http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...irement-fund/2011/11/21/gIQAC0G8gN_story.html Republican Herman Cain served on the board of a Midwest utility company that paid $10.5 million to settle claims it failed to protect the retirement savings of its employees and paid another $26.5 million over claims it manipulated gas prices, potentially embarrassing episodes for a candidate running for president on his business experience. While Cain sat on the board, Aquilas stock price dropped from roughly $37.50 in 2001 to less than $5 before the company was acquired seven years later. Cain denies any wrongdoing and takes credit for helping stave off a corporate bankruptcy. The company denied wrongdoing and said it paid to avoid the cost of litigation. Another payout to avoid scandal...oops I meant to avoid costly court fees.
I would say crass rather than crude.. What is his interest in Georgia farmers?? http://www.politicalforum.com/curre...p-losses-could-top-1-billion.html#post4739008
I dont think the article or my post blame the world wide economic collapse on Herman Cain. Stay on topic or go troll someplace else please.
they may have gouged the consumers, and (*)(*)(*)(*)ed the employees out of their pensions.... but at least the corp didnt go into bankruptcy! lol
I'm having trouble with people even believing that Obama is the cause of just America's economic problems.
Yes BVWC, it appears you are the last one here that still runs to Cain's defense. Of course you didn't defend him, you tried changing the subject but you showed you are one of his few supporters left out there.
I don't see how this is supposed to be a hit towards Cain. Last time I checked, board members didn't decide how consumers spent their money or how they bought stock. Last time I checked, board members also didn't take the blame when companies had economic troubles, seeing as how people like the CEO and other high-profile people within the company are responsible for more decision making then the board. But hey, I just look at economics, who am I to say what the media spits (or should I say s*its) out. Also, are you seriously STILL trying to say he's guilty of those sexual harassment charges? Even after the families of the women that stepped forward said that the women in question were bad people in general? And after Cain said he was tired of repeating the truth and was going forward with his message? I'm not even a Cain supporter and I knew when it was time to drop the "HE'S A SEXUAL DEVIANT" crap.
And Hillary sat on the board of Wal-Mart, does that on it's face disqualify her or at least rule her out as a Democrat nominee?
We are not talking about consumers here. We are talking about employees that were led to believe that the company stock was a sound investment. I am all for personal choices leading to personal consequences, but when the company withholds information about the true economic standing of the company I see that as a problem. That was only 1 part of the article, the other payout was because of price fixing for gas prices. The board may not be the only ones involved in running a company, but they sure share some of the blame for the companies actions. After all Cain claims that he and the board saved the company from bankruptcy so the board must have had a hand in operations. I dont think my post said anything about Cain's guilt or innocence in regards to the sexual harassment allegations. This is another matter, the only similarity is that it involved payouts. I didnt say that the payouts were his fault, but as a member of the board he has some responsibility in this. If he is such a great business mind, why did this business go to (*)(*)(*)(*)? After all we are talking about a utility company for Christ sakes. How hard is it to run a profitable monopoly? For all you Cain lovers out there (if any of you are left), I will be glad to continue posting his gaffes and anything else that makes him look bad until he drops below 10% in the polls and is no longer a threat to our country. He is and has always been a horrible choice for the Republican candidate for president. In fact I would only rate Bachman lower on the list. Lets nominate an electible candidate than has a chance of beating Obama. Everyone says that anyone can beat Obama, but in reality only about half of the candidates could. The American people may be fed up with Obama but that doesnt mean they will elect someone like Cain, Bachman, or Paul.
There you go again with the "disqualify" term. No where ever have I said that Cain shouldn't be allowed to run. This is getting really old. You must think that we can only hear about a candidates positives and never their negatives. Is that how you get a well informed opinion? Not me, I say let me hear it all and then I will decide what is important to me and make my decision. Every candidate has good and bad, if you honestly think that Cain can do no wrong then there is no saving you. I support Gingrich and Romney, both are far from perfect but I have looked at the information available to me and decided what is most important and formed my opinions from there. Will you still be supporting Cain long after he has withdrawn from the race?
