I'm sorry, but everyone I know in politics (and many who never pay attention) can't stop talking about Herman Cain. Bad enough (in terms of judgment) to run for president thinking no one will ever find out your company settled not one but two cases of sexual harassment. Bad enough to think you could stonewall the press on the whole thing. Bad enough to blame everyone but yourself when the stories started coming out. Bad enough not to assume that if there was one and then two, then there might be three and then four, and that you would have to find some way — like contrition — to stem the bleeding.
But to come out and call four women liars?
Forget about sexual harassment (for a minute). This is no longer solely a matter of very bad behavior, of abuse of power, of arrogance and insensitivity.
I know the nasty emails will start coming. I'm sorry. But Cain is too dumb to be president.
I have a rule of three for those fighting charges of sexual abuse. One woman may be crazy. Two women make it harder: Could they both be nuts or sluts? But once you get to three, you've got real trouble. Once you get to four, it's time for some major mea culpas.
What should Cain have done? Easy. He should have taken responsibility. He should have stood up and said, sooner and not later, that he was sorry for the hurt he caused; that he had learned from it; that he simply didn't understand that what he might have found to be flattering or flirtatious was, to the women involved, anything but; that he preferred to settle these cases rather than fight them because he did not wish to inflict further pain, did not wish to drag these women through the mud with him; that he did not want to force them to keep working at a job where they were uncomfortable or worse. As we used to say, he should have gone to the Betty Ford Center.
The first rule of politics is to stem the bleeding. Don't turn a one-day story into a two-day story. Don't turn a scandal into a circus.
With his press conference denying everything, claiming that he was the victim, not the women, and that he never even met No.
4, Cain ensured that this scandal will not be going away anytime soon. He ensured that people like me would shake their heads and head for the word processor. He got himself in a fight he cannot win, one that will only go from bad to worse. Send in the clowns.
I know. Bill Clinton "did not have sex with that woman." But he was already president — not a newcomer to the political scene whom no one knew much about. She never claimed it was anything but consensual. He never paid her off. There was one of her. No one ever was better at damage control than President Clinton. No candidate in my lifetime has been worse at it than Herman Cain.
A few simple points. If nothing happened, why did two women receive settlements? A year's salary is hardly a token payment. And when that annual salary turns out to be somewhere in the neighborhood of $35,000 and the man involved is the boss, you're talking about precisely the kind of inequality that goes to the very core of why we have laws against sexual harassment: abuse of power.
A few more simple points. I know Gloria Allred. Gloria is a friend of mine. I don't always agree with her, but she is smart and shrewd and knows her business. She doesn't stand up there and risk her reputation without doing some checking. She doesn't hold a press conference based on nothing more than an unverified story. Mark my words. Call her client a liar, and she will come right back with the proof. Cain never met her? Watch for the chapter and verse, the corroborating witnesses, the friends she told at the time, the folks who saw her in the restaurant or talked to her within hours, long before Herman Cain was a household name.
Everyone makes mistakes, although most of us don't make the same one as often as Cain did. Was he arrogant? Was he insensitive? Was he a boor? Is the sky blue?
But the issue is no longer just sex or insensitivity or abuse of power. Honesty and judgment go to the core of character, and character is at the core of the judgments people make when they vote for president. Cain has put his honesty and character on the line in a fight he can't win and that won't end anytime soon. And he has no one to blame but himself.
To find out more about Susan Estrich and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2011 CREATORS.COM

|
 |
Comments
|
11 Comments | Post Comment
|
|
Dear Ms. Estrich,
Former President Bill Clinton "got away with it" because the Liberal establishment SUPPORTED him!
How soon you conveniently forget Bill Clinton & friends tried to arrange jobs for Monica, as well as destroy the reputations of good people accusing him of doing wrong.
No wonder I write about you being a HYPOCRITE!
Comment: #1
Posted by: Dennis
Wed Nov 9, 2011 10:34 AM
|
|
|
|
Susan: Why should have clinton been excused because he was president? So that he could teach millions of young girls that oral sex is not sex as POTUS? Oh, and you forgot to mention the Broaddrick lady, who clinton raped by biting her so hard on the lips that he counseled to get some ice on 'em. And how about obama's flings with Larry Sinclair, and Vera Baker? Susan, we need a chainsaw to cut through the hypocrisy. And, it looks like Cain's accusers are what you call "nuts and sluts", and they are all from Chicago, a place where Cain has never lived. Susan, do you have any idea how corrupt and/or stupid you appear to anyone by braindead democrats. Bill
Comment: #2
Posted by: Bill
Wed Nov 9, 2011 4:20 PM
|
|
|
|
Estrich is at last seen in her true colors. As I have consistently posted she is a loathesome hypocrite of the first order. Estrich has over the years turned a blind eye to, nay supported Democrat rapists and abusers of women. Think no further than her unwavering support for Clinton against whom there are highly credible accusatiuons of rape and proven actual serial abuse of women and for Ed Kennedy a serial abuser of women and indeed a murderer of a woman. Estrich, out of one side of her mouth was happy to attack those women who came forward to denounce the then Abuser in Chief (Clinton) and yet out of the other of her mouth is happy attack a black man on the basis of unproven highly questionable anectdotes from certain highly questionable women all linked to the Democrat machine and all from the Chicago area. Estirch is simply a willing and eager participant of the high tech lynch mob out for Cain. Why? Because Democrats and progressives, like Estrich cannot abide the notion of a black conservative man leaving the plantation that the Democrats have constructed for blacks and upon which they must remain. Look back at how Dems and libs like Estrich have treated 'minorities" that do not bend the knee to their identity politics. Think only of Clarence Thomas. No not only is Estrich a hypocrite but like the rest of her progressive fascist clique she is an out and out racist.
Comment: #3
Posted by: joseph wright
Thu Nov 10, 2011 6:15 AM
|
|
|
|
Susan, you still don't get it. Cain did not authorize or pay the settlements. These happen at corporations like mine, often. One guy had three paid for by the company. He was guilty but has friends in high places.
The Democratic machine, which you defend, is so afraid of losing votes in the Black community to Herman Cain. He is their biggest fear. Why not fess up to that. I am ashamed of your last two columns as I always thought you were a reasonable person. No more. You are bought and paid for by the Liberal media and I see you are now exposed. I am disappointed in you.
Comment: #4
Posted by: Marc Scheel
Thu Nov 10, 2011 7:42 AM
|
|
|
|
1.Who's paying the $200/hr lawyers?
2. Feminism has created a situation where men can no longer 'flirt' with a women in order to get to know her,
date her and marry her. That's a genuine reason why women complain they can't fine a good man!
3. Susan is a liberal , enough said!
Comment: #5
Posted by: Early
Thu Nov 10, 2011 8:02 AM
|
|
|
|
In recent decades from Kennedy, to Clarence Thomas through Clinton, cases of sexual harrassment, inappropriate sexual behavior, sexual addictions, to many other Congressional sexual misadventures these have been mishandled, covered up, exploited in the media and so on. Few have been handled responsibly and so we wind up in a mess, with yet one more issue used to divide the parties and clutter up media space with accusations, blaming and excuses.
So the issue continues, never honestly addressed and and ever resolved. Women (and men) come forward only to be discounted and labeled "liars". Look at the church scandles of ongoing child molestation cases, and still the Church protects its power and throws money at the problem (money it receives from its parishioners the world over. Power is protected, how one appears is protected over how one really is. Some get fellow power brokers to join them in character assasination of the one(s) who has/have come forward (as was done with Anita Hill). Some stand before a crowd of known admirerers and crow about their innocence by attacking those who have come forward, knowing they will be applauded for their bravado. Still the issue does not get honestly addressed and the media frenzy goes on and on. There is lack of accountability on all sides. Take ClintonL: He has yet to tell the youth of this country that oral sex is sex and that because of his behavior thousands of especially middle school children indulge in his behavior sadly spreading std's yet another way. Take Monica Lewinsky: She was young, but
she had a responsibility to be more judicious in her behavior and less 'star struck" around power. Her behavior too was lacking in character. Now take Herman Cain, he has choices. He has been accused. That is ackward and embarrassing--potentially damaging. But why make it worse with counter acusations? What is needed is a show of character. Let him tell the public that he and his attorney's are looking into the matter with the four women and when all are ready to bring forth the truth to the public he will then address it. We have a country of blamers, power hungry blamers. cover up artists, spin masters, propagandists. When will the fresh air of true accountability ever blow across this country again?
Comment: #6
Posted by: Carole Grant-Fogarty
Thu Nov 10, 2011 8:48 AM
|
|
|
|
Dear Ms. Estrich,
Just what do you consider a 'nasty' email? It appears to me most of the comments disagree with you based on your hipocricy where when it's a Liberal [Bill Clinton] it's okay, but if it's a Conservative, in this case Mr. Cain it's down right evil.
As Bill stated in the above comments, just why are you giving former president Bill Clinton a free pass?
I don't know if you supported Bill Clinton during the impeachment proceedings or not. You do appear to now. If you wrote or stated he was guility please let us know.
Many good people believe based on the evidence 'semen stain' that he lied under oath, and of course lied to federal officers about not having sex with Monica both being impeachable offences.
Nuff Said...Dennis
Comment: #7
Posted by: Dennis
Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:01 AM
|
|
|
|
Re: Carole Grant-Fogarty
Carole you seem not to understand. Liberals, progressive, Democrats and those that vote for them or enable them all share one thing in common, to wit, they are strangers to truth. For those of that ilk, the truth is a concept that they have yet to encounter. It matters not to Estrich, Obama, Axelrod, libs, dems, progressives whether there is any truth to the allegations as against Cain or not. Making such allegations unfounded as they likely are and drumming up some gulible floozie or dem operative to support it are standard operating tactics for the left. In doing so it is the left that abuses the victim and the accuser. There is no way that Cain can disprove the allegations and those like the loathesome Estrich and the even more loathesome Axelrod who used the same tactics to have Obama elected Senator know that to be true, especially as the dishonest liberal media will continue to keep the pot boiling. Even if Cain could prove the allegations entirely unfounded or wholly exagerated the likes of Estrich and the media will simply continue to refer to him as "Herman Cain, against whom allegations of sexual abuse were once made" or similar. Estrich has outed herself as the low life pond scum she truly is.
Comment: #8
Posted by: joseph wright
Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:36 AM
|
|
|
|
Susan,
I always enjoy your thoughtful columns even though your political perspective is different from mine. You make good points in a polite, respectful manner.
The Cain thing is a little trickier than meets the eye. As a military officer and later a business executive, I often had to independently investigate complaints relating to personnel matters. I note a couple of things: the firing officer, often an executive by policy, always get accused that the firing was motivated by some misbehavior. Sexual harassment, because it is a bit vague, has become a favorite (not to say it doesn't happen and needs to be dealt with). Second, an amazing number of these challenges to firing are settled with cash to avoid further legal expense - a sad but persuasive result of our litigious society - "it's just business."
Comment: #9
Posted by: Kent
Fri Nov 11, 2011 5:49 AM
|
|
|
|
"Herman Caine is too dumb to be president". I couldn't have said it better myself. Thank You !!!!!
Comment: #10
Posted by: Gary
Fri Nov 11, 2011 9:19 PM
|
|
|
|
Re: Kent
As a former [now retired] chief union steward, I can whole-heartedly attest to this practice of sexual harassment being used as a club.
Nuff Said...Dennis
Comment: #11
Posted by: Dennis
Sat Nov 12, 2011 12:09 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|