Tuesday, November 1, 2011

Rand Paul on the Cain 'Scandal'

Senator Rand Paul has a strong opinion on the harassment 'scandal' buzzing in MSM.

“There are people now who hesitate to tell a joke to a woman in the workplace, any kind of joke, because it could be interpreted incorrectly,” he told the National Review. “I don’t. I’m very cautious.”

“In my election, I had an anonymous girl from college — who I still don’t know — make accusations against me,” he told NRO. “I don’t think you should print stuff like that. To libel someone’s character and not put your name on it, I think is inappropriate and shouldn’t be printed.”


  1. Good for Dr. Paul. The last gentleman on the national stage.

  2. Yes, it is strange for a politician, especially one who has an interest in seeing Cain destroyed, defend him. Rand may not be Ron, but he is a model of integrity compared to the shit that infects DC.

  3. It doesn't appear that the women approached the media. If I understand the events, someone (Democrats or Republican opposition) tipped Politico on this, and they chased it down. The women now want to be released from their non-disclosures in order to speak out since they feel Cain is libeling them.

    Something doesn't make sense here. Any decent lawyer would have made the non-disclosure section of the settlement 2-way. Neither the company nor the complainants would have been allowed to speak on the issue. Cain, as a high-level executive for the National Restaurant Association, would have been under a general non-disclosure of company business upon his separation even if he didn't sign the original settlement. So, either the women has shitty lawyers, or Cain is busting non-disclosures left and right. If he's doing that, I'd think the women would be free to respond without recourse from the NRA unless the NRA takes immediate legal action against Cain.

  4. The whole sphere of sexual harassment is so odd. A couple of women discussing it on NPR were referencing all the "gray" areas of sexual harassment. I am a woman, and if my boss said sleep with me or you're fired, I would go to their superior and attempt to have them fired. If the superior backed up my boss, I'd quit. Why would I want to work at a company that hires based on sex?

    Also, why would I deserve some payout for on this? I don't own that job. The company owns the job. I can take it or leave it. Ultimately, the way in which the company wants to run the place is their business. Maybe they would make money hiring sluts only. Who knows? I would judge not, and find a better job.

    Now if the boss tried to assault me physically against my will or threaten me, that is another matter entirely.

  5. Either Romney or Obama is to blame for this I bet.

  6. @Richard Fitz - I agree with the jist of what you're saying...

    But Rand Paul here isn't specifically defending Cain. He's commenting on baseless and/or unprovable accusations, libel/smearing...journalistic integrity.

    And this sort of shit slinging in general - as any Wenzel reader knows - is a distraction/smokescreen. Cain is a laughable candidate for office on his own merits; he was clueless that the economy was on the verge of implosion one month before it imploded in 2008. Isn't this a small detail that should be hammered home day after day. Instead, we're talking about some possible scandal with flimsy facts.