants jersey which I think is the height of in-your-face fandom.

She also has met Justin Tuck and I would invite Mr. Tuck, who played well yesterday even if many of his teammates did not, to tell the other members of the team that they have a five-foot, two-inch fan who wears their jerseys to Eagles games and takes on all comers, so why can't they?

Where the hell is their pride? Three perfect passes from Manning to wide open receivers dropped like hot potatoes?? C'mon!

Before I go I'd also like to leave you with a message regarding the Packers that came from a friend yesterday. Last year after the Packers-Bills game, Buffalo released quarterback Trent Edwards. During the Packers-Eagles game, the Packers injured Philadelphia quarterback Kevin Kolb.

Philadelphia then had to play backup quarterback Michael Vick. During a playoff game against the Eagles, the Packers injured Michael Vick and another backup was needed.

After the Packers-Cowboys game, Dallas fired Wade Phillips and most of his staff. After the Packers-Vikings game, Minnesota fired Brad Childress and most of his staff.

Four weeks after losing to the Packers, the 49er's coach Mike Singletary and most of his staff were fired and replaced. During the Bears Playoff game, the Packers injured Jay Cutler and backup Todd Collins forcing the Bears to go with 3rd string quarterback Caleb Hanie.

Here's the question ... Did the Packers create more jobs last year than Obama?

And you thought this was only about football.

Still, after all these years I have to face the realization that Bill Sternberg is a lifelong Eagles fan. Oh well, I suppose it could be worse. He could have been rooting for the Cowboys, or the Redskins!

FOX News released a minimal sampling of alleged registered voters Tuesday – calling it a "poll" – that it claims elevates Newt Gingrich to Target of the Week status.

The so-called poll is so lacking in credibility that any professional newsman with an ounce of pride would have resigned rather than broadcasting it as a game-changing barometer of public opinion.

The poll – which should be renamed a "self-fulfilling prophecy" – demotes previous frontrunner Herman Cain to also ran-status, while lauding Mitt Romney as the only consistent performer in the GOP primary field, even if he can’t get more than 25 percent of the votes on his best day. The sampling was so small that the margin of error was plus or minus 5 percent, which means that any of the results within 10 points of each other could just as easily be reversed.

And, to add insult to insult, 60 percent of those polled said they aren't firm in their opinions and could change their mind and vote for someone else.

In other words, the poll is worthless. But that won't stop FOX or any other propaganda outlet from spewing it as gospel.

The horrendously flawed poll interviewed only 370 people nationwide who claim to be GOP primary voters, some of whom were called on cell phones, the rest on landlines. So much for identity verification.

During a day of hyping its hype, FOX also delivered the news to its viewers and critics alike that since Gingrich, the former speaker of the US House of Representatives, is the newly media-designated frontrunner, he now is the next target of its relentless, merciless, and quite often baseless assaults. They even had one of their "pundits" or "analysts" on to say that this is exactly what the campaign needs because it will make Romney a stronger candidate.

Fox news has made it clear that it intends to do whatever is necessary to ensure that Romney gets the GOP nomination to face President Barack Hussein Obama.

The Washington and Manhattan "elitists," a term I use while trying very hard not to laugh since they obviously are brain dead lemmings, long ago decided that it is Romney's turn to be president and there better not be any interlopers from outside their inner circles trying to change that. The "poll results" support that contention, even though Romney hasn’t been able to capture significant support within the electorate despite at least six years of campaigning.

Gingrich has been creeping up in the polls in recent weeks as his performances in a series of debates has showcased his wide knowledge of the US government, world affairs and real world solutions to the nation's economic woes. In what could have been seen as a precursor to future events, Gingrich and Cain even participated in a "debate" with each other earlier this month, that seemed designed to show that they could work well together.

Fox broadcasters throughout the day sounded the alert that Gingrich, who was counted out of the race a year ago by these same brainiacs, was about to receive the same treatment Cain has undergone when he was falsely accused of sexual harassment. Fox broadcasters have routinely lied to their viewers during the assault on Cain, saying "four women have come forth" to accuse him of inappropriate behavior.

In fact only one woman came forth, well after the media began reporting that three "anonymous" accusers were raising the sexual harassment issue. None of them ever actually "came forth," but Fox as well as the other mainstream media outlets have shied away from reporting that the one who did pop up is regularly in financial and legal difficulties – despite her denials that her finances had anything to do with her sudden appearance.

The accuser, Sharon Bialek – pronounced Buy A Lick – who appeared with a publicity seeking lawyer who makes major contributions to the Democrat party, also was linked the Obama White House thorough his former senior adviser David Axelrod.

A second accuser who said she wanted to stay anonymous and avoid reliving her terrible ordeal at Cain's hands was outed by her brother-in-law, and it was quickly learned that she has a history of making sexual harassment claims, including another one against the federal government where she now works for the Obama Administration.

In that case she complained about a boss who sent an Internet joke around the office that compared men to computers by saying "they both have to be turned on to get anything done." Cain's alleged "crime" according to that accuser was saying that she was the same height as his wife.

It is likely that Cain was hurt to some degree in the polls although he has addressed that issue directly numerous times. Cain could well recover when you consider how many people in the FOX "poll" said they could change their minds, and his fund-raising actually has improved drastically since the allegations surfaced.

Cain also flatly denied any of the allegations against him, attributed them to the vicious political climate that exists in America and said he would take a lie detector test - when the women who made the claims against him take one too. That should help.

Gingrich is now in for the same treatment that Cain endured, and there are many who say he deserves it. But Americans are looking for a leader who will help the country out of the financial morass it is in, and his conduct in public certainly gives Gingrich a boost.

It was Gingrich who admonished his fellow candidates months ago not to give in to the media efforts to set them against each other, but few listened to his advice.

Now FOX and the other Democrat propaganda outlets will jump on him for his marital history, and any mistake, real, imagined or fabricated that he ever made. Every misstatement will be cast as evidence that he is deliberately misleading the public, and any misstep in his life, no matter how long ago or irrelevant, will be portrayed as a black mark on his character.

Frankly, I'm hoping Gingrich and Cain survive and make the primaries a real horse race. Then I can write a column telling FOX news and the other propagandists to stuff it, the Internet is the place for real news, AND the best barometer of public opinion.

Two weeks after anonymous, highly suspect, and ultimately unproven claims of sexual harassment surfaced against GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain, the media is scratching its collective head that he is holding fast and his fund-raising has gone exponential – in his favor.

But some in the media are still trying to stack the deck against Cain, apparently because Mitt Romney is supposed to be the heir apparent to the throne now held by President Barack Hussein Obama. But Romney is seen by many Republicans as Obama lite, and can't break out of the pack, even though challengers have repeatedly come forth, and fallen back, until now.

Cain polled first in Florida last week, well after the media assault on him peaked, with 30 percent support. Romney still was in the mid-20s, and former Speaker of the House of Representatives Newt Gingrich was surging – up from single digits only a few weeks ago to 19 percent last Tuesday.

But that was the Rasmussen poll, which has a very high trustworthy rating in my book, and included 788 likely Republican primary voters. It was conducted on November 8, 2011, the margin of sampling error is +/- 4 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

Now let's go to the Reuters/IPSOS poll that claims Cain, a black conservative businessman, is losing support with GOP voters.

Reuters is a British news agency headquartered in London that actually is part of Thompson Reuters, a massive, global media conglomerate, headquartered in Canada that does a lot of work out its Stamford, Connecticut offices and seems to have an inordinate interest in manipulation of American political views. Its report says:

Ipsos/ Reuters Poll: Herman Cain's Ratings Post Press Conference
Tuesday, November 08, 2011
Washington, DC - Ipsos has undertaken a third overnight poll on behalf of Thomson Reuters on the subject of Republican Presidential Candidate Herman Cain. This poll, published today, showed participants a video excerpt from yesterday’s press conference with Sharon Bialek, who has accused Cain of inappropriate behavior.

The poll is among Republican Registered Voters, and finds that two in five (39%) believe that the allegations presented by Bialek are true – and an equal number believe they are untrue (38%). In addition, 40% say that watching the video makes them less favorable towards Herman Cain.

Now, here's the rub, directly from the Reuters press statement on the poll. These findings are from an online omnibus survey of 462 Republican Registered Voters. Individuals were interviewed via a U.S. online household panel.

What? They do this poll online where it is virtually impossible to verify the identity of the respondent, they only interview 462 people, and they show participants a video of Sharon Bialek's accusations prior to asking them what they think of Cain?

Where is the poll showing what people think after they saw a video of Cain's press conference along with a rundown of Bialek's financial situation and her history of lawsuits and job turnovers? Is there one? Apparently not.

Fox News contributor Byron York jumped on the bandwagon today claiming that a Wall Street Journal "poll" shows that Cain's support slipped noticeably from last week to this week. Guess how many people were "polled?" One hundred and two.

One hundred and two people constitute a poll only when the total demographic is 102 people. Otherwise it is a coffee klatch. Shame on WSJ, York and Fox for this manipulative piece of misinformation.

The best poll on the results of the media assault on Cain is his fund-raising success. Cain received more donations from October 1 to November 8 than he did in the previous five months! We're talking more than $9 million folks! Even as the media continues to undermine him to this day!

Cain also had a fund-raiser on his website specifically to raise money for a concerted effort in Iowa where the first GOP caucus vote will be held in January.

Cain wanted to raise $999,000 – after his 9-9-9 tax reform plan – and gave himself five days to reach the goal. He was chugging along pretty much on target, and then he did two things that changed it all. He appeared on the Jimmy Kimmel show, where he was friendly, urbane and humorous, and he then held his press conference.

Within hours of the end of his press conference, a full 24-hours before his deadline, Cain broke through the $999,000 mark and blasted through the $1 million level! People obviously wanted to hear from him, and when they did, they responded.

The Reuters/Ipsos poll is not a reliable barometer of anything. Neither is the WSJ poll.

Now, while we're talking about sex let's talk about the hypocrisy of the news media.

I am picking on FOX here because it is the place I get most of my news. Over the years I have ceased watching all network news shows because they are untrustworthy, along with most of the cable news outlets.

I used to watch FOX News off and on from dawn to dusk but the last couple of months the biases of many of the "personalities" – including using polls that turn out to not be any more reliable than the Ipsos poll above – have turned me off to much of that broadcasting too. I'm down to Bret Baier at 6 p.m., Neil Cavuto at 4 p.m. and Stuart Varney at 9:20 a.m. on the Fox Business channel. Everyone else is out.

If you turn on the TV first thing in the morning, and tune in to Fox and Friends, what do you see? Well you have a great chance of seeing Steve Doucy and Brian Kilmeade sitting on the big couch on either side of Gretchen Carlson, who is beautiful, shapely, and has very nice legs.

How do I know she has nice legs? Because the camera regularly cuts away and shows her sitting on the couch wearing a short skirt, with her legs crossed, hands folded demurely in her lap.

Now jump to 9 a.m. when Martha MacCullem teams up with Bill Hemmer on America's Newsroom. Another drop dead gorgeous blonde, who once again has really nice legs, which I know because again, the camera regularly cuts away to shows of her lower extremities!


FOX News Anchor Jenna Lee, courtesy of Getty Images Entertainment

Then at 11 a.m. there is Jon Scott and Jenna Lee, who isn't quite blonde but has a beauty of the "triple Wow" factor, and once again, really, really nice legs.


FOX News Anchor Megyn Kelly courtesy of GQ

Oh, and let us not forget Megyn Kelly at noon with America Live. Be still my beating heart.

In fact, there is not one single full-time female anchor or correspondent, covering any issue, bureau or department, foreign or domestic, working for Fox News who is not on the "triple Wow to drop-dead gorgeous" scale. But don't be fooled by their overwhelming beauty. These are very, very smart, talented ladies and with law degrees, PhD degrees and world experiences that make them the best in the field.

But I still know that they have beautiful, shapely legs and that proves my point. Know why? Because I have no idea what Neil Cavuto, Bret Baier or Stuart Varney's legs look like, nor do I want to!

So what is the lesson we learn from this? Sex sells.

People turn their TVs to the Fox channel to see the beautiful women, and stay tuned in because they are smart and good at what they do. But when they jump on the misinformation bandwagon and start pushing an agenda rather than news, people like me turn off the TV and go to the Internet for our information fix.

The media was blatant in its efforts to crush Cain instead of doing its own digging and reporting the real news, not an agenda. At least on the Internet the blog writers and news sites are up front about their biases and we can determine for ourselves who to believe or not.

FOX news might want to think about that; the Wall Street Journal too.

If I was in a knock-down, drag-out campaign war with everything on the line - and I have been numerous times - I could not have wished for a better scenario than Herman Cain was handed by a media hungry Democratic operative Monday afternoon.

California wannabe panjandrum lawyer and Democratic operative Gloria Allred, who recently told FOX television host Sean Hannity that she enjoyed being groped by Transportation Security Agency workers at the airport, staged a press conference in which another unsubstantiated and unprovable claim of sexual harassment was lodged against Cain.

Although three previous accusers were anonymous, this time the "accuser" Sharon Bialek - pronounced Buy A Lick - made a personal claim that the alleged impropriety occurred back in the 90s in a limo occupied by her and Cain. She said Cain made a physical advance to her, but backed off when she told him to stop.

If that is the definition now in use for harassment every teen-aged boy who ever went to a prom or senior ball is in deep trouble. Bialek explained her presence in a limo with Cain by saying she wanted to talk with Cain about her employment status, although she was not employed by the National Restaurant Association which he then headed, and there were no witnesses, and she has no other way to verify her allegations.

Cain's camp immediately denied the allegations and said she was lying.

Rush Limbaugh said on his show Monday that Bialek hails from Chicago, home of such Democratic stalwarts as Rham Emanuel, former chief of staff to Barack Hussein Obama, and while we're on the subject, Barack Hussein Obama himself, who could face Cain in next year's presidential race if Cain is nominated.

Bialek said she was appearing today in support of the three other anonymous, and so far unknown, unseen, and unproven "accusers" who have not come forth but who - if they actually exist - have used another lawyer to spread allegations about Cain. However, Bialek said she does not intend to file a lawsuit, which prompts the question, then why did she hire a celebrity lawyer to accompany her?

As far as I could tell from the coverage that existed on her "press conference," no one thought to ask that question. Bialek said she made no formal complaint when the alleged incident occurred more than a decade ago either.

And, she also claims that while she told her then boyfriend and another male "mentor" that Cain had been "very sexually inappropriate" with her, she didn't go into the details. Apparently neither of these "men" who were supposedly so close to her, asked her to explain what she meant by "very sexually inappropriate."

This is right out of The Terminator. Even if she could produce her "mentor" and her then boyfriend - and she claimed to have affidavits from them - they couldn't provide any details on which they could be questioned for the purpose of impeaching her claims. Classic. Another Democrat bashing another black man and assuming they can get away with it because he is black.

This is exactly what happened to Clarence Thomas when he was nominated for the Supreme Court twenty years ago. Exactly.

By the way, have you noticed that this time around the Dems and their elitist GOP allies have canonized these anonymous women, because obviously if they charged a black man with a crime he MUST be guilty? But when Bill Clinton was charged with sexual ASSAULT, not harassment, ASSAULT, it was the women who were the objects of the Democrats' and the media vitriol?

Cain meanwhile, is riding a wave of popularity despite the media and the national Republican elite attempting to derail his campaign over the unproven and unsupported allegations. In fact Cain has a fund-raiser underway on his website in which he is hoping to raise $999,000 to launch at all-out campaign drive in Iowa.

As of 5 p.m. today he was at the $700,000 mark and climbing, after only four days.

I also had to laugh today when a new ABC news poll - I know, ABC news, a contradiction in terms - tried to portray Mitt Romney as the candidate that most Republicans think can win against Obama.

There was a 12 point spread between Cain in second place, and Romney. But hidden at the bottom of the poll graphic displayed on FOX news was the note that it involved only 438 people identified as "leaning Republican," meaning not necessarily Republicans or even voters. The "poll" had a margin of error of 5.5 percentage points, which actually put Cain and Romney in a statistical dead heat.

If 438 people came to my local elementary school auditorium for a Veterans Day event, there were be enough room for twice that number again. I seriously doubt they represent an accurate view of what the real Republican electorate is thinking.

I can't stand it when news organizations that are entrusted with the First Amendment, one of the most cherished and fundamental rights afforded to Americans under our Constitution, use that right to mislead the public.

Anyway, the latest accusation against Cain is so ludicrous, and so lacking in accountability, not to mention credibility, that only the mainstream media -and those who are in the tank for Cain's opponents, Republicans and Democrats alike, would give it serious coverage.

Rush Limbaugh was blasting Allred today, who is credited with derailing Meg Whitman's campaign against Jerry Brown for Governor of California. Last year she staged a similar press conference in which a former domestic worker who was employed by Whitman claimed Whitman knew she was an illegal alien - similar to what Rick Perry claimed about Mitt Romney last month.

Whitman denied the allegation and said the woman filled out standard IRS and Social Security forms when she was hired in 2000. Nonetheless, Allred's tactics helped defeat Whitman and Brown is now the governor. Did you see the stories on the "occupy" riots in Oakland last week? Do you think that crap would have happened if Whitman was governor? Just wondering.

So, with Republicans already despising Allred, a story of "inappropriateness" that is remarkable only for the inability to question it in full or in part, no witnesses, and some very questionable political connections, Herman Cain is sure to get a boost from this farce.

Maybe next week we can talk about the economy.

Before I get into the heart of this issue I have to ask a serious question: Is the lawyer we see on television claiming to have evidence of a sexual harassment charge against Herman Cain a transgender person?

Or alternatively, does this person have multiple personalities that manifest themselves in public settings?

The reason I ask this question is because television air heads keep saying that "three women have come forth” with allegations against Cain, but in a weeklong media onslaught that appears to be unprecedented in media onslaught history, only this lawyer showed up. And he keeps using the pronoun "We."

For instance, I tuned in FOX News last night and at 6:35 p.m. another of the damnable "panels" came on, in which a guy named Douglas Shoen claimed that "three women have now come forth" to allege sexual harassment by Herman Cain. Actually, no one has come forward, and that statement is false.

But instead of naming the women, or showing interviews with them, or anything that would prove they even exist, FOX switched to file footage of this lawyer. No client standing in the background, just another lawyer making allegations that would not stand the credibility test if Herman Cain was anyone other than a black, conservative Republican.

In file footage and newspaper accounts, this lawyer says on behalf of the Phantom Accuser, "She has decided not to relive the specifics of the incident," because it would be "extremely painful" for her to do so.

OK, so Herman Cain and his family aren’t going through an excruciatingly painful assault on him and his credibility with no one he can confront, and no specifics even about the supposed claims? The lawyer wouldn't disclose what was alleged either, saying only "We're not going to get more specific about what was physical, what was verbal. It qualified as sexual harassment in our opinion."

Now this guy was standing in front of a media crush ALONE! And he kept saying "WE" and "OUR" instead of "me, myself or I." So I ask again, is he the real person who made the allegations against Herman Cain more than a decade ago? Was this lawyer a woman then, and has he since had sex change surgery? Or is he a Sybil type character who pops up in a different incarnations?

If not why is he the only person we have ever seen making claims against Cain?

It seems, based on the comments I see from the public at the ends of many of print stories on this issue, that the only people who are being fooled here are the air heads who keep saying that anyone has come forth.

So, to Douglas Shoen, Shepherd Smith and anyone else on any other network, electronic or print outlet who has repeated this claim, could you people name one of these accusers? Just one?

You say she exists, so that means you know who she is, and you know who the others are. Why don't your viewers know who she is? Her name, please.

Silence. Just as I suspected.

Remember the movie Harvey with James Stewart playing an alcoholic who said he was accompanied by a six-foot invisible rabbit? How about Julia Roberts and Robin Williams in Hook – "If you can't imagine yourself being Peter Pan, you won't be Peter Pan"?

It took a lot of imagination to do these films, and it takes a lot of imagination to believe the media in its unsuccessful effort to crush Herman Cain. Maybe, ala Harvey, many in the D.C. beltway and Manhattan media "elite" are drunk on their own presumed power.

I found it interesting that the Real Clear Politics average of polls measuring Herman Cain's standing in the GOP field found him nearly three points ahead of everyone else even after nearly a week of an unspeakably vicious fusillade. In the Rasmussen poll, which was the only one that actually interviewed 1,000 respondents, the threshold for credibility in polling, Cain was up even further.

Now, here's why the GOP elitists, the Country Club Republicans, are so afraid of Cain. Unlike their self-anointed gurus of schlock, Cain deals with hard cold facts - numbers, and how they add up, or not. Inside-the-beltway types deal with appearances and they haven’t grasped that a huge segment of the American public is wise to them.

Republican operative Karl Rove can hold up his portable white board and scrawl on it all he wants, the public is done with him. Democrat operative James Carville can run savage attacks on individuals all he wants, he is irrelevant this time, which is the core reason these people hate Herman Cain and are so vehement in their desire to destroy him.

Rove was bashing Cain a couple of weeks ago for spending a lot time in Tennessee and far less time in New Hampshire prior to the 2012 primaries. Cain HAS to do well in Iowa and New Hampshire if he is going to go further in the primaries, Rove fumed.

Well, not really. Doing well there is about appearances, but it won't get you the nomination.

The GOP committees in these states jostle each other and try to outmaneuver each other over who gets to have the first primary or caucus, but in the end, they are all about appearances. Tennessee has as many delegates as Iowa and New Hampshire together, so why waste all that time and energy way out in front of the caucus or primary dates, when he can work much closer to home and pick up just as much support?

But the establishment elitists have always done it that way and if someone can do it another way successfully, it raises doubts about their omnipotence, doesn't it?

Also, Cain is leading the GOP race, but is way back in terms of money raised. He has earned his support through excellent debate performances and personal appearances, done in a bus tour, rather than skipping so much of the country by flying over it as the other candidates do.

Cain actually could benefit from some plane rides on occasion since bus rides are long and tedious and take a bigger physical toll than a couple hours in first class. But overall, his strategy is working very well, at a fraction of what the other candidates are spending.

And that really is the issue in Manhattan and D.C. These insider gurus make their bucks by lapping up the leftovers from the big media buys that all the other candidates believe they need to get their message across. Or by charging exorbitant fees for their services.

Cain is not spending big on media yet, and if he becomes the candidate these insiders are afraid they'll have to give up their cushy, bloated, self-important, egotistical lifestyles and work for a living.

They also are afraid that Cain will prove their mantra wrong – the one that says he who has the most money and spends the most money will be the winner. How many times have you heard these air heads regurgitating the same old theme, that money equates to donors and donors equate to votes?

Let me remind you of the US Senate race in Connecticut in 2010. Linda McMahon, former CEO of World Wrestling Entertainment, spent more than $50 million on her campaign to get elected senator, and lost miserably. How about Meg Whitman's $178.5 million spending spree to lose to Jerry Brown in the California governor's race?

The air heads talked all around those expensive failures, but they can't talk around Herman Cain holding onto first place while campaigning on a shoe string. And it worries them; you can tell that by their words and their deeds. Yet, even as the nation, including political junkies, has sickened of the attacks on Cain and is looking to move on, the media attacks continue.

Nonetheless, Cain, who has started a fund-raising drive to boost his presence in Iowa – he hopes to raise $999,000 by Wednesday – is already nearly two-thirds of the way there.

These are not the big bucks contributors either. A donor told me the other day that he sent Cain $10 because that is all he can afford in this economy. Yet he is outraged and sickened by what the media is attempting to do, and even though he was financially strapped, and has never given to a presidential campaign before, he sent ten bucks to Herman Cain.

It is obvious from this vantage point that the media is in the tank for anyone other than Cain. Nonetheless, Cain is holding on to his position, great numbers of GOP primary voters see through the media for what it is doing, and there is a growing backlash against the media, not Cain.

Bret Baier, who anchors the weeknight news broadcast on FOX at 6 p.m., noted late last week that the media has spent exponentially more time and done more stories on the unsubstantiated attacks on Cain than they did on the three of the biggest scandals of the scandal-ridden Clinton administration together.

But Cain is still standing, and the media has taken another black eye, as if that was necessary. Maybe the air heads should take a trip outside of Manhattan and DC and get a sense of how the rest of the country views them.

It should be an eye opener.

Can someone please tell me the anniversary dates when Monica Lewinsky was performing oral sex on President William (Bill) Jefferson Clinton in the Oval Office in the White House?

Anyone? No? Well, I'm not surprised. It's not on my calendar of memorable American events either. It was a disgraceful episode and it belongs as a foot-note in the history books.

But given that the United States of America has a centuries-long tradition of commemorating only positive events in our history, why is it that the American Terrorist Media spent an inordinate amount of time last week reporting on the "anniversary" of the disgraced Anita Hill's false claims of sexual harassment against Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas?

Hill, an attorney, worked with Thomas when he served in the Department of Education in 1981 and 1982, and moved with him from1982 to 1990, when he was Chairman of the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. She aired her discredited claims during his confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court in 1991.

Thomas overcame the reprehensible allegations put forth by Ms. Hill and was confirmed as a Supreme Court justice on October 23, 1991, a position he holds to this day.

Thomas, you may remember, is a black man, and a conservative black man to boot, which didn't sit well with America's pro-communist mainstream media then, and still doesn't today. Hence the 20-year "anniversary" retrospectives, not on his decades of Supreme Court decision making, and his reputation as a staunch conservative, but on the false claims of a disgraced accuser.

A veteran friend of mine, whose political leanings tend more to the Democrat side than the Republican, remarked to me as we watched one of those broadcasts last month, that "no woman who is really being harassed would stay on the job like she (Anita Hill) did."

Great point. I hadn't thought of it in those terms, but it makes sense. Hill could have walked away from her job with Thomas any time, but she didn't, and frankly I don't care what she testified to; her story didn’t hold up and Thomas is a Supreme Court Justice.

I bring this up because it was immediately after the media decided to dredge up the Hill allegations that it turned the full spotlight of its smear machine on Herman Cain, the current Republican front-runner for the nomination to oppose Barack Hussein Obama in the 2012 presidential elections. Oh, he's also black and conservative.

First it was claims that two women had filed sexual harassment claims against him back in the 90s when he headed the National Restaurant Association. Those claims were said to have been very quietly – and cheaply – resolved with a payoff and a non-disclosure agreement. Neither of these women has come forth to be publicly questioned.

Frankly, Cain and his campaign manager did not handle the original disclosures very well, but getting lost in the media feeding frenzy is the clip of Cain directly addressing the issue by calling the claims lies. Most politicians handle similar issues by mincing their words and talking nonsense, and if they are Democrats the media then takes over their defense.

But that is if they are Democrats, and usually white Democrats. Black, conservative Republicans are in for it, and there doesn't even have to be a real person or any documentation to support the allegations. As a matter of fact, the frenzy against Cain can well be described by Justice Thomas's statement during his confirmation hearings:

This is a circus. It's a national disgrace. And from my standpoint, as a black American, it is a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas, and it is a message that unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you. You will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured by a committee of the U.S. Senate rather than hung from a tree.

Substitute media for U.S. Senate and the statement stands the test of time. Take the current story that alleges a third woman is making claims of sexual harassment against Cain. It is being shopped around by Associated Press reporters Jack Gillum and Stephen Ohlemacher, who are making these allegations with no evidence whatsoever.

Their story is so lacking in substantiation that it would never have run in any news outlet in America three decades ago – well, maybe supermarket tabloids – even if the supervising editor was a child who was merely occupying that seat on a Take Your Child to Work Day. They wrote, and the rest of the American media dutifully passed on:

The latest allegations come from a woman who said in interviews with The Associated Press that Cain was aggressive and inappropriate with her, even extending a private invitation to his corporate apartment when she worked with him at the National Restaurant Association. The woman said Cain's behavior occurred at the same time two co-workers had settled separate harassment complaints against him while he was leading the association.

However, the alleged third accuser, let's call her the "Phantom Accuser" didn't file a complaint then, and doesn't want to be identified now according to the AP "reporters," which means they have become the source for their own story.

So, let's see their evidence. Cough it up. They didn't sign any non-disclosure claims so let's see the evidence. They apparently shared it with FOX News because FOX anchor Shepherd Smith started his 7 p.m. broadcast last night with the claim that "A third accuser has come forward."

That's patently false on its face, because no one has come forward, and I suspect it's patently false when you go deeper into his assertion, but maybe not. If the AP "journalists" shared their "evidence" with Smith, he certainly should share it with the FOX viewers, lest the entire cable network's news organization be held up to scrutiny for making false claims disguised as news stories.

Cain maintains that the entire issue is a "smear campaign" against him and the AP, with FOX News as a willing accomplice, is proving his point. Remember, it was less than two weeks ago on FOX News Sunday that host Chris Wallace and members of his "All-star panel" said they were working to help Texas Gov. Rick Perry – now floundering in the single digits in political polling – recover his previous position as the anointed front-runner, a position he achieved by virtue of the media saying so.

Cain's campaign manager said a Perry staffer who previously worked for Cain in an unsuccessful Senate run in Georgia and was aware of the issues with the National Restaurant Association, leaked the allegations to the Perry camp within days of being hired by Perry. Perry's camp denies that allegation and says it really was Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney who is behind the matter, which Romney also denies.

Romney hasn't pointed the finger at anyone although Michelle Bachmann did attack Cain, apparently prejudging him – again without any evidence. Ron Paul, however, handled the issue like a gentleman, refused to pile on like some other GOP candidates and media lackeys, and for that he should get a couple more points in the polls.

Perry meanwhile, is dealing with the fallout from an appearance in New Hampshire in which he appeared to be under the influence of … something. Perry says he was just high on campaigning, and word slurring is something we should see more of, not less.

To that I can only say that he should take a close look at the way the media is treating Cain. Perry can be the next whipping boy without any warning even if he was jober as a sudge in New Hampshire and merely got his mords wixed.

Regarding Cain I think we should consider that the National Restaurant Association thought highly enough of him, his work ethic, and the results of his efforts to dump the people who made the accusations against him, and keep him on. That says something about the man and what he brings to this country that this country so desperately needs.

Oh, and just in case you HAVE to know, according to Wikipedia, Monica Lewinsky had sex with Bill Clinton nine times, two of which were in November – November 15, 1995, and again on November 17, 1995. Happy anniversary!