Sexual Harassment is No Big Deal
A thought experiment: assume, for a moment, that Herman Cain did what the two (as of now) anonymous women accuse him of doing.
So what?
In 1998, didn't we all decide that sexual harassment was no big deal? Wasn't that the whole point of the second term of the Clinton presidency? Say it with me: Sexual harassment is no big deal.
Because it isn't. Back then, some Republicans thought it was, and then they learned that it wasn't. You can be an amazing, epic sexual harasser on a truly Biblical scale and still be a popular president, both with voters and -- more importantly, at least in this phase of an election -- with the press.
And that's because, say it with me: Sexual harassment is no big deal.
We thought it was, when Clarence Thomas was nominated for the Supreme Court, but then when Bill Clinton was president, we all realized it wasn't.
Next problem.
- Comment (30)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (4)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Jun '10
Re: Sexual Harassment is No Big Deal
Clinton was not a harasser; he was a predator, and worse if you believe Juanita Broaddrick. If leftists had a shred of self-introspection, they might ask themselves how their moral superiority squares with support for this monster.
Re: Sexual Harassment is No Big Deal
Of course, this double-standard, which totally exists, cuts both ways...
Aug '11
Re: Sexual Harassment is No Big Deal
It's particularly No Big Deal when your accusers are not identified, and when details about the allegations are not provided.
What this all breaks down to is: "We insist that you did something bad to someone! We're not going to tell you what it was you did, or who you did it to, but we demand you explain yourself!"
Politico should feel shame -- but I don't think they're capable of it.
Meanwhile, the reaction of any free-thinking person should be to point fingers at Politico and laugh at how cheaply they sold what little remains of their sorry souls.
Edited on November 1, 2011 at 7:24pmAug '10
Re: Sexual Harassment is No Big Deal
Clinton's legacy is one area where I can draw a line between "Leftists" and "Democrats".
During his tenure, there were plenty of leftists who hated Clinton. The independent/alternative left-wing press saw him as a "republican-lite" president.
Remember, the Clinton era also gave us the "Anti-Globalization" movement, protests like the "Battle in Seattle", and publications like Adbusters.
Democrats and Democrat-affiliated organizations (unions, big-money NGOs, etc) will always fall over themselves to whitewash Clinton's legacy. I'm not so sure the same can be said about non-moneyed "leftists".
Aug '10
Re: Sexual Harassment is No Big Deal
I agree. Words fail me, I cannot describe how uninteresting this story is. Not just this semi-scandal story, but the whole Springtime for Herman, Accidental Nominee story too.
Neither Cain's pulling a 10-G, body squishing, same day reversal on what he knew and when he knew it, nor his Clintonian parsing of settlement vs agreement, not even his odd burst into song or the prospect of some Rove/Cheney, spy vs spy subterfuge, none of that can get me to care much.
Given Perry's deeply bizarre New Hampshire speech, and this miserable pack of ankle-nibbling zombie-chihuahua also-rans, and the grim resolve of the base, who have set their face like flint against Romney, this thing is just a bump in the road for the man who proudly calls himself Black Walnut.
And you are right, in politics, Clinton-Lewinsky absolutely made sexual harassment a small thing.
Edited on November 1, 2011 at 10:20pmApr '11
Re: Sexual Harassment is No Big Deal
The problem is how this issue has been handled. He keeps changing his story. Clinton did the same thing. People will respect you and the story will go away faster if you just own up right away. Cain obviously needs some coaching and better advisers. Sad to see him act like a typical politician on this one.
Aug '11
Re: Sexual Harassment is No Big Deal
Not only was Clinton accused of rape, specifically, but we had the name of the accuser. And still Democrats assured us that this could be ignored.
Re: Sexual Harassment is No Big Deal
This story could mean something bad about Mr. Cain, or it could just be a run-of-the-mill dismissal of one or two employees. We have no ability to tell one way or the other, because nothing in the Politico story provides any of the substance needed to make a determination
The approach seems to be to throw a thin, anonymous allegation against Cain, put the onus on him to respond and then stand back. As per the template, today the story is seamlessly progressing to Cain's response to a protean non-charge rather than a call for the journalists to provide specifics.
Re: Sexual Harassment is No Big Deal
Rob, My understanding is that in Hollywood, it's mandatory.
Aug '10
Re: Sexual Harassment is No Big Deal
The great Greg Gutfeld, Ann Coulter, and TV's Andy Levy manged to defibrillate the story, Greg's look at the end is priceless!
Aug '10
Re: Sexual Harassment is No Big Deal
I am still trying to figure out who Barney Frank was actually screwing when he was sleeping with a guy who was an executive at Fannie Mae ( treasure chest of puns there).
May '10
Re: Sexual Harassment is No Big Deal
I've long been a fervent advocate of sexual harrassment. As defined by Human Resources brochures. Which nobody adheres to. Unless they work in an office crammed with the terminally homely.
If the only detail of Cain's behavior to so far emerge constitutes Sexual Harrassment, then nobody is qualified for elected office. Or indeed a job.
And then we'll all be very sad pandas indeed.
Oct '10
Re: Sexual Harassment is No Big Deal
I agree with Rob, oddly enough. I thought we resolved this and eliminated this sort of behavior as a barrier to holding elected office even if it's one of the highest offices available.
I suspect that the argument will be that Clinton's confirmed bad behavior relative to Monica Lewinski was consensual inappropriate sexual behavior compared to non-consensual inappropriate sexual behavior that Cain is being, I guess, accused of doing in the past. I don't have the stomach to watch the talking head shows to see if this comes to pass, but I'd be curious to know if it does.
Cain's responses have been somewhat odd and evasive which makes me suspect that there is something behind this. Someone might remind him that the first rule of holes is that when you are in one, you should stop digging.
Apr '11
Re: Sexual Harassment is No Big Deal
Well as we all know Clinton is "a refined Southern gentleman", as a caller on Rush's show called him in defending him from these accusations, so he could not possibly have committed the acts he was accused of. On the other hand, Cain is Mandingo to the left.
Jun '10
Re: Sexual Harassment is No Big Deal
So does this also mean that Newt's past personal life is no big deal as well? And if so, can someone remind me why we're not taking him seriously as a candidate?
Re: Sexual Harassment is No Big Deal
Interesting how the "racist" tea partiers are rallying around Cain, while the enlightened liberals savagely attack Cain in the same manner that they attacked Clarence Thomas. Cain and Thomas. Let me think. What do they have in common?
Aug '10
Re: Sexual Harassment is No Big Deal
Kennedy Smith: fervent advocate of sexual harassment indeed a job.
sad pandas indeed. · Nov 1 at 12:12pm
Speaking for the Panda Community, we decry this racist and sexist pandering.
Dec '10
Re: Sexual Harassment is No Big Deal
I wasn't a H Cain supporter before this latest event. I do not think someone who has not held an elective office is ready to assume the office of the President of the United States. I don't buy the "fresh face outside of politics theory." Sorry. And I think this latest story, made much more controversial because of his odd responses, disqualifies him from consideration. The stakes are too, too high, people! We need to WIN this thing next November -- not spend the next year defending these charges.
Sep '10
Re: Sexual Harassment is No Big Deal
What exactly are the charges?
Aug '11
Re: Sexual Harassment is No Big Deal
Mark Belling Fan
What exactly are the charges? · Nov 1 at 2:39pm
Nobody knows! Isn't that neat!?
And yes, I agree. We need to WIN this thing next November, which is exactly why we shouldn't even be considering the guy who lost to the guy who lost to Obama back in 2008.