Herman Cain Keeps Digging

I saw a lot of conservative guys making light of this on Twitter. I think the majority of men are totally clueless when it comes to communicating with women. Barring some type pf paternalistic relationship in which this would be seen as purely innocent, it's easy to understand how it could be seen as provocative. What does he mean by "standing close to her"? Why the need to frame it that way? What does her height have to do with anything, especially as he seems to also be acknowledging a preference for shorter women? It may have been totally innocent, but Cain has now opened the door to a whole series of questions and possibly broken any terms of an alleged settlement.

Van Susteren asked what Cain did that led to the accusation. There were reportedly more than one accusations in the complaint, but Cain said he recalled just one incident. "She was in my office one day, and I made a gesture saying -- and I was standing close to her -- and I made a gesture saying you are the same height as my wife. And I brought my hand up to my chin saying, 'My wife comes up to my chin.'" At that point, Cain gestured with his flattened palm near his chin. "And that was put in there [the complaint] as something that made her uncomfortable," Cain said, "something that was in the sexual harassment charge."

This is what amateur hour looks like when it comes to handling a PR crisis, folks. Send in the Cain, I mean, Clowns, nevermind, they're here.

As Brendan Nyhan notes, this is mostly noise, because Cain was all but certain not to win in any case. And Steve Benen rightly points out that the other Cain story of the day — about campaign finance — is at least as bad as this one. But since we’re on the topic, it’s worth marveling at what a huge mess the Cain camp has made of this story. Barring more info coming out, it seems likely that the original charges themselves won’t be the problem. It’s his handling of the story that will raise serious questions about his capacity to handle crises, even if we’re just talking about political ones.

Comments

[Ragspierre]

"...it's easy to understand how it could be seen as provocative."

No. It isn't.

It is, in fact, nucking futs to IMAGINE that is "provocative" and could form the basis of a REAL sexual harassment charge.

Good grief.

On the other hand, there are good specialists in crisis management, and they work pretty cheap relative to the damage you can do yourself in this bass-ackwards world.

[teebo]

Here's a straw, Dan. Grasp at it.

[smitty]

From what I can tell, Dan, Politico comes off looking like Dan Rather on all this.
Luck? Skill? Who can say.
I'm buying your point that Cain needs to up his game in general; but this story in particular is a farce.

[Huey]

If the incident played out as Cain said, then, one must read into it any sexual content. Really, really try hard to find some sexual content.

Unless they come out with something more than the nothing they have come out with thus far, the only people who are going to be harmed by this are those who do everything in their power to keep this story alive - for whatever reasons they may have.

There's nothing to what has been revealed thus far. Nothing. Not even something which, when viewed in the light most favorable to Politico appears to resemble a hint of something.

There are few CEO's who, at one time or another, haven't been hit with spurious claims and have settled those claims for "nuisance value." If she got a "five figure" payoff, then the settlement was for nuisance value, i.e., it cost less to pay her (and her lawyer) off than it would to successfully defend the case.

Happens. All. The. Time.

Keeping this non-story alive serves the interests of everyone except anyone who styles himself a conservative.

[Ragspierre]

Huey, I think that perversely it could actually help a large segment of America to get the BLAZING double-standard applied to people who essentially differ as to only politics.

Two words: Bill Clinton.

Given an official pass with the "one grope rule" by militant feminists, solely on their interests in maintaining him in power.

[Rich]

Riehl has completely lost it.

[dwok]

Sounds like you have a dog in this hunt Mr. Riehl.

Again for all of the thousands of women Mr. Cain has employed throughout the years, I would call it a job well done if he's had only 2 minor complaints against him.

"This is what amatuer hour looks like"

It's because he's not a politician.

[sickofrinos]

Is Perry's money getting you that condo in Austin? huh Dan!

[dwok]

Perry guy?

Talk about amateur hour.

[Pasadena Phil]

WTF Dan!!! Get a grip.

[Huey]

That's always possible, Rags. As my brother says, "Sometimes purple unicorns DO fly out of my ..." Few things, however improbable, are impossible.

[rickl]

I think the majority of men are totally clueless when it comes to communicating with women.

That's not exactly a news flash.

[rickl]

OK, so italics don't seem to work here. In that case, the first sentence above should be in quotes.

[Linda Starr]

...on the OTHER hand, isn't Mitt just too slick?

I still like Cain because he hasn't been corrupted yet (you can just tell).

So, I'm still leaning towards him.

But then, once he's in, he could become corrupt and THEN we'd have the inexperience AND the corruption.

Oh wait...that's what we have now!

[gary gulrud]

Politico told the Cain campaign they had this story 10 days ago and asked for comment.

Today Cain describes the charge as "sexual harrassment".

I'd say that's royally effin up.

[sickofrinos]

And the rino pundits keep pushing their agenda to a voting populace that is not buying. Hey Dan, when are you going to sell out Perry for your original pick, mittens?
It must be getting lonely in rino land.
You ill informed rino pundits might be the only people voting for your mittens.

[apodoca]

Dan, you missed the boat on this one.

[Ragspierre]

Cain should've shut up sometime Sunday morning.

Since than, he's done himself some positive damage, while others were carrying the fight.

A real shame.

[Ragspierre]

I repeat my earlier question: Would Jonathan Martin, Maggie Haberman, Anna Palmer and Kenneth Vogel have put their names on a similar piece, with no named sources, aimed at Barack Obama? Would Politico have run it?
==Jim Treacher

HELL, no. Consider the early treatment of the Weiner story.

[Ragspierre]

If Hilda Solis can call people "teabaggers",

can't I call her a filthy Communist b!tch...???

I mean, fair is fair...

[Mahjong online]

It may have been totally innocent, but Cain has now opened the door to a whole series of questions and possibly broken any terms of an alleged settlement.

[Huey]

Generally, in any settlement agreement (typically drafted by the attorneys defending the sued party - they have spent decades tweaking the draft) it is the PLAINTIFFS who agree not to talk of the terms of the settlement (or substance of the complaint) - NOT the defendants.

Certainly, there COULD be some such provision, there is no reason for there to be one from the perspective of the PLAINTIFFS who simply don't care if the person they sued talks about what he was sued for.

[Ragspierre]

I wonder, too, Huey, if Cain could be held to an agreement to which he had no part. Some accounts have him "recusing" himself, and the association making whatever arrangements settled the matter.

No meeting of the minds respecting Cain in that case.

[Huey]

Rags: Almost certainly, the agreement would have between the Restaurant Association and the complaintant(s). It doesn't appear that any lawsuit was filed else we would know all kinds of details that we currently don't.

We don't know if any depositions were taken. (Although, again, since depos are generally a matter of public record unless sealed, we would have seen some of them by now...). We don't even know if an EEOC complaint was filed.

Therefore, it is highly likely that it went down just the way Cain said it did - he got accused and handed it over to the people he paid to handle such things - and they handled it. He may have never seen the settlement documents.

[Ragspierre]

"He may have never seen the settlement documents."

My point exactly. They could not be binding on him, but would bind the association if drafted with mutual non-disclosure provisions (I always make mine mutual).

No depo that I take is public unless I file it with the court as trial approaches, and in Texas we do have a procedure for pre-litigation discovery in some instances.

The more I hear of the "accusations", the more I believe that they were essentially baseless.

[USA American]

"I still like Cain because he hasn't been corrupted yet (you can just tell)."

Haha, all factually verifiable evidence to the contrary. The blind faith of easy marks is truly a thing of wonder. The Pizza Man and The Quitta thank you.

[Ragspierre]

"...all factually verifiable evidence to the contrary"

Put

It

Up

You Poor, stupid, lying, RACIST, evil, Collectivist harpy(tm).

[12.lb.bluefish.last.saturday!!!!!!]

ragspeirre, i like your posts, but dont you think you should can the 'colectivist"" crap so we can all concentrae on beating Ofungus?

[Ragspierre]

"Collectivism" is a term coined by Albert J. Nock. Look it up. You'll see I use it both aptly and well.

[Ragspierre]

“You go inside or if they won’t let you in, you shut ‘em down. You sit in front of their doors,” Frank Cordaro of Des Moines, the man credited for the idea of the “First in the Nation Caucus Occupation,” told the Register. “Who knows? It could be a very big deal.”

The plan, Cordaro told CNN, is, “people coming to Iowa, occupying every presidential [candidate’s] office, shutting them down until they start talking real turkey about what’s going on in this country, where the 99 percent of the people who are not benefiting, at the expense of the 1 percent who are getting away with murder.”
--Politico

Yep. The Collective HATES democracy.

[Albert J. Nock]

bluefish, the Clownselor knows nothing of my work. Even an old fraud like me disdains the Clownselor for his propagation of Borg Collectivism.

[Ragspierre]

Ruh-rowh...

Nanny Bloomberg is speaking truth to stupid. That will NEVER do...

“I hear your complaints,” Bloomberg said. “Some of them are totally unfounded. It was not the banks that created the mortgage crisis. It was, plain and simple, Congress [and the Clinton administration] who forced everybody to go and give mortgages to people who were on the cusp. Now, I’m not saying I’m sure that was terrible policy, because a lot of those people who got homes still have them and they wouldn’t gave gotten them without that.

“But they were the ones who pushed Fannie and Freddie to make a bunch of loans that were imprudent, if you will. They were the ones that pushed the banks to loan to everybody. And now we want to go vilify the banks because it’s one target, it’s easy to blame them and congress certainly isn’t going to blame themselves. At the same time, Congress is trying to pressure banks to loosen their lending standards to make more loans. This is exactly the same speech they criticized them for.”

[Huey]

Note the "I’m not saying I’m sure that was terrible policy, because a lot of those people who got homes still have them and they wouldn’t gave gotten them without that..."

Yeah. Some people benefited. Therefore, the fact that it caused (and is still causing) the collapse of the American economic system doesn't mean that it was a "terrible policy."

Gotta love some Bloomberg. Even when he says something approaching rationality, he can't help his statist leanings.

[Ragspierre]

"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how'd you like the operetta...?"

[billygruffus]

@ the fake Albert J. Nock: I see nothing fraudulent in Albert J. Nock. You're the only fraud here. It's disgusting that you impersonate others.

@ Ragspierre: I don't like Obama or the Democrats, but it is clear to me that the Collectivism that Nock described and feared does not characterize the Obama administration, and that you are just making yourself seem a loon when you could offer something intelligent (as evidenced by some of your other more sensible posts on here that are devoid of name-calling. The problem with the Obama administration is that it is too much status quo -- a slightly leftier shade of gray of what Clinton and Bush had started.

[billygruffus]

And sadly, it is not appearing that we'll get the radical change we require from the next Republican. Hopefully by the grace of God the economic state will force the hand of the next President (and hopefully it will be someone with the courage to act -- calling Paul Ryan? Nah, four years too early)to act in the right way even if it contradicts their ideolgy.

[Ragspierre]

billy, you are entitled to your busted-ass opinion...which I'd respect a lot more if you knew what the FLUCK you were talking about.

Obama is, most assuredly, a Collectivist. He is an adherent of fascist economics (look it up) and a devout Statist.

There is nothing "slightly" about Bad Luck Barry. He is all in.

[Huey]

I term Obama a "true believer."

Potato Patato...

[Ragspierre]

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/11/pelosi-says-government-should-shut-down-boeing-plant-where-workers-refuse-to-unionize-video/

That, friends, is the Collective. NOT democratic. NOT freedom. NOT market economics. NOT Constitutional.

Just Statist.

[Xiaoding]

"eah. Some people benefited. Therefore, the fact that it caused (and is still causing) the collapse of the American economic system doesn't mean that it was a "terrible policy.""

As far as it goes, Mr. Bloomberg is correct. It was not terrible policy.

The housing bubble is not CAUSING the economic trouble, it is a CONSEQUENCE of the economic trouble. To wit, millions of American men, made obsolete by machine labor.

These guys, of average to below average intelligence, (VERY important fact)found a temporary haven in house construction, then speculation. But that speculation, did not cause the problem.

Hopefully, America will elect a slightly less leftist leadership in the coming election. When those conservative policies also fail, perhaps America will be ready to come out of the fog.

[Ragspierre]

Dingy...!!! (face-palm)

[Ragspierre]

My hemmoroids are flaring up because I sit on the Internet all day long. Obama made them WORSE.

[Ragspierre]

Terry, the commercials recommend Prep-H for your butt. I would think your callouses would offer some protection...but, hey...

You should try lithium for your psychosis (from what I read).

[Huey]

Xioding: What you say may be prophetic as the Singularity draws nigh, but it isn't true NOW.

Not all the jobs lost NOW have been "lost." They've been re-located to places where it is profitable to do those jobs. This re-location has been caused in greatest part by a combination of two factors: The high cost of doing business in the USA as compared to the low cost of doing so elsewhere.

There is no question that as the future rushes upon us that many jobs (almost EVERY job, for that matter) will be performed better, more efficiently, and more cheaply than they can be performed by humans.

But, we ain't there yet.

[Thomas Jackson]

Auditioning for LGF or Karl Rove? Pathetic.

[CaptainAmerica]

Ragspierre is a lying, hypocritical, paper-pushing bureaucrat, a corporate shill who hates America and it's working men. He's also a racist with an irrational hate of Obama.

Bush destroyed the economy, Obama's making it better!

[Ragspierre]

Cap-i-tANUS is here complimenting me again.

Considering how inverted...and clearly insane...his last sentence is,

and how self-contradictory and obviously MAD his rantings about me are,

the take-away is...

1. I am the opposite of his description

2. I am maddeningly effective at countering Collectivist BS

Shucks...my blushes...

[Ragspierre]

This controversy is the perfect storm of (a) media hypocrisy: given the bar set by Clinton/Edwards/Ted Kennedy/et al., the worst possible case of what Cain is accused of — if you draw every conceivable negative inference against him — doesn’t come close to being a story, yet the lefty media energetically dig into Cain after having buried the exponentially worse Democrat scandals; (b) the special bull’s-eye fitted on black conservatives: their example of self-reliance and independent thinking makes them such a threat to the “social justice” narrative that, when it comes to destroying them, anything goes; (c) sexual harassment: a social-engineering caprice the arbitrary standards of which can turn routine — not admirable, often unsavory, but entirely unremarkable — human behavior into legal ruin; and (d) the litigious nanny state: with human life hyper-regulated and legal fees hyper-expensive, ordinary human behavior becomes grist for extortionate lawsuits that parties settle on the cheap because the cost of fighting is prohibitive — and later, these parties end up sounding like jackasses if asked about the suits, at least in part because, if you say something strong in your defense, you risk violating the standard reciprocal confidentiality provision and thus reopening the whole expensive, embarrassing business.
--Andy McCarthy

Note a and b particularly.

This is SUCH a rich lesson in how the Collective's Mushroom Media operates...!!!!

[Musher]

A possible presiedential nominee who settled not one but two sexual harassment suits then couldn't get his story straifpghtnabout them isn't a story. Frigging hilarious.

This is how Dmocacy ends!

[Ragspierre]

John Edwards. Journ-o-list.

That is how democracy ends, idiot.