Despite all the innuendos and allegations made against Perry, they can’t bring any sexual harassment scandals against him. Perry never used his CEO status to sexually harass anyone, and if anything was in his past we would’ve learned of it by now. A few months ago, Michael Moore offered $1 million to any woman who would come forward with details about having bedded Perry or had an affair with him.
The victim in the Cain case is going to come forward, and sooner or later we will hear from her. She is trying to get a release from the confidentiality clause which under the settlement agreement obligates her to remain silent. Yet, Cain has gone from network to network changing his story, but also badmouthing this woman as a gold digger who wanted a huge amount of money for something he never did, or at worst for something as innocuous as comparing her height to his wife’s height. Such profoundly stupid statement insults my intelligence. There is no sexual harassment in comparing someone’s height to another person's height. I found that not only to be patronizing but utterly unbelievable. Perhaps it is the kind of comment that his followers will offer as 'facts' since they cling to every word he utters.
I want to hear the other side of the story, and I am sure most Americans want to hear it as well.
It is illogical to suggest that these women went after Cain some 15 years ago for political reasons when no one knew at the time that Cain would one day run for political office. I’m interested in finding out if Cain, as the CEO of a big company, exercised his power over subordinate female employees in an unlawful way.
Victoria— I totally agree with your post. There is some smoke here, and I’m not going to unlock logic to declare a la Ann Coulter that this is a lynching. I supported Clearance Thomas after I investigated and more of the allegations became unbelievable (Coke cans and such). I am also 20 years wiser now, and I’ve seen some pretty horrible leaders in my life, as all people my age probably have. The series of stories coming out over the past three months from the Cain campaign point to what I tried to enunciate in the lead editorial of this thread. I believe Cain is an arrogant and reckless manager. He’d sink a submarine if he was skipper. I’ve seen this before. In real life.
Joe
Are you so naive as to believe that this does not happen? I have personal knowledge of many instances of this exact kind of thing. I also personally know a woman who has consistently brought charges to see what she can get out of it... and the company always pays rather than go to court.
A man today working in a managerial capacity has to tread on very thin ice when it comes to the subject of so-called harassment or perceived harassment.
Um, that's exactly why these complaints were unsubstantiated. That means that, after they were investigated, they were found not to constitute sexual harassment.
Wanting to re-open this case is extremely unhelpful, unproductive and unfair. It is closed. It was a long time ago. People can come forward and say all kinds of things that can neither be corroborated nor refuted.
Why would you want this kind of ridiculous distraction brought into the GOP race at this time? This is exactly what the Left wants, however.
If you believe the mere existence of a sexual harassment complaint against Cain is enough to impugn his character or conduct -- even though that complaint was unsubstantiated and closed without any action whatsoever taken against Mr. Cain and, instead, the women were paid-off to shut up and get the hell out of the assocation -- by all means, do what you gotta do.
But don't wish this ridiculous and worthless drama on the rest of us. We are trying to hire someone who can beat Barack Obama in 2012.
What don't you understand about the fact that these complaints were investigated and no -- repeat ZERO -- sexual harassment was found to have occurred?
Why do you think you are in a better position to judge what happened than the people who were there, who conducted the investigation, who are trained in the law, and who made the final decision, WHICH WAS ACCEPTED BY THE WOMEN WHO COMPLAINED?
They had every opportunity to appeal the finding against them in court. They did not. Instead, they took a pay-out and moved on.
If you don't know why pay-outs are offered and accepted, read this article, as it explains it very well:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2800937/posts
I'm sorry, this sounds like so much of the overload of celebrity crime stories. People sitting around entertaining themselves with the Casey Anthony or Amanda Knox case.
Or reading a NYT article and thinking on that basis they can understand and evaluate the case better than the several courts that reviewed it and even the Supreme Court.
This was a very inconsequential complaint. As I posted upthread, the HR director said she doesn't even remember the complaints. It was investigated, found unsubstantiated and closed.
Wanting to hear the story of the women just smacks of Oprahism. It can't possibly have anything to do with vetting Mr. Cain, because nothing real or reliable can come out of having people come forward and yammer or lie about events 15 years ago.