View Full Version : Cain and sexual "harassment"
DoggerDan
Nov2-11, 01:47 PM
The media feels it needs to give every item "equal time." Thus, a presidential sneeze gets 30 seconds, the same as bronchitis. I once had the "audacity" to tap a female subordinate on the shoulder to get her attention. Why did I have to touch her? She was wearing earphones on the job, which entailed monitoring and using radios, which she couldn't hear because she was listening to her iPod. Before I tapped her on her shoulder, I queried her twice, once in a normal tone of voice, the second rather loudly, much louder than the radios she was supposed to be monitoring. One guess as to her response to my directing her to ditch her iPod while on the job. Fortunately, two witnesses were right there and emphatically supported the truth, so her idiotic effort backfired before it began. The fact that she claimed sexual harassment despite the fact that two witnesses were right there underscores her idiocy. Perhaps she thought it might help keep her from being fired.
Nope.
As for Cain, no physical contact was involved, which tells me it's the liberal, ant-right media which is digging up this speck of dust and shouting it from the mountaintops. This behavior gives the media a VERY bad name, as well as anyone else who joins in the shouting.
chaoseverlasting
Nov2-11, 02:07 PM
Wow. Really? A sexual harassment suit because you tapped someone on the shoulder?
This has Karl Rove written all over it.
There's an old saying - the truth will set you free.
I think this will backfire on the Left - given their earlier defense of President Clinton through his scandals. EVERYBODY can see the hypocrisy in this matter - one more reason not to trust the main stream media.
On the other hand - if Cain is covering up any part of the story - he's done. People will understand and forgive a bumbling/fumbled but truthful response as he's embarrassed and uncomfortable with the topic - but they won't tolerate a lie.
Romney/Gingrich 2012 is looking like the ticket.
russ_watters
Nov2-11, 05:36 PM
I don't know if the charge has merit, but he has so far botched the response effort.
I don't know if the charge has merit, but he has so far botched the response effort.
Might be making it worse now.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/11/cain-blames-perry-consultant-for-his-harassment-scandal/247799/
"As the scandal surrounding Herman Cain's alleged sexual harassment problem takes on a life of its own, the former pizza titan is hitting back with accusations that the story was a hit job from Rick Perry's campaign."
skeptic2
Nov2-11, 06:09 PM
As for Cain, no physical contact was involved, which tells me it's the liberal, ant-right media which is digging up this speck of dust and shouting it from the mountaintops. This behavior gives the media a VERY bad name, as well as anyone else who joins in the shouting.
Where did you hear no physical contact was involved? Do you know who the source was for this story or are you just blaming the usual suspects (the liberal, ant-right media)?
AlephZero
Nov2-11, 07:06 PM
If he wants to be a politician but he can't handle thiis sort of stuff, he's failed. The truth or falsity of the allegations is as irrelevant as whether Obama is really a Martian who converted to Islam.
Where did you hear no physical contact was involved? Do you know who the source was for this story or are you just blaming the usual suspects (the liberal, ant-right media)?
Politico broke the harassment story.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/67398.html
skippy1729
Nov2-11, 08:08 PM
Have Reverend Al and Jesse Jackson weighed in on this yet?
As for Cain, no physical contact was involved, which tells me it's the liberal, ant-right media which is digging up this speck of dust and shouting it from the mountaintops. This behavior gives the media a VERY bad name, as well as anyone else who joins in the shouting.
Ah, so you were there when this happened, I take it, otherwise there's no way you could know whether physical contact was involved or not. Please fill us in on what really happened.
DavidSnider
Nov2-11, 08:43 PM
The guys on the right are correct, this will backfire on the left.
The right loves the Herman Cain controversy because it deflects attention away from Perry and Romney eating their own to the 'liberal media conspiracy' against a candidate who never had a chance against Romney anyway.
Wow. Really? A sexual harassment suit because you tapped someone on the shoulder?
I had a similar situation to the OP where me (a male) and a male subordinate came around the corner too quickly and collided. I instinctively put my hands on his arms and steadied eachother and guided him around me. He reported the contact to HR whom called me and wanted an explaination. I gave them myside of the story and never heard anything of it again. He was getting fired in a few days for repeated performance failures (he had a specific goal after several months of evaluations and was very far from meeting it), and I think he saw the writing on the wall so was doing any little thing to keep a foothold.
On Cain - I agree he's handling it very poorly. It's hard to reply to oddball accusations without drawing extra attention to them (but at the same time addressing them).
NeoDevin
Nov2-11, 08:52 PM
As for Cain, no physical contact was involved, which tells me it's the liberal, ant-right media which is digging up this speck of dust and shouting it from the mountaintops. This behavior gives the media a VERY bad name, as well as anyone else who joins in the shouting.
So you're trying to tell us that physical contact is required for it to be sexual harassment?
The EEOC defines sexual harassment as:
Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, or other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature when:
1. Submission to such conduct was made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual's employment,
2. Submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual was used as the basis for employment decisions affecting such individual, or
3. Such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual's work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment.
1. and 2. are called "quid pro quo" (Latin for "this for that" or "something for something"). They are essentially "sexual bribery", or promising of benefits, and "sexual coercion".
Type 3. known as "hostile work environment," is by far the most common form. This form is less clear cut and is more subjective.[6]
Source: Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_harassment#United_States_2)
Given that the EEOC is the enforcement agency responsible for dealing with claims of unlawful sexual harassment, I'd say their definition supersedes yours.
Your argument appears to go like this:
"I touched a woman at work once and she cried foul. Because I wasn't sexually harassing her, someone else must touch a woman for it to be sexual harassment."
It's a complete non-sequitur. And that's ignoring the fact that you have no idea of any of the details of what actually happened.
DoggerDan
Nov2-11, 11:52 PM
Wow. Really? A sexual harassment suit because you tapped someone on the shoulder?
Never made it past her complaint to HR. They got statements from the witnesses before showing them to her as they fired her.
On Cain - I agree he's handling it very poorly. It's hard to reply to oddball accusations without drawing extra attention to them (but at the same time addressing them).
Agreed. His best response should have been something along the lines of "it was investigated and dismissed." It's not the sort of topic one wants to spend hard-earned media time discussing at length.
Might be making it worse now.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/11/cain-blames-perry-consultant-for-his-harassment-scandal/247799/
"As the scandal surrounding Herman Cain's alleged sexual harassment problem takes on a life of its own, the former pizza titan is hitting back with accusations that the story was a hit job from Rick Perry's campaign."
Which is very problematic for Cain - first he says he was unaware of any sexual harrassment lawsuit against him, then later says one of his former advisors leaked the story to Perry's camp - either way, he lied then or is doing so now (by lie, I mean lied about knowing if there was a suit, not that it actuall happened).
DoggerDan
Nov5-11, 03:44 AM
Which is very problematic for Cain - first he says he was unaware of any sexual harrassment lawsuit against him, then later says one of his former advisors leaked the story to Perry's camp - either way, he lied then or is doing so now (by lie, I mean lied about knowing if there was a suit, not that it actuall happened).
Your claim rests on the false assumption that human memories are perfect.
Mine's not. I've reviewed Cain's interviews on this subject, and they're smack dab in line with the way the human brain remembers relatively un-rememberable events.
At this point, there are 2 anonymous women another anonymous woman that has been cleared to speak but chooses not to and instead has a spokesperson lawyer?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/05/us/politics/cain-accuser-tells-of-harassment-pattern-lawyer-attests.html
""WASHINGTON — The lawyer for one of the women who accused Herman Cain of sexual harassment said Friday that Mr. Cain engaged in a “series of inappropriate behaviors and unwanted advances” toward his client over two months in the 1990s, and he directly accused Mr. Cain, a Republican presidential candidate, of not telling the truth about his behavior.
The lawyer, Joel P. Bennett, who represents a former employee of Mr. Cain’s at the National Restaurant Association, said the accusations did not center on a single exchange that could be easily misinterpreted, which is how Mr. Cain has characterized it. Mr. Bennett said there were multiple episodes that led his client to file a formal complaint with the restaurant association.
If this woman is unwilling to testify (and unless this lawyer was a witness to events spread over a 2 month period) - perhaps Cain or (more appropriately) the National Restaurant Association should hold the lawyer's feet to the fire?
Actually, at this point there's no proof the lawyer actually has a client. The National Restaurant Association continues to suffer damages to it's reputation every time the lawyer speaks - something it sought to avoid when it settled nearly 20 years ago. The damages to the National Restaurant Association (actually a global enterprise) may be hundreds of millions of dollars.
There's an old saying - the truth will set you free.
I think this will backfire on the Left - given their earlier defense of President Clinton through his scandals. EVERYBODY can see the hypocrisy in this matter - one more reason not to trust the main stream media.
On the other hand - if Cain is covering up any part of the story - he's done. People will understand and forgive a bumbling/fumbled but truthful response as he's embarrassed and uncomfortable with the topic - but they won't tolerate a lie.
Romney/Gingrich 2012 is looking like the ticket.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/03/herman-cain-woman-45000-payout
Romney and Perry are the left, now?
In another setback, Cain's team backed off its claim that rival Rick Perry's team had originally planted the story in a dirty tricks operation. Cain had blamed a Perry strategist, Curt Anderson, as the source.
But Cain's team on Thursday was forced into a climbdown after Anderson denied it. Anderson said he had known nothing about the sexual allegations until he read about them on Politico.
He added that he continued to have enormous respect for Cain and would not speak negatively about him either on or off the record.
Mark Block, Cain's campaign chief, said: "Until we get all the facts, I'm just going to say that we accept what Mr Anderson has said, and we want to move on with the campaign."
Anderson had worked for Cain as a consultant in a failed bid for the Senate in 2004. Cain's team claim he was briefed at the time about the sex harrassment allegations.
Perry's team suggested that another rival, Mitt Romney, might have been the culprit, noting that one of Romney's big donors was in the restaurant industry.
To be fair, Cain has nothing to back up his suspicions about Perry and Romney except that people in their campaign staff could have known about the incidents. But thinking this was leaked by "the left" is equally unfounded at this point.
[url]
To be fair, Cain has nothing to back up his suspicions about Perry and Romney except that people in their campaign staff could have known about the incidents. But thinking this was leaked by "the left" is equally unfounded at this point.
I would consider this story slanted "Left" - chiding Conservatives.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/05/opinion/martin-cain-race/
" If you're Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Brent Bozell, Sean Hannity, and yes, even Herman Cain, you must feel pretty stupid for trying to fool the American people by blaming the reporting on sexual harassment complaints against the GOP presidential candidate on his race."
Label this IMO.
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/11/04/msnbc-guest-cain-really-would-have-been-lynched-if-he-did-50s-or-60s
This one too:(my favorite) my bold
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/kyle-drennen/2011/11/02/chris-matthews-speculates-herman-cain-sexually-harassed-women-while-dr
"Appearing on Wednesday's NBC Today, MSNBC Hardball host Chris Matthews urged Herman Cain to admit to sexually harassing women and even predicted what the Republican front-runner might say: "I think even if it's really bad he has to put the context to it. He has to say, 'It was an extraordinary night, I had too many drinks, I normally don't act like that, this is not me.'"
The segment began with co-host Matt Lauer going after Cain for suggesting racial motivations behind the dredged up accusations: "He believes race is playing a role in this but he has no proof to support that. Is that a dangerous statement on his point?" Matthews replied: "I think he's struggling to come up with some rationale why he's not talking....At some point we're going to find out, maybe by the end of the week, what he actually did that caused all of this trouble. He clearly did something wrong." "
Proton Soup
Nov5-11, 05:06 PM
that's some bold speculation
Your claim rests on the false assumption that human memories are perfect.
Mine's not. I've reviewed Cain's interviews on this subject, and they're smack dab in line with the way the human brain remembers relatively un-rememberable events.
Perhaps so, but if I were to ever be accused of this, I wouldn't ever call it "un-rememberable".
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57319854-503544/sharon-bialek-accuses-cain-of-sexually-inappropriate-behavior/
This is someone new, who it appears never pursued it but felt the need now to talk about it.
While I find it abhorrent to try to extort sexual favors with a job offer, I don't find it surprising. While the moral content of our president is an external symbol of our national moral values, I really don't know if I'd refuse to vote for someone SOLELY on an event such as this. But a history of it would show his lack of respect for women, and that IS a huge problem.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57319854-503544/sharon-bialek-accuses-cain-of-sexually-inappropriate-behavior/
This is someone new, who it appears never pursued it but felt the need now to talk about it.
While I find it abhorrent to try to extort sexual favors with a job offer, I don't find it surprising. While the moral content of our president is an external symbol of our national moral values, I really don't know if I'd refuse to vote for someone SOLELY on an event such as this. But a history of it would show his lack of respect for women, and that IS a huge problem.
I don't know what to think of this - as a long time member of the NRA - I have lot's of questions.
1.) Why wait until now - Cain ran for Senate?
2.) How did Atty Gloria Allred find this woman?
3.) Why was David Axelrod's name connected to hers in Google searches?
4.) Why did she lose her job at NRA before she met Cain under these circumstances - what was going on inside NRA politics?
5.) Was she planning to leave her boyfriend (in NJ?) and move to DC - or did she live in Chicago where the Education foundation and trade shows are based?
I don't know what to think of this - as a long time member of the NRA - I have lot's of questions.
1.) Why wait until now - Cain ran for Senate?
2.) How did Atty Gloria Allred find this woman?
3.) Why was David Axelrod's name connected to hers in Google searches?
4.) Why did she lose her job at NRA before she met Cain under these circumstances - what was going on inside NRA politics?
5.) Was she planning to leave her boyfriend (in NJ?) and move to DC - or did she live in Chicago where the Education foundation and trade shows are based?
In addition she states she told her boyfriend and friend after the incident:
The lawyer said she had two sworn statements from Ms Bialek's then boyfriend, as well as a longstanding friend, who said she had told them about Mr Cain's alleged behaviour shortly afterwards.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15628860
So 6) Why her boyfriend and friend waited until now?
Your claim rests on the false assumption that human memories are perfect.
Mine's not. I've reviewed Cain's interviews on this subject, and they're smack dab in line with the way the human brain remembers relatively un-rememberable events.
Perhaps so, but if I were to ever be accused of this, I wouldn't ever call it "un-rememberable".
Actually, I think something like that would be pretty memorable, too. How often do these type of things happen to him that they'd become un-rememberable?
That still doesn't shed any light on what actually happened - it just shows he doesn't want to talk about it. Nor does does the NRA, hence the 5 figure settlements.
Likewise, Chris Matthew's comments aren't exactly bold speculation, even if I don't think Cain definitely did something legally wrong. Something happened that the NRA felt was worth paying out money instead of defending itself (and Cain?) in court. That doesn't mean the women would have won their case. It only means whatever happened would be embarrassing whether they won or lost. I think Matthew's comments are an overstatement, even if not bold speculation.
In addition she states she told her boyfriend and friend after the incident:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15628860
So 6) Why her boyfriend and friend waited until now?
Well, to be honest, its more of a "this perv tried to bribe me with a job for "sexual favors"" story that you'd tell your friend. Really doesn't seem like something you rush to the press to talk about.
Well, to be honest, its more of a "this perv tried to bribe me with a job for "sexual favors"" story that you'd tell your friend. Really doesn't seem like something you rush to the press to talk about.
Accordingly, why are there 2 sworn statements?
Why was David Axelrod's name connected to hers in Google searches?
This is the source of the confusion: Cook County records showing a court case involving Bialek and a plaintiff represented by a “David Axelrod” of Highland Park, IL.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=david+axelrod+attorney+highland+park&rlz=1R2GZAG_enUS440&gs_sm=c&gs_upl=0l0l1l1288l0l0l0l0l0l0l0l0ll0l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&biw=960&bih=399&wrapid=tlif132071938324110&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi
http://michellemalkin.com/2011/11/07/no-david-axelrod-is-not-connected-to-sharon-bialek-plus-cook-county-court-records/
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=david+axelrod+attorney+highland+park&rlz=1R2GZAG_enUS440&gs_sm=c&gs_upl=0l0l1l1288l0l0l0l0l0l0l0l0ll0l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&biw=960&bih=399&wrapid=tlif132071938324110&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi
http://michellemalkin.com/2011/11/07/no-david-axelrod-is-not-connected-to-sharon-bialek-plus-cook-county-court-records/
Ok - coincidence it is. I'll replace that one with how does one place a hand up a (you know what) and pull a head down to (you know where) at the same time - if standing? That sounds very aggressive - why would she ask him to drive her back to her hotel after that encounter? If there is any truth to this - my guess is they knew each other better than either are stipulating.
Ok - coincidence it is. I'll replace that one with how does one place a hand up a (you know what) and pull a head down to (you know where) at the same time - if standing? That sounds very aggressive - why would she ask him to drive her back to her hotel after that encounter? If there is any truth to this - my guess is they knew each other better than either are stipulating.
Who said they were standing. They were sitting in a car. He stopped the touchy feely bit when she ask him to. Who else was going to drive her back to the hotel? They probably did know each other better than either stipulated or she would not have come to him seeking a favor.:devil:
Who said they were standing. They were sitting in a car. He stopped when she ask him to. Who else was going to drive her back to the hotel? They probably did know each other better than either stipulated or she would not have come to him seeking a favor.:devil:
I just listened to the whole statement. I thought she had said they gotten out of the car. Now more questions - why would the boyfriend send her to see Cain, how/why would he upgrade her room - then ask "why are you here?", why were they drinking and going to dinner, and what was the purpose of visiting closed offices?
If I were in her shoes - just lost a job and wanted to speak to the President about it - the meeting would have been in his office during regular business hours.
Likewise, if I was in Cain's shoes - even when I was single - there wouldn't have been any room upgrades and private drinks and dinners if I didn't know what this former employee had in mind.
The entire affair sounds shady to me.
I don't know what to think of this - as a long time member of the NRA - I have lot's of questions.
1.) Why wait until now - Cain ran for Senate?
Most of the time something like this happens to a woman, it doesn't occur to her that there have been others in the same situation. Seeing this scandal unfold probably gave her the courage to step forward.
Also, frankly, it's humiliating. Especially since she was, in fact, asking him for a favor - maybe she was afraid it would make her look bad. I bet she just wanted it to go away, and pretend it didn't happen.
Btw, she has identified herself as a "registered Republican" (NPR).
Proton Soup
Nov8-11, 12:00 AM
i just want to know if he pulled a Clinton and bit her nose.
ThinkToday
Nov8-11, 08:59 AM
Seriously, how can someone respond to undocumented charges more than a decade later? "She has witnesses". Yea, the entire ACRON organization would make get witnesses for each other, lol. Do you really think the Democratic Party nuts like Soros, MoveOn.org, etc. couldn't set this up on short notice? Remember, none of these "victims" have filed a legal complaint, so they can't be punished for filing a false police report. "Oh, but they put themselves up to public reticule and exposure". Yea, they get to brag to their friends they help sandbag some guy running for president, and make a little money selling the story.
Let’s examine recent history. Voter registration fraud, completed voter ballots mailed out recently in one state by democrats, etc. Is it too hard to image that a popular candidate may have a false claim made against him which is so late it's almost impossible to defend? Anyone remember these same people that hate Cain come to defend Clinton against those false allegations by Flowers, Lewinski, etc.? Even with tapes and Clinton’s “DNA”, they still defended him. With Cain, we only have decade plus old undocumented or discredited claims.
Most of the time something like this happens to a woman, it doesn't occur to her that there have been others in the same situation. Seeing this scandal unfold probably gave her the courage to step forward.
Also, frankly, it's humiliating. Especially since she was, in fact, asking him for a favor - maybe she was afraid it would make her look bad. I bet she just wanted it to go away, and pretend it didn't happen.
Btw, she has identified herself as a "registered Republican" (NPR).
I just heard an interview with the accuser and Attorney Gloria Allred. She said she talked to Cain at a convention recently and he remembered her. Why would she go to see him at a recent convention? Next, she claims her former boyfriend called to determine if she was one of the anonymous accusers - then encouraged her to contact Atty Gloria Allred - because she needed the best.
The more I hear about this - the more it sounds like a failed date - drinks, dinner, and a room upgraded to a suite - over a weekend?
Perhaps the biggest clue was when she said Cain asked her "why" she was there - this was during drinks and discussion of the room upgrade.
Today she said they previously had a great time (with her boyfriend along) at an NRA convention prior to the bad encounter. They (accuser/boyfriend/Cain) were familiar and social - this time she came alone.
Please note, the NRA food shows/restaurant conventions used to attract over 100,000 people into McCormick Place over the weekend - $10-$15 admission at the door and all the food, beer, wine, and alcohol one cared to consume. Aside from the floor show - elaborate private parties for industry professionals were held in the surrounding hotels. Needless to say - the food and beverage industry know how to throw a great party. This NRA party/event was the basis of their prior relationship - social - not work.
Let’s examine recent history. Voter registration fraud, completed voter ballots mailed out recently in one state by democrats, etc.
Got sources for that? That's simply opinion unless you back it by legitimate sources.
Anyone remember these same people that hate Cain come to defend Clinton against those false allegations by Flowers, Lewinski, etc.?
Yes, and there are those on the left who didn't believe Clinton, jut as there are some on the right who don't believe Cain. And there were some on the right who immediately (i.e., before any proof) lambasted Clinton, just as there are some on the left who are immediately lambasting Cain.
Even with tapes and Clinton’s “DNA”, they still defended him. With Cain, we only have decade plus old undocumented or discredited claims.
There are actually 2 documented claims, and if they are discredited, perhaps you should support that statement with sources.
The more I hear about this - the more it sounds like a failed date - drinks, dinner, and a room upgraded to a suite - over a weekend?
Failed date? Perhaps. It certainly is weird, whatever it is. On one hand, she claims she went to him for help in seeking a job at the urging of her (now) ex-boyfriend who said he [Cain] appeared impressed with her at a prior meeting, so maybe he [Cain] could help her in finding a job (this is paraphrased from the story I heard yesterday on NPR).
On the other, she met with him for drinks in her hotel lobby (yes, nothing wrong with that) then went for dinner with him driving. Perhaps not the best judgement on her part, but then, I've never been to big meetings like that, so maybe it happens all the time, and it's no big deal.
However, saying she didn't file any claim at the time means she made the whle thing up is speculative at best (not saying you did this WhoWee). Part of the psychology of sexual harrassment is that the female frequently is too embarrassed, has feelings she will be blamed, etc. She may have made the whole thing up, but then gain, she may not have. At this point, I think it's too early to tell one way or the other.
Failed date? Perhaps. It certainly is weird, whatever it is. On one hand, she claims she went to him for help in seeking a job at the urging of her (now) ex-boyfriend who said he [Cain] appeared impressed with her at a prior meeting, so maybe he [Cain] could help her in finding a job (this is paraphrased from the story I heard yesterday on NPR).
On the other, she met with him for drinks in her hotel lobby (yes, nothing wrong with that) then went for dinner with him driving. Perhaps not the best judgement on her part, but then, I've never been to big meetings like that, so maybe it happens all the time, and it's no big deal.
However, saying she didn't file any claim at the time means she made the whle thing up is speculative at best (not saying you did this WhoWee). Part of the psychology of sexual harrassment is that the female frequently is too embarrassed, has feelings she will be blamed, etc. She may have made the whole thing up, but then gain, she may not have. At this point, I think it's too early to tell one way or the other.
I'm not trying to protect Cain - just make sense of the story. From Cain's perspective ala her description of events:
1.) Cain, accuser and her boyfriend party together at the NRA show. She was an employee but not under his direct supervision and with an escort - not ideal but not a problem.
2.) She loses her job a few months later and she contacts Cain - wants to visit him in DC (should have talked specifics on phone)
3.) She takes a nice hotel room (weekend- he should have questioned what else she was planning-any friends in town?) and they decide to have drinks in the lobby (that's ok - their prior relationship was drinking)
4.) Prior to drinks he upgrades her to a suite (might not have cost him anything - Pres of NRA)
5.) He asks "why" she is there - she lost job and wants his help - apparently not to work with him but back in Chicago. (if this is the correct timeline - he should have hit the brakes if he was thinking about a personal affair)
6.) They go to dinner (ok)
7.) They swing by offices after dinner (might be ok?)
8.) Staying in the car to make a pass - very stupid from his perspective if it occurred as she described. If he wanted to make a pass why not go up to his office (the base of his power) or back to the hotel (suite upgrade and privacy)? This would also be the most offensive and disrespectful place to make a pass from her perspective.
9.) Drove her back to hotel and dropped her off - consistent with a nervous response to a failed pass (alternative was feet on pavement).
10.) Apparently the story ends for him - until she showed up at a recent convention and now with Atty Gloria.
Sorry if I made it seem like you were defending him - I'm trying to make sense of it too. Then again, I try to make sense of quantum mechanics (my thanks to Feynman for that wonderful quote!)
Sorry if I made it seem like you were defending him - I'm trying to make sense of it too. Then again, I try to make sense of quantum mechanics (my thanks to Feynman for that wonderful quote!)
No worries - as my AU associates would say.
My guess is politicians everywhere are watching this case - if the new standard is a failed pass 12 years ago?
daveyrocket
Nov8-11, 12:38 PM
It looks like Cain forgot the basic rules of sexual harassment:
http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/sexual-harassment/258532/
Apparently this is the recent event the accuser approached Cain at - spoke to him before he took the stage? "Why" is the question at hand.
http://teapartychicago.org/teacon2011
"TeaCon 2011, the first Midwest Tea Party Convention, was held in Schaumburg, Illinois on September 30 and October 1, 2011. The Chicago Tea Party was a proud tea party partner of the event along with the Illinois Tea Party. TeaCon featured Glenn Beck, Andrew Breitbart, Dana Loesch, Steven Crowder, Guy Benson, Ed Morrissey, Republican Presidential Candidate Herman Cain, Congressman Joe Walsh and hundreds of tea party leaders and activists from across the Midwest. "
Why would she approach him (alone) and have a private conversation a few minutes before he took the stage at this event? In interviews, she indicates he recognized her. A radio talk show (witness) said they spoke privately and Cain remained "stone-faced" - just nodded.
Then, a month later, why show up in a news conference with Atty Gloria?
ThinkToday
Nov8-11, 01:06 PM
Got sources for that? That's simply opinion unless you back it by legitimate sources.
Yes, and there are those on the left who didn't believe Clinton, jut as there are some on the right who don't believe Cain. And there were some on the right who immediately (i.e., before any proof) lambasted Clinton, just as there are some on the left who are immediately lambasting Cain.
There are actually 2 documented claims, and if they are discredited, perhaps you should support that statement with sources.
Sources for mailing out completed ballots can be found in the current news. I don't recall if it was msn.com or foxnews.com that carried the stories of the investigation. Maybe you missed it on the liberal media “news” shows you watch. Voter registration fraud, seriously? Did you watch the news on ACORN and others last election. Did you not know of the high voter turnout for JFK in Chicago…. Cemeteries when he was elected. Try using Google.
lol, "those on the left who didn't believe Clinton". Who? Certainly not in ANY liberal main stream media.
"There are actually 2 documented claims, and if they are discredited, perhaps you should support that statement with sources." <- of what? you do know Clinton left "tracks" on Monica's dress, right? Oh, right, it was planted. As for Flowers et. al., you forget about the tapes she made and those former Clinton adviser Dick Morris made with Bill’s voice???
ThinkToday
Nov8-11, 01:21 PM
My main problem with this entire thing is that it's so long ago, there is no defense available to Cain. Surveillance footage is long gone. Other witnesses that may have been able to come to his defense are lost. Just too murky, too much she said vs. he said. I've been going to conventions, annual meetings, etc. for 30 plus years. No way in hell I can remember what I did, when, where, and with whom, with or without a drink. There are just too many things going on. On top of that, it's one of the dumbest places for an easily recognizable figure (President of NRA) to go wild. Everyone there knows you. Getting to a "room" unseen by surveillance, other guests, etc., not to mention all the people dropping by your room and calls from people that want to meet with you. On top of that, if she was so uncomfortable as to feel harassed, why keep going to talk to him? Going to that showboat Gloria Allred pretty much smells of publicity stunt (fund raiser) for both.
Sources for mailing out completed ballots can be found in the current news. I don't recall if it was msn.com or foxnews.com that carried the stories of the investigation. Maybe you missed it on the liberal media “news” shows you watch. Voter registration fraud, seriously? Did you watch the news on ACORN and others last election. Did you not know of the high voter turnout for JFK in Chicago…. Cemeteries when he was elected. Try using Google.
You made the claim, therefore the onus of proof is upon you, not me.
lol, "those on the left who didn't believe Clinton". Who? Certainly not in ANY liberal main stream media.
I never claimed mainstream media (and frankly, that was over 10 years ago and I imagine any google search would come up empty because of that)
"There are actually 2 documented claims, and if they are discredited, perhaps you should support that statement with sources." <- of what? you do know Clinton left "tracks" on Monica's dress, right? Oh, right, it was planted. As for Flowers et. al., you forget about the tapes she made and those former Clinton adviser Dick Morris made with Bill’s voice???
And what does this have to do with the documented claims? Your diatribes about Clinton are not proof that the documented claims about Cain have been discredited, as you claimed. Again, where is your proof the claims have been discredited?
Proton Soup
Nov8-11, 03:49 PM
http://www.suntimes.com/8592168-417/sneed-witness-says-cain-accuser-hugged-him-during-tea-party-meeting-a-month-ago.html
◆The encounter: “It looked sort of flirtatious,” said Jacobson. “I mean they were hugging. But she could have been giving him the kiss of death for all I know. I had no idea what they were talking about, but she was inches from his ear.”
No worries - as my AU associates would say.
My guess is politicians everywhere are watching this case - if the new standard is a failed pass 12 years ago?
Wasn't he married 12 years ago?
Cain said he doesn't know her...
Romney-Gingrich 2012!
IMO - Cain needs to spend 100% of his time focused on lawsuits against everyone that has done damage to him. Again, the truth will set him free.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=david+axelrod+attorney+highland+park&rlz=1R2GZAG_enUS440&gs_sm=c&gs_upl=0l0l1l1288l0l0l0l0l0l0l0l0ll0l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&biw=960&bih=399&wrapid=tlif132071938324110&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi
http://michellemalkin.com/2011/11/07/no-david-axelrod-is-not-connected-to-sharon-bialek-plus-cook-county-court-records/
She lived in the same apartment building as David Axelrod (President Obama's guy)?
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/11/08/cain_accuser_lives_in_same_building_as_david_axelr od.html
"Martha MacCallum, FOX News: "One of the things is that you lived at a 505 North Lake Shore Drive apartment, right? This is the same building, it happens to be the same building David Axelrod lives in. Do you know David Axelrod? Ever have any interaction with him at all?
Sharon Bialek, Cain accuser: "I saw him in the gym. I mean -- everybody nods to each other. It is friendly building but I never had any interaction with him.""
We will never know the truth or falsehood of the claims, but with four women now claiming harassment, two of the women publicly identified, and two of the claims having documented settlements, I suspect the guy is toast. If this joint press conference actually happens, it will be very damning.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57321023-503544/karen-kraushaar-interested-in-press-conference-with-all-cain-accusers/
We will never know the truth or falsehood of the claims, but with four women now claiming harassment, two of the women publicly identified, and two of the claims having documented settlements, I suspect the guy is toast. If this joint press conference actually happens, it will be very damning.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57321023-503544/karen-kraushaar-interested-in-press-conference-with-all-cain-accusers/
Again, he needs to refocus 100% of his attention on bringing suits. Two of these people broke agreements to speak out. This headline is unbelievable.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/us-election/8878323/Herman-Cain-is-a-monster-says-second-woman.html
"Herman Cain is a monster, says second woman"
ThinkToday
Nov9-11, 09:00 AM
Again, he needs to refocus 100% of his attention on bringing suits. Two of these people broke agreements to speak out. This headline is unbelievable.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/us-election/8878323/Herman-Cain-is-a-monster-says-second-woman.html
"Herman Cain is a monster, says second woman"
A "five figure settlement", lol. That's not a settlement for sexual harassment. The dollars are way too low for a credible case. It's more likely something else. Five figures is more likely disposing of a nuisance suit, e.g. cheaper to settle than fight and deal with bad press. Or, as some have said, severance. You have to wonder why these claims are all coming out now and why each is doing it with a lawyer.
As a public figure, he'd likely lose the case, but he could compel sworn testimony from each woman about the allegations. If it shows they are part of an organized strategy by some on the left, that could be very good. Yep, looser in court, but may be a winner in the public, if it shows political coordination and conspiracy. If the latter is the case, he may win in court.
A "five figure settlement", lol. That's not a settlement for sexual harassment. The dollars are way too low for a credible case. It's more likely something else. Five figures is more likely disposing of a nuisance suit, e.g. cheaper to settle than fight and deal with bad press. Or, as some have said, severance. You have to wonder why these claims are all coming out now and why each is doing it with a lawyer.
As a public figure, he'd likely lose the case, but he could compel sworn testimony from each woman about the allegations. If it shows they are part of an organized strategy by some on the left, that could be very good. Yep, looser in court, but may be a winner in the public, if it shows political coordination and conspiracy. If the latter is the case, he may win in court.
The NRA is also due whatever award was stipulated in their agreements with these women - at minimum - they have also been damaged.
A legal action by Cain will certainly bring forth the details of who, what, where, when, how, and why these women came forward. I still want to know why accuser number 4 went to the TEACon event to see Cain a month ago?
I thought the two who received settlements were still (AFAIK) anonymous, but 1 was seeking permission from the NRA to speak more about it. That's why they're going through lawyers - to make sure they don't break the law by going against the non-disclosure agreements/gag orders.
I thought the two who received settlements were still (AFAIK) anonymous, but 1 was seeking permission from the NRA to speak more about it. That's why they're going through lawyers - to make sure they don't break the law by going against the non-disclosure agreements/gag orders.
This one was anonymous and had an agreement with the NRA.
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/herman-cain-monster-accuser/story?id=14912783#.TrqkovQoExw
"Bennett said he did not want to characterize "what was physical and what was verbal," but that Cain's behavior "qualified as sexual harassment in our opinion." "Mr. Cain knows the specifics," he said. Kraushaar left the NRA after receiving a reported $45,000 settlement."
Her attorney now promises to detail the original complaint - said it wasn't a gesture regarding her height relative to Cain's wife's height.
A little info on the NRA
http://www.restaurant.org/aboutus/history/
The NRA press release:
http://www.restaurant.org/pressroom/pressrelease/?ID=2182
The NRA press release:
http://www.restaurant.org/pressroom/pressrelease/?ID=2182
Regardless of the fact that "Mr. Herman Cain disputed the allegations in the complaint," I for one find it hard to believe that the NRA would pay out $45,000 if they thought the claims were baseless. After all, what would you expect him to say?
skeptic2
Nov9-11, 12:44 PM
Cain said he doesn't know her...!
Does he not know Karen Kraushaar too?
AlephZero
Nov9-11, 12:46 PM
I don't understand why the Democrats would want to make this into an issue. Surely they want the GOP to nominate a presidental candidate who is completely unelectable?
Most of the front-runners for that award aren't standing, but Cain is. So let him win the nomination, and them destroy him, if he doesn't spontaneously combust within a couple of weeks anyway.
ThinkToday
Nov9-11, 12:55 PM
Regardless of the fact that "Mr. Herman Cain disputed the allegations in the complaint," I for one find it hard to believe that the NRA would pay out $45,000 if they thought the claims were baseless. After all, what would you expect him to say?
Ya got to admit this line is interesting. "Notwithstanding the Association’s ongoing policy of maintaining the privacy of all personnel matters, we have advised Mr. Bennett that we are willing to waive the confidentiality of this matter and permit Mr. Bennett’s client to comment. As indicated in Mr. Bennett’s statement, his client prefers not to be further involved with this matter and we will respect her decision. "
She's free to slam Cain with the details, but doesn't..... Not even a little curoius why?
As for the $45k settlement, I have a family full of lawyers, judges, etc., it's a cheap out. BTW, I'm not a Cain supporter. I just don't like people that fling BS in the fan to see what sticks on others.
skeptic2
Nov9-11, 12:55 PM
What have the Democrats been saying? I haven't anything from the Democrats. It all seems to be the media reporting allegations by the self identified victims and the Republicans claiming either that the victims are lying or the Democrats are making this up.
ThinkToday
Nov9-11, 01:03 PM
Agreed. It won’t be Cain, even before this stuff. Cain is kind of like Howard Dean was in the Demo primary years ago. I suspect it may be Gingrich. I'm not sure Newt could win, but he'd completely clean Obama's clock in any debate like the one between Cain and Gingrich. Obama’s fine with a teleprompter, but Newt is just plain smart. You can disagree with him, but he knows his stuff.
Regardless of the fact that "Mr. Herman Cain disputed the allegations in the complaint," I for one find it hard to believe that the NRA would pay out $45,000 if they thought the claims were baseless. After all, what would you expect him to say?
Unfortunately, (IMO) it happens all the time where a lawsuit is settled rather than taken to court, since it's easier to bank ona sure thing (the settlement) for both sides, rather than risk a jury's decision.
Edited to add: And not just sexual harrassment suits - pretty much any personal injury type suit as well.
skeptic2
Nov9-11, 06:23 PM
Do you think the American people would elect an admitted sex criminal to be president?
Virginia Statute
18.2-366. Adultery and fornication by persons forbidden to marry; incest.
A. Any person who commits adultery or fornication with any person whom he or she is forbidden by law to marry shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor except as provided by subsection B.
Char. Limit
Nov9-11, 06:40 PM
Do you think the American people would elect an admitted sex criminal to be president?
Yes.
Apparently, the audience did not like the questions presented at tonight's debate?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/09/herman-cain-sexual-harassment-debate_n_1085215.html
"To audible boos and groans, CNBC debate host Maria Bartiromo on Wednesday asked GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain the question we'd been girding ourselves for -- his sexual harassment allegations. It's an odd fit for a debate on the economy, and Bartiromo had to couch it in terms of "leadership" and "character" in order to get it in. It only barely did -- the audience was not happy to hear this inquiry coming up."
skeptic2
Nov10-11, 05:57 AM
I was not referring to Cain but to Gingrich in response to ThinkToday's endorsement.
Proton Soup
Nov10-11, 02:32 PM
Apparently, the audience did not like the questions presented at tonight's debate?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/09/herman-cain-sexual-harassment-debate_n_1085215.html
"To audible boos and groans, CNBC debate host Maria Bartiromo on Wednesday asked GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain the question we'd been girding ourselves for -- his sexual harassment allegations. It's an odd fit for a debate on the economy, and Bartiromo had to couch it in terms of "leadership" and "character" in order to get it in. It only barely did -- the audience was not happy to hear this inquiry coming up."
that's a bit hilarious given the obscenely graphic allegations that were hounding Clinton throughout his presidency.
DoggerDan
Nov10-11, 08:34 PM
Unfortunately, (IMO) it happens all the time where a lawsuit is settled rather than taken to court, since it's easier to bank ona sure thing (the settlement) for both sides, rather than risk a jury's decision.
Edited to add: And not just sexual harrassment suits - pretty much any personal injury type suit as well.
Good point. Such settlements in no way either support or deny the accused party's guilt or innocence. It's simply legally, financially, and politically expedient to do so rather than drag things through a public trial.
Good point. Such settlements in no way either support or deny the accused party's guilt or innocence. It's simply legally, financially, and politically expedient to do so rather than drag things through a public trial.How many such "settlements" might we expect to find about before we consider that Cain *might* be a creep who abuses women? He might be a swell guy, and fun to be around, but I'm not getting warm and happy feelings from the press that he's getting now.
DoggerDan
Nov11-11, 03:23 AM
...I'm not getting warm and happy feelings from the press that he's getting now.
Congrats, turbo - you're a child of the press, rather than a free-thinker.
How many such "settlements" might we expect to find about before we consider that Cain *might* be a creep who abuses women? He might be a swell guy, and fun to be around, but I'm not getting warm and happy feelings from the press that he's getting now.
I haven't seen, heard or read any reports indicating "warm and happy feelings from the press that he's getting now"?
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/fourth-woman-accuses-herman-cain-sexual-harassment/story?id=14896935#.Tr0ToPQoExw
"Chicago Woman Claims Herman Cain Wanted Her to Trade Sex for Job"
**********
Here's a Republican calling for him to quit the race.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/11/08/first-on-cnn-murkowski-says-cain-should-quit-if-allegations-are-true/
"Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski told CNN on Tuesday she is "concerned" that the most recent charge of sexual harassment against Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain "is not an isolated incident" and that he should quit the race if there is any truth to the claims."
**
I wouldn't call these "warm and happy"? IMO - Cain needs to step back and evaluate his situation. Next, he needs to bring strategically placed suits against his accusers designed to flush out information regarding how and why they've come out of the closet after this much time. If he's innocent - let the chips fall where they may. If he has anything to hide - he should expect his bluff of a lie detector to be called. Either way, this distraction only helps one person - President Obama (IMO).
Jimmy Snyder
Nov11-11, 07:01 AM
Next, he needs to bring strategically placed suits against his accusers designed to flush out information regarding how and why they've come out of the closet after this much time.
Regardless of whether you think the charges are true or false, there is only one possible reason why they come out after this much time. A lawsuit to flush out such information is a waste of the court's time.
Regardless of whether you think the charges are true or false, there is only one possible reason why they come out after this much time. A lawsuit to flush out such information is a waste of the court's time.
You're right - they have more important issues to consider - some involve spending of tax dollars.
http://www.medicaldaily.com/news/20111011/7367/transgender-federal-prison-state-prison-inmates-regulation-surgery.htm
"Recent revisions in the federal prison health system could signal big changes for a handful of transgender inmates suing states prison facilities for gender reassignment surgery.
In late September, The U.S. Bureau of Prisons, which regulates federal prison facilities, released revised rules allowing transgender inmates diagnosed with gender identity disorder who did not begin treatment before entering into federal custody will now be eligible for hormone therapy, specialized mental health counseling and possibly gender reassignment surgery while imprisoned."
Jimmy Snyder
Nov11-11, 07:24 AM
Person that says All rise: All rise.
Judge: You may be seated. Call your first witness.
Lawyer: I call Karen Kraushaar or however you say it.
Person that tells witnesses to take the stand: Karen Kraushaar please take the stand. Do you swear?
Kraushaar: S*** yeah.
Lawyer: How did you come out of the closet?
Kraushaar: By making an announcement.
Lawyer: Why did you come out of the closet after this much time?
Kraushaar: Because Cain didn't run for President until recently.
Lawyer: I have no further questions.
Judge: Let's adjourn for second breakfast.
Lawyer: But your honor, recent revisions in the federal prison health system could signal big changes for a handful of transgender inmates suing states prison facilities for gender reassignment surgery.
Judge: I should have gone to med school.
I haven't seen, heard or read any reports indicating "warm and happy feelings from the press that he's getting now"?
God I love the English language (not). This is a perfect example of how the same sentence can mean two totally different things to two different people. I interpreted this as turbo not getting any warm and happy feelings from the press coverage (i.e., the coverage Cain is getting is making turbo disgusted with Cain), but I can easily see how it could be interpreted as the warm and happy feelings the press (i.e., the institution of the press) is giving Cain.
Next, he needs to bring strategically placed suits against his accusers designed to flush out information regarding how and why they've come out of the closet after this much time.
It should be obvious why the ones that received a settlement took so long to "come out of the closet". "Staying in the closet" would usually be part of the settlement. Especially if the reason for the settlement was that the NRA would lose simply by having a hearing, win or lose. You don't settle for an entirely bogus claim. You settle because the story would be embarrassing regardless of its legality (or illegality, except in the latter, the accusers would probably be less willing to settle).
For the others? Who knows? It's not unheard of to be unwilling to be first victim to break the story. How is it that Penn State asst coach Jerry Sandusky's actions came to light because of what another coach knew and who he told and who they told? How come none of the victims raised complaints? (The really shocking part of that story was Sandusky was already being quietly investigated before McCreary witnessed the sexual abuse. McCreary's story would have been very valuable information for the authorities at that time.)
It should be obvious why the ones that received a settlement took so long to "come out of the closet". "Staying in the closet" would usually be part of the settlement. Especially if the reason for the settlement was that the NRA would lose simply by having a hearing, win or lose. You don't settle for an entirely bogus claim. You settle because the story would be embarrassing regardless of its legality (or illegality, except in the latter, the accusers would probably be less willing to settle).
For the others? Who knows? It's not unheard of to be unwilling to be first victim to break the story. How is it that Penn State asst coach Jerry Sandusky's actions came to light because of what another coach knew and who he told and who they told? How come none of the victims raised complaints? (The really shocking part of that story was Sandusky was already being quietly investigated before McCreary witnessed the sexual abuse. McCreary's story would have been very valuable information for the authorities at that time.)
Apples and oranges - Cain isn't being accused of anything beyond jestures, comments, and inappropriate external touching of an adult woman in a car (in public) and after drinks and a dinner date.
Regardless of whether you think the charges are true or false, there is only one possible reason why they come out after this much time. A lawsuit to flush out such information is a waste of the court's time.True. Anita Hill broke her silence after Thomas was nominated to the highest court in the land. If Cain harassed these women, they have every motivation to keep him out of the Oval Office. Why go public now and lay themselves open for attacks if they are insincere regarding the harassment charges? It will not benefit them personally, and could jeopardize their jobs, relationships, etc. It doesn't help that Cain is essentially calling all of them liars with no factual support. When a politician says something like "this has all been put behind us", you can bet that like the Great Oz, he doesn't want anybody looking behind the curtain.
True. Anita Hill broke her silence after Thomas was nominated to the highest court in the land. If Cain harassed these women, they have every motivation to keep him out of the Oval Office. Why go public now and lay themselves open for attacks if they are insincere regarding the harassment charges? It will not benefit them personally, and could jeopardize their jobs, relationships, etc. It doesn't help that Cain is essentially calling all of them liars with no factual support. When a politician says something like "this has all been put behind us", you can bet that like the Great Oz, he doesn't want anybody looking behind the curtain.
I'll be the pessimist - they might just hope to make some money. We still don't know why Atty Gloria's client went to see Cain the weekend of October 1 at the TEACon event - or what she wanted?
As for Anita Hill:
http://www.amazon.com/Speaking-Truth-Power-Anita-Hill/dp/0385476272
"After her astonishing testimony in the Clarence Thomas hearings, Anita Hill ceased to be a private citizen and became a public figure at the white-hot center of an intense national debate on how men and women relate to each other in the workplace. That debate led to ground-breaking court decisions and major shifts in corporate policies that have had a profound effect on our lives--and on Anita Hill's life. Now, with remarkable insight and total candor, Anita Hill reflects on events before, during, and after the hearings, offering for the first time a complete account that sheds startling new light on this watershed event."
Jimmy Snyder
Nov12-11, 04:55 PM
Bush has come out of the closet announcing that in 2004 when Cain's presidency at the NRA was long over he cancelled the space shuttle program. Cain claims that he can't recall the incident.
Obama lost China. (http://news.yahoo.com/cain-criticizes-obama-space-exploration-165435922.html)
Bush has come out of the closet announcing that in 2004 when Cain's presidency at the NRA was long over he cancelled the space shuttle program. Cain claims that he can't recall the incident.
Obama lost China. (http://news.yahoo.com/cain-criticizes-obama-space-exploration-165435922.html)
Cain's obviously not an expert on the space program.
"I can tell you that as president of the United States, we are not going to bum a ride to outer space with Russia," Cain said to loud applause. "We're going to regain our rightful place in terms of technology, space technology."
So I assume that means Cain would be against using American Atlas V rockets that use Russian RD-180 engines to put objects into space?
Actually those type of comments are meaningless, as most of the candidates running for President probably don't know all that much about rockets and satellites. If there's any lesson to be learned, it's that candidates often say dumb things just because they sound good to people that know as little as the candidates do.
ThomasT
Nov15-11, 03:00 AM
The media feels it needs to give every item "equal time." Thus, a presidential sneeze gets 30 seconds, the same as bronchitis. I once had the "audacity" to tap a female subordinate on the shoulder to get her attention. Why did I have to touch her? She was wearing earphones on the job, which entailed monitoring and using radios, which she couldn't hear because she was listening to her iPod. Before I tapped her on her shoulder, I queried her twice, once in a normal tone of voice, the second rather loudly, much louder than the radios she was supposed to be monitoring. One guess as to her response to my directing her to ditch her iPod while on the job. Fortunately, two witnesses were right there and emphatically supported the truth, so her idiotic effort backfired before it began. The fact that she claimed sexual harassment despite the fact that two witnesses were right there underscores her idiocy. Perhaps she thought it might help keep her from being fired.
Nope.
As for Cain, no physical contact was involved, which tells me it's the liberal, ant-right media which is digging up this speck of dust and shouting it from the mountaintops. This behavior gives the media a VERY bad name, as well as anyone else who joins in the shouting.Cain's a joke. Perry's a joke. Paul's a joke. Just my opinion of course. Do you want guy's like this running the country? Did I mention Romney and Obama. Yeah, they're jokes/tools also. Just my opinion of course. We've already experienced what such lightweights can render. GW Bush -- a veritable disaster for the US. Obama -- a veritable extension of Bush.
I don't care if Cain sexually harassed 100 women, because even if he's completely pure and wonderful, he's still not qualified to be president, imo.
Cain's a joke. Perry's a joke. Paul's a joke. Just my opinion of course. Do you want guy's like this running the country? Did I mention Romney and Obama. Yeah, they're jokes/tools also. Just my opinion of course. We've already experienced what such lightweights can render. GW Bush -- a veritable disaster for the US. Obama -- a veritable extension of Bush.
I don't care if Cain sexually harassed 100 women, because even if he's completely pure and wonderful, he's still not qualified to be president, imo.
Have you ever googled "Joe Biden gaffes" - lots of results. If he weren't just (1) heartbeat away it would be funny.
http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/joebiden/a/bidenisms.htm
"Bidenisms
Dumb Joe Biden Quotes and Gaffes"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hZtW_q_6Ug
"Joe Biden Gaffe Blooper Mix"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRV5Y1JCGRI
"Biden Gaffe: Asks a Gentleman in a Wheelchair to Stand Up"
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20001074-503544.html
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/18/biden-reveals-location-secret-vp-bunker/
"Vice President Joe Biden, well-known for his verbal gaffes, may have finally outdone himself, divulging potentially classified information meant to save the life of a sitting vice president.
According to a report, while recently attending the Gridiron Club dinner in Washington, an annual event where powerful politicians and media elite get a chance to cozy up to one another, Biden told his dinnermates about the existence of a secret bunker under the old U.S. Naval Observatory, which is now the home of the vice president."
ThomasT
Nov15-11, 01:58 PM
Have you ever googled "Joe Biden gaffes" - lots of results. If he weren't just (1) heartbeat away it would be funny.Thanks. I forgot about Biden. You can include him in my list also. :smile:
What's weird about Biden is that he didn't seem so loopy prior to becoming VP (at least you never heard about it)> What is it about becoming VP that turns people loopy (Ok Cheney was probably the only one in recent history that wasn't loopy - he just scared the Bejeesus outta me). However, we should keep this thread about Cain.
ThomasT
Nov15-11, 09:18 PM
What's weird about Biden is that he didn't seem so loopy prior to becoming VP (at least you never heard about it)> What is it about becoming VP that turns people loopy (Ok Cheney was probably the only one in recent history that wasn't loopy - he just scared the Bejeesus outta me). However, we should keep this thread about Cain.Yes, the well known VP Loopy Factor. :smile: And the well known fact that Cheney was/is in league with the Prince of Darkness.
Whoops ... back on topic.
Cain has a new problem. He fumbled, Perry style, through answering a question about whether he agreed with Obama's handling of the Libya stuff. Apparently he's not doing his homework. Strike two.
Cain has a new problem. He fumbled, Perry style, through answering a question about whether he agreed with Obama's handling of the Libya stuff. Apparently he's not doing his homework. Strike two.
He appeared very distracted and (quite honestly) it seemed I was watching an actor who forgot his lines. NEXT!
DoggerDan
Nov16-11, 12:13 AM
He appeared very distracted and (quite honestly) it seemed I was watching an actor who forgot his lines. NEXT!
Could it be he pulled an Obama, where he fumbled without benefit of his teleprompter?
Could it be he pulled an Obama, where he fumbled without benefit of his teleprompter?
I like Cain and thought his participation was good. Although more of an insider than perceived - he brings a fresh perspective. Unfortunately, this video is a nightmare.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WW_nDFKAmCo
ThomasT
Nov17-11, 12:57 AM
I like Cain ... I don't. At least not for national public office. Now, if he was running for some local office in my area, then I'd probably vote for him, and even contribute to his campaign. That is, he seems eminently buyable.
So he hit on a few women. So what. The truth of this seems to me to be transparently evident. We've all hit on women. It's normal. It's natural. Problem is that now he's running for 'President'. So, I'm sure he's kicking himself in the butt, figuratively speaking. "Why wasn't I just a bit more careful", he might be saying to himself.
Anyway, this harassment stuff isn't why I don't like Cain. It's that he's just such a lightweight. Make that, uh, bantamweight. No, flyweight. Is there a category that's lighter than that?
I don't. At least not for national public office. Now, if he was running for some local office in my area, then I'd probably vote for him, and even contribute to his campaign. That is, he seems eminently buyable.
So he hit on a few women. So what. The truth of this seems to me to be transparently evident. We've all hit on women. It's normal. It's natural. Problem is that now he's running for 'President'. So, I'm sure he's kicking himself in the butt, figuratively speaking. "Why wasn't I just a bit more careful", he might be saying to himself.
Anyway, this harassment stuff isn't why I don't like Cain. It's that he's just such a lightweight. Make that, uh, bantamweight. No, flyweight. Is there a category that's lighter than that?
In a twisted way, I think the severity of the charges in the Penn State matter have given Cain cover. Rubbing the leg of a grown woman after dinner and drinks hardly compares to the alleged activity by the former coach with young boys.
DoggerDan
Nov17-11, 03:08 PM
I don't. At least not for national public office.
So Obama, with a few years of law practice and half a senate term under his belt is more qualified to run our country than the CEO of a major corporation?
How do you figure that?
So he hit on a few women.
That's been alleged, and as has been pointed out, a significant number of such allegations wind up being false.
The truth of this seems to me...
It's not seeming that way to many of the rest of us.
Anyway, this harassment stuff isn't why I don't like Cain. It's that he's just such a lightweight. Make that, uh, bantamweight. No, flyweight. Is there a category that's lighter than that?
Compared to Cain, I'd have to say "Obamaweight," if there were such a category.
ThomasT
Nov17-11, 03:43 PM
So Obama, with a few years of law practice and half a senate term under his belt is more qualified to run our country than the CEO of a major corporation?
How do you figure that?I don't figure that. I don't like Obama or any of the candidates of the major parties. Definitely won't be voting for either a Democrat or a Republican in the next presidential election.
That's been alleged, and as has been pointed out, a significant number of such allegations wind up being false.And a significant number of such allegations wind up being true. Cains obviously a player.
It's not seeming that way to many of the rest of us.Then you're just being naive, imho.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.