-
John Kerry, Secretary of Gaffes
April 25, 2013 | 9 comments
-
Rand Paul and Marco Rubio at CPAC
March 14, 2013 | 0 comments
-
SEQUESTER: The Dumbest Weight-Loss Plan Ever
March 1, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Israel’s Hard-Right Turn That Wasn’t
January 22, 2013 | 1 comment
-
Deep Space Nine, Twenty Years Later
January 3, 2013 | 23 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Much of the discussion among my cobloggers seems to assume that the charges against Herman Cain are likely to be false. I’m not sure why. This isn’t a Clarence Thomas-style he said/she said. It’s a Bill Clinton-style he said/she said/she said/she said/she said.
One accusation of sexual harassment may be a lie or a misunderstanding. But four accusations? One of which resulted in a $35,000 settlement, one of which resulted in a $45,000 settlement, and one of which is backed up by two affadavits signed under penalty of perjury by people swearing that the accuser told them about the incident at the time?
Anyone who lived through the Clinton era will remember watching partisans blindly defend a politician when he was repeatedly accused of sexual impropriety. It’s surreal to now see some conservatives behaving like Clintonites, complete with attacks on the motives of the accusers (gee, I can’t imagine why some of the women might prefer to remain anonymous).
Apply Occam’s razor. This isn’t some vast conspiracy launched against Cain because he’s a black conservative, with complaints planted long ago by political enemies who foresaw that he’d be a threat more than a decade later. There is a much simpler explanation: The charges are at least partially true.
View all comments (30) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by John Tabin
http://spectator.org/blog/2011/11/08/cain-and-clinton
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Pedro Gonzalez| 11.9.11 @ 3:08AM
I'm not suggesting that the allegations be summarily dismissed. What I'm suggesting is that you put more on the plate before you scramble Cain's candidacy. You and other political pundits seem almost eager to fit Cain out for his political casket. Two affidavits. By whom and when were they submitted? On Clinton, I seem to remember Paula Jones being more credible than Ms. Bialek(listen to the Bill Curtis interview).
SpiralArchitect| 11.9.11 @ 3:09PM
Nothing beats having the state troopers runs security ( directly or otherwise) for your cocain import/smuggeling into the Mena, AR airsttrip.
Unless you count murder, no, not jsut Vince Foster.
Research on your own, plz.
Here is a starter google 'the clinton chronicles'.
PCC| 11.9.11 @ 6:22AM
In modern, feminized America, when it comes to allegations of sexual misconduct or racism, you're not innocent until proven guilty, you're guilty until proven guilty.
It's a wonder a guy can even get a date in the U.S. without having his lawyer present.
Teflon93| 11.9.11 @ 6:38AM
We haven't even seen the evidence yet!
My goodness, wait until we see it before convicting the man...that's not being a partisan, that's being an American!
JPM| 11.9.11 @ 10:25AM
Cain's not going to be convicted of anything. We all have to make a judgment quite different from the judgment a criminal jury has to make. We don't have to decide whether Cain should be incarcerated, only whether he is a fit candidate for President. At this point, only the utterly oblivious can be in any doubt on that point. Cain was always unqualified, now he's disqualified. The sooner he gets off the stage and lets everyone get back to the serious business of selecting a GOP presidential candidate, the better. The longer his nuts-and-sluts spectacle continues, the more damage it will do to the Republican brand.
Go away Herman! Far, far away.
ElPuma25| 11.9.11 @ 11:08AM
and that is exaclty what the left wants.
'till whem are we going to allow the left to dictate our future?
So it was with Sarah Palin. "She is unelectable" was the moderate-republican clamor, and so is now with Cain. Well, if they are unelectable is because we let them be so, because we let the left trash them without any of our leaders having any courage to defend them.
Not anymore, I'm fed up with that attitude. Prove that Cain is guilty of what he is charged. Until you can do that, I'm standing by him.
Patriot4Freedom| 11.10.11 @ 1:26AM
Sorry, but I am not rushing to the defense of ANYONE who has demonstrably lied multiple times to the voters he hopes to lead !
He is guilty of lying to us, and I WILL NOT support a candidate who does that !
Mike| 11.9.11 @ 11:23AM
Ah, yes Teflon93. The battle cry of the right during the Clinton administration. I remember it well. It rang especially hollow from the lips of Newt Gingrich, that paragon of moral rectitude.
Teflon93| 11.9.11 @ 1:18PM
Except in Clinton's case there was evidence--and plenty of it.
Or perhaps you're dumb enough to think Monica stained her own dress, Mike.
martin j smith| 11.9.11 @ 7:36AM
Let us pause to look first at tbe background of these allegations. I mean that this is a political season and thus the motive for these stories. Next the source--I mean who gave us the stories ? Politico ? NYT ? Not what I would call unbiased journalism--right ? Next lets look at the actual people --so far we know one maybe two sort of--
Since they are insinuating themselves into a politcal campaign they are thus public figures and subject to scrutiny ? Right ? Then the lawyers representing them they too should be subject to scrutiny , right ? And of course the payoff for the
"testimony" . All of these things should be examined under the clear light of day. You just do not jump to any conclusions before making judgement But of course Mr Tabin you have drown your own conclusion without giving Cain the benefit of the doubt. So let respond to that.
If your candidate and I would be it is Romney wins the nomination I will decide if he is worthy of my vote or not. Do not take Conservative ( I mean real Conservative not the fake BS types like Romney ) for granted. Oh yes--I hate Obama--but I equally currupt politics of any type and your position sounds currupt to me.
Teflon93| 11.9.11 @ 7:59AM
Absolutely right---Occam's Razor cuts both ways.
The answer to the question of "why are these women making accusations now?" is "to politically destroy Herman Cain."
We should require actual, honest-to-God EVIDENCE before allowing them to achieve their aim.
We should also ask where Mitt Romney was and what he was doing when Politico got this "scoop" given Romney got caught red-handed by Fred Thompson smearing him anonymously in 2008.
This isn't just politics---it's a window into the characters of the men who would be President. We need to consider both the character of the candidate being assailed and the candidate doing the assailing.
Given Romney's track record, why is it conservatives aren't asking him any questions about involvement with this story?
Patriot4Freedom| 11.10.11 @ 1:33AM
They are NOT making accusations now - they made them in the 90's.
Somebody at the Rest. Assn. who knew the story leaked it to Politico, who ran with the story because Mr. Cain is a Republican.
You need to ask Mr. Cain why he lied to us last March, and why he lied to us when the story of what happened to him in the 90's broke !
Bumr50| 11.9.11 @ 8:28AM
Cain will be the nominee due to popular support, and "John Tabin"'s head will explode.
It's clear that he doesn't care that the two women with names have documented histories of being serial accusers.
The AP is reporting this for cripes sake.
This is a man's honor that you are so flippantly condemning in the interest of advancing your more preferred candidate.
If you support someone else, fine, dis Cain on his merits.
But crawling into bed with the disgusting figures that are trying to destroy Mr. Cain is reprehensible.
Shame on you, sir.
Patriot4Freedom| 11.10.11 @ 1:36AM
Bumr50 - I don't claim to know what happened in the 90's, but Mr. Cain knows. He has to answer for lying to the Republicans when this came out, because he DID know.
SUSEYQUE| 11.9.11 @ 8:30AM
No one really knows what goes on when a married man is alone with a woman who is not his wife. No one knows what lurks in the minds of decent men. When a man is rich and powerful he may easily succumb to a sense of sexual entitlement with an attractive younger women. He toys with it in his mind and then he acts it out in this sex-crazed culture.
SpiralArchitect| 11.9.11 @ 4:01PM
Exceptional display you have provided for us of your simplicity.
You preface your comment with 'No one really knows...' with a conclusion of what a man does both mentally & otherwise.
Bravo, you dolt.
PattyMor| 11.9.11 @ 8:53AM
True, Suseque, but no one knows what goes on in the mind of females which are said to be made "uncomfortable". And the standard is in the mind of the accuser. Did he get too close or make some offhanded remark or really make a move on these women? And then there is the ability just to make a quick money by making a he said/she said accusation. Firms are willing to pay just to get rid of these things.
We all know what a conservative Black Man goes through to get to high positions of power. Just ask Clarence Thomas about that disgusting media debacle called his hearing for the Supreme Court.
And read Saul Alinsky. The Lefty side doesn't want to defeat the opponent, but to utterly destroy them. Just ask Sarah Palin about what lengths they will go to savage conservatives. Knowing what tactics the Left (and half of the Republican Party) will go to in order to eliminate their opponents, I am willing to give Herman the benefit of the doubt, in spite of the multiple accusers. And the more that snarky Karl Rove dumps on our conservatives, the MORE I will support them.
Patriot4Freedom| 11.10.11 @ 1:43AM
Come on PattyMor . . . I love Sarah Palin, but the idea that there was some Republican faction out to destroy Sarah is just plain nuts !
Firms DON'T pay $40,000 for nuisance-value suits to employees who leave a company after filing a harrassment report.
Name me just one previous Republican candidate for President who has even ONE complaint of harrassment against them. There just aren't any !
hrmsy| 11.9.11 @ 9:26AM
Worst case scenario is political correctness being convieniently used for financial gain over integrity. What is at stake is the clarification of what is guilt. When political correctness is allowed to be abused for influence of a particular view it protects no one, and violates the spirit of freedom.
SpiralArchitect| 11.9.11 @ 4:04PM
Claims made without the ability to substanciate?
Sounds like someone deserving of a civil suit, slander is not welcome nor legal.
Mike Rogers | 11.9.11 @ 10:07AM
Two accusers have been demolished already by their own history, including one by AP!
Two remain anonymous because there's nothing to tell.
A new story by an Obama Zombie trying to project Clintonite "procurement" methods onto Cain, with, once more, no story at the end.
It looks bad for Cain, because it's MEANT to look bad for Cain - a steady drip, drip of accusations so that his supporters will eventually give up on the man. But what if they are ALL false?
Remember accuser #1, who turned out to be Karen Kraushaar: First, we hear about the settlement, then we hear that it was a severance package after the NRA investigated and found the claim baseless, and that they'd be better off without her. Indeed, her next employer found the same thing - she took exception to an emailed joke (not exclusively sent to her, nor sexual in nature), in order to try to get extra leave, a promotion, and a year's scholarship to Harvard's school of government.
Floosie #4 has a checkered past, multiple bankruptcies and lawsuits, is described by friends and neighbors as a gold digger, and by a Chicago radio host as more likely the aggressor, if anything happened at all. Then she "hires" a professional hit lawyer. Hmmmmmm.
Ham Sandwich| 11.9.11 @ 4:09PM
Accusations will not stop me & I can debate too.
My history is long and loved by many, I carry no baggage like my rival.
If the people demand, if called upon, I will accept the nomination and right the wrong done to this great nation by this anti - American administration.
-HS
conservative bob| 11.9.11 @ 10:46AM
Mr. Tabin,
We have accusations that are being made by people unnamed. We have others made with that paragon of truth and light Gloria Allred in leading the charge.
As to the ‘settlements’ I believe the NRA called them severance which is vastly different.
I am familiar with the cost associated with defending employment allegations in court and the amounts in these ‘settlements’ are a bargain. Awards for proven sexual harassment are much higher. So I have some doubt as to how much really happened with the 2 anonymous claims.
Do I believe that someone would sign a false statement about something that happened 14 years ago to advance a political end? Short answer is yes. There is no way to prove perjury, their statements are among the friends and associates of the accuser, so what is the risk.
If the 5 that are out there no do not take Cain down then they will find 5 more.
Are you at all troubled by the proximity of several of these accusers to the dem entities? What a coincidence.
At this moment we have a number of women several anonymous making vague claims. What exactly did he do? It is a bit early for you to be sliding the rope around his neck.
The women coming forward now are discrediting the allegations of all. I simply do not believe anything that comes out of Allred’s mouth. She is a Dem hack. If the same person would have come forward with some no name lawyer with no political connections I would have found her more credible but Allred, sorry the burden of proof increases exponentially when ever that media whore enters the picture.
In the universe of people that worked at NRA from ’96 – ’99 you find nothing odd that the ones coming forward lived in David Axelrod’s building or work in the Obama administration? I thought people in your business were supposed to have a ‘healthy skepticism’.
Mike| 11.9.11 @ 11:20AM
Mr. Tabin
The situation with Herman Cain does have a certain deja vu quality to it, including "watching partisans blindly defend a politician when he was repeatedly accused of sexual impropriety."
Many accusations, many categorical denials.
Well, I reserve judgment, but I suspect we are far from hearing the end of this story. I am particularly interested in Mr. Cain's "remote" possibility that he may have further recollections.
Dai Alanye | 11.9.11 @ 12:35PM
Tabin is being both naive and premature, assuming he doesn't have an axe to grind.
At this point we have two known accusers, one of whom is a bimbo, the other a neurotic who has profited in the past by making accusations. Tabin's "four accusations" are down to "two possibly believable but nebulous accusations." Mighty weak material with which to condemn a man.
Dai Alanye | 11.9.11 @ 12:35PM
Tabin is being both naive and premature, assuming he doesn't have an axe to grind.
At this point we have two known accusers, one of whom is a bimbo, the other a neurotic who has profited in the past by making accusations. Tabin's "four accusations" are down to "two possibly believable but nebulous accusations." Mighty weak material with which to condemn a man.
Patriot4Freedom| 11.10.11 @ 1:56AM
CORRECTION - There are two accusers from the 90's. Those are the two women who filed complaints back then against Mr. Cain. He knew of them when he lied to all of us, in March, and again when the story broke. Then he lied again, and again, then a third (Bialek) came forward. He then lied again - saying he didn't know her and had never met her, when there are multiple witnesses to the contrary. We have yet to hear directly from the AP story woman, but it sounds bad for Cain (He tried to get a private dinner with an attractive young girl while on a trip without his wife). I am NOT condemning him, but I cannot support someone who intentionally tries to deceive me about his personal history. By doing so, HE has shown me that he is a man who lacks the character I expect from my President !
Casey Abell| 11.9.11 @ 3:37PM
Lord and Goldstein are going out with guns blazing, but even around here, most everybody else seems to be tossing in the towel on Herm. Latest defector: Quin hopped over to NRO to endorse...Santorum? Good luck with that one, Quin.
After a while pundits get tired of defending a guy who seems to be, shall we say, shading the truth. Even at American Spectator, formerly known as Cain For President, too many accusers and too much money in settlements make it tough to believe in Herm's pure innocence.
Patriot4Freedom| 11.10.11 @ 2:00AM
Amen !
There is just too much deceiving going on for this to be just his bad luck. I cannot think of ANY executive who has had two harrassment complaints filed against them. Especially during such a short term as CEO.