Well, well, well! Suddenly the meteoric rise of Republican Presidential candidate HermanCain seems to be encountering stiff head winds.
On Sunday, allegations surfaced that Mr. Cain had allegedly harassed two former employees during his stint as Chief Executive Officer of the National Restaurant Association. Both employees were reputed to have left the Association contingent upon signing Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDA), and receiving financial settlements. It is important to note, this matter appears to be far from over.
In the interim, this post is in no way intended to serve as an indictment of Mr. Cain, nor does it suggest that he is innocent. Rather, the discourse here is designed to elevate for your consideration, some of the key assertions and events related to the alleged acts of harassment by Herman Cain.
Five weeks ago, I penned a post entitled, “Raising Cain: Don’t Bet On It!” At that time I suggested that Mr. Cain’s unsuspected rise to near the top of the Republican candidate’s pecking order was, in effect, built on shaky ground. To wit, I posited he had benefitted greatly from having been a proverbial after thought in the over all discourse between and among GOP Presidential candidates. That is to say, the general thrust of candidate’s barbs, innuendo, and pointed attacks were aimed at whomever the front runner was, which up that time had included Michele Bachmann, Mitt Romney, and Rick Perry; but not Herman Cain.
Frequent attacks and counterattacks directed at and by the leading candidates contributed their own rise and fall. My view, as I expressed then, was that Mr. Cain was a direct beneficiary of having not participated in, nor been victimized by, the mosh pit of vitriol and direct or indirect attacks, fomented by his fellow candidates. I argued further that as Mr. Cain rose to the ranks of the upper tier candidates, he like others who spent time bearing the front runner’s torch, would begin to receive his own share of slings and arrows. And that, gentle readers, is the gist of how and why we find ourselves here.
When historians look back in the rear view to dissect what is sure to be viewed as a significant juncture in Mr. Cain’s Presidential campaign, many elements may stand out. However, in all likelihood, none will be deemed more critical to the resolution of the questions surrounding the allegations, and potentially to the outcome of Mr. Cain’s Presidential aspirations and campaign than the Hermanator’s own actions and responses.
When first approached by a reporter Sunday, Mr. Cain appeared totally unprepared to respond. He claimed not to know who the complainants might have been. This despite the fact his campaign had been given a 10-day heads-up by Politico, the news outlet that broke the original story, to prepare and provide an answer.
On Monday, Cain began weaving a series of evolving, but not particularly effective or complete responses that continued through at least Tuesday, including:
- “If the Restaurant Association did a settlement, I am not – I wasn’t even aware of it, and I hope it wasn’t much, because nothing happened. He added he was “unaware of any settlement.”
- Facts have “come about during the day, as I have attempted to recall what happened back then.” He went on to say, “I was aware that an agreement had been reached.” He noted it was worth “maybe three months salary.”
- “I am not changing my story, but trying to fill in as many details as I could possibly recall.”
- “It was an agreement. So it looked like I changed my story. I didn’t change my story.” He noted, “The difference between settlement and agreement, it makes sense to me.”
- “No, I just started to remember more. This was not exactly something I had top of mind.” Again, I would note, despite his Campaign having been given 10 days to prepare and provide a response to questions about the alleged harassment.
- “Remember this was 12 years ago, and I was trying to recollect this in the middle of an already planned busy day. A major speech in the morning. A major speech luncheon speech at the Press Club.”
- “It was concluded after a thorough investigation that it had no basis.”
- “On the record, there was some sort of settlement or termination, bit no big settlement.” WHAT?
- I “recused myself,” during the investigation.
- “We are not going to chase anonymous sources, when there is no basis for the accusation. I have never sexually harassed anyone and those accusations are totally false.”
Of course, it should be noted, Mr. Cain does have staunch supporters. Ann Coulter, a conservative journalist, likened this incident to one that brought notoriety to Justice Clarence Thomas, calling the situation a “High-Tech Lynching.” This phrase was popularized during Justice Thomas’ Confirmation Hearings for the Supreme Court, when he used it to refer to the treatment he received from the media in the wake of Professor Anita Hill’s accusations of sexual harassment. Ms. Coulter blamed the Liberal media. In addition, using the Conservatives’ Race Card gambit, she stated, “Our blacks are so much better than their (Democrats) blacks. To become a black Republican, you don’t just roll into it. You are not going with the flow…and that’s why we have very impressive blacks in the Republican Party.” Wow, I feel so…"unimpressive" now. After reading that, I’m thinking of seeking therapy.
Rush Limbaugh also deigned to play the Race Card, saying, “It really is about blacks and Hispanics getting too uppity. That’s what this is. You don’t achieve in American politics as a Republican…you try it and we’re going to destroy you.”
Mr. Cain has referred to the harassment issue as a witch-hunt, and suggested that the Left is out to get him. As was the case with a similar assertion about the source of the Occupy Movement, which I wrote about last week, he went on to add, he had no proof. Hmmm, interesting; what a revelation!
Mr. Cain went further and said he believes the Clarence Thomas analogy in play. He made this comment in response to question posed by a Fox News commentator. I’ll leave it to you to discern whether the question about a Thomas-Cain comparison was intended to be incendiary…or whether it were just another transparent effort to play to the (ultra-Right) base.
Next time a Conservative tries to suggest the Race Card is either the sole province of blacks, Democrats, or both, please refer them to Ms. Coulter and Mr. Limbaugh. Apparently someone needs to be reoriented.
Late yesterday, news reports revealed that one of the complainants now wants to be released from the aforementioned NDA, so she can come forth and tell her story. A number of analysts predict that the Restaurant Association will be asked to waive, cancel, or suspend the agreement so a more complete version of the story can be entered into the public domain. Chances are this will happen.
With that in mind, it is all but certain this matter is going to get bigger and more awkward before it gets smaller and/or less nettlesome. In my estimation, it is probably in Mr. Cain’s best interest to do his level best bring closure to this matter ASAP/PDQ, if not earlier. Of course I am also convinced that ship has already sailed.
This matter has dominated the political news cycle for nearly four days now. It has taken the air out of the room for discussion on numerous important issues, including the Stock Market expansion and retraction, based on the European debt crisis, the judicial approval of the Black Farmers’ Settlement, and the on-going work of the Debt Supercommittee, among others.
If you are a fan of politics as political theater, the good news is, by all appearances, this madness is nowhere near over and done. Alternately, the bad news is, the furor is causing a figurative solar eclipse of matters that are considerably more important, in the grand scheme of things. Still, it is a bit like the traffic accident on the other side of a divided highway that creates an inexplicable stream of rubber-neckers who just can’t pass without slowing traffic to a crawl in the otherwise unclogged lane. Do you hear me Democrats? LOL!
All-in-all, what have we learned here? First and foremost, if ever you should find yourself in a situation where a revision of the facts is in order, remember this; The Herman Cain Case: Anatomy of a Retraction…Not! So, don’t do it.
I’m done; holla back!
Read my blog anytime by clicking the link: http://thesphinxofcharlotte.blogspot.com. A new post is published each Wednesday. For more detailed information on a variety of aspects relating to this post, consult the links below:
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment