Herman Cain responds to accusations of inappropriate behavior by not responding to accusations of inappropriate behavior

According to Politico, Herman Cain engaged in sexually suggestive behavior towards at least two female employees during his time at the National Restaurant Association. Suspiciously, the women signed agreements and received financial settlements to leave the association. It’s hard not to continually question Herman Cain’s legitimacy as a candidate, with his faulty logic, annoying bravado and frightening policy suggestions–but this is not looking good.

Initially, Cain didn’t respond to these allegations,

Cain spokesman J.D. Gordon told POLITICO the candidate indicated to campaign officials that he was “vaguely familiar” with the charges and that the restaurant association’s general counsel had resolved the matter.

The latest statement came from Cain himself. In a tense sidewalk encounter Sunday morning outside the Washington bureau of CBS News — where the Republican contender had just completed an interview on “Face the Nation” — Cain evaded a series of questions about sexual harassment allegations.

Cain said he has “had thousands of people working for me” at different businesses over the years and could not comment “until I see some facts or some concrete evidence.” His campaign staff was given the name of one woman who complained last week, and it was repeated to Cain on Sunday. He responded, “I am not going to comment on that.”

He was then asked, “Have you ever been accused, sir, in your life of harassment by a woman?”

He breathed audibly, glared at the reporter and stayed silent for several seconds. After the question was repeated three times, he responded by asking the reporter, “Have you ever been accused of sexual harassment?”

Was his next response going to be, “I’m rubber, you’re glue…”?

The Cain campaign finally responded late Sunday night claiming that Politico’s report shows us that we have entered that period where people are making up lies about their opponents in an effort to smear them. However, considering they failed to deny the actual charges, they seem to be doing a better job of smearing themselves.

I already knew his overemphasis on the “Chilean model” was suspect. (C’mon, I had to).

Join the Conversation

  • http://cabaretic.blogspot.com nazza

    He has never been properly vetted by anyone credible until now, and here’s a perfect example.

  • http://feministing.com/members/smiles/ Smiley


    What’s the point of the comments on “[...] Herman Cain’s legitimacy as a candidate, with his faulty logic, annoying bravado and frightening policy suggestions [...]“?

    He might have faulty logic, he might be annoying and his policies might be frightening, but that does not make him a harasser.

    I suspect you don’t like him, and any accusation or allegation is simply used as a stick to beat him. My suspicion is that had the allegations been made against someone you liked, you’d have said that the opponents were smearing your candidate, … unproven…, dredging up old stories,… ad hominem attacks…, Fox News… mud…, disgraceful… low blows…

    Maybe I am wrong.

    [... and someone who is logical, non frightening, and lacks bravado can be a harasser.]

  • http://feministing.com/members/toongrrl/ toongrrl

    Hmmmmmmm…..doesn’t change my fear of him and the other Republican nominees

    • http://feministing.com/members/blueeyes90/ blueeyes90

      I’m with you on that.

  • http://feministing.com/members/robbieloveslife/ Robert

    I don’t think this will affect him in the 2012 elections if the republicans nominate him. I say this because Americans have a short attention span and the shock factor will wear off by then. Also our society tends to make a joke of sexual harassment so this probably won’t sway a swing voter’s decision. I strongly believe that the health of the economy next year will decide who wins the election. If somehow it gets worse than it is now people will vote for any republican regardless of his past. I remember back in 2007/2008 when Hillary Clinton and Obama were battling it out, I knew (well strongly believed) that whoever was the democratic nominee would win the election because so many people hated Bush that no republican was going to win. I supported Obama because of his “change” theme and overlooked his lack of experience. While he has good intentions whatever he is doing isn’t working. I think Hillary Clinton would be doing a much better job as president and would be getting much more support for a second term. As things are going now and getting worse, I think it would take a miracle for Obama to win next year.