But there was more. Several weeks ago, word started circulating that Cain’s business record was not quite as impressive as he claims, specifically as it relates to his tenure as head of the National Restaurant Association. Some of his peers privately said that they were astonished at how he was being portrayed. They said that his less than three-year tenure (rather brief in the Washington trade-association world) was rocky and that the restaurant folks couldn’t get rid of him soon enough—possibly because of sexual-harassment allegations. They said it took some time to get the association back on sound financial footing after he left. Some who worked with Cain said that he spent considerable time running around the country giving speeches and that he was a policy lightweight, both internally and externally. But they hesitated to be more specific.
(Source: National Journal (in new window)
What are you talking about?
I’m not “throwing out theories.”
I told you what Politico reported the HR Director having said. That is all.
If you want to speculate on why she said what she said and just make stuff up, please stop complaining that everyone else is the black helicopter crowd and “no fun.”
It’s perfectly legitimate to think she said what she said because it’s true. There is no apparent motive for her to lie and you can’t show one, either.
As for what the NJ “reported” about Cain’s tenure at the NRA, were you shocked by that? That, if true, a man with a 30-year career in business has some detractors or political opponents?
The present President of the NRA (Cain’s old job) was previously an executive at AARP (Dawn Sweeney). Do you think she’s unhappy with Cain’s position on both Hillarycare and Obamacare? Would you be shocked to learn she wasn’t planning on voting for Mr. Cain?
This is information to be evaluated and weighed. You seem to think it’s gold.