Posted on 11/03/2011 7:22:05 AM PDT by Kaslin
Who wants to be Paula Jones? Or Kathleen Willey or Anita Hill? All three women have accused political icons -- Bill Clinton, Bill Clinton and Clarence Thomas -- of sexually harassing them.
And what did they get for sticking out their necks? Jones squared off against skater Tonya Harding on "Celebrity Boxing." Willey and Hill wrote books. They can't prove their allegations, and for the rest of their lives, they will have to live with the consequences. They are not in an enviable position.
On Sunday, Politico reported that two women had accused GOP presidential hopeful Herman Cain of "inappropriate behavior" in the 1990s, when Cain was head of the National Restaurant Association. Both women received five-figure severance packages. Tuesday, a lawyer for one of the women told the media that his client was seeking release from a confidentiality clause so that she could come forward.
Big mistake. It's "he said, she said." The burden always falls more heavily on the accuser, not the accused. The reported payouts are not so large as to spell out whether the association ponied up to atone for gross misbehavior or because settling was easier. No woman wins in this game.
I could go on about the double standard. Democrats who excoriated Thomas conveniently discarded their indignation during Clinton's many scandals. Because Cain, like Thomas, is African-American, supporters charge that the Politico story is another episode in what Thomas referred to as his 1991 "high-tech lynching."
The original Politico story was weak. As The Daily Beast's Howard Kurtz wrote, "it is difficult to assess the potentially damaging allegations, as the article relies on unnamed sources, does not identify the women, and does not detail what is said to have happened." Because liberal pundits cannot even specify any misconduct, they have been reduced to writing that the real issue is Cain's evolving statements on the topic. It's the cover-up, they argue, not the alleged civil tort.
The thing is that it doesn't matter what Cain did or did not do during the Clinton years. Cain has no business running for president.
Cain's only political experience prior to 2011 was losing the primary for a U.S. Senate seat in Georgia in 2004. Cain has a great personal success story. He also beat cancer, and he's usually good for a fine quote. But he never has had to deal with a hostile legislature, treacherous GOP allies or a foreign potentate.
As I write this, I see reports that a third woman has told The Associated Press that she considered filing a sexual harassment complaint against Cain. The next couple of news cycles are going to be too predictable. Partisans who like Cain will defend him. Those who don't won't. Facts won't matter.
Cain already had begun to lose some of his luster. He changed his 9-9-9 tax plan to a 9-by-9 model. He joked about his lack of foreign policy expertise by claiming he doesn't need to know the names of the leaders of flyspeck countries, such as "Ubeki-beki-beki-beki-stan-stan." Cain told CNN's Wolf Blitzer he could see himself authorizing the release of all Guantanamo Bay detainees in exchange for one captive U.S. soldier. Then he said that he had spoken "in error."
Cain's presidential campaign always was going to tank. Now it's going to tank ugly.
The thing is that it doesn't matter what Obama did or did not learn in these first three terrible years of his reign. Obama has no business running for president. Obama's only political experience prior to 2011 includes voting "present" in the Senate, acting as an advocate for community organizers in local government, and catastrophically failing at everything he has touched in our White House. Compared with Obama, not only is Cain overqualified, but a sack of manure is overqualified. King Tut would do a better job than Obama because he's long dead, so he couldn't make any mistakes.
Notice the trend here?
No evidence, no facts, no paper trail. No evidence at all. Merely a string of anonymous sources making accusations.
The accusations are then “validated” by more hear say accusations by third party sources linked to other GOP campaigns.
The GOP machine better buy a clue. This stupidity on their part may just buy them a Tea Party presidential candidate in 2012.
I see the GOP Rovebot Establishment whisper campaign is working.
Avoid the issue but make up knowing misstatements that complete misrepresenting how Cain handled the issue. Then the GOP media bot is critical of Cain for not delivering a completely flawless response to these anonymously sourced fraudulent accusations.
Contrary to the GOP Establishment machine’s fraudulent talking point on this NO CANDIDATE would of ever responded any better to this sort of unprecedented slander attack
Sorry, Deb, Wishful thinking!!! Cain ROCKS!!! Cain/Rubio, 2012!!!
Excellent point
Unfortunately your Cain/Rubio, 2012 is wishful thinking on your part. Rubio made it clear that he is only interested in doing his job in the Senate
All the being said, we do ourselves no good when we deny the obvious..Cain has not handled this well. They had 10 days notice before Politico ran the story. What they should have done, IMHO..was hold a presser BEFORE the story ran, got it all out, which would have totally defused it..and but Politco on the defensive. They messed up. Block should not have been the one to be the point person on this..Get an accomplish, polished female to handle the press. There are many choices.Cain ain't the Pope..he's NOT infallible. And it shows..the biggest lesson.. that that despite running an "unconventional campaign, he'll need far more boots on the ground..polished political operatives..
Or for that matter, who wants to be Mary Jo Kopechne? I’m afraid the facts (and the differences) are lost on you, Debra.
I am the ultimate positve thinker!!!
Debra j once agains proves how stupid she is. Probably spend the past few days at an occupy meeting.
No one is defending the claims. We know nothing other than there were settlements.
Wilson works for perry.: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2801469/posts
Well, he could have started off by admitting he knew about it, he could have stopped having to acknowledge things piecemeal, he could have remembered that he discussed the matter with his advisors (as he now admits) back in 2004 during his other failed run for office, and he could stop attacking people for asking him about it and he could stop blaming his rivals for the whole thing.
He is “handling” it exactly the way Clinton “handled” the Monica problem, even though it sounds like there was far less there to worry about in the first place. Why didn’t he just admit it, say that settlements had been made, and humbly say that he regrets any impropriety or even appearance of impropriety? It would all be over by now.
But this is definitely ending in an ugly way. I think not only has he damaged himself, he has damaged all the other candidates in the race too.
VIDEO -Trump’s Take: ‘Ugly’ Cain ‘Witch Hunt’ & Bleaker Economy. Advises Cain to file a MAJOR lawsuit...
http://video.foxnews.com/v/1255359768001/trumps-take-ugly-cain-witch-hunt-amp-bleaker-economy/?playlist_id=86858
Kurt Schlichter , a trial attorney defending businesses in civil litigation, says, “Facts are optional - How sex-harass suits work” bttt
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/facts_are_optional_MGlu78c7RflvWKMH5eUuvM
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.