• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Herman Cain and the women accusing him

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Herman Cain and the women accusing him

    I've seen this story on the news the last couple of days and I can't help asking why the women concerned didn't make accusations earlier. I don't want to get into Mr Cain's politics, as there are probably many things on which I would disagree with him, and many issues on which I would agree with him; that's not the point though.

    Many years after he is alleged to have made sexual approaches to some women, they come out accusing him, when they don't seem to have taken action straight after the alleged incidents. That makes me rather skeptical about the whole story. It also brings a more serious consequence; it can be made even more difficult for women who really have been raped to actually get justice, simply because there seem to be so many crankies who make accusations that are many years past. The one woman on the news this morning, giving a press conference, was reading her story from some notes; it seems to me that if she has such vivid memories of what supposedly happened, she wouldn't need to read the story for the cameras.

    Herman Cain is a monster, says second woman - Telegraph

    In short, I have more reason to doubt their stories than to believe them. Maybe that makes me a cold, unfeeling sexist pig, but I don't think so.
    And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

    #2
    Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
    I've seen this story on the news the last couple of days and I can't help asking why the women concerned didn't make accusations earlier.
    She DID!


    From the FIRST ******* paragraph
    Karen Kraushaar, a US Treasury spokesman, was revealed as one of two women to have received five–figure payouts from the National Restaurant Association after complaining about Mr Cain in the 1990s.
    Coffee's for closers

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by Spacecadet View Post
      She DID!


      From the FIRST ******* paragraph
      Did she go to the police? Or did she just get a tulipload of money from her employer?

      I feel this is important, because when justice is about getting some money out of someone who's done something wrong, it's very attractive to make accusations.
      And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

      Comment


        #4
        Who really knows? Allegations like this probably doom any politician, except Italian ones obviously.
        bloggoth

        If everything isn't black and white, I say, 'Why the hell not?'
        John Wayne (My guru, not to be confused with my beloved prophet Jeremy Clarkson)

        Comment


          #5
          Does this have any bearing on whether he would be a good president?

          Nope not really. An Alpha male that chases women is probably a good sign.

          I think when men chase women it's fairly normal actually. There was a time when it was fairly normal to pinch the secretary's bum; which is basically what it's about.
          I'm alright Jack

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by xoggoth View Post
            Who really knows? Allegations like this probably doom any politician, except Italian ones obviously.
            Well it's not a very good thing if it makes it more difficult for women with genuine complaints, and certainly not a good thing if it discourages very accomplished people (and Mr Cain does have some good credentials) from standing for office.
            And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
              Did she go to the police? Or did she just get a tulipload of money from her employer?

              I feel this is important, because when justice is about getting some money out of someone who's done something wrong, it's very attractive to make accusations.
              I don't know the details of this incident.

              Sexual harrassment can take various forms. Sometimes harmless teasing can be misinterpreted (either deliberately or accidently). But sometimes it can make the recipient feel very uncomfortable and maybe even anxious. Most people wouldn't actually do anything about it. But if, later, someone else accuses the harrasser, you'd be likely to come forward and say "Hey, that happened to me too".

              I don't know how you determine the truth in cases like this. Money/spite/jealousy are always strong motivators for false accusations, but that doesn't mean the incidents didn't happen. I'd go with innocent until proven guilty. No idea how you find that proof years after the incident though.
              Last edited by mudskipper; 9 November 2011, 11:20.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by BlasterBates View Post
                Does this have any bearing on whether he would be a good president?

                Nope not really. An Alpha male that chases women is probably a good sign.
                It shows whether they are likely to have their mind on the job.

                It shows how they react to a crisis when these things come out - a series of denials, half-truths and ineptitude over something which could be construed as relatively minor in the grand scheme of things, does not bode well for someone with their finger on the button.
                Best Forum Advisor 2014
                Work in the public sector? You can read my FAQ here
                Click here to get 15% off your first year's IPSE membership

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by TheFaQQer View Post
                  It shows whether they are likely to have their mind on the job.

                  It shows how they react to a crisis when these things come out - a series of denials, half-truths and ineptitude over something which could be construed as relatively minor in the grand scheme of things, does not bode well for someone with their finger on the button.
                  A bit like Churchill and Roosevelt, you mean?
                  And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
                    A bit like Churchill and Roosevelt, you mean?
                    ....JFK, Henry VIII, most of the Popes, actually virtually all rulers, primeministers of democratic countries since time began. Some notable exceptions include Stalin, Pol Pott and George Bush.
                    I'm alright Jack

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X