Tag: Herman Cain

Mrs. Gloria Cain Announces Herman Is No Longer in The Race for President!

Michael MatheronLeave a comment

December 3, 2011

The announcement is in. Herman Cain is out. And the biggest surprise is who made the announcement. Just a few minutes ago, Mrs. Cain took the stage at the Cain for President HQ in Atlanta, Georgia and told the large crowd assembled that Mr. Cain would be cooling his jets for the foreseeable future:

“My friends, thank you for being here today. Herman will not be able to be here today due to the simple fact that he is presently locked in the third-floor bathroom of our home. Therefore, by default, he delegated me, his wife, to speak with you today.

The man is in trouble. The man doesn’t even seem to understand how much trouble he is in. He has memory problems, as we all know. Like, he can’t remember a 13-year dalliance with a certain other woman during our married life. He can’t seem to recall that he is presently married to me, Mrs. Gloria Cain. He does not know where Libya is. Likewise, he does not appear to know where I am half the time, and I am not hiding. 

He wants you to know that he’s made some mistakes. Yes, like mistaking a bunch of other women for his wife, me. I’m standing right here in front of you good people. I ask you; do I look like any of those other women? “Mistake,” he says! A mistake is like not knowing anything at all about Libya. A mistake is making a wrong left turn in a strange town. And I’ll tell you one thing, a mistake is cheating on me, Mrs. Gloria Cain.

So, for the very long foreseeable future, Herman will be a stay home kind of guy. A man who brings his wife breakfast in bed. A man who sweeps the floor, mops the kitchen, and cleans the commode.

For now, unless he can run a presidential campaign from the third floor bathroom of our home, I’m here to tell you good people, Herman is on the midnight train to nowhere. Via con Dios. Sayanora. And adios.”

Rejoice, Herman Cain Supporters, Rejoice! There Are TWO Herman Cains!

Michael MatheronLeave a comment

November 11, 2011

On Tuesday this week, Herman Cain held a press conference featuring Herman Cain.  Herman Cain scheduled the event to explain Herman Cain’s take on the allegations continually surfacing about Herman Cain’s past sexual harassment of at least four women.  During the questioning, Herman Cain implied there is yet another Herman Cain running around town.  The Herman Cain at the podium spoke (in bold) numerous times for that other Herman Cain:  

“I chose to address these accusations directly, rather than try to do it through a series of continuous statements or spokespeople because that’s the person Herman Cain is . . .” Well, a businessman by the name of Herman Cain stepped forward. But you see, that’s one thing about Herman Cain that I think that a lot of the American people know, and that is, just because it’s tough, there’s no reason for me not to do what I feel like I have to do. Well, I happen to think where it’s coming from is that some people don’t want to see Herman Cain get the Republican nomination, and some people don’t want Herman Cain to become president of the United States of America. I can’t answer why the ones that have already made these – one anonymous – accusations and one that was, you know — you know, put their face on TV, started a media campaign to basically try and slander my integrity and my character, I can’t tell you what their motivation is, other than it’s to stop Herman Cain.”

As you can see, he continually skittered back and forth betwixt 1st and 3rd person. In one part of certain sentences, he uses “I” and “my” and “me,” 1st person pronouns that one uses to refer directly to oneself. In other places Mr. Cain (if that really is his name), he (or “they”) refers, in 3rd person, to another Herman Cain, one who apparently couldn’t make it to the presser. So, a man we’re quite familiar with stood at the podium, the man we’ve watched climb up in the GOP polls to a leadership position. However, the Herman Cain at the podium acted at times as a spokesperson for the other, missing, Herman Cain. 

Referring to oneself in the 3rd person is familiar in politics, recall Bob Dole’s circa 1996 presidential campaign. Also, I’m old enough to remember this one, after Nixon lost the 1962 California gubernatorial election: “As I leave you, I want you to know . . . just think how much you are going to be missing, you don’t have Nixon to kick around anymore because, gentlemen, this is my last press conference.” Fat chance.

Illesimish or Simply Boorish? This practice of referring to oneself in the third person, I learned today, is called “illeism,” from the Latin ille (“that man; he”) + -ism (modelled on egoism). I call it boorish. Is Herman Cain boorish? I mean, here’s a man whose business success is legendary. His charisma is noteworthy. His rise in the GOP presidential field is unprecedented. Is this man a man one would call boorish?  Yes.

That aside, his boorishness is not the main issue here. In his scattered use of illeism during Tuesday’s press interrogation, he revealed a symptom that could trump his relatively benign illeisms.  People with true illeistic  personalities tend to remain in “voice” throughout. 

However, in using the 3rd person only periodically, while reverting to 1st person at other times, Herman Cain may have uncovered a more serious problem, Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID), once called Multiple Personality Disorder. Here’s the relevant portion of the National Alliance on Mental Illness description of DID: “[a] disorder involving a disturbance of identity in which two or more separate and distinct personality states (or identities) control the individual’s behavior at different times. When under the control of one identity, the person is usually unable to remember some of the events that occurred while other personalities were in control.”

WebMD has this to say about the Cain-relevant symptoms: “Amnesia. This is the failure to recall significant personal information that is so extensive it cannot be blamed on ordinary forgetfulness. There can also be micro-amnesias where the discussion engaged in is not remembered, or the content of a meaningful conversation is forgotten from one second to the next.  Identity confusion or identity alteration. Both of these involve a sense of confusion about who a person is. An example of identity confusion is when a person sometimes feels a thrill while engaged in an activity (such as reckless driving, DUI, alcohol or drug abuse) which at other times would be revolting.”

Or, when a GOP presidential candidate gets caught consistently forgetting about various issues related to allegations of past sexual harassment settlements, agreements, peace treaties, and whether he sexually harassed anyone, anywhere, anytime, that’s an example too.

Certainly, he’s not simply lying.

News from the Legal Frontline – Herman Cain’s New Statistical Defense to Sexual Harassment Claims

Michael MatheronLeave a comment

November 11, 2011

At the GOP debate on Tuesday night, CNBC’s Maria Bartiromo asked Herman Cain about the well-known sexual harassment claims swirling around his campaign and his character like a river around a boulder. Like that boulder, unmovable, Cain answered, in part, and to applause: “I value my character and my integrity more than anything else, and for every one person that comes forward with a false accusation – there are probably – there are thousands who would say, none of that sort of activity came from Herman Cain.”

Well, besides speaking in the 3rd person, media outlets far and wide consider this a weak, even shabby, defense, the “proportionality,” or “statistical” defense. . . For example, “Your Honor, my client presents the well-accepted proportionality defense.  We ask that you take judicial notice of the clear fact that my client has robbed only a very very tiny proportion of the world population of banks and credit unions. Defense rests.”

I Beg To Differ. I disagree with the critics of this defense. In fact, I love the idea. Often, it would have pulled my chestnuts out of the fire: “Your Honor, think of the many times I did not exceed the speed limit by 45 miles per hour in that neighborhood, and that particular neighborhood is only one among millions of neighborhoods in this great country of ours, a country known for the fairness, in statistical terms, of its judicial system.” But, I’m not running for President. (Yet)

Bill Clinton could have used it. “I did not have sexual relations with that woman” could have been expressed in this fashion, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, when one considers how many women there are in the world with whom I also could not have had sexual relations with either.” End of story. If the proportion defense existed then, well, Bill Clinton would still be President of the United States, and Monica Lewinsky would be Chief of Staff (no pun intended).

Newt Gingrich could employ it virtually every day of his life. “I did not say what you just viewed on that video. Just consider for a moment just how many videos are out there where someone is not shown blatantly and outrageously straying from the exact truth. And what is the exact truth anyway? Was it when Bill Clinton said . . .” You get the idea. Gingo’s hopeless.

It would be a boon to Mitt Romney! Imagine this page in his campaign brochure.

Many Have Claimed That I Am A “Flip Flopper,”
Particularly On The Issue Of Abortion. 
However, In Relative Terms, My Stance Is As Solid As Mount Rushmore.
 
 Consider This:
There Are Literally Thousands Of Positions, Highly Nuanced,
That I Might Take On The Abortion Issue.
 
I Chose To Take Only Eight:

  • Have The Abortion,
  • Don’t Have The Abortion,
  • Go To Jail For Having The Abortion,
  • Be Commended For Protecting A Woman’s Right To Choose,
  • The Right To Choose Is A Ticket To Hell,
  • If Men Had Babies, I’d Support Free Abortion Clinics,
  • The Fallopian Tube Is A Legal Person, And
  • Where Is The Vagina, Anyway?

With this defense Rod Blagojevich would today be in the U.S. Senate. Tom DeLay would be making a fine living dancing with rich old ladies at Vegas nightclubs. And Anthony Weiner . . . well, that’s another story altogether. . . And Nixon! “My fellow Americans, the Bureau of Justice Statistics
of the Department of Justice has just informed me that, in statistical terms, I am not a crook.”

So, if you ever think you’re not quite the best Dad or Mom in the world;  if you sometimes claim a little more for charitable deductions than you should;  if you consume three dozen glazed donuts in one sitting as a reward for doing so well during the first week of your diet, just remember this:

Statistics is your friend 

Please, SOMEONE Ask Herman Cain to Define “Sexual Harassment”!

Michael MatheronLeave a comment

November 7, 2011

Hmmmm . . . . . . .

So far, we’ve heard very little from Mr. Cain about his actions that led to sexual harassment claims back in the late ’90s when he led the National Restaurant Association. Yesterday, he told reporters he simply was not going to answer any questions on the matter. O.K. Perhaps, though, he’d answer a very general question, “What, sir, do you think ‘sexual harassment’ is? What’s your understanding of the real world meaning of the term?” His answer would help us understand what he means when he repeatedly says, “I have never sexually harassed anyone.” So, please, some brave soul with a press pass, ask him! . . . .

Here’s one of his, sort of, references to sexual harassment, according to Politico where Cain was referring to the Civil Rights Act of 1991, where Congress created the right of victims of intentional discrimination, including sexual harassment, to seek money damages in court, rather than just a court order: “This bill opens the door for opportunists who will use the legislation to make some money,” Cain, then CEO of Godfather’s Pizza, told Nation’s Restaurant News. “I’m certainly for civil rights, but I don’t know if this bill is fair because of what we’ll have to spend to defend ourselves in unwarranted cases.” 
 
Potentially, Mr. Cain’s definition of what he considers to be “sexual harassment” will reveal far more than has been thus far about his character. Certainly, we’ve heard a lot from Cain himself about his present predicament, most of which can be boiled down to “Quit asking about that,” and “Get out of my face.” That approach, of course, is standard, and no surprise at all when a politician does it. But no one in the media has to my knowledge asked him, “Just what, Mr. Cain, do you think sexual discrimination in the workplace is? Can you provide some examples?”

 It’s time to do so. George Will once wrote, “Conservatives define themselves in terms of what they oppose.” Would that characterize Cain’s response? In any event, his answer is important. It would reveal more about his character. It could help him. It could sink him. So, please, someone ask him!

Please Give Us Some Examples of “Nothingness.”  But, like some of us think a tomato is not a fruit, but a veggie (I do, despite so-called “science”), I guess we all have our own definition of sexual harassment. Here’s the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s:

“Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitute sexual harassment when (1) submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual’s employment, (2) submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as the basis for employment decisions affecting such individual, or (3) such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual’s work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment.” [29 C.F.R. § 1604.11]

The laws prohibiting sexual discrimination were, by the time of the infamous Anita Hill-Clarence Thomas showdown, already on the books, aka The Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC definition above, as in most laws intended to have a long reach, is couched in general terms. Some phrases do appear to be commonsensical, though. “Requests for sexual favors” is one. But others, from the first sentence in the EEOC regulation, leave room for disagreement, for example: Unwelcome sexual advances, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature.

What do most of us label as verbal conduct of a sexual nature? Telling a sexually loaded joke?  Calling a woman a “babe” or a “cutie”?  These are just a few of many possibilities and remember that they apply to males as well. And, of course, women can themselves be guilty of sexual harassment. And it also covers all gender identifications.

Here’s some explicit examples deemed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to be sexual harassment. It’s from their agency-wide guidance, Understanding Workplace Harassment (FCC Staff): Examples of actions that may create sexual hostile environment harassment include: 

  • Leering, i.e., staring in a sexually suggestive manner
  • Making offensive remarks about looks, clothing, body parts
  • Touching in a way that may make an employee feel uncomfortable, such as patting, pinching or intentional brushing against another’s body
  • Telling sexual or lewd jokes, hanging sexual posters, making sexual gestures, etc.
  • Sending, forwarding or soliciting sexually suggestive letters, notes, emails, or images

Perhaps some cub reporter will ask Mr. Cain what kind of actions he considers to be sexual harassment. I think we’d all love to hear the answer.

The Herman Cain Controversies — Utah Senator Orrin Hatch Says Cain Mistreated by Media, Praises GOP Family Values. . . HUH?

Michael MatheronLeave a comment

November 3, 2011

Longtime Utah Senator Orrin Hatch has his shorts in a bunch about the media coverage of the Herman Cain allegations, claiming, among other things, that conservatives get worse treatment from the press in matters sexual scandally than the Dems. Personally, I don’t keep track, but I do enjoy this kind of news regardless of party affiliation, although I’m truly ashamed. It’s not Hatch’s belief about press treatment that gets my shorts in a bunch, though. It’s what he said next that was exceptionally misleading. . . Here’s the portion of the story related to what Hatch believes about press coverage of GOP sex scandal allegations:

Senate GOP rips media for Cain story, alleges double standard

By Alexander Bolton – 11/01/11 02:45 PM ET

Conservative politicians like Herman Cain come under more media scrutiny than liberal candidates, several Republican senators said Tuesday. The GOP senators ripped the media for its handling of anonymous sexual harassment allegations against the Republican presidential candidate, and asked whether a Democrat would face the same kind of reporting in the absence of a public accusation. “It’s easy to take potshots at conservatives,” said Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), who described the media’s treatment of the Cain story as “overdone.” Hatch argued conservative candidates often get harsher treatment from the mainstream media.”  [To read the rest just click here]

I never looked into this double standard allegation until today when I needed to thanks to Senator Hatch and his GOP cronies. Being a kindhearted soul, I limited my research to allegations of scandals amidst presidential races since the Cain controversy seems to be what caught Hatch’s eye. What I found refutes Hatch’s sense of (typical right-wing GOP) victimhood:

  • In 1987, Gary Hart’s affair with Donna Rice created a media feeding frenzy, culminating in the infamous “Monkey Business” photo that, a week later, forced Hart out of the presidential race
  • In early 1992, prior to the New Hampshire primary, Bill Clinton’s affair with Jennifer Flowers was trumpeted with enormous energy throughout the media.
  • John Edward’s extramarital affair . . . well, let’s forget about that one. . .

I think most of us can recall the media shark attack the followed these. The press treatment of these Democratic presidential candidates was far from minor as Hatch and others would have us believe.

Yet, Hatch Continued to Speak . . . A Sentence Too Far. Here’s what Hatch said next that does not pass the smell test: “Conservatives are family oriented, for the most part religious, they believe in raising children and they believe in marriage.” O.K., I’ll bite. Let’s check this out, using past and present GOP presidential candidates since 1992. I think you’ll see a pattern. 

Newt Gingrich (2008, 2012)

Rudy Giuliani (2008)

John McCain (2000, 2008)

Gary Bauer (2000)Dan Quayle (2000)

Bob Dole  (1996)

Phil Gramm (1996)

It’s not the sexual scandals themselves that steam me, we’re all human (well, mostly), and our fidelity synapses are not well-developed, but seemingly our sex wiring is full-blown manic (pardon the pun). So, as Donald Rumsfeld might say, “Sex happens.” 

What rankles most – for all of us, I think – is the hypocrisy involved. This thought, of course, is a common criticism of the right by the left. But it’s still worthwhile to remember that, for decades, “family values” has been at the core of the Republican party image. They’ve touted it from pulpit to campaign stops to the floor of the House and Senate. Entire libraries could be filled with their scribblings about “family values.” Worst of all, they’ve deigned to haughtily instruct us. Yet, as far as actually living family values rather than merely talking about them, well, as Gertrude Stein said about Oakland, California in the 1930’s, “There’s no there there.” And, Senator Hatch, their claim to family values, and that energetic hypocrisy is why they get hammered in the “lamestream media.” And who should be surprised by that?

Herman Cain Surprises Meet the Press – Calls Himself Stupid!

Michael MatheronLeave a comment

October 17, 2011

From: Meet the Press, October 16, 2011, transcript of a portion of the discussion between David Gregory and Herman Cain, arguably the front runner in the GOP presidential race for the party’s nomination.   

 MR. GREGORY: You’ve also said that stupid people are ruining America.
MR. CAIN: Yes.
MR. GREGORY: Who exactly are you talking about?
MR. CAIN: People who are uninformed. People who will not look at an alternate idea. People who are so dug in with partisanship and partisan politics. Open-mindedness is what’s going to save this country. The reason that my message is appealing is because it’s simple and people can understand it. You know, a good idea transcends party politics. But there are some people who will not even consider 9-9-9 or any other proposal if it’s coming from someone of the opposite political persuasion.

But this may be a good thing. Will Rogers once said,

If Stupidity got us into this mess,
then why can’t it get us out?

It seems to be the trend . . .

Here’s an Idea! Put the GOP Presidential Candidates on a Samoan Island!

Michael MatheronLeave a comment

July 6, 2011

Please. . .  This whole GOP primary thing is light years beyond ludicrous, but not as comical as it could be. Since all news, good and bad, is first of all entertainment, you Republicans ought to go for more. America loves fun!!!  So, simply make a small rule change in the GOP presidential nomination process and run the primaries like Survivor. Simply transport all the presently noteworthy nominees to a Samoan island and let them have at it!  Imagine the ratings! Independent voters like reality shows, and that’s the group you guys need the most in 2012.  So, don’t just sit there, get moving!  Imagine Gingo Gingrich in the Survivor Menu challenge or on an 11-mile hike.  My money’s on Mitt Romney being voted off first (or simply garroted by Bachmann).  

See what I mean?  Get on with it Republicans. The Fall 2012 voting season is almost upon us.