The Viking wrote: I guess sexual harrassment is a funny issue with Cain.
Cain jokes about Anita Hill
A day after he had to go and appologize to Nacy Pelosi for calling her a name during the debate, who, if he was President, she is still the person he has to work with in the House on the Democrat side, he is caught on camera making a joke about Anita Hill! THIS MAN IS NOT PRESIDENTIAL MATERIAL!!! Look at the people behind him in the video. They don't find sexual harrassment jokes funny at all!! He was literally rolling with laughter doubling over. Time for Newt.....
You'd almost think he's deliberately going out of his way to nail down the sexual harrasser vote, wouldn't you?
So he is going after the Democrat vote?
This is why I really hesitate to ever reply to certain posters. I'm agreeing with him and all he can do is make a pointless, snarky, partisan (and ungrammatical) remark.
The accusations against Herman Cain are serious but puzzling. All of these ladies are associated with one organization. Where are the accusers which should come from:
1. The Coca-Cola Company;
2. Pillsbury;
3. Burger King;
4. Godfather's Pizza;
5. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City;
6. Aquila, Inc;
7. Nabisco;
8. Whirlpool;
9. Reader's Digest;
10 AGCO, Inc
These are the other companies where Cain held positions of authority. But the accusers only come from one organization, National Restaurant Association. This raises quite a few questions concerning the motivation and veracity of those accusations.
Perhaps the other corporations were a little more on the ball with sexual harassment awareness and reporting policies. It may be that Cain had more free reign in the NRA.
I think the way the Cain machine is dragging the accuser through the mud -- setting up an entire website to run her down -- and threatening any future accusers with his high-powered lawyer will set sexual harassment reporting back for decades.
That is a lot of assumption and "perhaps". The fact is there is only one source of accusers.
The accusers are dragging Cain "through the mud". Why is self defense against false accusations viewed as "dragging the accuser through the mud"?
Perhaps the other corporations were a little more on the ball with sexual harassment awareness and reporting policies.
If this were the case, then there would be quite a few more filings of sexual harassment, not less.
At any rate, filings of complaint have nothing to do with the organization, but the person being harassed.
Arlen wrote: That is a lot of assumption and "perhaps". The fact is there is only one source of accusers.
The accusers are dragging Cain "through the mud". Why is self defense against false accusations viewed as "dragging the accuser through the mud"?
Because he's an conservative. When liberal do it... it's ok...
On Sept. 20, 2010, right after Tea Party favorite Christine O'Donnell became the GOP’s U.S. senatorial nominee in Delaware, a political watchdog group filed two ethics complaints against her. Miss O'Donnell subsequently was dragged through the mud by the liberal press for weeks before the election, accompanied by red-hot rhetoric such as this from Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), which filed the complaints:
