I'm really on the fence with this. Part of me says that if 4 women are making these claims, there has to be something to it. But the "victim" who's been the most vocal seems like sort of a nut, and I read that her son works for Politico. And why would she wait 14 years to bring this up? I wish the other women could speak openly.
Sadly I don't think whether he's guilty or not will matter now. The allegations have been made public and there will always be doubt in someone's mind.
I'm neither D or R - but I feel this is damaging the Rs - the sooner he drops out, the more chance the rest have of focusing on the issues at hand - while this lingers, it becomes the single most important factor, and is exactly what President Obama wants.
The real question is 'who' brought these issues to the fore - was it another R canidated, the Dems, or a totally different group with racist issues!
Going back to the question - until full facts are disclosed (if they ever are) we will never know if he is guilty or not!
Her son does not work for Politico, that was misinformation put out by Cain's chief of staff. I think there are very legitimate reasons for the alleged victims to not speak out at or near the time of the incidents.
Cain may not be guilty of harassment, but he is never the less absolutely unqualified to be president.
"but he is never the less absolutely unqualified to be president.
Since when has this actually mattered?
Well, we got George W. Bush who wasn't qualified with the result--f two costly, futile, needless wars, tax cuts for the rich, an unfunded Medicare drug plan that was written by the pharmaceutical lobby, and the deepest recession and deficit since the thirties.
I guess you weren't serious in saying that it doesn't matter. Suffice it to say that having a competent president matters a whole lot.
We've got one now. His name is Barack H. Obama. Before that we had Bill Clinton. In between we had a lazy, incompetent, clueless slacker.
Obama? has he fixed all of those problems you mentioned? Surly you jest, I hope to god you jest.
His efforts have been sabotaged by the Republicans in Congress. Mitch McConnell has said he's willing to run the country on the rocks if that's what it takes to beat Obama in 2012.
Thanks for the info, Ron. Do you know if the other stuff said about Kraushaar is true?
I think the guy is qualified, but I think his ideas, performance, and ability to not go back to the schoolyard and act like jerk little kid displays that he wouldn't be a good President, much less a shot to beat Obama. As it stands now, the entire field is like the Jersey Shore of politics.
I'm somewhat on the fence too. But I know that four - and far more - people can very easily lie or exaggerate, especially if there is some sort of financial inducement for them to do so.
There are few things more damaging to a politician than allegations of sexual misconduct; it's a very easy way damage a person's career and character, unless the politician happens to be a white Democrat from Arkansas or Massachusetts. It's the modern version of the old question, "Senator, when did you stop beating your wife?"
I think "would" is a better choice of words here - at least for one of the women, who has been given permission by the Restaurant Association to speak out, but who chooses not to. As far as assumptions can be made, her choice to remain silent leads me to assume that her claims could not stand up under the scrutiny of media questioning.
As they say, where there's smoke there's fire. It doesn't matter, however, because Cain isn't remotely qualified for the presidency.
You know, I don't really care. Don't bother to come forward 15 years later to complain that you have been sexually harassed. Except if you were a child, or teen, not knowing how to handle the situation.
I believe all these women will cash in on their claims sooner or later, with a book or TV and radio appearances.
I also think it was Mitt Romney who dug up this dirt. Cain was is closet competition.
I read somewhere today that there is a study that showed that only ten percent of these kinds of incidents are reported because of fears of retaliation by the employer, reluctance to endure the publicity or fear that a complaint will harm the woman's career.
I don't know maybe it is me. When I was about 19, I had a temp job working at a mechanics garage. When the owner got to handsy with me with me, I gave him a nice big punch. I didn't report it but didn't go back either. I came from the rough part of town and didn't play that! LOL.
If I had not stood up for myself,and remained there, he probably would have continued to try his hand. The job wasn't worth it either.
In response to the first woman who came out in person, she was the one that sought Cain for help in finding a job. It is also strange that when he touched her, she said, you know I have a boyfriend. That implied (even if it weren't true) that if I wasn't dating, it might have been acceptable.
All in all, I understand if it really happened, wanting the country to know what kind of man Can really is. I never liked how when he talks, he flicks his tongue. Every noticed that? kind of snake like. LOL! He may be guilty...who knows.
There is a pattern of sexual harassment beginning back into the 90s. Unfortunately, these women had gag orders in place along with the settlement. The attorneys are trying to have the gag order lifted. That is why you aren't hearing from the other women.
Keep in mind that a number of women don't usually file sexual harassment claims against an employer.
If the phrase "Princess Pelosi" didn't give you a clue as to how he feels about women, I don't know what else can...
Do we know for a fact how Ms. Nancy Pelosi regards the term 'Princess Pelosi'?
I did a web-search this morning on the term, to see what she had to say about it, and found nothing. Instead I found that the phrase apparently has been around for years, and I could find nothing indicating she regarded the term as derogatory.
I did find an awful lot of discussion by other people, but nothing from her. Do we know for a fact that she does not view herself as royaly, or is it just part of our mindset what she would never consider regarding herself as royalty?
Anyhow, can someone point me to the video or quote where she indicates she regards the term as derogatory?
Yesterday, I read that the columnist for Politico named "Kraushaar" claims taht he is not related to the woman named "Kraushaar" who claims she was sexually hararassed. That's a stretch for me. I mean, how many people named "Kraushaar" can there be in the US? It just smells fishy, especially when you consider that Politico first broke the story about the first alleged victim. That would make 2 victims with Politico connections. Too many coincidences to not be fishy.
And as far as fishy and nutty names go, the name Bialek raises a red flag to me, because there is a real nutcase named Bialek who has been running around for 20-30 years claiming that he was part of the government's Time Travel experiments. Maybe the Cain accuser Somebody Bialek is not related to him, but I don't trust the name anyway.
I think he's guilty of being himself. He's got a charasmitic, charming, and flirty, personality, and he also says what he thinks. Since he's not a professional politican, he's not into political double talk, never giving a straight answer to a direct question, or redirecting conversations. I'm sure any harassment, if there was any, was unintentional.
I don't know, he seems harmless to women. He just like them blondes perhaps.
Not one but four women.
Not one but two settlements out of the National Restaurant Association.
I don't blame those women for not coming forward.
Of course their stories won't stand up to media scrutiny. They'll be pilloried.
This is shaping up to be a giant rape trial. The victim is on trial and her (or their) dignity is shredded and people sit in judgment of their "credibility" as victims/witnesses.
It's up to the victim to prove it happened and that it was deliberate sexual harassment.
Remember what happened with Anita Hill?
But regardless, this is all a giant distraction from the rest of the sideshow.
Reality TV. Who will be the last candidate not voted off the island???
Giant rape trial? Hardly, but I agree with you that it is a giant distraction.
It is exactly like a rape trial.
If you're going to go public with an allegation against a powerful man, you better be ready to have your own motive dissected in the process.
With no prospect of justice of any sort, why would anyone put themselves through that???
It's moot, howeveer.
No matter how credible any/all of these women end up being, his supporters don't care.
And America's attention span is so short we (collectively) will be moving on momentarily.
Meanwhile, if Gloria Alred's client wants to make some money on this, I suppose she's as entitled as Cain is to profit from his 15 minutes of fame.
I hope you're not saying that Anita Hill was a victim.
Yes I am. A victim of the scrutiny I'm talking about.
Quite the interesting standard for victimhood. I wonder if you consider or care about the high level of scrutiny and judgment that is unleashed on the accused.
Not even close.
Powerful men are made of Teflon.
The only ones who get taken down by their sexual exploits are ones who trip themselves up. Otherwise, it's the woman who's tried and convicted in the court of public opinion.
Anita Hill has spoke enough about her ordeals with Clarence Thomas. He was clearly in the wrong, but his connections made it "all right".
I wonder how much it bothered you when Clinton was accused of rape? I wonder how much it bothered you when he lied about the intern thing? I bet you weren't bothered at all, but you will probably tell us NOW how outraged you were.
Did you read my post above, RG?
Men of power -- of both parties, including sports celebs -- engage in sexual power grabs (no pun intended) all the time.
It doesn't surprise me when it happens.
Hate to say it comes with the territory, but that's exactly true.
For the record ... again ... I could care less who gets a BJ in the oval office.
I did say, on more than one occasion, that I just wished SOMEONE would please give Bush a BJ so we could get him out of office too!
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/1 … ild-labor/
Scrutiny of an individual who makes allegations against someone has to be part of the process regardless of how distasteful that process is. Americans have the right to confront their accusers. In this case, the woman who was outed regarding the complaint she filed with the NRA, moved on to another job and filed a series of similar charges against someone there, demanding as compensation, money, a raise, a fellowship at Harvard, and the privilege of working at home. Those charges were found to be without merit, by the way and she has since changed jobs again. One of the charges of sexual harrassment she lodged against Cain was that he commented that she was the same height as his wife. She sounds disturbed to me.
Victims should absolutely be afforded as much protection as we can reasonably give them, but you can't allow accusations to be made against someone but refuse them their right to defend themselves.
Why didn't I think to demand a Fellowship at Harvard as compensation for my sexual harassment in the 1980s???
Thanks for the tip.
I will be sure to use that in my next job.
Nobody is "refusing Cain's right to defend himself." However, his denials and memory failure haven't been consistent let alone convincing.
With a name like Cain can the guy get a fair hearing?
In England we had a Conservative candidate with the good old Yorkshire surname of "Greed". A Conservative actally called "Greed" was a gift to the socialists!
Its a documented fact that settlements were made and for settlements to have been made there had to be something going on. There was also a gag order.
I think Cain is probably a dirty old man and he's just caught up with.
I am not for the Republicans or the Democrats. I think they are all crooks and out for their own self interests. Mainly the dollars that they can put into their pockets.
I know I keep saying it but it is things like the Cain incident that is used to keep the public's mind off important issues.
1. 15.000 plus Homeless People living under bridges and etc in the downtown area of New Orleans. And another 300.000 former residents of New Orleans that still have no home to come home to. Maybe we should have spent the money for the Iraq War on New Orleans instead.
2. All of our textile jobs have been shipped over seas. Whole towns in the south are now little more than ghost towns. One city right near me has hundreds of boarded up houses and they are now tearing the old textile mills down. And politicians from both yes both parties allowed this to happen.
3. One in four children in the United States go to bed hungry each night. But I don't see a politician from either party screaming about this. Why not. Because its not a popular news item to show you hungry American children over and over every night on the nightly news.
4. We continue to fight a war on drugs that is never going to work. Prohibition never worked and the war on drugs is never going to work. Tax the marijuana and put it out for sale at the corner store. But wait again its all about the money.
It will all go on until we tell the Republicans and the Democrats that we have had enough. And we kick all the bums out of office, out law lobbyists, and set strict term limits so we won't have career politicians. If you did those things you would have a different America tomorrow.
Ask yourself what do you think Washington , Lincoln and the Kennedy Brothers would think of present day America. They just might call for a revolution.
Doesn't it bother you at all that Obama had the house, senate and the presidency and still didn't accomplish anything other than a health care plan that no one wants? How long do you think Americans are going to sit by while this pimple whines about it being someone else's fault? Face it, your deity is done.
It all seems like a reality show, the GOP candidates and the non stop 'who is the least qualified among us' gong show.
Guilty or not his campaign has clearly been damaged by this. Also the Perry gaffe last night was cringeworthy. It looks like it's Mitt Romney all the way now. Whether that's a positive thing I don't know.
2besure: that flicking his tongue line is the finniest lthing I've heard in a long time.LOL
by Pamela Lipscomb5 years ago
I kind a feel sorry for the poor guy. I don't think he would be foolish enough to run for president knowing he had all this stuff in the closet. I wonder if his closest competitor, Mitt is digging up this...
by Robephiles5 years ago
I saw this clip from the Rachel Maddow show. I think she is being somewhat fastidious because in order for her thesis to be true Cain would have had to organized his own sexual harassment scandal, which would have...
by Susan Reid5 years ago
Forget who is behind bringing these 12-year-old allegations forward at this particular juncture (ladies and gentlemen, place your bets. I'll wager even money that it was Perry and not Romney).Politics is a dirty...
by preacherdon5 years ago
I am not justifying Herman Cain's behavior, but the media acts like he is the first womanizing politician. They willingly forget that Clinton had many scandals during his run for office and while he was in office. What...
by Susan Reid6 years ago
People who live in glass houses, even if they are the Trump Tower, should not throw stones.This is from TIME online (also saw it on CNN). The writeup was so good I had to copy it in its entirety.So should Trump put his...
by Scott Bateman3 months ago
It also banned the phrase "emissions reduction".I'm hopeful that the Trump administration will soon ban other stupid phrases, such as "freedom of expression".http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/e...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.