Posted on 11/01/2011 7:53:42 PM PDT by bullypulpit
If you read between the lines of the various news reports about the Cain operation, the picture becomes clearer to me every day. The latest dust up about the sexual harassment of employees confirms it.
Leading up to the sex scandal, we had the clues. Now I know it to be so, that Herman Cain is an ass, and he's reckless.
The first clue came just after Cain placed poorly in the Iowa straw polls. We heard from disgruntled former Cain staffers:
Jim Zeiler, the regional field director who was one of the five disgruntled staffers who left, explained his decision with a devastating assessment of Cain, saying the candidate was more interested in jet-setting than running a campaign that incorporates traditional grass-roots techniques.
"He’s not inquisitive. He wants to be in front of the adoring crowds, but he doesn’t seem to be interested in the issues," said Zeiler, a former regional field director for Cain’s campaign.
(Source: Politico, "Cain's campaign crash continues at Ames")
Mr. Zeiler was a disgruntled former staffer. This kind of tripe is expected in today's coarse society. No one gets asked to leave, or quits in anger, without throwing the former boss under the bus. If you've ever employed people, you know this. A good friend of mine, an employer in the retail industry, told me that his strategy when interviewing potential new hires is to ask himself "How long will it be before this person screws me," not if he/she will screw me. The "screw" is inevitable.
So, it's easy to dismiss this accusation as the disgruntled ex-employee getting his last jab. The "screw."
Since Cain staffer Jim Zeiler has left, however, we have seen how Herman Cain isn't very sharp on the issues. He certainly isn’t 'presidential material smart.' I only posted five gaffes here. I have 10-20 more. Electric fences, anyone? Do you think he's serious about learning the issues? I don't. My radar was still searching, though.
Next, we hear that Herman Cain doesn't want staffers to speak to him unless those staffers are spoken to them by Cain first. Apparently this rule is enforced when staffers are chauffeuring the candidate around. The New York Times sources that accusation from an intercepted email in the reporter's hands that originated from campaign leadership. Was it from "The Smoking Man"?
For goodness sake, the poor drivers for Cain are probably star-struck young interns or volunteers. Do barely paid, or volunteer campaign workers deserve to be treated that way?
To be fair, Cain explained that he does tell people driving him to shut up when he's preparing for a speech. In this Right Scoop video, he's all chuckles about it. I thought that it was reasonable. Maybe. My radar was honing in, though.
I re-read the Times article tonight, in light of the sex scandal. The article details more arrogant behavior.
Does this sound like someone who should be leading in the GOP nomination polls?
After all of the staff revelations, we now have the sex scandal. Viewing the scandal in a vacuum, it's easy to run to Cain's defense. My initial reaction was that this was Clearance Thomas 2.0, and we cannot let this stand. This is Herman Cain, a conservative black man deserving of our support against the evil marauders in the mainstream media.
However, when viewed through the prism of earlier reports of Cain's egomaniacal behavior, the sex scandal makes perfect sense. My radar locked on.
Cain is arrogant and reckless. He mistreats people working for him. Why would not Cain's penchant for employee mistreatment also include sexual harassment? This is especially true of the powerful, arrogant CEO versus the weak, insignificant female employees.
What is more, regardless of Cain's waffling denials of the sex scandal's ingredients, there are not one, but two incidents. One would think that a powerful, calculating CEO would figure out what went wrong the first time, and avoid a second accusation.
Two accusations reinforces my point, that Cain is arrogant and reckless. He doesn't believe the rules apply to him. Why not invite a young employee to his hotel room?
Radar locked. Fox One!
Herman Cain is not ready to be our Republican standard bearer.
I am talking about citizenship that goes through the process. That I think most conservatives would agree on. I am not in favor of giving citizenship away like one would go get a Social Security number. Since I never had to go though such a citizenship process, I have no idea what it requires. Do you?
“Texas makes a PROFIT off the illegals that enter college so it is not a taxpayer issue. “
Prove that.
Students Who Qualified For In-State Benefits Paid Approximately $32.7 Million In Tuition and Fees In FY 2010, A Net Gain Of $11.07 Million. According to the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board: “Institutions of higher education report students who completed an affidavit paid approximately $32.7 million in tuition and fees in Fiscal Year 2010.” [Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, October 2011]
Removing The Tuition Benefit Will Have An Estimated “Net Loss Of Almost $92 Million In Tuition In Fiscal Year 2016 Alone.” According to Texas immigration attorney Susan Nelson: “A law was proposed in the 2011 legislative session that would have required undocumented students to pay non-resident tuition. The Higher Education Coordinating Board estimated that almost 20,000 students would be affected by the change, and calculated that the state’s institutions of higher learning would suffer a net loss of almost $92 million in tuition in fiscal year 2016 alone.” [Texas Immigration Lawyer Blog, 9/25/11]
WSJ: Undocumented Immigrants In Texas “Are More Likely To Bear A Larger Share Of The Tax Burden Than Their Counterparts In Most Other States.” According to the Wall Street Journal:
Immigration status aside, state residents are thought to be deserving of a subsidy because they pay sales taxes, property taxes and other fees to support state institutions that nonstate residents don’t pay. Especially in a state like Texas that has no income tax, illegal aliens are more likely to bear a larger share of the tax burden than their counterparts in most other states. [Wall Street Journal, 9/27/11]
You: “Trying to ‘blame’ the legislature for this bill would mean you think he is a weak Executive. So ... is he an Open Borders & Amnesty supporter, or ... was he just too weak an Executive to stop this Open Borders & Amnesty law ?”
He signed the bill because that is obviously what Texans wanted.
He represents the people of Texas.
Your argument is flawed: Should Obama pass another Stimulus Bill because he feels it is the right thing to do even though the American People do not want it?
A Government Official is suppose to Represent the People and that is what Governor Perry did.
You: was he just too weak an Executive to stop this Open Borders & Amnesty law ?
Your really losing your credibility here. It is not an open border or amnesty law at all. It has to do with education and it has to do with dealing with a consequence of the Federal Government not doing it’s job of securing the border.
You really do have a problem with putting the blame where it belongs and that is OBAMA.
He refuses to secure the border, refuses to deport, refuses to send more Guard and on top of it all Obama and gang are running guns to the drug cartels across the border.
What is so hard to understand about that?
You: Since there are only a fixed number of total seats available in state universities, that means the same number were unavailable for citizens.
Or did you think colleges just accept everyone who applies ?
Every post you make to me, you end in a snide remark, and try to belittle me.
I think the applicants with the best grade averages will get the first seats whether they are in-state or out-of-state.
What State do you live in? And do you not like the Universities in your State? Or is Texas the only state with Universities acceptable to you?
LOL!
He would be a much better POTUS than Cain.
“Also, this puts those students on a track towards citizenship.”
So you admit that Perry favors amnesty for illegals ? Thank you, that’s more honest than most Perry supporters are on this issue. Conservatives who DO NOT support amnesty and who ARE NOT for Open Borders should not support Perry, as he has shown himself as an aid and abet to illegal activity.
These students did not commit a crime.
The United States Government allows these students to apply for a permanent resident status. It is like a green card but it is permanent with no expiration.
Perry favors Students who have lived in Texas most of their lives and were brought over by illegals parents when they were young OR their parents visa’s expired to obtain a permanent resident status which makes them a legal citizen. The Students or Kids committed NO CRIME.
Many of them have brothers and sisters who were born in this country (anchor babies) and are American Citizens.
{Perry did not make that law either}
Perry is against Amnesty.
Perry is against Open Borders.
Perry is FOR securing the border.
Perry is against the Anchor Baby Law.
Perry signed Texas Law requiring American Citizen proof to vote.
Perry signed Texas Law that only American Citizen can obtained a Texas Drivers License.
Perry put Texas Ranger Recon Teams, Texas National Guard and Texas TXDOT Officers on the border with equipment.
Perry used Texas Taxpayers money ($400 million) to secure the border. On your behalf and all other non border states.
He is on record doing and saying all of the above.
I am watching him now. You watch. Perry’s gonna run away with the nomination. He’s on fire, and extremely focused. It just took him a while to get the campaign engine chuggin’.
It is an excellent interview with Hannity.
Joe
This isn't a court room. It's a presidential race. I pointed to clues that Herman Cain was reckless and arrogant. I don't need proof beyond a reasonable doubt. I made my case, and it looks like a lot of people were either 1.) concerned that my editorial rang true and attacked me, usually in a non-serious way, or 2.) Agreed with me.
Welcome to the First Amendment, baby!
You are right. We have a hare and tortoise race right now between Cain and Newt and Perry will make a sprint to the front when the others falter well before the finish line. End of the day? A Perry/Gingerich ticket.
“Well he has led the nation......”
LOLOLOLOLOL Texas leads itself with little or no help from the weak powers governor.....to suggest that Perry has been a national leader the past 10 years is laughable......
Sorry, but I’ve had my BS innoculation this year.
I think of the three aforementioned “turtles”, Cain, Gingrich, and Perry, the turtle with the biggest game plan on the ground gets to the finish line first, and that turtle may turn out to be a pretty hairy rabbit with some pretty quick feet that runs past the RomneyRabbit, who cheated by taking a five year head start (-;
Perry could’t make friends in the Women’s house of detention with a handful of pardons.
Give it up! His Presidential aspirations are finished.
He doesn’t have the intangible “ IT !”
He blew his chance!
When you have to ask “ is or is he not drunk ? “ at a public appearance, it’s time to hang it up.
It might be time to come back down to earth and get behind a Candidate that can defeat Barak Obama!
And the USAF said you were sane enough to be trusted with bombers?
... and nukes!
It requires applying for permanent residency while still in your home country, waiting possibly several years for approval and a visa, then several years of not breaking any laws while here, then applying to take a citizenship test, passing it and taking the oath. If you fail to follow these steps, you are immediately deported.
If you have illegally entered the country, you are automatically a lawbreaker and cannot apply for any of this process. The only way spending money on college for illegals can ever pay off is if the illegal is given amnesty for their past crimes. Otherwise, they can never make a living here legally and pay the taxes that would repay the expense. So Perry is either knowingly flushing taxpayer money down the toilet, or he supports amnesty.
Oh, please. Is that all you got?
When confronted with logical inconsistencies and internal contradictions in your statements, brush that off with . . . the invocation of the First Amendment.
Yes, you are right. The First Amendment does allow stupid speech, among other things.
Try something original.
“It is not an open border or amnesty law at all. It has to do with education and it has to do with dealing with a consequence of the Federal Government not doing it’s job of securing the border.”
You really are blind, aren’t you ? ANYTHING that makes life easier for illegals is an incentive to other foreigners to come here illegally.
As far as the money goes, you need to ask yourself WHO profits. Not the taxpayer who is paying the bill and getting nothing back. Police stopping muggers really cuts into the profits of the muggers, doesn’t it ?
You need to go back and reread the articles you quoted and ask yourself how they can be true. Stop taking at face value every lib article you read. If these 12k illegals paid $32M in tuition and fees, then they paid less than $3K each when full tuition averaged across all state schools is $11K. So the state’s taxpayers paid the other $8K average or roughly $100M. Go to any Texas state university website and look at the difference in tuition for instate vs. nonresident, and ask yourself how each student paying less than the full tuition could ever result in MORE tuition being paid. The only way that happens is if they assume there will be fewer students. Obviously, if those spots are taken by citizens rather than illegals, and the citizens pay the same instate tuition, there is no lost revenue. So ... who is writing the articles, and what assumptions are they making to twist the math that way ? The answer is that they are written from the perspective of the school system, not the taxpayer, and that they assume those spots will not be filled with citizens if the illegals don’t take them. There is no other way for the math to work. So, the spots must stay empty, AND the cost of teachers and facilities must stay constant. Obviously, both can’t happen — either you need all those teachers and facilities because citizens filled those student rolls, or you saved the money because you needed fewer teachers and facilities.
OF COURSE a school system will receive less money from the state if there are fewer students, because fewer teachers and facilities must be paid for. “Profits” go down.
OF COURSE the taxpayer will PAY LESS IN TAXES if there are fewer students chewing up tax dollars. “Tax Bills” go down.
That’s what conservatives should want — the taxpayer paying the least amount possible while still serving its citizens.
Increasing the number of students the taxpayer must pay for is what the teachers and school administrators want, because that means more jobs and money for them.
We’ll see about the poll numbers now that they have four witnesses to the sex problem and his reaction has not been all that great. The claim that he’s brought in more money since the allegations, is from his campaign.
I don’t think anyone read my piece, because no one mentions the content. You didn’t either, but you seemed like a serious poster, so I responded.
My point was that there is a pattern of behavior of arrogance and recklessness. The sex scandal is the logical conclusion. It’s well supported. Nuff said.
Of course I read your piece.
I understand your point. But you still ignore the fact that you have zero evidence for your conclusion.
That’s fine. Just be honest and say it’s your gut talking.
And, yes, talking guts are also protected by the First Amendment.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.