The BBC has it that Cain claims he was so accused, but that the accusations were false, and he was not involved in any settlement.
I dunno. Perry might want some payback for Cain’s comments on the hunting lodge story (which made it harder for his defenders to dismiss it as just the “librul meedya”).
A local liberal talk radio host is getting flak for wondering if it will make a difference with conservative voters, especially in the south, if it comes out that the women were white.
After the McCain “black baby” in SC and “Harold, call me!” Ford in Tenn. I think he has a point.
Cain and the GOP are certainly doing everything they can to play up the Thomas comparison, but it seems to me the situations are only superficially similar. OK, they’re both black guys who were accused of sexual harrassment. But one of the points that was used to impeach Anita Hill’s credibility was the fact that she never took Thomas to court and didn’t quit her job, so people asked if her allegations were politically motivated because he was being considered for the Supreme Court. This is the opposite- two women accused Cain of sexual harrassment years ago and the National Restaurant Association settled with them for something between $10,000 and $99,999, and they quit their jobs and signed non-disclosure agreements. I guess we’ll find out more in the next few days.
More like a vast left-wing conspiracy posited by the liberal MSM…
(er, you get my drift)
Wonder why this is being called a “Clarence Thomas problem” and not a Bill Clinton problem?
(Well actually, I know why.)
Why, it’s because they’re both Republicans, of course.
I had the same thought, but even without the race thing, its a lot more similar to Clarence Thomas’s problems then Clinton. For both Thomas and Cain, a former female co-worker (or two) surfaced once they were seeking a high office with accusations dating back several years.
Clinton was accused of actually having sex with an aide, relatively recently, and not while he was seeking office. And the woman he had sex with wasn’t the person driving the allegations.
So I’d say calling it a “Clarence Thomas” problem works better, even if Cain was white.
The Lewinsky thing came to light because Paula Jones was suing Clinton for sexual harrassment.
Which Clinton problem? The one where he was inappropriate with Paula Jones? Or the one he had lying to congress regarding his relationship with Monica Lewinsky?
I don’t think he lied to Congress; he lied to the public and was (depending on how you feel about it) lying or misleading in court during a hearing on the Jones case. Nothing about this Cain thing appears to be similar to the Lewinsky scandal; arguably it could be similar to the Jones situation.
I don’t like Cain’s politics or positions. I think he’s a nutbar.
But I don’t fucking care about this in the slightest.
Being accused of something doesn’t equal guilt.
Agreed, and I’d like to think most people agree – so then why didn’t he just say that in the first place instead of acting like people were making up stories about sexual harassment suits? No they weren’t. Just claim innocence, dumb ass, instead of obfuscating.
Wait…what? Guy could admit to splint-dicking entire Brownie troops and he’d be forgiven as long as he explained it with some slippery kind of absurdity like, “I was blinded by my love of God/Country/Both and couldn’t understand at the time that I was using poor judgment. But at least I ain’t no homasessual.”
If you’re going to run for president based primarily on your business experience, it’s relevant if you sexually harrassed people you worked with. Which isn’t to say he did anything he’s being accused of, because I don’t know that. But I don’t think harrassment can get the ‘that’s between him and his wife’ treatment. A spouse might look the other way at an affair between two consenting adults, but the deal with harrassment is that somebody isn’t consenting.
Which sounds like assumed guilt.
I’m not assuming it’s true. I’m saying that it shouldn’t be dismissed as irrelevant. I can accept the “I don’t care, it’s between him and his wife” response to purported affairs whether they’re true or not, but I don’t think that works with allegations of sexual harassment.
It’s only relevant if it’s substantial. If we had to consider every accusation against presidential candidates as relevant, it would be trivially easy to bury candidates in accusation scandals. We’ll see how this plays out, but I’m willing to file it in the “it doesn’t matter yet” category in my mind.
I understand that. “It doesn’t matter yet” is not the same as “I don’t care in the slightest.” One is a wait and see attitude and the other is a conclusion.
You’re correct. My mistake. He lied in a court of law, not to an assembly of congressmen.