Posted on 10/31/2011 12:16:36 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
I am willing to give Herman Cain the benefit of the doubt and assume that the sexual-harassment allegation(s) against him was entirely baseless.
Here is what troubles me. Mr. Cain says: “If the Restaurant Association did a settlement, I wasn’t even aware of it, and I hope it wasn’t for much, because nothing happened. So if there was a settlement, it was handled by some of the other offices that worked for me at the association, so the answer is absolutely not.”
Okay, so if I’m reading that quote right, then:
1. Herman Cain, in his role as head of a major trade association, did not bother to learn how a complaint or complaints of sexual harassment against him was resolved.
2. Herman Cain, not bothering to have learned how a complaint or complaints of sexual harassment against him was resolved, decided to run for president without bothering to learn.
I got a lot of grief for writing that, based on my interaction with Mr. Cain, I would have hesitated to hire him to run a pizza company. I am feeling more comfortable in that judgment.
National Review doesn’t like the idea of Cain as President?
I’m shocked...
If he didn't do anything, why should he care?
BS...people are allowed to make an honest assessment without having to be a Romney supporter. I am tired of this paranoia.
Yawn.
I think I’ll send 100 more bucks to Mr. Cain.
I think Cain is going to need to spend a “do-over card” on this one.
Kevin Williamson is a weekly embarassment for the once-vaunted National Review.
America is GROSSED OUT, Mitt!!!!
If this story has legs, better now than after Cain wins the nomination (in my opinion).
We may well end up with Romney, as Cain is the last “anybody but Romney” guy. IN which case....sheesh....I’m all for Romney, because I (along with millions of other sane Americans) am 1000% against obama.
If this story doesn’t have legs, then Cain will emerge and be stronger. So, while brutal, this is all good.
We’ll see how the next few weeks play out...(I do hope that Cain emerges from this victorious...we shall soon see).
Cuz he was the President and they keep records (by law)....as chief exec....the boss, I believe he would have had to sign off OR given someone the power to do so on his behalf.
This is the bimbo eruption that never was, and nothing the Democrats do can make it more than nonsense.
I think this will HELP Cain's run.
Many of the folks I talk with, are sick and tired of character assassination. When you can't attack an idea, the typical degenerate will attack the person. Why, if you can villianize the person, then by extension his policies and ideas are null and void.
When you bring up an set of anyonymous charges, made over 12 years ago, this smacks of the "Clintonista" method of politics - a method that even the DNC renounced during Hillary's run for the nomination.
This is doing nothing more, than making Herman Cain a celebrated 'Underdog' in a very major race.
I’m sure National Review just sent Politico a fruit basket today. They have been trying to get rid of Cain for a month now. Notice in the link how NRO promotes the Kevin Williamson opinion as the lead article.
http://www.nationalreview.com/
You will vote for Romney alone, Dude.
Perhaps Cain took the complaint as frivolous, and not worthy of his time, since he had other business to attend to. The women could have gotten severance pay for not just one complaint, but because of their work ethics in general. Complaints might have added up against them, and the company got rid of them. It could be that simple. Sometimes, it’s hard to fire someone, and this is the simplest way to get rid of them.
That alright you toad. Cain doesn't need you to hire him. He can buy and sell you all day long.
The face of stupidity.
The only way this could be the end of Cain is if the allegations were true and Mrs. Cain beat him to death.
Well, at least I dropped my subscription to NR long before it turned to crap.
This is a stupid argument. I don’t know if there was ever anything to this incident or not. But this author is off base. Cain said that it was thoroughly investigated and he was exonerated, therefore he did know the outcome.
But it would be completely appropriate to keep the accused person out of any settlement negotiations with accusers. The Association’s board and lawyers would have insisted on Cain staying out of it. Cain would not have been objective and could very well have a conflict of interests in that what would be best for the Association (a quick, quiet settlement) and what might be best for him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.