2012 Tuesday: The response, not the allegations, got the worst of Cain
Welcome to the big time, Herman Cain.
One of the ugly sides of politics is that people perceived as threats tend to have mud thrown their way. And the definition of mud is a thinly — and anonymously — sourced story that just happens to land on the evening before a fast-rising candidate is due to get some positive “earned” media (meaning news coverage they get for talking about their ideas, as Cain did yesterday in Washington).
It’s clear that someone, somewhere, considers Cain’s spike in the opinion polls something more than a temporary blip.
I will issue a caveat here that there could well be more details and facts to come out about the sexual harassment allegations leveled against Cain while he was head of the National Restaurant Association in the late 1990s. Without such details and facts, I’m not very troubled by these allegations alone: They’re just allegations that, from what we know so far, seem not to have had much merit. But if they do come out, and they are bad for Cain, he will have a serious problem on his hands.
Absent such revelations, the biggest problem for Cain is one of his own creation — and undoubtedly the precise problem hoped for by whoever brought the allegations to the Politico reporters’ attention. I’m talking about his response.
Cain’s biggest asset as a candidate is not so much his 9-9-9 plan, because all such plans are subject to change. It’s his credibility: as an “outsider,” as a genuine man and authentic conservative, as a trustworthy and respectable human being.
If you’re Herman Cain, that credibility has taken almost 67 years to build, and you are the person best capable of throwing it all away.
Had Cain immediately acknowledged the two settlements, noted that they were small and based on unproven charges, and explained his side of the story, I and others probably wouldn’t be writing about them today. But for whatever reason — because his advisers gave him bad advice, because he thought he could put a lid on the story with a less-complete explanation, because he’s so convinced of his innocence in the cases — he didn’t do an adequate job. (This kind of thing is one reason I’ve had my doubts that, in the year 2011, the presidency could be the first elected office a candidate had ever won.)
Instead, his story has, to put it charitably, evolved over the past 36 hours. And he’s fallen back on a tactic we’ve seen on stories such as his stances on abortion and on swapping prisoners at Guantanamo Bay for captured American troops: chalking it up to not hearing the question properly or his choice of words being misinterpreted.
On its own, a story based on innuendo from second-hand sources probably wouldn’t have been enough to drag Cain down. Cain’s response may ultimately hurt him more with GOP primary voters.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
241 comments Add your comment
ragnar danneskjold
November 1st, 2011
5:04 pm
I think our leftist friends are being too hard on Bill Clinton here, holding his more egregious predatory behavior to a such a harsher standard than Herman’s idle conversation.
MarkV
November 1st, 2011
5:05 pm
Tiberius @ 5:01 pm: “Yeah, MarkV, those sure are “details” and “proof”.”
Yeah, Tiberius, those ARE details. And what proof do you need in addition to Cain’s admission?
John
November 1st, 2011
5:06 pm
whatajoke,
You too…I remember the same except I was in the 3rd grade.
Kyle Wingfield
November 1st, 2011
5:12 pm
Aquagirl: It might still be a plus for some folks. But it doesn’t mean, in a year when you have a former speaker and three former governors (five if you count T-Paw and Gary Johnson) running, that you’re going to pull top-drawer staff. He’s run for office once, and didn’t make it out of the primary. Being someone else’s adviser doesn’t necessarily make you a magnet for other advisers.
And I never said sexual harassment wasn’t a real problem. But so are nuisance claims of harassment. We need more facts to know which kind of problem we’re dealing with here.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
November 1st, 2011
5:12 pm
“Do you say the same with reporting by Rush, Fox, Andrew Brietbart, etc. which stories such as Shirley Sherrod, Obama’s trip to India, The Muslim cultural center near Ground Zero, Obama being a Muslim, birtherish…the list does go on.”
I treat all with a healthy skepticism and assign them appropriate weight and credibility until facts are presented. Why do you ask?
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
November 1st, 2011
5:15 pm
MarkV, please detail the Who, What, When Where and Why of this story as presented by Politico, including the precise figure (in the 5-figure settlement), and then we can talk about proof and details.
John
November 1st, 2011
5:17 pm
“I treat all with a healthy skepticism and assign them appropriate weight and credibility until facts are presented.”
Not a single one of the right wing stories I mentioned had any facts presented.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
November 1st, 2011
5:21 pm
“Not a single one of the right wing stories I mentioned had any facts presented.”
Not true. You simply refuse to accept the facts you don’t want to accept. Yet since you have no idea what my views are on all of these (and they are irrelevant now, btw) I still have to ask, Why do you care?
Hillbilly D
November 1st, 2011
5:24 pm
It’s nearly a year ’til the election. By then, whether this is true or not, this will be forgotten (Cain may be too,or he may not but that’s another story). We’ve got many more of these episodes to go through between now and next November. Who knows what somebody is waiting to drag up on somebody that they see as a threat to their own success. Wake me up towards the end of September.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
November 1st, 2011
5:28 pm
I don’t care about this story because I don’t care about sexual harrassment. It’s a bogus, made-up offense manufactured by the same weenies who claim to be “offended” by the sight of a crucifix or six-pointed star. Grow up.
John
November 1st, 2011
5:28 pm
Tiberius – Your lightning rod of hate! @5:21,
“Not true. You simply refuse to accept the facts you don’t want to accept. ”
As you asked MarkV, state the facts you claim I don’t want to accept.
Shriley Sherrod…edited video first posted by Andrew Brietbart and picked up by Fox, etc. to make it look like she’s a racist.
Obama’s trip to India…not a single fact presented, story picked up from an Indian news source…the number of troops accompanying the president, the number of hotel rooms booked and the cost changed constantly from one report to the next.
The Muslim cultural center near Ground Zero…reported as the Mosque AT Ground Zero. Again made up reporting.
Birtherism…again no facts. The same as the stories of Obama being Muslim…not a single fact.
ByteMe
November 1st, 2011
5:29 pm
We need more facts to know which kind of problem we’re dealing with here.
WaPo is reporting that one of the women wants to come forward, but the confidentiality clause in the settlement is preventing her from doing it even as Cain goes around saying whatever he wants about it. Lawyers are reviewing to see if the contract has already been broken or if the NRA will release her from the confidentiality clause so that she can defend herself.
The story’s got legs….
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
November 1st, 2011
5:29 pm
“It’s nearly a year ’til the election.”
Which lends credence to the earlier poster that believes that this is a GOP-based primary attack, rather than one designed to derail Herman in the general election.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
November 1st, 2011
5:31 pm
And again, John, what does this have to do with Herman Cain and his fitness for office?
ByteMe
November 1st, 2011
5:32 pm
Which lends credence to the earlier poster that believes that this is a GOP-based primary attack
It’s screams “Karl Rove”, not “Mitt Romney”.
MarkV
November 1st, 2011
5:32 pm
Tiberius – Your lightning rod of hate! @5:15 pm: “MarkV, please detail the Who, What, When Where and Why of this story as presented by Politico, including the precise figure (in the 5-figure settlement), and then we can talk about proof and details.”
Tiberius’ “theory of journalism”: If a newspaper reported something like the following: “The government has learned that an unknown organization is planning to attack a US nuclear reactor,” they would have been wrong to publish it, because while there was What, but there was no When, Where and Why.
The above comment by Tiberius is so ridiculous, it is hard even to take it seriously. When Politico learned that the settlement was in 5-figures, they should not have reported the story, because they did not know the precise figure?
mum
November 1st, 2011
5:33 pm
Anyone who watched the Greta Van Susteran interview last night saw his response when she asked him if he was a flirtatious person. The response, something about liking flowers, and the smirk said it all. He obviously didn’t realize that his response and body language was way off…he corrected both when she asked him the question again.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
November 1st, 2011
5:34 pm
ByteMe, what does she have to defend herself against? There have been no names involved, therefore she hasn’t been “attacked” in order to need defending. There have been no details of the alleged act, which means there is no defense needed. In short, there has been a whole lot of nothing with this non-story.
Somebody’s looking for their 15 minutes of fame here, and it ain’t Herman Cain.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
November 1st, 2011
5:34 pm
“The same as the stories of Obama being Muslim…not a single fact.”
————————–
Obozo talked about “my Muslim faith” on Stephanopoulos’s show. Fact.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
November 1st, 2011
5:38 pm
MarkV, I’m not sure if you are being deliberately dense, or if this is your nature.
You’ve been tasked with treating this story with the credo of good journalism; Who, What, When, Where, and Why. Please do so, or your comments will be treated with the little regard they deserve. If you think Politico’s reporting on this is so stellar, prove it with journalistic integrity.
ByteMe
November 1st, 2011
5:38 pm
Tiberius: they’re reporting that she’s gone to stay with family because reporters are camped on her lawn. She’s not so anonymous it seems. As for whether she’s been “attacked”… Cain’s saying her claim was false and spurious. If it’s not false, then he’s attacking her credibility. And if there are reporters already outside her house, she’s not going to be unnamed for very long.
Hillbilly D
November 1st, 2011
5:41 pm
Tiberius @ 5:29
That’s the only thing that makes sense. If it was the Obama camp, they’d save it until later.
Aquagirl
November 1st, 2011
5:42 pm
I never said sexual harassment wasn’t a real problem. But so are nuisance claims of harassment
True—but I find it interesting how many leap to Mr. Cain’s defense, even when he clearly lied, saying he didn’t know about the claims in the first place. Somehow this leads to the logical conclusion that the women are lying gold diggers , and the guy who has already lied is a martyr.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
November 1st, 2011
5:43 pm
“Tiberius: they’re reporting that she’s gone to stay with family because reporters are camped on her lawn.”
And yet, not a single news story with her name. Sorry, that doesn’t wash, ByteMe.
clem
November 1st, 2011
5:45 pm
being charitable, he is either brain addled or incompetent(& his team)
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
November 1st, 2011
5:45 pm
“even when he clearly lied, saying he didn’t know about the claims in the first place.”
Yet, he did not lie, Aqualgirl, as the original question was not “Have you had sexual harassment claims against you?”, but rather, “Have you ever sexually harassed anyone?”, which he answered truthfully.
clem
November 1st, 2011
5:48 pm
the man clearly lied to in his speech at the National Press Club….then changed his story for fox only an hour or so later…….did it all come back to his memory in the span of an hour or so…..
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
November 1st, 2011
5:50 pm
“the man clearly lied to in his speech at the National Press Club”
And yet, clem, he actually didn’t. But please feel free to prove your point.
MarkV
November 1st, 2011
5:52 pm
Tiberius – Your lightning rod of hate! @5:38 pm
Tiberius, one more time, because you appear to be dense for whatever reason:
Politico did not accuse Cain of sexually harassing anybody. They reported facts they learned and which have been confirmed: That Cain had been accused of sexual misconduct by two women, and that there had been a 5-figure financial settlement by the National Restaurant Association with these women with confidentiality agreement about the accusations.
You may want this to have been suppressed by Politico, but that is your private opinion for which you have your own reasons. But Politico did what any respectable journalists would have done.
John
November 1st, 2011
5:54 pm
Tiberius – Your lightning rod of hate! @ 5:45,
“Yet, he did not lie”
He also said there was no settlement, that he was aware of. Then said there was a “agreement”. But since you don’t believe he lied, that must mean you buy into his “there was no settlement but there was an agreement and they are totally different” and that he was just trying to use the correct verbiage.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
November 1st, 2011
5:55 pm
MarkV, you’re the one who has been crowing about Politico’s reporting. I’ve asked you to prove it with journalistic integrity, which you have failed to do.
“Nuff said.
clem
November 1st, 2011
5:55 pm
he said he knew nothing of the settlements(he later in another interview nitpicked on settlement vs agreement)……i saw the npc live or tape delayed…..
he then related on sustern some discussion of settlements that revealed he knew something of them
now i know you are going to nitpick here, but this man is memory challenged
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
November 1st, 2011
5:56 pm
“But since you don’t believe he lied, that must mean you buy into his “there was no settlement but there was an agreement and they are totally different” and that he was just trying to use the correct verbiage.”
Correct. Unless you can prove otherwise. Unlike you, I do not buy into anything unless I have proof, not mere accusations.
clem
November 1st, 2011
5:58 pm
need i add to the list that rove went over to prove this man may be a good guy and we all agree govt needs to be better, but i don’t want him leading this country…..
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
November 1st, 2011
6:05 pm
And all of a sudden, Karl Rove is supposed to be the be all and end all on who should lead this country? As if his opinion was accurate with Bush?
I Report (-: You Whine )-: Thee Magnificent!!! mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
November 1st, 2011
6:09 pm
So he’s not slick and evasive like Romney or Clinton.
Some find that to be a virtue.
Aquagirl
November 1st, 2011
6:09 pm
Tiberius, if you think Kyle is lying about Cain’s changing story, take up your mansplaining with him. You have a lamestream media representative making that claim right here, and if you don’t have the cojones to ask him why, it’s not my problem.
John
November 1st, 2011
6:10 pm
Tiberius – Your lightning rod of hate! @5:55,
Why are you so hung up on Politico’s reporting? Even Herman Cain is not denying the story…he just keeps changing it. Politico reported about sexual harassment complaints made against Herman Cain. As you pointed out, Cain never lied because he didn’t deny a complaint or two was made but he would he say it was true either. What he did deny is the having sexually harassed anyone. Whether you want to call it lying or not, he has not been forthcoming with the truth and his story has been changing.
Before you defend him and say he didn’t lie, let’s look at Webster’s definition of the word…
: to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive
: to create a false or misleading impression
Would you agree that Cain, at the very least, created a false or misleading impression.
clem
November 1st, 2011
6:11 pm
nice of you to avoid the main point that cain either lied or was brain addled (i provided the proof)…. i merely reminded you that one on your side (i presume you are conservative) had listed 5 or so issues where cain was flopping worse than romney
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
November 1st, 2011
6:16 pm
“Would you agree that Cain, at the very least, created a false or misleading impression.”
No. I would maintain that his explanation is evolving as his recollection of the matter increases.
And Aquagirl, my use of the word evolving (I believe) is more accurate than Kyle’s “changing”. The fact remains that unless you were in the room with Herman Cain, his HR people, the women allegedly involved or the legal counsel, you may believe he was lying all you want, but you have no proof that he did so.
And clem, I do not avoid anything. I just assign points for relevance, and your comment came up a it short in that regard.
clem
November 1st, 2011
6:17 pm
i can’t help that you are slow
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
November 1st, 2011
6:22 pm
Nor can I help it that you’re points are irrelevant.
John
November 1st, 2011
6:24 pm
Tiberius – Your lightning rod of hate! @6:16,
You must believe no one ever lies…all someone has to say is I haven’t lied and say their just trying to get the verbiage right and you believe them.
clem
November 1st, 2011
6:24 pm
time to recharge your rod then
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
November 1st, 2011
6:26 pm
“You must believe no one ever lies”
No, John, I actually know that some people lie. However, I do not presume to know everything about every person’s activities, so I am less likely to accuse them of something I haven’t witnessed.
It is called objectivity. You should try it sometime.
Woody
November 1st, 2011
6:30 pm
Regardless of the man’s politics, with which I do not agree, he is entering onto a very different playing field than he’s been used to. Kid me not, did he really think no one would find out? He had no contingency plan whatsoever? This man deserves not to be in the international arena.
Aquagirl
November 1st, 2011
6:32 pm
And Aquagirl, my use of the word evolving (I believe) is more accurate than Kyle’s “changing”.
BWAHAHAHAHA!!!! Just when I think I’ve seen every lame dodge in history, you really came through with that gut-buster.
Again, why are you addressing me about Kyle’s inaccurate/untrue words? Afraid he’ll hurt your tender fee-fees? He’s a freakin’ journalist, paid to express concepts in writing. Effing that up doesn’t concern you more than anonymous posters?
I question him all the time, if you are too much limp noodle to do so, quit now and spare yourself further embarrassment. Let me know if you need any hand-holding.
John
November 1st, 2011
6:34 pm
Tiberius – Your lightning rod of hate! @ 6:26,
Just turn on the news or read online news stories and you’ll witness it. Do you believe Cain has been totally consistent with his response from the beginning and stuck with that response?
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
November 1st, 2011
6:34 pm
“This man deserves not to be in the international arena.”
Really? For not having a “contingency plan” for something that he obviously didn’t think was relevant (as in baseless accusations) 12 years ago? And you can disqualify him solely on that regard?
Hope to hell you didn’t vote for the current disaster-in-chief, Woody. That would shoot your entire theory out the window.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
November 1st, 2011
6:38 pm
Aquagirl, unlike you, I do not attack someone for a difference in wordsmithing.
And once again, John, do you not know what the meaning of the term “evolving” means? I am not looking for machine-like consistency, I am looking for the truth. Thus far, I have nothing upon which to base an opinion on either way, therefore, I merely point out inaccuracies of the reporting and of the conclusions being presented.