The story originated in Policico. Fox and NBC picked it up from there.

Madison From NY

This is another MSM diversion to DELAY the institution of IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST OBAMA

*****

Really? And how are those progressing? Darn smart of MSNBC to plant this story YEARS before Cain became a politician..... And how nice of Cain's organization to provide the lady with monetary compensation considering this was just an MSNBC set-up!

Madison, can you say "SQUIRREL"!!!!?

Weasel,

Here's another likely scenario. Some woman falsely accused Herman Cain of sexual harassment. Maybe looking for money, maybe because of a misunderstanding. In order to simply end the issue, the NRA offered her a settlement. She accepted because that's what she was looking for or because it was a severe enough incident that she thought she would prevail in court. MSNBC has nothing to do with any of this. Years later however, Politico runs the story simply because its good news and might sell advertising or increase their readership. Truth of the allegations? Who cares, they're just here to create controversy. MSNBS picks up the story because, of course, they hate all republicans and love all democrats. See, that wasn't so hard, was it?

Not a high tech lynching at all. When a criminal defendant takes a plea deal, basically foregoing a jury trial to avoid a longer prison sentence, we don't say those people are innocent...in fact we say they we're guilty otherwise why would they take the plea deal. The same goes for a civil settlement, innocent people don't settle out of court, and if he was "in-fact" innocent of sex misconduct...he should have demanded a jury trial to clear his name.

Lynching.... what a bunch of histrionics... if Cain, THE CEO was unaware of a payout to settle a sexual harassment claim against HIM, he is at the VERY least a totally incompetent administrator. Cain's got his choice here - INCOMPETENT or LIER...

And as far as this be a "left wing conspiracy " .... please.... the left would LOVE to have a Tea Party darling with deep ties to the Koch brothers and a disastrous tax plan as the GOP nominee.

Is it a lynching when you pay hush money to the accusers? i think not.

teahead,

Sexual harassment complaints are often settled because they are, in many cases, unwinable. Because here in America, where we supposedly believe in "innocence until proven guilty" there are certain acts for which men are found guilty simply by accusation - infidelity, sexual assault, sexual harassment, child abuse, etc. You don't need to be guilty to have your life destroyed, you only need to be accused. They of course can't be found guilty in a court of law simply by accusation, but rather in the court of public opinion where it is much easier to destroy lives and careers.

many times these claims are cheaper to just pay off rather than fight! Doesn't make him either guilty or Innocent just a business decision.

I hope this event helps publicize what Cain did as the head of the lobby group: National Restaurant Association. He worked to loosen drunk driving laws and stop smoking bans in restaurants.

This man is being considered for President?? No one is THAT stupid to vote for someone with that history.

By the way, his Pizza stint was 15 years ago...yet that's what he's running on. He wants you to forget he was a lobbyist.

Greg, you do not live in the real world...do you know how many lawsuits are prevented from occurring due to this practice? Our legal system is so screwed up that all you need to do is get one lawyer to listen and take the case on and blam! Settlement before it even makes it to the light of day. It saves money in the long run to settle! I am not saying that he is innocent but I am saying that innocent people will take this route due to the low cost and low publicity.

Corporations settling lawsuits and accusations out of court is absolutely par for the course and a byproduct of our litigious society. Any lawyer will tell you that if you sue a corporation to expect at least a $10K payday as it is cheaper for the corporation to settle than to spend one day in court for it.

The comparison to criminal cases is utterly ridiculous.

Funny how the media is able to ferret out this story during the run up to the election but when it came to John Edwards sex scandle they couldn't find anything even though it was common knowledge. The difference? A white liberal vs a black conservative.

Nothing to see here folks, move along.

Cain is toast - next. Guess they will be back on Romney not that all the other candidates hour glasses have run out of sand.

Why would anyone with his kind of money not fight a false accusation? And then claiming he didn't know a thing about it? Unbelievable in more ways than one.

I first heard about this on CNN this morning before tuning in Morning Joe where they didn't get around to it until about 7AM.

Dream on! Like you can get a laywer to take on a lawsuit even to settle unless you have a good case. You just have to have a totally sensational case to get it into the courts with witnesses and documentation.

There would never have been a settlement unless they thought she would win.

yes, please nominate this @!$%#bag for GOP presidential candidate. i love everything about him, except him; but that's not what it's about, is it. the bottom line is we want a @!$%#bag, in order to break this country, regardless of consequences. god before dogma. dogma before country.

"A High Tech Lynching", a funny choice of words.

i love it.

"I did not sexually harass anyone!" Cain. "I did not have sex with that woman!"Clinton. "If the President does it, it is not illegal!"Nixon. "WMD in Iraq" Bush, Cheney and Powell. "I'm innocent. You've got to believe I'm innocent. If you don't then take my job!" Nixon. And on and on and on . . .

The point is, they all lie!

x

most times these claims are cheaper to just pay off rather than fight! Doesn't make him either guilty or Innocent just a smart business decision.

Time for Cain to pull out the harmonica and play a couple of verses of "Gimme That Old Time Religion".

Everybody, sing!

@ joemike

Yes lets just start making up stuff and forget about the actual facts and documents of the pay off that included a gag order. So the women must be lying right... even thou u don't have any factual information to suggest so... People just don't throw money at false accusers the counter-sew... Money + gag order usually means she was telling the truth plus she had evidence... but we will never know because of the gag order... which is the whole point of keeping the truth hidden while allowing Cain to say whatever he likes without contest.... so do you really think these women are lying?

Timetrvlr, your whole post is an advertisement for your complete lack of knowledge about our legal system.

Does the name Paula Jones mean anything to you? She got $850,000 out of Clinton...AFTER the case had already been dismissed. A bit more than 5 figures, wouldn't you say?

Cain denied the allegations, saying on FOX this morning he was "falsely accused"

The fact that he went to "Faux News" to reply says it all.

True enough. Settling out of court does not imply guilt. People do it all the time for a whole host of reasons. The court of public opinion, as mentioned earlier, adheres to no court ruling. Get accused of certain things and the people will call you guilty no matter what the jury or judge says.

Personally, I'd love to see Obama hand Cain his ass in a debate so more power to Cain. His tax plan is ridiculous.

Don't forget the accuser's name is dragged through the mud just as much as the accused if it goes to a civil trial. That is why it's settled out of court, plus a runaway jury could award millions of $$$$$$. There is no doubt in my mind that he was aware of the settlement and the amount of it. However that doesn't mean he was guilty.

I thought he was CEO at Godfathers Pizza, not Long Dong Silvers.

I don't know why you call it a lynching when Cain payed for the rope.

I just knew that MSNBC would figure out a way to get this story on First Read. I mean, how could they deny the First Read regulars such a prime opportunity to spew some really juicy hate at a conservative. It is, after all, what they do best.

Oh yes, Forrest Gump, how do you know Cain did anything??? Source, please.

Either he did it personally or the organization he ran did it, so it is his responsibility either way. Why pay if your innocent, what is your good name, or the good name and reputation of the organization you run worth?

spider-737231

I just knew that MSNBC would figure out a way to get this story on First Read. I mean, how could they deny the First Read regulars such a prime opportunity to spew some really juicy hate at a conservative. It is, after all, what they do best.

Wow, it's kinda funny watching righties get all wired up defending one of their messiahs.

most times these claims are cheaper to just pay off rather than fight! Doesn't make him either guilty or Innocent just a smart business decision.

So exactly how are people supposed to make a decision on guilt or innocence if the perp pays the accuser off? Maybe it is not such a good idea when you are in politics (or thinking about it.). The whole smoke/fire thing tends to flare up when these accusations come to the fore.

If you believe in Caine and his tax plan you believe in never never land,

middle class will suffer as usual only to end up with the poor..

Has head of the restaurant association he should have been aware of sexual harassment guide lines, what does that say? Not to know the outcome of such serious allegations tells quite a bit about lack of follow up to such matters. His lack of knowledge and attention to details of his personal life show some defects as a candidate. I'm not judging whether he's guilty or not just his disregard to important details like 999 now its something else c'mon. Paula Jones got paid more than what Clinton settled on look up the "Arkansas Project" how could a clerk from Arkansas live in a $100,000 condo in West L.A. and drive a mercedes in the late 90's/

Who cares whether he is guilty or not, there are two MUCH BIGGER issues here...

1) As a CEO, he DID NOT KNOW of a settlement for a case against HIM. As someone else pointed out, that is blatant incompetence.

2) This has brought to light the fact that he was a lobbyist. Even Republican candidates have admitted that lobbyist money is the single biggest problem with our government. A former lobbyist is the LAST person we need in the white house.

It is no surprise that the "tax plan" from a lobbyists REDUCES taxes on corporations and the top 1%, while INCREASING taxes on the middle class.

I don't see how any sane person could doubt that Cain harassed her. He probably did. It's happened with politicians and businessmen, time and again. That doesn't prove he actually did it, of course, but SOMEBODY must have thought he did or there wouldn't have been a settlement. Period.

Chances are, he's a sexist jerk and I see no evidence at all to the contrary. Since he's attempting to win the GOP nomination for POTUS, it's definitely newsworthy and not the least bit surprising, either. At least not to me. And I believe he has plenty of company on both sides of the political spectrum, too. It's probably next to impossible to find even one of these guys who ISN'T capable of sexual harassment, in private.

I don't know about calling it a "lynching", but I'd like to know the complexion of the women that did the accusing though. If they looked like Anita Hill, Cain may just get by, but if they looked like Ivanka Trump, Cain may be looking at a real life lynching!

talkingtoyou55

Paula Jones got paid more than what Clinton settled on look up the "Arkansas Project" how could a clerk from Arkansas live in a $100,000 condo in West L.A. and drive a mercedes in the late 90's/

So how much do you think the Republicans paid her?

Goodness sakes, he just asked them to sample some of his pepperoni!

Uh, Madison? Do you know what an impeachment is? I don't think that word means what you think it means.

" I don't think that word means what you think it means."

Toasty - Shades of The Princess Bride! :)

WCA, I agree..... the old liberal media (olm) is very tenacious in their attacks on conservative politicians..... despite the overwhelming evidence that Obama should be a one term president.

Power corrupts. The Occupy Wall Street folks are not looking at all the corruption facing the country these days!

Mire - I'm not making stuff up more than anyone else here who just assumes that the women are telling the truth and Cain is guilty because the story ran on the Internet. We don't know what happened because conveniently the women are not being identified or described. Funny how, in the media, we always protect the "victim" but never the accused.

BTW - non-disclosure clauses are a part of every settlement agreement written by every lawyer who is not an absolute idiot. There is nothing unusual or surprising about the fact that there is a non-disclosure agreement that was part of the settlement. It proves nothing.

Spider sorry to bust your bubble but this is the work of your own establishment. No way in hell do they want this guy, they wanted him in the debates and in the conversation so they could claim impartiality. FOX News wants Perry and always has, The Republican establishment wants a Business yes man, they do not want a guy who is going to make Corporate America pay 9 percent taxes and hold their feet to the fire. IE, Perrys flat tax but BTW you can stay in the old tax system if you like, for all of you not paying tax. They want their Crony.

Love how this was a non-story when it was slick willy pounding anything with a heartbeat. Now it's frontpage news. LOL.

Another piece of crap known as msnbc journalism. No details, no dates, no names just throwing around accusations. I WANT TO KNOW FACTS AND DETAILS! AND IT DOESN'T HELP THAT CHUCK TODD IS A LIBERAL HATCHETMAN!

Factnotrhetoric, ?????WTF. Clinton was a non story? Really? Please don't even try that BS.

Vote for Ron Paul... As long as you're not a big fan of the Civil Rights Act.

most times these claims are cheaper to just pay off rather than fight! Doesn't make him either guilty or Innocent just a smart business decision.

Yea, that was really smart to say there was no settlement..... then, if there WAS a settlement, some other company executives must have handled it............ then, there was an "agreement", but no "settlement".

The man is a genius!

All this conjecture from the loonie left is good for a laugh for sure. We know nothing about this claim. We don't know if the accusation was ridiculous, and settlement was small, or if it was serious, but un-prove-able.

But keep ranting, you show your empty headed shallowness.

People have a hard time believing you are innocent when you settle out of court, and when you settle twice it's twice as hard for them to believe.

another social conservative politician shows that social conservatives are nothing but useful idiots.

I know someone that sued her boss for sexual harassment. Everyone knew it was a joke. She told everyone she was going to do it and nobody believed her. She walked away with money, but very little compared to what she wanted. She was only in it for the money, told everyone so and never thought we'd tell the attorneys what she said.

Ron Paul is an idiot. His ideas are so far off base as to border insanity and this country could not survive if he were to put them in effect. I believe anyone that supports him are also lunatics that don't realize the damage his programs would cause this country.

I knew someone that lied about another person suing their employer for sexual harassment that never happened.

Whether this is fake or not, it will spell the end of Cain's run for presidency. Which makes seem like the intention from the beginning.

It's become obvious that this is nothing more than left wing BS to destroy someone who would beat Obama if he wins the Repub nomination. People are wising up to the extreme destruction of the left wing media. These guys obviously have no credibility with anyone with a brain. They've been running none stop a story that isn't a story at all. Look at what facts haven't been presented. We don't know who did what to who or when. MSNBC refuses to say who. Politico refuses to say who. No one has yet said what. So, other than a nebulus label of "sexual harassment" no one knows what was said. Since reporters don't seem to have anything to report, logic dictates that it is all made up. Of course, it is all a ploy to detract from the fact that Obama is destroying the country and can't run on his record. His administration and re-election campaign people can't point to anything that he has accomplished (Bin Laden and Gaddhafy are not his "accomplishments"). The economy is still going down the tubes and he has yet to present anything that will even remotely begin to create jobs. You'd think that among all his legions of admirers, there would be at least one person who could point out something concrete that he has proposed that has created any jobs or that is intended to create jobs. The closest I've read is some loony who thinks that employers will hire someone for $50,000/yr. so that they can save $1000 in employment taxes.

So, bottom line is that any of the repubs are better than Obama. Whatever imperfections are discovered or claimed to exist with any of the repub candidates pales in comparison to the damage and destruction that Obama is causing and the fraud and waste of money he is allowing.

When I first heard of these allegations against Herman Cain I was saddened. Not because it is another sordid story meant to sully and destroy a man who had the audacity to run for President to presumably improve his country but because I know what it means to be accused of sexual harassment and to be completely innocent.

My story goes like this:

The company I worked for at the time had been publicly busted by 'creating' an environment of harassment and settled out of court. As part of the settlement the company instituted an anonymous tip line to report harassment of any kind. Every employee was trained in what is harassment and how to use the system. Managers were taught how to respond to any report of harassment. All seems fine, right? Now for the unintended consequences of a morally just action.

At the ripe young age of 29 I was promoted to manage a group of engineers, 14 total and all men typically older than me. As a young manager of experienced engineers I quickly learned that I do not have to have all the answers and I only had to rely on the experience of my team to get our work done and to solve our problems. Everything seemed to be perfect.

Then one day a colleague tells me that they were asked to come down to HR and were asked questions about me. Hostile work place questions, sexual harassment questions, and everything else you can imagine. Then a few hours later another comes to me. The next day two more come to me and tell the same story. No specifics just questions about the environment I supposedly created. Let me tell you something, your mind races and you feel panic and then you remember you have done nothing wrong and you become indignant only to go through the whole thing again in your mind. Over and over you try to think of something you did. You don't sleep. You get paranoid. You don't look anyone in the eye for fear of them taking your look as a some sort of advance.

Finally HR calls me down for a meeting a week later. I have lost 5 pounds in the first week alone as the stress and lack of sleep take their toll. I weighed 182 lbs that day at 6 feet 1.

The interview begins by asking me about a golf trip I had taken two years before with some friends. None of their business. They ask me about what went on during the trip. They insinuate going to strip clubs, going to bars, and other lewd and lascivious behaviors. None were true, just hard core golf. They asked to see how we paid for the event. OK so they think this was a vendor provided junket which is a violation of company policy, but we had all paid with our own credit cards in a package deal. So that wasn't it.

The meeting ends with no accusations made. I was not charged with anything and not told what this was all about. Another week of no sleep ensues. I share the details with my wife and she worries along side me. At the end of week two I am becoming angry as a result of my frustration. I call the next meeting with HR.

HR mtg #2 (Weight 174 lbs). I demand to know what this is about. They refuse to answer saying they don't have to tell me according to company policy in order to protect anyone involved from retribution. What are they talking about? Then it hits me. These words, "to protect from retribution," were part of the harassment training. So I demand to know if I have been accused of harassment of some sort? No answer from HR. HR says they will be auditing my corporate expense account to look for improprieties. I tell them to have at it because there is nothing there.

Four weeks later I am summoned again to a meeting with HR but this time it is company lawyers asking the questions, the same questions everyone else had asked. I weighed 165 lbs for this meeting and suffered from almost daily nose bleeds. My blood pressure was sky high. I had not slept for weeks. Probably had not smiled for 6 weeks.

The lawyers begin their interview. One lawyer assumed the role of good cop while the other asked all the nasty questions accusing me of womanizing, of leering at women, of making crass comments, of being a thief, of enjoying vendor paid golf junkets, and on and on. The good lawyer offered me ways to "come clean" and to exonerate myself. I was astounded. The blood started flowing from my nose. They offered to adjourn the proceedings. I refused. It was my turn.

I had consulted my own attorney by this point and had prepared a strategy. To go on offense I began taking blind shots at what we assumed the company had against me - a sexual harassment charge most likely anonymous. My attorney figured they were doing their due diligence to show that the company now works hard to root out harassers. So I asked them for the letter accusing me of theft, graft, and sexual harassment. I will never forget the look on their faces. Poker players they weren't. The meeting ended abruptly and I was given no answers.

A week later an HR representative sympathetic to my situation showed me the letter the company had received. In it was a fantasy of silly charges, absurd claims, half truths and innuendo. The claim of "his leering stares make me feel as if I am being undressed..." made me sick to my stomach. I was not given a copy of the letter but I memorized as much as I could. I had the kitchen sink thrown at me. The last line was the clincher. "Either the company fires this man or I take my case to the media."

I fainted at work a few days later. I went into the hospital and was placed on IVs with a crash course in electrolytes and other goodies. I slept with the aid of drugs for two days. I left the hospital weighing 158 lbs. I had lost 29 lbs during the ordeal. Gone was my smile and my sense of humor. I became a robot at work.

Then 4 weeks later I was summoned again to HR. I was told the investigation was concluded and that nothing was found supporting the claims against me. I was innocent. I asked the company how they would communicate my innocence to my co-workers. They said they would not since it was a private matter. During the investigation they had interviewed dozens of pretty smart people who put the pieces together just like I had. They knew what I was charged with. Some came to my aid and for that I was truly grateful. Everyone in the building was talking about it, all 2500 people. But how do you make it all go away? How do you know what people are thinking about you? I became hyper-aware of my behaviors. Gone are my jokes, gone is my quick wit, and gone is any friendship at work. I asked the company how I get my reputation back as having integrity and being a respected leader. They had no answer.

I left that company 5 years later and I wish them well. They were just doing what they had to. During my exit interview with the HR representative, who had ironically conducted much of the investigation, I asked him who he thought had sent the anonymous letter. He said he did not know but suspected it was one of my engineers who had felt slighted by a young engineer getting promoted over them. In fact, within about 3 months of the end of the investigation one of my best and brightest engineers suddenly quit the company without so much as a what for. Was it him? I will never know.

I got my health back. I gained back the weight. My blood pressure is 110/70 again. But I am not over it. I wrote this post purely from vivid memories now 17 years old. I am angry and sad after sharing this with you.

So to Mr. Cain and those others out there who get charged with baseless claims of harassment and so on I understand and I wish you the best. To those who are harassed at work know this, I have aided many employees who have been harassed because as their manager, director and now vice president, it is my responsibility to provide a safe work environment for the team. But also know that if you make a claim purely for retribution for some perceived slight to you then your claims cause great harm.

That explains why his wife is not by his side.

Anyone who makes a provable false claim of harassment should be summarily fired. The false claims make real distress by real workplace harassment harder to investigate and remediate.

Here is what I get from this story (so far):

There was at least one allegation of some type of sexual harassment done by Herman Cain when he was CEO of the National Restaurant Association. The allegation/claim was settled for an undisclosed amount and the person making the claim signed an agreement to leave the NRA and not disclose the nature of the claim or the settlement.

While Mr. Cain STATES he did not know of any such allegation, that is purely BS. There is no way any organization would even think about settling a claim without finding out if there is any truth to it by talking to the accused. Secondly, as CEO of the NRA, how could he not know what he was signing off on. I can't imagine the CEO of such a group not being directly involved in the settlement of a sexual harrasment lawsuit, whether or not the CEO was the person accused.

Herman Cain obviously is not familiar with the vetting process. He should have known this was going to surface sooner rather than later or at the least his "team" should have known.

He should have made the disclosure himself. To say he can't remember something as significan­t as being sued for sexual harassment­, whether true or false is something that does not make sense even to the slowest people.

To admit to having a Faulty Memory while running for POTUS is strange! This was only 12 years ago.

Herman can remember the woman was 5 feet tall the same height as his wife, he said, but not the lawsuit?

come on he is lying!

Gladly, USG:

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2011/05/ron-paul-would-have-opposed-civil-rights-act-1964/37726/

Why doesn't Herman Cain seem to know much about the harrasment suit and settlement???

Because he RECUSED himself and let the HR department along with some Chief Officers to do the investigation so that it didn't look like he was trying to persuade or push his own side. He did what you are suppose to do and let those on the outside do their own investigation and decide the best action. The fact they told him the charges were baseless and that the problem had been resolved is all he probably cared about. If they gave her some settlement because they thought she was after money and thought they could just buy her off cheaper then fighting that was their choice not Cains.

If you think the media would be handling this the same way if it were a Black Democrat, I have a bridge for sell you might be interested in. They gave Anthony Weiner the benefit of the doubt for days even as more photos came out. Maybe the story finally gets somewhere and the facts tell us the real story, but if this is all they come up with they owe Cain an apology. I remember when Clarence Thomas got nominated for the Supreme Court and all of a sudden accusations got made towards him. Seems to be how you get dealt with if you're black and don't tow the liberal party line.

Even if he recused himself, after the case was bought off, he would have been made fully aware of the outcome in completed detail. In fact, as CEO, he would have had access to the documentation. Here are some troubling facts:

1. Could not remember the details of a charge of this nature after only 12 years.

2. Said he was unaware of a settlement.

3. Just remembered a situation in his office about the height of this woman compared to his wife.

4. His story keeps changing. It changed all day yesterday.

5. Said he would not ask the Restuarant Assoc. to open their books on this matter.

6. Can't remember the situation of the other woman. (Their were two).

7. The news organization that leaked the story said he ask her to his hotel suite and there was inappropriate touching.. (Interview with Chris Matthews).

8. Blames it as a smear campaign.... If it is, fine, ask the Restuarant Assoc. to lift the gag document from the women and ask the assoc. to open its records and let the people decide. What is wrong with that?

LogicReguired........

Yours is an interesting (if naive) spin. Here's an equally likely explanation:

Sexual harassment can be a CRIME. Mr. Cain may have avoided a CRIMINAL PROSECUTION by BRIBING his victims not to PRESS CHARGES.

The differentiating issue (criminal v civil) is whether unwanted touching was involved (sexual battery).

Perhaps Mr. Cain should release his accusers from any legal obligations they have to remain silent on this subject so that we can all judge for ourselves.

Cain - D9-D9-D9= Guilty, He said it was a "JOKE"

witchrunner,

I find it interesting that you accuse the left of trying to smear Cain when HE is the one whose creditability is at question - not the democrats. Even if he did not sexually harass anyone, he said on TV that he knew nothing about this claim or any kind of settlement.......only to go on to give full details of what the settlement actually entailed a few hours later in the same day!

Anyway, back to you. You accuse the left of spreading lies about Cain (when it appears they weren't lies AND it wasn't the "left" that revealed it), only to go on and make about a dozen malicious claims against President Obama, all of which not only are not true, but they could not be further FROM the truth.

I love it. This is Cains birth certificate issue. Lefties are gonna have fun with this. All Cain has to do is release the documents, but he won't. He'll claim there's some legal reason he can't release them. I'll never believe he didn't harass those women until I see the documents. I want to see the proof. We deserve to see them.

ROFL, excellent point, Dave.

WHY WON'T YOU RELEASE THE DOCUMENTS, MR. CAIN? Original form only. What are you hiding?

bill c: Care to tell me what the accusation really was? What was the source for it? Where were all these people who are pressing on this when Bill Clinton was around and why don't those same people raise all the proven stuff about Clinton? It's politics, pure and simple.

The only "facts" we know are those provided by Cain. The only incident he can think of is that he told someone over 12 years ago that the woman was about his wife's height and that he brought his hand up to around his chin level. Now, that's hardly anything that anyone would classify as sexual harassment. Of course, maybe the libs recognize their own and figure that it must have been a reference to Clinton & Lewinski. Of course, this just happened to come up just 2 days after Cain started advertising on Limbaugh's show, and Cain was surging in the polls. If this had happened the other way around and Cain was a dem, these people who give no sources and no facts would have been screaming racism. They do it all the time. The fact is that the dems know that Obama can't run on his record, since not even his supporters cite his record as a reason they support him. Plus, the libs have shown that it is totally unacceptable for a minority to be "successful" if they are a conservative. Think: Clarence Thomas, Herman Cain, Alberto Gonzalez, Miguel Estrada, J.C. Watts, Michael Steele.... The list goes on.

Of course the dems (libs) credibility is at stake. These so-called journalists would have been fired long ago if they were reporters back in the Woodward/Bernstein days. No facts, no sources, nothing of any substance and no independent corroboration. In other words, it wouldn't have and shouldn't have seen the light of day. Now-a-days, anything goes. There is no such thing as independent journalism in the so-called mainstream media, if there ever was. They are nothing but dem PR machines. Those, my friend, are the sad facts of today.

I disagree and you guys are buying the Red Herring. Every single channel last night had some Republican Stuffed suit talking about the incident. This was orchestrated by the Anti Cain Republicans, they don't want this guy, they want a puppet. Sorry but the Left is not scared enough of Herman Cain to discredit him when they would much rather see Perry and Romney ousted. Believe what you want but I think the hard core Right is responsible.

"It's not true! It's not a big deal! It's his personal life! It's a witch hunt!"

All things said when this same story came out about Clinton. Where is your feigned outrage now? Oh, right. He's a Republican, so now it's a bad thing and he should be run out of town.

FactsNoRhetoric

Conversely, where was your acceptance of Clinton (by the way most of us libs did not like or accept his philandering) and why are you not trying to run Cain out of town? You go ahead and vote for Cain if you like him, I don't like his politics so I would have never voted for him anyway. It sounds like you would never have voted for Clinton. It is very possible that the group responsible for leaking the information on Cain is Republican, maybe the same group who went after Clinton. Dirty tricks is what they do best.

Notice the head line now: NBC confirms one accuser received cash settlement. What they imply is "trust us, we aren't going to tell you anything about it, we've confirmed it to our satisfaction, but we aren't going to tell you." ie; the author said it is so so that is enough for us.

witch,

Where are you coming up with all this crap? None of that makes any sense. NBC is simply reporting the news - period. end of story.

Also:

1. this is entirely different than the Clinton situation, which was a private matter between two consenting adults, not sexual harassment
2. the Clinton affair was ALL OVER THE NEWS.
3. the reason the victim cannot come forward to reveal herself is because the victim was paid by Cain to keep quiet about it

The only "facts" we know are those provided by Cain. The only incident he can think of is that he told someone over 12 years ago that the woman was about his wife's height and that he brought his hand up to around his chin level. Now, that's hardly anything that anyone would classify as sexual harassment

This is anything BUT a known fact. This is what Cain says happened. Yesterday morning he said the entire story was fabricated and he knew nothing about a settlement - it was all just a smear. Last night he was giving a detailed description of the settlement.

Do you really believe he "forgot about it"? You don't forget about someone accusing you of sexual harassment - even if it was 24 years ago...... that is, of course, unless you've harassed so many women you can't keep up with them all.

And one other thing. When you say:

The fact is that the dems know that Obama can't run on his record, since not even his supporters cite his record as a reason they support him.

and all the other things you said about him, that IS NOT A FACT EITHER. I am an Obama supporter, and I would very much cite his record as a HUGE reason to support him.

It's taking longer than it should because the republiicans are blocking anything they can that will improve the economy or benefit our nation, for their own selfish policial motives, but Obama is turning things around from the near-collapse of the entire finanacial system we were facing when Bush left office. He's made solid, well-thought-out decisions in every aspect, gaining the respect of other nations and working WiTH our allies, instead of spending trillions on wars, and causing the entire rest of the world to hate us.

President Clinton, is that you? You probably don't want to read some of these threads. They are still blaming YOU for getting it right! (and they won't even give you credit for the surplus). typical rightwingers,...

"Chances are, he's a sexist jerk and I see no evidence at all to the contrary"

So, it's guilty until proven innocent now? And I thought our legal system couldn't get any worse...

Hey Clara, if I say I made $1000, only had $800 in bills, but couldn't forsee the $1400 clutch for my truck, did I have a $200 surplus? No? Only on paper? There you go. There was never a surplus. Stop with that stupidity.

And that is sort of our point. Clinton was admittedly a great leader, for the sole reason that he didn't lead by "My way or the highway" and worked with his Republican controlled congress. His sexual escapades had nothing to do with his ability to lead, yet you leftwing Obots keep acting like (if it's even true) that the Herman Cain scandal negates his ability to lead. It's a double standard, and therefore hypocrisy. You all also made sure to scream it from the rooftops that it was Clinton's "personal life, and it didn't matter what he did in it.". Now all of the sudden when a person you don't like does the same thing (pays off a plethora of women to shut up about sexual misconduct), it's not okay, and makes him a pariah. You can't have it both ways. Either it's their personal life and doesn't matter, or any politician, regardless of party, that does these things needs to be removed from the races they run. I could vote either way, to be honest, as both Weiner and Clinton were, for the most part, excellent politicians that made stupid mistakes....but you can't crucify your opponent for doing the same when you make excuses for your own.

FactsNotRhetoric

If the trend line had maintained a continuum, there was a projected surplus. Are you saying the Iraq war was like a clutch on your truck? Many of us felt that war of choice - kept off the books (plus the taxcuts and the Medicare D) were fiscally imprudent. Which you appear to agree with given your envelope math.

Sadly, you fall prey to your own stereotyping. I did NOT support Clinton for LYING. I did NOT support Weiner for LYING. I do NOT support Cain for LYING. I have been clear on this point regarding Cain,...did he or didn't he? I do not know. But when asked about it on camera he said, "...I don't recall...I wasn't involved...She was a subpar employee..."

That makes him a LIAR in my book. He either remembered or he didn't. He can't just remember her performance and NOT a settlement. That's hypocrisy at its finest. He was willing to villify his accuser. Rather than rise above and say, "I'm not going to speak to that. It's a privately settled matter where no fault or guilt was established."

He is a snake for labeling her subpar. Personally, I hope she fires back in a tell all. But you better believe that isn't his only problem. His Libya moment, his Ubeckibeckibeckistanstan wasn't too swift either. Jon Stewart eviscerated him two nights ago and rightfully so.

Well stated Clara.

Who's reputation, the association's or Herm's?? Now who's reputation is going to suffer when the Restaurant Assoc. has to admit they used their members money to pay off the victims of Herm?? Silly members... they thought their dues and contributions were being used to further their best interests, not Herm's..... lol

Like ITM says, this is pretty typical in the business world, that's why they have harrassment training. Probably a good thing it comes out now, instead of during the general. I doubt this will hurt him in the primary. As folks are saying, Bill Clinton kind of opened the door to electing politicians with harrassment allegations, (and I like Bill.)

You have an ignore option, bobby, use it. But again, so good to see that level of disrespect for women from the family values crowd.

"ugly little knockers"?

Wha......??

Absolutely amazing, right DBO: Let's see if bobby has enough class to apologize.

White Collar Auto,

Pointing out the real facts of someone's past is not lynching. Lynching is more similar to making up stories about phony birth certificates, Kenyan births, and being a Moslem.

IntheMiddle,

I would suggest that most voters will not believe that two five figure settlements are the result of "just making jokes". Clearly the organization, that Mr. Cain was Executive Director of, settled with the understanding that the details not be made public. That's more than a joke or two. An upstanding organization would have terminated Mr. Cain immediately as I'm sure his supporters will do now.

Well, just to be technically correct: Lynching as defined by most penal codes is the unauthorized release of a prisoner.

Hey, Bob numbers,

This is what you wrote in a post yesterday.

You liberals cant win on the merits, so you slime, smear and belittle your political opponents. You ought to be ashamed, but you have no shame.

So it's horrible to belittle one's political opponents, but it's fine to belittle people who post on this site? Who has no shame, Bob?

Men need to learn.

Bunch of whiny fricken men.

newday and buzz,

Thanks for helping validate ITM's point.

(Sheez .... I gave you guys the clarification and you still fell for it?)

Apologize ........ to Feisty ..... for a knocker joke?

Now that is funny.

Jack letters,

You got the wrong numbers

Yep, bobby is graceless. What a shame. Guess he won't be pushing the right wing hypocrisy on "holier than thou."

Kathryn, men need to learn what?

@mkemike since the "ladies " also supposedly signed a silence agreement, does this mean they are giving back the money as in the contract.

That's not what "Knockers" are where I come from!

Ok Herman, Just be aware that after the stains left by the Clinton Administration, the tax payers demanded an added deposit for carpet cleaning the oval office....... :)~

Buffalo Bob: Do you read? This was exposed by someone at the Restaurant Association, not the women. No way they paid this kind of money for a joke or a pat on the back, and no way Cain wasn't aware of it.

Lying by Cain. Bad.

Hey, Forrest! Saw where you are thinking about running for President! Happy to vote for you!

Hi MkeMike,

I think you are reading into the story your own political biases, though I suspect you are more right than not that most voters will assume guilt rather than a simple business decision. Five figures is irrelevant to veracity or to scope. It simply means the settlement was between 10k and 100k. Most businesses would be unwise, unfortunately, to fight a claim that will cost less to settle. Perhaps with some sort of enforced "loser pays" plan these settlements will occur less, and mean more if done.

I've seen too many false accusations made to simply assume something must've happened in every case. And because it is standard practice to agree to be silent in return for the settlement I doubt we will ever know any facts of this case in any credible way. I would instead look to the man's life history aside from these claims to see if he has some kind of pattern, like Clinton did, of boorish behavior. If that fact pattern exists, then this story has legs. If not, then it will be, as another wrote, more of a political lynching than anything else.

@mkemike since the "ladies " also supposedly signed a silence agreement, does this mean they are giving back the money as in the contract.

Buffalo bob: Who said anything about the women accused saying anything? I know you want to make the women look bad (I guess it would question their credibility..something the conservatives love to do) but why jump to that conclusion?

After all, we need to honor a contract, don't we? Unless it's a union contract, which can be voided at will by the right-wing, and then everything is perfectly fine?

Is this the news media VETTING a canidate?

Must be a republican.

For all you indiots that don't understand our legal system, phony claims are settled all the time in the restaurant business simply because it is far less expensive to pay a liar that to fight in court.

It is a simple way to extort money that often has nothing to do with the accused and it is a very common occurrence that hurts the honest people who actually have valid claims.

Am I missing something. What he is saying (not claiming) is he never even knew about these claims. Even if could prove himself innocent, he appears to be avoiding the fact that claims were made. He does not appear to be forthcoming in his responses.

So the women are always the liars? Good. Nice to know what you think about women!

Two words...Paula Jones.

I find it hard to believe Cain did not know these women had settled when he was the head of the association, but then again, he says he does not need to know anything about foreign policy, because he would appoint people to handle it for him. Sounds like to me the man just doesn't pay attention to business or doesn't care what happens in his business. I can guarantee you that if you work for a large association or business and you have been accused of harassment you would have known or at least took an initiative to find out whether the women either dropped the charges, proven wrong in their charges, taking you to court, or your company settled... Give me a break.

Sexual harrassment charges are typically investigated thoroughly internally, and then decisions are made whether there's a concern about potential lawsuits. Employees found to have made dubious or openly-false assertions get fired rather than cash settlements.

If the association decided to offer settlements, it may indeed have been because there was enough substance to the charges that avoiding suits was preferable to paying for a defense in court. It also helped the organization avoid a potentially-damaging public black eye.

Herman Cain's wriggling on the hook of these revelations is indeed fishy, and his future as a viable candidate is really smelly. On top of some of his absurd remarks, his hollow approach to policy - mainly, no approach at all - and his undeniable standing as a front man for ultra-right groups, this scandal is simply too much.

Plausible deniability

There are many real sexual harassment cases around but then there are a lot of women who falsely accuse men all around the country especially powerful men, this way they know they will be paid to keep it quiet. It is a shame but it happens and because Cain is rising like bread dough people who want to topple him will dig far and deep to get dirt.

The victims are gagged from speaking about it, yet Herman and gang just tell it "their way". If it's baseless, don't gag the women--let us hear their story. 44 Presidents and how many female? Zip. 65 years after slavery was gone before a woman could vote or own land.

Also, Cain presents himself as an outsider while her was head of a lobby and served on the board of the KC Federal Reserve Bank. One scam after another.

Maybe he didn't speak to the guys who wrote the checks first, so they were unable to tell him they did it. That can be a problem when those around you are told not to speak, unless spoken to first.

My sister received over $500,000.00 in a sexual harassment case. Her ex-employer thought it would be funny to pull his pants down when she entered his office. Some people can get so testy.

I've been in the business world long enough to know that all a woman has to do to cause trouble is say she was harassed. The company or organization MUST take it seriously and unlike other proceedings, the man is generally presumed guilty instead of innocent. The woman has ALL the rights and is treated as the victim from day one, even if she is lying through her teeth and the man is the real victim. There are women who know this and use it to get what they want. I have personally seen women completely over react to very innocent comments or gestures and scream harassment, and it's sickening.

In most of these cases there is no way to know the real truth, since the only people who really know the truth have very different stories (the old, "he said, she said"), so it's not surprising that companies just settle to get it out of the way so they can move on with business.

In the case of Herman Cain, the allegations are some 20 years old, so I'd be inclined to worry less about them than about his solutions for the country. If the country didn't care about Bill Clinton's behavior with a 20 year old intern, I am not sure we should disqualify Cain for unsubstantiated allegations from 20 years ago.

It seems to be some ignorant ppl on these post but I refuse to waist my time pointing them out. I do agree with "justplaindave". This Cain is lying or denying the issue at hand, which to me tells a whole lot about his ethical background. I for one don't trust anything associated with or contain the name "Cain" because they all represent trouble, pain, or destruction; hurri "cane", Co "cain"e, Cain (in the holy bible-killed his brother Abel), Nova "cain"...and what ever else CAIN----

I would not be so quick to judge Cain based on this information until all the facts are known. Having been through many respect in the workplace training classes, you should know sexual harassment covers a wide range of infractions. In addition just because someone received settlement does not mean the accused is guilty. I have worked with several individuals who have brought suit against someone because they thought they were being unfairly criticized. I'm not saying he is or is not guilty, just that there isn't enough information to judge based on the articles. It does seem to me the press is sensationalizing this before all the facts are out there.

@ thetotas My sister received over $500,000.00 in a sexual harassment case. Her ex-employer thought it would be funny to pull his pants down when she entered his office. Some people can get so testy.

There had to be a little more to it, because everytime I do that the only thing the women gets is a big laugh.

everyone here is completely missing the point.

one settlement could possibly = a cost of settlement issue

two settlements probably = a pattern of behavior

as we know there were AT LEAST 2 settlements, and probably more documented occurrences;

it seems likely Cain has something to hide. this is further borne out by his evasive responses.

not all the evidence is out at this point, but the facts sure seem to all be pointing in the same direction so far...

Really, Pat, Bruce...do tell....WOMEN who say they have been sexually harrassed are the problem??Women just don't understand "innocent remarks"??? A lot of people you so easily dismiss (especially women) do care about sex harrassment and contrary to your protestations of absolute innocence, do know it exists. They also know a helluva lot exists that never, ever gets reported or stopped. Then they get the joy of going through the humiliation of having people like you claim they are nothing but gold diggers and should have just put up with whatever happened rather than "victimizing" someone by saying they won't tolerate it. If it's one thing both of you ought to be smart enough to know is that if one is running an organization, you ought to be aware of "thousands of dollars in hush money", particularly if its paid on your behalf. You two gotta be as old as Cain to try that ridiculous 50's advice that women just 'get over it'. Good luck with that wisdom. No wonder you two are a bit defensive.

I can understand people claiming Cain was not guilty or set up, but defending harassment as something that's bound to happen in the workforce or the woman's fault is inexcusable.

And don't even try to compare this to Clinton when that was a private matter between consenting adults. Enabling a hostile workplace and allowing harassment are illegal and no one can defend them as appropriate in any situation regardless of your political leanings.

Again, I didn't say Cain himself did anything wrong. I'm sure we'll find out one way or the other soon enough anyway. I'm more stunned at the response that it's no big deal and everybody does it.

Well, I can see that the demonizing has begun. Just make an accusation, then don't worry about the truth. Even if it is true, those who champion free speech and equal rights and let people do what they want are extreme hypocrites. if it's someone you like its no big deal. If it's a person with opposing view points, well how could he ever be president. Get serious!

Sorry, Mike, but if you truly believe that the President of the United States getting blown by a page in the oval office is ok as long as she did it willingly, it doesn't matter what you comment here...it has no credibility. I mean, you apparently never got beyond the blow job itself, and considered the possible security and diplomatic consequences of such an incredibly stupid act by the most powerful person on the face of the earth.

Bob numbers said:

(Sheez .... I gave you guys the clarification and you still fell for it?)

Apologize ........ to Feisty ..... for a knocker joke?

Well Bob, it doesn't matter that you "explained" or "clarified" your crude attempt at humor, trying to say you meant something else. In the business world, that would just add MORE fuel to the case against you, and it would have increased the settlement that would be offered to your accuser. Don't get me wrong... I'm neither a "lib" nor from California, and I think it should work in a way where nobody would get a settlement after accusing you of harassment for making a crude joke like that (whether clarified or not). But in my experience in the business world (over 30 years for a Fortune 50 company), if some female had accused you of harassment for making that joke in the workplace, she would have been offered a settlement. And you might never have learned of the settlement either.

I still dislike Herman Cain, but I dislike him for his positions on issues. I don't dislike him just because he's been accused of sexual harassment. If anything, that gives me some sympathy for him. I don't believe in "guilt by accusation". Lots of people are accused of things that are unreasonable, and ridiculous corporate decisions are made to reward the accuser even as the same corporation exonerates the accused. Come to think of it, that's just one MORE reason why we don't want some business professional elected to the presidency. Since when does business experience translate to the ability to make good policy decisions? Corporations really aren't people...

@ New Day 2.2

Forrest Grump is in the hunt, for the republican nomination. I only got six votes, but that is enough to put me ahead of Huntsmann and Johnson, and I am right on Santorum and Bachmann's tails. Anna Molly can I use "The Common Cents Ticket" I really think it's good, and I would like you to consider taking the top job in the Justice department if I am elected. If I was faced with a largely inept and completely belligerent Congress as president Obama now is I would personally and repeatedly TP the Washington residences of the offending members as befitting and illustrative of their crappy level of cooperation and competence. I know you must have reservations about me running as a republican but the Democrats have a really good candidate, so I figure my best chance is to run against a weak republican field.

PS How long has it been since you were involved in a really good TP job on someones house, I need some volunteers because I think I will start with Mitch McConnels house tonight as a campaign kickoff stunt and a nice October Surprise for my friend in the Senate, I think tonight will be perfect. There will be a sign up sheet for volunteers and TP donations for anybody that wants to join in the fun. Besides it is about time somebody asked him, Trick or Treat Mitch which is it going to be for the American people?

Forrest,

You are so bad! :)

Here's a novel idea; why not interview the woman? The subject coudl be easily put to rest and we can get back with the Herman Cain Show. Everybody loves a good under the big top. I eagerly look forward to his new CD. Outside of book signing, seriously bad pizza and some weird views on women, distant foreign lands, their culture, their language, their people and why its important to know where they are, what they speak, if they have any natural resources of interest...............Herman never stops entertaining. Dial 999 Help.

Granted we don't know the whole story but I find it hard to believe he didn't know about it.

Why doesn't the GOP just say we all know women are natural born liars. Two not one made claims, could be more. What's next? So is or isn't he for abortion? Just joking about an eclectic fance to kill people. You realy want this guy????

It's the Herman Cain Show. He's not denying it any longer. He is now stating he knew he was accused, the accusations were untrue and he doesn't know how much money the women got.

Then he sang a line from a hymn..........about Jesus.

It doesn't get any better than this. :)

Guy's got a decent voice. Maybe this is his idea of American Idol?

spider-737231 ... this was only surpassed by the "diplomatic consequences of the GOP going after him like dogs in heat, and keeping the most powerful person on the face of the earth from doing his job".

Especially when he was trying to nail Bin Laden ... before 9/11 .......... thanks GOP ... your priorities and judgement are impeccable ... win at all costs ... distroy your foe at any cost ............

The hell with the job program ... just bring Obama DOWN ............

We don't know what happened here and we should quit pretending we do. There is no evidence Cain harrassed anyone. There might be, but we don't have such evidence. And we should quit pretending that all women who say something happened are being honest. For what it's worth a woman yesterday at a soccer tournament accused me of hitting her. She had wanted to file a complaint about a referee and since I was a referee she thought she'd ask me how to go about it.

I explained what she could do. I showed her where the field marshals were. I told her how to go find the tournament referee assignor. She would have none of it, was pretty damned wild with anger, and simply wanted a confrontation. So I walked to the marshals and she followed step by step, told them she had a problem and wanted to file a complaint, and apologized for putting her in their lap. Which is when she cried out that I had hit her. She is a complete and total liar and is just seeking attention. But it was easy to say. Frankly, I don't give a rat's rear about what she says and told her so when she ran back to me as I was leaving to say she wanted to file a complaint against me too.

Men, and women too, have all sorts of stories they can tell that are similar. Lots of people do bad things, lots of people falsely accuse others of doing bad things. If there is proof of this with Cain then let's see it. If not, then let's quit hyperventilating over it. I GET partisanship, but geesus, this is incredibly pathetic.

For a non-politician, Cain has sure learned how to lie like one. Spin, deny, spin, deny.

Man, some people on the "right" really are clueless! you are blaming the "liberal media" for this? IT WAS KARL ROVE you dummies! You guys don't even know the plays of your own team! Pathetic! You need so called liberals to tell you what's really happening on your own side! LOL!!!!!!!

If Denzel Washington did it, it could be considered by some women as flirting, when Hermann Cain does it, it would be considered by most women to be harrassment.

Forrest Grump 2.0 ... not knowing what the freak did ... your point????

Even "Denzel Washington" could only get away with certain things!!!!

AND ... why didn't you use Tom Cruise as an example????

thetotas

I bet she had a difficult time finding his 'evidence',...lol good for her, though! Once less slimebag flashing in the work place,...Remember when GM used to throw 'stag' parties in the board room? Yeah, those good ole boys, just wanta' have fun.

As someone who has worked in Finance for my entire career, it is impossible for Cain to be the head of an organization and not KNOW of any pending litigation or settlements of litigation. IMPOSSIBLE. So that makes the man a liar. Which on it's face is unacceptable.

As I stated when the Weiner scandal broke,...I can forgive the crime; but not the lies. I was never going to vote for Cain; but now that he's a proven LIAR? I hope he's toast. And I never forgave Billy Boy, either. I've been completely consistent on that point.

How will we ever know? Even if the women did come forward, it would be their word against his and we have been down this road many times. Can you say Bill Clinton? How many were there and how many never said anything. The Ark police took care of a lot. Bill left office with 900,000 in legal fees associated with sexual harassment suits.

Cain was aware of the allegations. He said so this am. He also said there was an investigation which he says proved to show baseless accusations. He says he did not know the two women in question were paid off by the restaurant assoc. That is all we know. How often does this happen that those making an accusation get paid off even if guilt is not determined? Maybe a lot. I don't know.

I do know in our country that liberals assume all men are guilty until proven innocent with regards to any issue regarding sex. Remember the false allegations by the stripper at the Duke Univ campus? Even the liberal teachers took sides against those boys because the assumption is boys are guilty and women never would bring false charges. Of course that assumption proved to be wrong ruining many lives along the way.

I have seen and I have been the recipient of sexual harassment several times in my life. At one point, it was very common in the workplace. Back then, many women just shrugged and avoided those men that were suggestive and rude. If they couldn't avoid them, they left their jobs, or they transferred within the company. Very, very common.

Mike in SA ... let me see "Paula Jones" skank, tramp, opportunist, just off the top of the head!!! Sort of a Casey type!!!

Figures. The only way a black man can rise to prominence in the Tea Party is to be more violent and racist than the rest of them. Just look at Cain and Allen West. Both are violent, unstable, and openly bigoted.

My point is if the women plays along, if they are flirting, or even having an affair, that is not sexual harassment, it has to be unwelcome conduct, and it has to happen more than once. If I say something of a sexual nature to a woman that is not sexual harassment, she may play along, or just ignore it, it becomes sexual harassment when she serves notice that my behavior is "Unwelcome Conduct" after she does that then and only then can what is said afterward be considered harassment. It has to happen more than once, no single offhand remark is considered harassment, it's never harassment until the women serve notices that she is not interested and that the situation is unwelcome by her.

My point was, what I could get by with and what George Clooney could get by with realistically are two different things.

How does this go? "I'm no crook", with the Victory sign!!

I definitely smell a lawsuit here. Those women were paid a settlement to never release any details.

Mr. Cain is the victim here and should sue those women for breach of contract and demand repayment of their settlements. What is this world coming to when people paid perfectly good hush money can't keep a lid on a candidate's previous illegal activities or conduct?

He paid good money (through the Restaurant Association) to make this go away and then this happens.

WCA (collapsed post 1.0)

I agree with you..... the old liberal media (olm) is very tenacious in their attacks on conservative politicians..... despite the overwhelming evidence that Obama should be a one term president.

Power corrupts. The Occupy Wall Street folks are not looking at all the corruption facing the country these days!

12 months to go.... we can count on the OLM and far left to dig up even more 'dirt' to use in their efforts to keep the regime in power! So much for BO's Hope and Change lies of 2008, that went away 'fast and furious' after the anointed one's 'coronation', hypocrisy rules among the left!

Forrest Grump 2.0 ... so your saying that if "George Clooney"" shoved a rod up a laddies butt ... at work just once ... it would be ok???

W H O A

CLUELESS ?

If there was a cash settlement...Cain doesn't know about it?

We DON"T need a CLUELESS President of the United States.

Settling a nuisance suit is always cheaper than litigating it. That's just the way it is in a litigious society.

Well your getting a little out there on that one, that's knid of extreme, but at that point it would be an affair if she is willing, and rape if she was not, or he is a proctologist and it is just another day at the office for him and a traumatic experience for her that comes with a copay to add insult to the injury.

JustAnotherPolitician ... but to deny knowing certain facts is another animal!!!

OLD NEWS, AND GROWING STALE BY THE DAY ...

How long ago was this? Why is it relevant now? Did he look up the skirt of his 1st grade teacher too? LOL. Besides character assassination, slander, and libel, on the part of the Left, does this accomplish anything?

P.S. No one has mentioned the possiblity that this woman is being paid under the table by "haters of cain". And yes, there are people who are in the business of tearing others down for profit, believe it.

Forrest Grump 2.0 ... it's just your romantic view of sexual harassment in the work place in most cases does not fit ... and with Cain's situation ... like I said ... we don't know what the freak did and he's not saying ... and the lady was paid to shut up!!!!

WoW!

Some of your allegation, all the excuses, why women can be sexually harassment, in the work place. You can tell anyone because we have a contract, so you are my little sex slave at work. "holding up the contract".

Tell me Mikey, just what does your contract say about Sexual harassment, what does the your HR dept say about this.

Are you One?

Newsvine...home of bigots and sexists!

No it is not my romantic view it is the law, further more there are two distinct different kinds of sexual harassment, "Hostile Environment" and "Quid pro quo". It's not harassment until the women serves notice that she don't want to play, only after that can it be harassment, and even if she has been playing once she says she don't want to play any longer, then after that it is harassment.

thetotas

My sister received over $500,000.00 in a sexual harassment case. Her ex-employer thought it would be funny to pull his pants down when she entered his office. Some people can get so testy.

Testy, meet testes?

Greg really...likening allegations of sexual harrassment to a grade schooler "looking up a ladies' skirt"?? Tell me you're over 12??

This man is a fool. He paid them cash hush-money to keep them shut up. Then he makes the claim after the investigation they found the claims to be false. Why not wait until the investigation was done and over and not pay any hush-money to either one of them.

He's as guilty as that sleazy grin in his commercial. That's why he paid pout all that hush-money to these two women.

Forrest Grump 2.0 ... the problem is ... you put your two cents in ... even trivializing by implying that "if Cain was a better looker" he might have gotten over ....

When it fact ... you don't know what he did ... if he did anything !!! BUT ... it is no joke ... this i a man who wants to be president!!

I am not trivializing it I am telling you how it works, the point I am trying to make is unwelcome conduct, two men can say the same thing if the women is receptive to one it is not harassment, if she tells the other she don't want to hear that kind of talk from him and he continues after that it is harassment, but it is never harassment until the women serves notice, and if she don't, then it is not, that's the law. Most women would probably give George Clooney a little more leeway than they would an old troll like me.

Forrest,

Harassment is in the eye of the harassed. You don't need to serve any notice.

Yes you do Pragmatic, if the women plays along or even ignores it, there is no harrassment, she has to call them out first, that is why no offhand remark can be considered sexual harassment. It is never considered harassment by law until the women can prove she asked them to stop. I'm telling you the truth. I agree it is in the eye of the harassed, as to whom she may choose to serve notice too and when, but she must serve notice, and if it continues after she does then and only then does she have a case.

@ John A

"Sexual harrassment charges are typically investigated thoroughly internally, and then decisions are made whether there's a concern about potential lawsuits. Employees found to have made dubious or openly-false assertions get fired rather than cash settlements."

That has been my experience exactly in dozens of these matters. I have never seen any businessman just start handing out cash because somebody claims they have been sexually harassed. Never.

So many wing-nuts are defending Cain because that sort of thing happens all the time. In that case, what was all the fuss about Monica Lewinsky? That was something Hillary could have handled all by herself and no one else needed to know. Think of all the money that could have saved and think of all the time Clinton could have devoted to more important issues like tracking down bin Laden while he was planning the 9/11 attacks, instead of fending off rabid Republicans in Congress. If Republicans are so interested in Democrats' personal lives, don't be surprised when the tables are turned. Hypocrites.

First, none of you know anything about this alleged incident.

Second, Bill Clinton was diddling Monica IN THE WHITE HOUSE AT WORK ON THE GOVERNMENT PAYROLL.

Good Lord is it freakin hilarious how libbies like to exaggerate in both directions to try and make others as scummy as they are.

Paul F -- "while on the government payroll"? That's a pretty weak, and desparate, excuse for all the years and money wasted on trying to force Bill Clinton out of office on any pretext whatever. Next, the TPers will demand that Obama deduct from his pay the time spent on restroom breaks.

Really, Pat, Bruce...do tell....WOMEN who say they have been sexually harrassed are the problem??Women just don't understand "innocent remarks"??? A lot of people you so easily dismiss (especially women) do care about sex harrassment and contrary to your protestations of absolute innocence, do know it exists. They also know a helluva lot exists that never, ever gets reported or stopped. Then they get the joy of going through the humiliation of having people like you claim they are nothing but gold diggers and should have just put up with whatever happened rather than "victimizing" someone by saying they won't tolerate it.

Not every woman who screams harassment is lying, and most probably aren't. Just like there are a number of blacks out there waiting to scream "racism" at every innocent happening because they are black, however, there are undeniably women out there with the same chip on their shoulder with regard to harassment, looking for it under every rock.

An an example, I sat in a presentation regarding Healthcare, and the presenter was talking to the group about how their software could recommend treatments based on things like gender, age, etc. He looked at the crowd and then said, "So we could send an email to John recommending a prostate screening because he is a male around 50, and a mammogram for Sue." After the meeting, "Sue" went to HR complaining of harassment because the presenter "referred to her breasts" in an open meeting with lots of people. There was no harassment. Not even close. Not even an off color joke. It was a purely medical discussion in the context of medical software and the presenter was merely making the point that they could tell if the user was a woman or a man and recommend a mammogram for women. This experience let me know that there ARE women out there who WILL see harassment in virtually anything, just as there are those who will see everything through the "racism filter".

Wow!,..I got collasped at 2.49 for stating the truth......sorry about that.......maybe someone was right,..There REALLY are alot of democratic racists out there...............I Proudly served so some people have the right to act stupid.........(neither party has a lock on that).............for all of you who didn't serve,....why not??????......U.S.Army Disabled Veteran.

justwonderin:

I wouldn't collapse your post.

I can see why someone else might consider it BS, though. The nicest thing I can say about your post, is that you need to reconsider your definition of sexual harrassment/misconduct.

Kennedy and Monroe had a CONSENTUAL fling.

Ted and and the girl who drowned were BOTH drunk and driving along. Ted maybe should have got charged with manslaughter, but there is NO evidence he commited sexual misconduct, rape, or harrassment against the girl. Many people(of both genders) go home with other to fool around, when they have been drinking. get over it.

Clinton lied, when he should have just said "none of your f*ckin business!", or stayed quiet on the matter.

Having sex with Monica, was between he, Monica, God, and Hilary(and it looks like Hilary forgave him).

It isn't rape or sexual harassment/misconduct, unless there is a victim(unwilling participant).

Herman may be guilty or innocent of the accusations, but his response to the matter doesn't paint him as very honest.

American Lobo

Well stated. If sexual harassment actually happened or not, it is not the same as consentual sex between two adults. The relationship between an employee and their Supervisor or Supervion is much different when one's job may be threatened by not going along with the program so to speak. Abuse of one's positon is harassment.

matt:

Everyone in America has some character flaw or skeleton that a high paid detective/lawyer can bring to light. This will get treated for what it is. (Acient history), that has been settled.

Some might say Obama has a character flaw from when he was snorting that shyt up his nose and smoking that bo.

No MAN is perfect. If he was, we would know him as Jesus Christ.

As long as they're conservative enough, anything goes, right TX???

Sounds too much like Mr. Caine is just another Weiner....

Marlon:

You twisted what I was saying.

What someone did 20+ yrs ago should not matter in 2011. BTW: last time I checked Obama was not conservative.

....this is very disturbing stuff.....

Yeah right....just like when Bill Clinton hammered all those women in the 80s and 90s, huh, Matt?
So disturbing that the Dems gave Billy the Playboy 8 years in the White House....where he continued his attacks.

I suggest NBC interview Bill and Hillary Clinton.....get their input. Bill is an expert on the subject. Hillary will probably claim "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" to prevent a Black candidate or some such garbage..........LOL......

Aw, Clinton got a blowjob and you didn't. Crocodile tears.

Obama's misdeeds didn't come out in tabloids and nobody was paid to hide them. HE brought them out. Also they happened before he was grown and they involved no victime but himself.

Yellow Journalism at best! "NBC discovers" and yet will provide zero details. What happened to the right to face your accuser?

who says Cain hasn't confronted his accuser? what do you think the payout was for?

It really disheartens me to see the party and all its supporters that claimed that every person who disliked Barry was a racist. And the same party and its supprters prove their racisim by slandering a Black man running for the nomination for the opposition party. But wait the leader of the their party did everything within his powers to set the stage for Palestinian statehood which looks probable. The American people have wised up to everything Barry has not done for America and everything he has done for our enemies.

Mattpfl, falsely accusing somebody of sexual harassment is equally disturbing.

Perhaps you didn't notice the long line of women who had previously worked for Mr. Cain strongly vouching for his character. Next time you may want to read the WHOLE Politico piece, not just the headline.

article not about Obama, Bob. stop diverting

Ancient history, IntheMiddle? Not as long as he is lying about it in real time.

First, he had never sexually harassed anyone. Then, he had never heard of the allegations. Finally, he wasn't aware that the Restaurant Association paid any sort of settlement. Dog-Do! Why would the association pay anything without questioning the alleged participants? In fact, why would they pay for Mr. Cains alleged dirty deeds at all?

How many politicians deny, deny, deny...only to later fess up? Too many to count.

Mr. Cain is right about one thing. There is indeed a target on his back. Unfortunately, he's the one that put it there.

Bob,

If there was a scintilla of truth in the accusations, then this is not "slander." And if the NRA paid out thousands to not one, but TWO women whom Cain is working hard to become oblivious to, there has to be at least the appearance of impropriety. My former boss was accused of the same thing. I believe he was innocent, but he certainly was NOT unaware of any facet of the investigation or settlement. If Cain is truly as disengaged from these two incidents as he wants us to believe, then he is an insensitive jerk, at least, and, I believe, probably guilty of harassment as well.

Yeah.....and nothing was going on in the oval office with Lewinsky I guess.....

Matt, did you say the same thing when then President Clinton has his fling with Monica Lewinsky? Did you say anything when Clinton lied about it?

Mark: are you in kindergarten? "He DID IT FIRST!" WAH!!!

I like that! Cain's Wiener. cracks up!

There is a reason I left Tejas. Texsssss!

your one to aren't you. Yep let us throw out the baby with the bath water. Really!

Again you right wing dummies. The story was leaked by KARL ROVE and friends. You are SOOOOOOOOO clueless it isn't even funny anymore.

ASSUMPTIONS, ASSUMPTIONS, ASSUMPTIONS

Folks here seem to be "assuming" that this deed actually took place. That Cain is guilty as hell. Maybe, yes and maybe no. Legal matters are SETTLED for various reasons -- cost of litigation is the chief one. Lets say someone could pay out $10,000 to settle OR pay their lawyers $200,000 to fight and win. The deep pockets approach is to pay whatever it costs, no matter what, to fight and win. However, much of the REAL WORLD does not work that way.

Why is it people are so certain, when they are at the same time so ignorant? Were you there? Me neither.

"Very disturbing stuff?" I don't think so.

A President routing billions of dollars to his leftie supporters only to see the money disappear and the companies go bankrupt, now that is disturbing. Building secret military drone bases in Africa, that is disturbing. Dropping bombs on people without Congressional oversight or approval, that is disturbing.

An unsubstantiated accusation from more than a decade ago? yeah, just like Obama hanging out with known homegrown terrorist Bill Ayers. Now that's disturbing.

Clearly Paul you haven't watch the many faces of Herman Cain today. Morning : I didn;t do anything this a smear campaign. Afternoon: There might have been an incident but there was no pay out. Evening: OK There were harassment charges made against me and yes there was a pay out. Unsubstantiated Paul? So is Cain's confession his attempt to smear himself? lolbcc

Organizations pay settlements all the time just to make things go away. Sometimes those "things" are real, and sometimes they're not. In this case, we probably aren't going to ever know.

Boy, is it fun to watch the 'family values crowd' tap dance around this one!

Silly members... they thought their dues and contributions were being used to further their best interests, not Herm's..... lol

He may be innocent - someone else may have used his phone or e-mail account or...

newdayDAWNING...RETURNED

Boy, is it fun to watch the 'family values crowd' tap dance around this one!

I feel like im watching Dancing with the Teabaggers with all the tap dancing...

Yep, let's see how long they can keep up the pace!

Marlon - seriously? Is this your first rodeo?

1 - Lawsuits and claims are paid everyday, regardless of fault. My clients make decisions all the time to settle for a small amount rather than fight, win, but pay me a big amount. It's called a 'cost of defense' settlement.

2 - The Association settled, not Cain personally. Or do you have different info.?

3 - That's be up to the association to advise/disclose, but likely in the financial statements.

You seem to be conflating the actions of the Association with Cain personally.

Why is that?

NEWDay - I don't suppose you have any of the facts? I love dancing, but around what - five figures cost of defense settlements?

Ask AnnaMolly - it's very hard to litigate anything for five figures.

Spanky...perfectly said. Especially your first point. The charges may be true, or the association may have made a decision in their own best interest. Who knows.

Cain isn't my choice for the nomination, but I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise. And I most certainly don't consider myself part of the family values crowd.

@Spanky,

No, I guess Cain, as the head of the association, has nothing to do with it personally. Gee, if the head of the association doesn't have anything personally to do with it, who in the heck does?? If he were Prez, I guess he wouldn't be personally invested in that either, would he. Hmm, very convienent..... lol

Are you familiar with associations at all?? They are only in existence because of their membership's dues and contributions. And they only give that money with the expectation that their interests are going to be represented, not the CEO's personal interests.

Soooo, if Cain had used his own money to settle (a la Clinton), that would have been far more ethical than using the membership's money. And why do I think the Restaurant's Assoc. membership didn't know anything about how their money was being spent??

So, even if Cain never actually touched any booty, there's plenty of issues here too cook his goose, so to speak.

MJ: If they are groundless accusations, why pay them?

Many insurance plans offer a coverage that if someone gets hurt on your property and sues that the insurance company will pay $5000 to make the entire matter go away. It could have been their fault they got hurt, or it could have been your fault they got hurt. The $5000 just keeps all lawyers and judges out of the process and makes the whole thing disappear.

Same with the SH settlement. The Restaurant Assoc. probably has insurance for a SH charge. Both parties just made it go away with a set settlement. It doesn't mean something is true or not true. It just means it's over.

MJ: Not to jump to a conclusion, but .

But it appears you have.

Thanks Frank.

I read somewhere these where 'five figure' settlements.

Nothing sceams cost of defense like five figures.

I settled a case last month - my client paid $257,500 to settle. The claims were for $15 million.

It was a pure cost of defense settlement - much cheaper to give the $257.5K than continue to litigate. My bills to defend were already over the settlement amount.

I get the sense many here have never thought or heard about such things.

The other reason settlements are paid, Frank, is that if it gets to court, the award may be higher. I don't know what happened here, and neither does anyone except those involved, but Cain needs to come clean about this. I get tired of they hypocrisy from the right wing, so outraged if a Dem is involved and so defensive if it is one of their own. I don't care what side of the partisan divide anyone is on, wrong is wrong.

Just to clear up your reading issues, Mr. Cain said that he didn't pay anyone; therefore, he didn't use the members' money and he didn't have anything to tell the members. And if the Association did settle, it was paid through their insurance company, not by the members. As for your question about if it's true would you want him as president, please remember that we elected a serial cheater who was accused of rape.

Great insight Marlon - now let's apply that thought to Holder and Obama re: Fast and Furious, and Chu and Obama re: Solyndra.

And now Beacon Power, and next month Sun Power.

Can we do that Marlon?

regardless, the Association is paying insurance premiums to cover things like this??? Hopefully all of this is being reported to the association's membership. This is, after all, where their money in the forms of dues and contributions are going... If true, time to fire the Restaurant Assoc. leadership, boys and girls, wouldn't you say???

Cain has signed the same confidentially agreement the women signed. It looks like the Politico story has sourced their story through friends of the two women accusers, but it sure sounds like they have knowledge of the story only those two women would know. So now the Libs are up and arms about "Cain needs to come clean". Other than the denial, there isn't much else Cain can do, seeing he signed a confidenially agreement.

Hi Newday...

I agree with you here...this was clearly a settlement and we don't know the merits of the case right now. Cain may have done nothing and they wanted this to go away. He may have done something but it would have been word against word. Who knows? I definitely agree that wrong is wrong, no matter which side. Dems tend to defend Dems and get outraged over Reps, and vice versa.

If it is proven that he was guilty of something, so be it. I will jump right in line to denounce those actions. But right now, we know there was a settlement, and that's really it. As Spanky and JAS1 mention above this is certainly not an unheard of thing to do. May have been handled by the association Director's and Officer's liability policy for all we know (Spanky may have more insight on this than I do).

MJ: regardless, the Association is paying insurance premiums to cover things like this???

Yeah. Corporations and Associations have insurance for all sorts of things. It's a cost of doing business. More and more regulations require more and more insurance.

MJ: Hopefully all of this is being reported to the association's membership.

One would hope that the cost of insurance is a line item in the Associations financial reports.

You don't have knowledge of how Politico sourced their story unless you are one of the people who researched or wrote it, JoAnna. Why would Mr. Cain need to sign a confidentiality agreement in the first place?

From Smiffy: "Cain has signed the same confidentiality agreement that the women signed." Really, Smiffy, then that puts the lie to what Cain is saying that he is not aware of a settlement. You can't have this both ways.

Frank: Yep. In a nutshell. What bothers me most is that the people defending this would be outraged if it were the President. Make up your minds. The potential of someone harassing an employee is right or wrong. If it is found that Cain has a problem with that, is he still qualified to be President? But, quit telling me how positively without sin the right wing is. It gets old.

If the association paid them off, Cain is guilty - not necessarily of booty touching - but guilty nonetheless for lack of leadership and ethics, imo. It's a disqualifying action. How does the leader of an association justify spending his member's money on his own issues instead of the Restaurant industry issues??

"I didn't know" or "they acted by themselves" doesn't really cut it when you're supposedly in charge. Is this how it would play out when he's Prez. i mean come on, dem or repub, it's just bad...

This is just ANOTHER nail in the old coffin of Cain.

MarlonJacobs, does the name Paula Jones mean anything to you???

So what's your stance on Bill Clinton??? He paid off Paula to the tune of $850,000.

@ Spanky "You seem to be conflating the actions of the Association with Cain personally."

Did they file suit against the association, did they claim the whole association harassed them, or did they file against Hermann Cain, and claim he personally harassed them? Was it a "Hostile Environment" or "Quid pro Quo" sexual harassment suit. Those are the two different levels of seriousness of harassment and would help indicate if Cain personally did the harassing, or if it was organizational. Either way Spanky don't even try to pretend that the guy who headed up the organization has no responsibility in it's actions. You want to forgive him his responsibility in this, but trust him to take responsibility for the USA? I don't buy your cost of defense argument either, what is your good name worth? People pay when they are guilty, yes to save money, but if it is an open and shut BS complaint, it does not cost six figures to defend. If he is innocent and felt the organization he ran was, but just decided to pay, to make them to go away quick, cheap, and easy, then I definitely don't want that kind of President, I would want somebody that would defend his and the organizations he runs good name, and reputation. So did he or the organization he ran commit harassment or is he a sellout on his own good name, which serious character flaw does he have is the only question now.

People have forgotten how many women Clintion sexually harrassed, and that he most likely raped Juanita Broaddrick

Marlon - based on your posts and reasoning...

Not to jump to a conclusion, but ..... if this is true ..... would you really want this man as President???

Gee, if the head of the association doesn't have anything personally to do with it, who in the heck does?? If he were Prez, I guess he wouldn't be personally invested in that either, would he. Hmm, very convienent..... lol

Interesting conclusions...I suppose since hillary didn't divorce bill for getting those WH BJ's it was OK for bill to be prez. Nice to see that you are finally starting to understand why many say obama is "one and done"! All that blaming of the right (among other things) for his own inadequacies. lol!

Hey Merlin, are you really an idiot or just pretend to be one?

Forrest, Where did you get your JD; in what state are you licensed to practice?

Clinton was getting blown in the oval office and you didn't have a problem with that.....

Oh yeah, he didn't get off......maybe that's why it was OK.

LOL.

An affair and harassment are two different things, harassment is "unwelcome conduct" If you are a willing participant it is not harassment.

Hi Forrest Grump,

This really should not be too hard to comprehend. Firms, and Cain was an employee of the Association, often settle cases rather than fight them. I'd think it most likely that when settling those cases the Association excluded Cain from all deliberations given it was the Association more, and not Cain, that was liable. Say it would have cost $200k to litigate the case, and the complainant was willing to settle for$25k...do the math for us and tell us which is the wiser business decision?

Sure, you might litigate and win, but in a "he said/she said" case the best you can really hope for is to be left with an unsightly record regardless of the truth. So protecting "your good name" is, entirely, exactly what was done here. Some of you people are so ignorant about the law that it, frankly, shocks those of us that aren't. You think that because someone settles it must mean guilt, yet it is nothing of the sort. It MIGHT mean guilt. But it often just means smart business people are in control.

We will never know the facts in this case. We will never know who did what to who, if anything. But we can look to his life for a fact pattern. Does it reveal other such acts, like a look into Bill Clinton's life revealed? No. Maybe things will change, but for now, with nothing to go on and no life pattern to support it, I think the best conclusion one can make, the conclusion which is most fair, is that this was simply business.

Too bad, btw, that it works this way. Maybe if liberals and democrats would work with republicans to put into place some sort of "enforced" loser pays mechanism then firms and individuals would be more inclined to fight for their good name. Unfortunately the Party of No, the democrats, refuse to compromise at all.

I'm also a lawyer and while Spanky is correct about the cost of litigation, nothing is mentioned about the standard confidentiality agreement - Cain must have known about that little detail (he would sign it), so he must also have known about the payment to settle; did he forget that he cannot discuss the details? Sometimes it isn't the alleged act that gets one in trouble, but lying about it. Ask Roger Clemens how that worked out for him.

Then P. Heckler; to clarify, how can Cain say he knew nothing of the settlement if he had to sign the agreement? Or is that a step too far?

Marlon - are you for real? You seem awfully righteous about this point that the money belonged to the association, and the association's membership needed money spent in their interests rather than the interests of the association's CEO. So a question for you: Whose money would have had to pay for a defense of the allegations? That's right... the association's money, i.e. the same money that came from membership dues in the first place.

I'd like to suggest another possibility of why money was paid by the association to settle with the accusers. Possibly it was because the investigators found no merit to the claims, and were concerned that when they announced that their finding that the accusations were baseless, that very announcement would have angered the accuser, making her more likely to file suit. So rather than pay 6 (or 7) figures for a successful defense, they'd rather pay 5 figures to just end it. I don't know if that's what happened in this case, but I know it is fairly common in business harassment cases.

By the way, I still don't like Herman Cain. But I don't like him for his policies and his positions on issues... it has nothing to do with accusations that were apparently investigated and found to be baseless.

Hi P. Heckler,

If the complaint was made about an employee (Cain) of the Association, and the Association settled with the complainant, then why would Cain have ever signed anything given he was not involved in the settlement?

I don't know what a JD is so I am certainly not licensed, however I have seen plenty of bogus harassment charges dispatched without spending anywhere even close to the sums you claim a defense would take, or offering any kind of settlement whatsoever. My experience is that it is very cheap for an employer to defend the BS charges, it only gets more expensive when they think there is a case against them, and it makes a difference if the case is against them as an organization, or an individual that works for them. So I would ask again what kind of a suit was it was it, a case of "hostile environment" or "Quid pro Quo", or are those details prevented from being known by way of the settlement, which is another and probably the biggest reason I have personally seen for out of court settlements for the exact reason of preventing the details from becoming a matter of public record.

Let me see, the conservative response to this is "Clinton did it too." Are we keeping moral terpitude score now? Let's start at the beginning shall we: I'll see your Bill Clinton and raise you an FDR. I'll see your FDR and raise you a Thomas Jefferson... You get the idea. And we can do this exercise on the Republican side too.

Most of you are missing the most important point - how has the Cain campaign and Cain himself responded to this? What are they saying and, more importantly, not saying. From my point of view, they have mangled their response by making non-denial denials, and non-statement statements. I understand they were caught off guard, but gee guys you are just digging the hole deeper. And the rest of us should stop as well. Take a breath. Let's not make offenses or defenses without all the facts.

"An affair and harassment are two different things, harassment is 'unwelcome conduct' If you are a willing participant it is not harassment." - Forrest Gump 2.0

Again, have you never heard of Paula Jones???

MKM1944, those here from the left are chanting the mantra "Wouldn't have a settlement if not guilty...wouldn't have a settlement if not guilty". My reference to Paula Jones (and Clinton) is simply because it is the most well publicized case of sexual harassment ever. Her case was thrown out and Clinton still settled for $850,000 after.

It's hard for your side to defend statements like you can't "get a laywer (sic) to take on a lawsuit even to settle unless you have a good case. You just have to have a totally sensational case to get it into the courts with witnesses and documentation," when the most well known sexual harassment complaint ever came from a woman making unsubstantiated claims with no witnesses and in fact state troopers who disputed the accusation. Not only did lawyers take the case, but a judge moved it forward AND the woman was paid off to the tune of $850,000 even AFTER the judge eventually threw the case out. So sorry the most well known case of sexual harassment involved your boy Clinton, but I use the case because it undercuts nearly every argument the left is making here and because everybody making a comment on this should be familiar with that case.

Hi Rich I don't think what was done here protected his good name because if now they facts can never be determined, then Cain can be subjectively considered as innocent or guilty, the settlement now requires people to just believe his story or not, they payed to settle, it's hard to convince people you did that because you were innocent, how does that protect his good name, sounds to me like he paid to now have a questionable reputation at best, and not to protect a good one.

It's funny how some of you right wingers defend unwanted advances but condemn consensual sex...and don't seem to understand the difference between the two.

Caligula, where have you even seen or read what Herman Cain actually did. I can make an innocent commment on how a fellow female worker cut her hair a new way and it can be blown out of proportion and interpreted by a female as harassment. You and anyone else have no idea what or if this entails anything. For all you liberals that tie this in to being President. Clinton was accused and admitted to at least some of his transgression while in office. Do you remember Lewinsky, Jennifer Flowers, Katherine Willey, Paul Jones, and others. Lewinsky while he was President. Here is a article with a list.

http://www.realchange.org/intern.htm#women

I will agree that our politicians need to have boundary lines and if crossed, they all need to go. Not just a democrat or republican, but all.

"they payed to settle, it's hard to convince people you did that because you were innocent" - Forrest Gump 2.0

Not anybody who has even the slightest clue about how our legal system works, Forrest.

Or any other women who come forward.

I thought that a strange thing for Cain to add.

abouit as strange as clinton not considering a BJ was sexual in nature, right AF?

So what has this got to do with Clinton?? You can't admit anything happened because a conservative Republican is the one being accused of paying hush money to sex harrassment charges??

Good point, trm: thanks for the chuckle!

Laker: pathetic. You must get extra ditto head points for trying to get anyone to believe that one. The remark about Lewinsky though shows what you're really made of. Not something I'm sure any female would want to get too close too.

the left-wingers and their media have already attacked Palin, Michelle B, Mitt, Perry,

While the right-wingers have ceaselessly attacked the President, Pelosi, Biden, Reid, most of Obama's cabinit and our country....

so your point is?

AND don't forget poor ol' Weiner... "what is good for the goose..." so please save your poutrage.

that dang liberal media! why i bet they drugged herman and forced him to sexually harass them women. And I bet they made the association pay them off just to make Herman look bad. It's a conspiracy, I tells ya.. lol

Do we know if the woman'women that supposedly took this settlement are libs or cons? Seems more than a few posters have it all figured out that this is somehow strictly a lib vendetta....

If you don't like having your candidates attacked, stop running such whack-os.

I would guess this came from the Romney camp.......he is the one most threatened by Cain.......not so much Obama.

Some very bad things about the Current Occupant will be revealed leading up to the election

Marlon, did you say the same thing when then President Clinton has his fling with Monica Lewinsky? Did you say anything when Clinton lied about it?

AmyB - I concur, obama should never have run and he should do an LBJ and tell us he will not seek a second term. 70%+ say America is heading in the wrong direction. As potus obama sure likes going the wrong way!!

american

Obama still beats the guys you have put up so far. That said, the Repubs are below 10% in popularity because they do not represent the majority of voters out here. LBJ did not go for the second term because he was on the wrong side of Viet Nam war issues and he had cancer and was not going to live through another term.

winemaker! What makes you think it isn't Mitt or Perry or the GOP "mainstream" folks who didn't dig this up and release it to Politico? Who will gain from this disclosure...this early in the GOP primary season? It isn't the Democrats spanky.......nothing would be better than GOP funning Herman Cain against Obama in general election.

Hi Jennifer,

Republicans aren't below 10% in popularity. It's difficult to try to have a rational conversation with liberals like you given your willingness to delude yourselves. It's Congress which has a 9% approval rating, and Congress has two houses, one the Representatives, the other the Senators. One is controlled by republicans, the other by democrats.

I think it's easy for people to dislike Congress--it's a messy way to get things done--despite it operating exactly as designed. Most Americans, I've got little confidence you are not among them, have little comprehension about how Congress works or why it was set up to work this way. Even when things are good, even when people see high GDP growth, low unemployment, growing incomes, and the like, they still regard Congress with disdain.

LBJ, for what it's worth, didn't run in 1968 because every predictor showed he was going to lose. It had nothing to do with his likelihood of living four more years or not.

Jennifer:

A little tidbit. The Republicans do not control Congress. Congress is split and that 10% represents CONGRESS AS A WHOLE.

Republicans represent a solid 45% of the country the same as Dems. Where you liberals get this "most of the country" quotes from, baffles the hell out of me.

YOU say Obama beats Republicans. No one has voted as of yet, at least I don't think (sarc).

I think it's more likely its the neo-cons don't want Cain ...he can't beat Obama....but he might take out whoever it is they want to crown.

Check out the rating of Congress b4 the Reps took the House...not great but WAY above 9%.

If you think the Dems control the Senate you may want to revisit the rules of the Senate. REF: Fill O Buster!!! The Senate's been out of business since 2008.

And the Reps are responsible. I was a proud Republican for 30 years but they went to the darkside and the Dems are just weak. I'm starting to believe we may ALL have to boycott the election as there are not any choices. A or B both bought by the same 1% who gives a sh-t!

I suspect, that the GOP opponents of Cain will continue to look for any advantage to pull Cain down....watch the next debate...should be interesting....will give Mitt a little rest too.

Madison: My dog has better focus. Concentrate now. The subject is : CAIN

It must be news. You're here reading it.

Cocaine in the hood???!!!!!!! Hahahahaha. You're delusional, just like Hermie and the rest of the connies. Seriously, get lost.

Proudamericanveteran...Did you make it beyond E-3? Sure sounds like it from the content and context of your post! Very glad I never served with the likes of you! Hopefully you are NOT a Marine.

Obama selling drugs??? Where is your evidence or a witness or even a shred of paper accussing him of that........These women, on the other hand, are real.

proudamericanveteran......I doubt very much that you are a veteran...No veteran would have such disrespect for america. You are a disgrace to your uniform, if you have one, which I doubt....

Torpedo,

I echo your comments--especially the part about hoping he was not a Marine. Frankly, I think he made it to E-2 and quickly got busted back to E-1. The only smarts he had was a smart mouth.

Says lamont in an unfounded personal attack against his President.

Lamont is right...your president is not someone to be proud of...but continue being delusional.

Lamont & Wally

You connies crack me up. I just hope both of you are on this vine Nov. 7, 2012 so I can give you a big fat I told you so. One word for you guys....DELUSIONAL!!!!!!!

That all you got Wally? See, here is the thing: If you are an American, President Obama is YOUR President too. And I am sure that you completely support him, the office of the Presidency, and that Obama is successful so the country flourishes. That is what a patriotic American would do.

Wow! You need to get back on the meds, Lamont.

That's the first thing that came to my mind... he's the head of this association and he's not aware of these settlements? Either he's a bald-faced liar or totally out of touch as a leader. I sure wouldn't want anyone in charge who had no idea what was going on right under his own nose...

And that's giving benefit of the doubt about the sexual harrassment charge. He says he didn't harrass anyone, but no one will ever know for sure... willing to take that chance? I'm certainly not.

kathryn sullivan: the women are real? then where are they?

Oh they are real, they did not pay out monoply money to fake people, they paid real money to real people, now why would an innocent person of real integrity do that.

If Obummer was slinging coke W was his best customer!

Forrest, unless, of course, they were FRAUDULENT ACORN voters,...then there is NO way they could exist,...lol

So Peggy: you want them to come out and make a statement after agreeing to not speak about this settlement? Then be harrassed by every right wing nut in the country telling them they are lying? Read the comments here to see what's in store for them if their names are revealed. Why would they risk that for a candidate who is going down the tubes anyway?

Ha it really don't matter what he did or did not do now does it if they sealed the truth, people can now believe as they wish, Cain slipped himself the large peperoni on this one.

Well well well, just look at all the Cain defenders. Wonder how they all feel now that Cain has admited that yes there were harassment charges and yes there were settlements. Of course, he finally fessed up after changing his story all day long until he couldn't lie about it any more. LOL TOLD YA SO!

Yes "Shellie", quite comical now. He should have just fessed up, but noooo, just make it a bigger story. Guess the ladies didn't like his other version of the 9-9-9 plan... Sexual harassment is no joke, alleged or not. He just got caught being dishonest about it. Come clean in the beginning and you wouldn't look so dirty in the end. The Koch brothers or some other GOP group probably leaked this. The man was getting too close to the GOP nomination. So Machiavellian, "let's leak a story and blame the liberals and media for tearing down the black guy we want out of the race any way". Shades of Clarence Thomas, how ironic and sad.

I also think that Liberals would be delighted if Cain won the nomination. He seems to be constantly putting his foot in his mouth, and his 9-9-9 tax plan makes him virtually unelectable in a general election.

Sounds like a GOP hatchet job to me too...

Ron Paul is a joke, just like his racist son Rand, the fruit doesn't fall far from the tree.

Geez, why the hell do Ron Paul supporters always have to spam stories that have nothing to do with him?

Geez...I don't know but he's the only Repb I'd vote for.

Of course, especially if the GOP run's any of the clowns ....pleasepleaseplease run Cain against Obama in the general election PLEEEEASE!

Since Dick Nixon got pardoned the elites have been "getting away with it" by buying the victims off.

I just wonder which neo-con decided to take Cain out...because Obummer would love Cain to be his opponent.

Women like men with money and men with money believe it's them women are attracted to...causes confusion. The rich have decided they live by different rules than the 99%. This most obvious in politics, finance, and Pro sports, but there plenty more examples.

Equal treatment under the law is toast 1000s of crimes have been committed on Wall St and DC and the No-Justice Department and Treasury and the SEC are covering their ass instead of jailing them. Political parties are a bad idea and NOT Constitutional, George Washington warned against them in his farewell address...they are dying and taking the Country with them. We are never going to have a MEANINGFUL ELECTION UNTIL THEY ARE GONE. Mitt or Obummer...why vote?

Thanks for the answer Winemaker; it solidifies exactly what I posted.

the liberals will continue to dig for anything they can find on a candidate

Which is exactly what the conservatives do to the President...

Have you heard from the left, any negative statements on administration policies

Well, I certainly have not heard anything positive about our President from the right...

Now the Weiner was great levity during his moments of fame. I do miss the weiner jokes. And the Clinton definition of sex.

Okay - you, Republicans, set these precedents, so DO NOT try to believe they will not apply to you and yours as well. You set these parameters for Democrats, you MUST adhere to them too, so you should be careful what you do to your opponets. (Do you seriously believe Dubya could have survived a 3 year, 4 Bil dollar investigation into his personal life like Clinton endured? What do you think his answer to questions about his personal sex life would have been? Do you believe ALL U.S. Presidents from now on should have to explain to the public on national TV about their private sexual encounters? Well, that is what Reps have established with their Clinton vendetta, so Rep. Presidents should be prepared for the same thing.)

Point is, no matter how much you try to make it otherwise, THERE WILL BE NO MORE DOUBLE STANDARDS; NO MORE advantages for Republicans different from what Democrats have; we 99% gaurantee it, so get used to it.

Now will you be able to save your poutrage when the direction of the election moves towards the Obama record?

ABSOLUTELY! We will put Obama's record side-by-side with Bush's for comparison antytime!! In fact, considering the roadblocks, obstacles, and stonewalling the Republicans have done, and their "goal" and primary purpose of "...making sure Obama is a one term President.." by harming this nation so he will appear to be a failure will be promoted and publicized between now and 11/12 so all voters can be informed and compare and see the true CAUSE of the country's problems.

Any more questions?

Or how about a 'stain' on a dress?

Certainly not like the liberal left that respects women like Bill Clinton, Al Gore, John Edwards, Eliott Spitzer... etc etc.

The problem with you ditto heads are facts like;

When a Democrat has the dalliance, the women don't complain!

Maybe a little envy?

I'm sure Juanita Broaddrick had a great time with Bill Clinton. As did Paula Jones. And Eileen Wellstone. And Sandra Allen James. And Kathleen Willey.

Among the ones we know of, tmd39. But that was OK, cuz he was a Democrat, right. This "story" will be gone by week's end. Some pretty bad stuff about Obama is being held back till next summer which should close the chapter on this fraud of a president.

tmd, do not forget Monica Lewinsky and I did not have an affair with that woman.

Dont forget crack head Berry....and whatever he was having sex with......

Nice list of "victims"? Which ones were paid? Please include the fox news payments.

Considering that almost all of these woman came forward before Fox News was launched in 1996, I think your argument is baseless.

Vitter, wide stance, walking the Appalachian Trial blah blah ring any bells, issues with sex seems bipartisan and very human.

Yet these women keep showing up on Fox and getting paid.

I'm sure, almost all, typical talking point verbage.

So who was paid off.....................?

This is whats wrong with this country ..these GOP perverts with their "FANNY VALUES". Then they get caught in the zipper of life so to speak !

The reason the story is important is obvious. Just like the facts: Once a cheater always a cheater. Once a liar, always a liar. We've had enought lies under Duh-bya.

I suppose that's why you listen to Clinton like he's the gospel.......he was working REAL HARD in the oval......

If crack head Berry can get re-elected after trying to catch AIDS from something, anythings possible!

Actually the problem with America is that we have an administration that has no ideas how to turn the economic tide. For example, if your car is running badly (it doesn't matter why it's running badly, may have been the last bad mechanic) and you take it to the mechanic and he makes it run worse, you don't let him work on it anymore. You find a new mechanic. Obama has worked on the economy for three years now and it is worse than before. Common sense says get someone else to give it a try. Maybe someone who realizes that a jobs bill does not mean you have to spend money. A jobs bill just needs to address regulations and tariffs that would put us all on a even playing field. The private sector creates jobs not the government.

The Fed, with the TBTF Banks run the economy not the Pres. Look to Wall St...Capitalism, that's the economic theory that is missfiring...because it has morphed into Corporatism and gone criminal because there is no accountability for the 1% and the Gov they own.

Gee laker: Is Bill Clinton running? I must've missed that.......

LOL!!! Welcome to the big leagues Pizza Man. If you're so innocent -- why did you pay hush money?? Remember -- it's not the crime that gets you, it's the cover-up.

So the tetard flavor of the month has been Palin, then Pawlenty, then Trump, then Bachmann, then Perry and then Cain. NEXT!!!

When there's money involved it harassment. If no money is involved, it's called hitting on someone. If you never hit on someone, you spend to much time on these computer things. Don't fish off the company peer. Don't keep you honey where you make your money.

I agree FOX News has their agenda, but I think you are going to far to say that NBC doesn't. Seriously, real journalism?

Send Hannity to Syria!

During World War II the common fuel and oxidizer system in torpedoes was 100% alcohol and concentrated Hydrogen Peroxide. The sailors used to steal the alcohol whenever they could so it was eventually nick-named "Torpedo Juice". Seriously though it is hillarious lately to see the delusional right wing candidates being eaten alive or, like the cannibals they are, eating one another. I have a good laugh every day.

He's guilty of something, go back to your businesses, there's an opening as CEO of Christies Toybox.

hey steve..... WE DON'T CARE... keep putting out stories...we DON'T CARE...... your lies and the left's lies are comical and even if they are true....WE DON'T CARE.... you elected obama on MUCH MORE and clinton on much more........

Any woman any time can accuse a man and their is NOTHING you can do but pay them to go away.

OR pay lawyers even more and then pay them to go away...

yeah Greg: you know how evil those women are...always trying to get some innocent man in trouble by making up harrassment stories so they can get booted out of their jobs and ridiculed for not being able to "take a joke" ...Good thing the Republicans are here to make sure women don't start thinking they can stand up to any of that...you tell 'em!

If you have ever been sexually harassed you would know its not something a woman wants! Its humiliating and dehumanizing!

True but Some Women..... Want the money........

If they REALLY had a case and they were so worried about abuse they would not have taken the money but rather seen him fired.....

They wanted the money.....

Hey, I'm all for nominating Cain. If the republicans think the liberals really put this story out they must be smoking something - Cain winning the nomination would be the best case scenario besides Bachmann. Sorry, this is an inside job...