• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Two women accused Herman Cain of inappropriate behavior

I did not have sexual relations with that woman

I did not inhale

what is the definition of "is"
Yeah man. I mean...they had no problem throwing Roger under the bus, but Bills history as governor partying with known drug dealers...the Jones indecent exposure incident (the trial that was the genesis of the perjury allegation), the Broderick rape, the Wiley groping...heck...I give him a pass for Lewinski...she was the best thing that ever happened to him.
 
I agree with this. I think it is tough to claim a 'high tech lynching' if in fact the allegations are real. If they are real but unfounded he should simply explain the situation.

I just think it is comical that there are liberals bringing up anything regarding sexual misconduct in light of how readily they swallowed everything Clinton gave them and did. And FTR...he was a good president. Just not someone you would trust around your daughter.

why is it comical? democrats are doing the exact same thing republicans did. they are politicians, and both sides delight in the scandals of the other side. one difference: if this is true, it doesn't sound as though the women welcomed his behavior. and from his recent behavior and "non denial" denial, perhaps where there is smoke there is fire. could also be that republicans operatives put this out there......you know, like the bush campaign spread that crap about mccain. in fact, i would bet on that.
 
why is it comical? democrats are doing the exact same thing republicans did. they are politicians, and both sides delight in the scandals of the other side. one difference: if this is true, it doesn't sound as though the women welcomed his behavior. and from his recent behavior and "non denial" denial, perhaps where there is smoke there is fire. could also be that republicans operatives put this out there......you know, like the bush campaign spread that crap about mccain. in fact, i would bet on that.
Its comical because when you defend a man for multiple allegations of rape, groping, indecent exposure and sexual harassment, its kind of tough to feign concern over a possible allegation of some form of sexually suggestive comments or behaviors.

I agree...both sides play dirty tricks. But when you are shooting from a foxhole its tough to pretend you have the moral high ground.
 
Last edited:
When you run for public office, especially the highest office in the land, you have to expect that everything about your life - personally and professional - will be called into question. I think it's very appropriate to call Herman Cain's actions into question here because they speak to his character. And since we hold the office of the President of the United States in such high regards...

Put this way, how many of you were pissed off at former President Clinton over his behavior during the Monika Lewinski sex scandal?

What about John Edwards and his affair that's still before the legal system?

Ted Kennedy and Chapaquitick?

JFK and Marline Monroe?

Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill?

The governor who left the country trailing behind his Mistress in South America?

And how about the most recent sex scandle involving the NY Democrat who resigned because sex pics were posted online but he claimed his Facebook account was hacked? (His name escapes me at the moment...)

Sex and politics just don't mix especially when you're of a political party that claims to hold itself up to beholding to "strong moral fiber" and be so God-fearing.

Look, clearly Herman Cain conducted himself inappropriately. Why else would he settle out of court? The issue shouldn't be "this is all old news", but rather "how well does this speak to his character to be President/Commander and Chief"? That's what we should be looking at.
 
Last edited:
Its comical because when you defend a man for multiple allegations of rape, groping, indecent exposure and sexual harassment, its kind of tough to feign concern over a possible allegation of some form of sexually suggestive comments or behaviors.

the issue here is that the republicans run on a morality platform. personally, i don't care about what cain did ( i would never vote for him anyway) , but's it's fair to expose it, right? it's all been fair game since clinton was in office. we reap what we sow.
 
Its comical because when you defend a man for multiple allegations of rape, groping, indecent exposure and sexual harassment, its kind of tough to feign concern over a possible allegation of some form of sexually suggestive comments or behaviors.

I agree...both sides play dirty tricks. But when you are shooting from a foxhole its tough to pretend you have the moral high ground.

I don't think either side can claim the moral high ground over the other in terms of sexual indiscretion.

This story, however, probably came from one of Cain's rivals for the nomination.
 
the issue here is that the republicans run on a morality platform. personally, i don't care about what cain did ( i would never vote for him anyway) , but's it's fair to expose it, right? it's all been fair game since clinton was in office. we reap what we sow.

And one has to expect that his past will come back to haunt him. (Excuse the pun...after all, it is Halloween....:skull:)

I don't think either side can claim the moral high ground over the other in terms of sexual indiscretion.

This story, however, probably came from one of Cain's rivals for the nomination.

No matter who dug up the dirt from his past, it's still fair game in a presidential election cycle.
 
Last edited:
During Herman Cain’s tenure as the head of the National Restaurant Association in the 1990s, at least two female employees complained to colleagues and senior association officials about inappropriate behavior by Cain, ultimately leaving their jobs at the trade group, multiple sources confirm to POLITICO.
The women complained of sexually suggestive behavior by Cain that made them angry and uncomfortable, the sources said, and they signed agreements with the restaurant group that gave them financial payouts to leave the association. The agreements also included language that bars the women from talking about their departures.

Oh look, more women attention whoring themselves out for possible morning show interviews and maybe a book deal.
 
the issue here is that the republicans run on a morality platform. personally, i don't care about what cain did ( i would never vote for him anyway) , but's it's fair to expose it, right? it's all been fair game since clinton was in office. we reap what we sow.
Surely you dont think the dirty tricks started with Clinton? I doubt it was other republicans, just as I doubt the Perry/racism thing was republicans (however the Romeny/illegal immigrant thing was DEFINITELY from Perry). Could have been...I just dont think other republicans see him as a threat.
 
Obama volunteered information about his drug use. Bush avoided it. Clinton was forthright too.

:lol: I had compleatly forgotten about that bull****...."I did not inhale"...what a line :lamo
 
Did what you say cause the Dairy Queen owners pay the person some money to keep quiet about what you said?


If not I think what Cain probably said is rather more significant. Most organizations do not give payouts without a rather good reason

The 90's was the age when sexual harrassment was defined. Sounds like he was guilty of typical boorish behavior rather than the more serious types of harrassment like trading sex for promotions. There was a lot to learn for men and habits to change. Sounds like he got caught up in it. And, by the way there are plenty of reasons to settle cases like this even if you think they were unjustified. Mostly publicity and calculating the cost of fighting a claim. If his record is clean since then and he's had no serious offenses I don't care. This is politically motivated hackery.
 
The restaurant industry is full of stress and sexual tension.
 
Oh look, more women attention whoring themselves out for possible morning show interviews and maybe a book deal.
It doesnt sound like it is the two women that brough this forward. Id actually like to see it all come out. from what was in the cited article, he fired one woman and it wasnt until after he fired her that the allegations were made. The other stated he made some sort of gesture...not...sexual...but it still made her feel uncomfortable. It also sounds like the vast majority of women that worked with him are very supportive. Maybe they should just let the chips fall...see how they read.
 
During Herman Cain’s tenure as the head of the National Restaurant Association in the 1990s

The desperation to find something to smear him with has hit new lows. It will be completely dismissed.
You say that as if this is something special about him. Have you ever seen an election before? It's not about him. They do it to everybody - Republicans and Democrats. :roll:
 
It doesnt sound like it is the two women that brough this forward. Id actually like to see it all come out. from what was in the cited article, he fired one woman and it wasnt until after he fired her that the allegations were made. The other stated he made some sort of gesture...not...sexual...but it still made her feel uncomfortable. It also sounds like the vast majority of women that worked with him are very supportive. Maybe they should just let the chips fall...see how they read.

You read chips?

Is that like some kind of SuperBowl voodoo?

Here, read my chips, what do they say?

194023.jpg
 
Last edited:
Personally, no matter what the poll numbers say, I don't consider Cain to be a serious candidate. Neither is the 999 plan - the cornerstone of his campaign - a serious plan. He has little to offer beyond that.

Didn't seem to matter when Obama had little to offer.
 
Personally, no matter what the poll numbers say, I don't consider Cain to be a serious candidate. Neither is the 999 plan - the cornerstone of his campaign - a serious plan. He has little to offer beyond that.
I'm starting to see him as a Sarah Palin type, more interested in the fame and money part of it. He says what he wants which isn't going to get him elected, but will get him a following who will pay for appearances and such when he drops out.
 
Obama volunteered information about his drug use. Bush avoided it. Clinton was forthright too.

Yeah yeah, Clinton didn't inhale. Bush admitted he had a drinking problem that he sought help for. What did Bush avoid?
 
Yeah yeah, Clinton didn't inhale. Bush admitted he had a drinking problem that he sought help for. What did Bush avoid?

There were allegations of cocaine use.
 
During Herman Cain’s tenure as the head of the National Restaurant Association in the 1990s, at least two female employees complained to colleagues and senior association officials about inappropriate behavior by Cain, ultimately leaving their jobs at the trade group, multiple sources confirm to POLITICO.
The women complained of sexually suggestive behavior by Cain that made them angry and uncomfortable, the sources said, and they signed agreements with the restaurant group that gave them financial payouts to leave the association. The agreements also included language that bars the women from talking about their departures.

I can't believe these racists would make outrageous aligations against a Black presidential candidate! Haven't African Americans endured enough hardship?
 
You read chips?

Is that like some kind of SuperBowl voodoo?

Here, read my chips, what do they say?

View attachment 67117803
No ridges,less greasy and fewer broken chips than regular potato chips, and you maybe have waaaay too much time on your hands! ;)
 
Last edited:
Yeah yeah, Clinton didn't inhale. Bush admitted he had a drinking problem that he sought help for. What did Bush avoid?

The best quote about past drug use is one I've heard attributed to Newt Gingrich. Asked about marijuana use, he said, "Sure, I did it once or twice. It was 1969 and I was in grad schoo."
 
During Herman Cain’s tenure as the head of the National Restaurant Association in the 1990s, at least two female employees complained to colleagues and senior association officials about inappropriate behavior by Cain, ultimately leaving their jobs at the trade group, multiple sources confirm to POLITICO.
The women complained of sexually suggestive behavior by Cain that made them angry and uncomfortable, the sources said, and they signed agreements with the restaurant group that gave them financial payouts to leave the association. The agreements also included language that bars the women from talking about their departures.

I doubt it.

The problem is that the settlement he paid to the victims--a mere 5-figure dollar amount--is not large enough to appear as though he was trying to hide something. Sounds more like he just didn't want the hassle of a trial.
 
Back
Top Bottom