News Examining the Validity of Sexual Harassment Claims in the Media

  • Thread starter Thread starter DoggerDan
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the validity of sexual harassment claims against Herman Cain, with participants expressing skepticism about the allegations and criticizing media coverage. Some argue that the accusations are exaggerated, citing a lack of physical contact and framing the situation as a politically motivated attack from the left. Concerns are raised about Cain's handling of the allegations, suggesting that his responses have worsened the situation. The conversation also touches on the implications for Cain's political future, with some predicting that any dishonesty could end his candidacy. Overall, the thread highlights the contentious nature of sexual harassment claims in the political arena and the media's role in shaping public perception.
  • #51


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_...d-in-press-conference-with-all-cain-accusers/
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #52


phyzguy said:
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_...d-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/wor...rman-Cain-is-a-monster-says-second-woman.html

"Herman Cain is a monster, says second woman"
 
  • #53


WhoWee said:
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/wor...rman-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.
 
  • #54


ThinkToday said:
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?
 
  • #55


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.
 
  • #56


daveb said:
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.
 
  • #57


A little info on the NRA

http://www.restaurant.org/aboutus/history/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #58


The NRA press release:

http://www.restaurant.org/pressroom/pressrelease/?ID=2182
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #59


WhoWee said:
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?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #60


WhoWee said:
Cain said he doesn't know her...!

Does he not know Karen Kraushaar too?
 
  • #61


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.
 
  • #62


phyzguy said:
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.
 
  • #63


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.
 
  • #64


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.
 
  • #65


phyzguy said:
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.
 
  • #66


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.
 
  • #67


skeptic2 said:
Do you think the American people would elect an admitted sex criminal to be president?

Yes.
 
  • #68


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."
 
  • #69


I was not referring to Cain but to Gingrich in response to ThinkToday's endorsement.
 
  • #70


WhoWee said:
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.
 
  • #71


daveb said:
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.
 
  • #72


DoggerDan said:
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.
 
  • #73


turbo said:
...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.
 
  • #74


turbo said:
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/fourt...ual-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.co...ays-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).
 
  • #75


WhoWee said:
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.
 
  • #76


Jimmy Snyder said:
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."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #77


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.
 
Last edited:
  • #78


WhoWee said:
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.
 
  • #79


WhoWee said:
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.)
 
  • #80


BobG said:
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.
 
  • #81


Jimmy Snyder said:
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.
 
  • #82


turbo said:
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:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0385476272/?tag=pfamazon01-20

"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."
 
  • #83
Bush has come out of the closet announcing that in 2004 when Cain's presidency at the NRA was long over he canceled the space shuttle program. Cain claims that he can't recall the incident.
http://news.yahoo.com/cain-criticizes-obama-space-exploration-165435922.html"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #84
Jimmy Snyder said:
Bush has come out of the closet announcing that in 2004 when Cain's presidency at the NRA was long over he canceled the space shuttle program. Cain claims that he can't recall the incident.
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.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #85


DoggerDan said:
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.
 
  • #86
ThomasT said:
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"


"Joe Biden Gaffe Blooper Mix"


"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."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #87


WhoWee said:
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:
 
  • #88


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.
 
  • #89


daveb said:
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.
 
  • #90


ThomasT said:
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!
 
  • #91


WhoWee said:
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?
 
  • #92


DoggerDan said:
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.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #93


WhoWee said:
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?
 
  • #94


ThomasT said:
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.
 
  • #95


ThomasT said:
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.
 
  • #96


DoggerDan said:
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.

DoggerDan said:
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.

DoggerDan said:
It's not seeming that way to many of the rest of us.
Then you're just being naive, imho.
 

Similar threads

News Is the Definition of Sexual Harassment Too Narrow in Today's Workplace?
Replies
44
Views
7K
News Protestants vs Catholics: A Cultural Comparison in Contemporary Society
Replies
3
Views
4K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top