|
ABOUT THE QUICK TAKE Every Friday, the Quick Take columnists will offer their views on an issue of significance to American University. Notable members of the campus community will also be invited to contribute to this new feature. Suggestions for topics and other ideas from readers are welcome and encouraged, so please submit comments to edpage@theeagleonline.com. |
Throughout the past two weeks, Herman Cain has weathered multiple accusations the he sexual harassed multiple women while the CEO of the National Restaurant Association. Four different women have alleged that Cain acted inappropriately toward them, while two went public this week. Yet despite the media firestorm, Cain remains a republican front runner, only a few points behind Mitt Romney. Why has Cain been able to whether the scandal? How should people react to sexual harassment allegations? Our Quick Take columnists weigh in:
Derek Siegel
Sarah Palazzolo
It's time to take sexual harassment seriously
Nick Field
The rise of the incredibly arrogant candidate
Looking for a decent leader
By Derek Siegel
As Cain emerges as a front-runner for the Republican nomination, his campaign suffers an unexpected twist: three different women, more than a decade after the alleged incidents, have released simultaneous accusations of sexual assault. Do I think there’s politics involved? Of course. Even unproven and vehemently denied by the candidate himself, these allegations have shaken the playing field.
But should the claims be dismissed as political froth? Never. No man, including Herman Cain, is above the law. If these allegations contain even a shred of truth, he must face the consequences. But what would happen if Cain apologized to these women? What if he released a press conference denouncing his past behavior but affirming his renewed commitment to lead our nation with dignity?
We’d boot the bastard right out of Washington. If he didn’t respect these three women, then he’s certainly not fit for office.
What’s more interesting than Cain’s response to the scandal is our response to it. When did we become so interested in the personal lives of our candidates? I’m just as guilty as anyone else. I never bothered to read Cain’s 9-9-9 plan for economic reform, but I’ve scoured the Internet for the latest news on his sex scandal. This is just one facet in an unspoken nation disagreement as to what makes a “good” leader. For some people it’s all about the policies. They’ve just a check list of their own—education, immigration, diplomacy, etc—that they compare to the candidate’s platform. For other people, though, politicians are more than the sum of their policies.
There’s the old stereotype that you can’t trust a politician. But I think, when we go to the ballots on Election Day, we like to vote for men and women we can trust. We want to have a person that we can trust to lead America to greatness sitting in the Oval Office, but a person we can also trust on a more personal level. While Cain’s personal life makes little difference in his ability to serve as our next President, it does affect the way we think of him as an individual. For better or worse, the Presidency has evolved to a position of morality as well as a position of power. Americans need to know that their leaders are honest and justice-oriented. And it’s hard for us to feel that way about a man who has been accused of such indecent behavior.
We look for our leaders to be exemplars of decency as well as expert politicians. Idealism, as I see it, isn’t dead because we’re still looking for that knight in shining armor.
Derek Siegel is a Freshman in SIS and a Quick Take columnist for The Eagle.
It's time to take sexual harassment seriously
By Sarah Palazzolo
And people wonder why there are so few women in U.S. politics.
Herman Cain's recent scandal just goes to show that men in power appear to have unchecked opportunities to indulge themselves in whatever sexual fantasy is convenient: Monica Lewinsky doesn’t even begin to address the gravity of sexual harassment in federal politics.
According to the Washington Post’s history of political sex scandals, since Clinton in 1998, there have been twelve federal legislators and state governors, all men, involved in major public sex scandals, not including the recent example of Herman Cain. What is even more interesting is that none – none! – of the twelve were convicted or forced out of office. They lost the next election or chose to resign rather than face the electorate - some were re-elected anyway. But none of these offenders faced disciplinary action or direct legal consequences.
I think one reason that men get away with this kind of thing in politics is that sexual harassment is not considered (by dominant male discourses) a “serious” issue. Theoretically, debates focus on policy goals rather than personal lives, but of course everyone loves a good story, so personal lives are dragged to the forefront of any campaign. The women who press charges against political tycoons are caught in a war of he said-she said where the campaign denies allegations and the burden of proof falls to the victim. Harassment victims are belittled in the media as unreliable sources, gold-diggers, malicious campaign saboteurs. Women are told that perhaps they misunderstood the politician’s sense of humor. A little sex scandal here or there is like comic relief, an interesting plot twist in the soap opera of national politics.
If sexual harassment is not a serious issue, men like Herman Cain will continue to feel it is appropriate to refer to the former Speaker of the House as “Princess Nancy.” It will continue to be permissible, somehow, for national media to discuss Hillary Clinton’s laugh, criticize her hairstyle, and analyze gendered stereotypes about her leadership abilities.
On his campaign website, Cain calls the recent sex allegations “trivial nonsense” and reminds his audience that “we actually have serious matters to talk about.” He then goes on to describe how he refuses to play by the rules of the “warped,” “absurd” process of presidential selection and freedom of journalistic expression.
I’d like to encourage women in politics at any level – campus, grassroots, local, and even national – to borrow a line from Cain: Let’s refuse to play by unspoken, unjust political “rules” that have warped and corrupted our democracy. In order to solve the gendered representation gap, the electorate needs to speak out so that women’s issues will be taken seriously.
Sarah Palazzolo is a Freshman in the CAS and a Quick Take columnist for The Eagle.
The rise of the incredibly arrogant candidate
By Nick Field
As it’s become more and more inevitable that Mitt Romney is going to be the 2012 Republican presidential nominee, conservatives have been looking for literally anybody to replace him. So, it shouldn’t be surprising that they would eventually turn their sights to Herman Cain, the man who had always been the funny, charismatic long-shot in the primary debates.
Cain’s infamous 9-9-9 plan captured the electorate’s attention and vaulted him to the top of the polls. Now, however, the electorate is getting a look at the real Herman Cain and their reaction is almost as serious as the accusations leveled against Cain. Instead of calling for Cain to be pushed out, they have instead tried to hold this man of incredible arrogance up as a victimized hero.
Of course we really should have known Cain’s life and career were just one uninterrupted episode of uninhibited hubris. An early clue was the title of his autobiography “This is Herman Cain!” and the fact that he spent all his time selling his book instead of campaigning in Iowa and New Hampshire. I know I realized it when he was questioned on the inaccuracies and ineptitude of his 9-9-9 plan and he, with no further explanation, responded “The problem with that analysis is that it is incorrect”. Then, there was the illuminating revelation that his staff had been issued a memo which stated that when traveling with Cain “Do not speak to him unless spoken to.” And finally there was that incomprehensible and oft-mocked smoking ad. So when we heard the allegations that Cain had sexually harassed employees, we shouldn’t have been surprised, nor should we have been when his response was to attack the victims.
Ultimately, it shouldn’t be surprising that Republicans have backed Cain and his despicable and disqualifying conduct, over those who are truly victims. And yet they defend Cain and his belief that his accusers are all part of some type of DNC-sponsored “liberal media” conspiracy. Cain’s joined himself to Clarence Thomas; another man correctly accused of sexual harassment, and invoked Thomas’ insulting term of a “high-tech lynching”.
Now we are faced with the sad realization that the Herman Cain campaign is, and always has been, more about increasing his profile and stroking his ego than running for President. Cain is now running for martyr instead of President of the United States, and the worse he has acted, the more support he has gained. What a shame for all of us that our presidential nominating process now aids and abets those least qualified to run for the highest office in the land.
Nick Field is a senior in SPA and a Quick Take columnist for The Eagle.
