Corporate policy is to settle disputes. Corporate lawyers hate juries. They would rather settle and be done with it. This way, they minimize the risk and the publicity. It's just the cost of doing business to buy off the malcontents. This was explained to me by the lead attorney at a Fortune 100 company.
Some may look at Cain's handling of the matter and find fault. But some of that will just be a rationalization for hyping the non-story. I doubt Cain will lose a single supporter over this. Unless there is a pattern, or Cain is caught in a bold lie, this story is a non-story.
One aspect that IS interesting to me is where this story came from. It sure seems to me that his GOP rivals have more of a motive than the DEMs. The radio talkers were avoiding this yesterday, trying to use this as an attack on the MSM and liberal hypocrisy (talk radio template 101), but it's the one part of the story that I find curious.
Not so. In their analysis of the situation both Mark Levin and Rush said that "it was also possible" that the campaigns of the Republican front runners may not have clean hands in this.
In fact, on his show last night, Levin said that both campaigns should question their staffers on this to determine if any of them were involved.