What a shame for Herman Cain . . .

Warning: Illegal string offset 'status_txt' in /homepages/24/d232285398/htdocs/ddr/wordpress/wp-content/plugins/share-and-follow/share-and-follow.php on line 1997

Warning: Illegal string offset 'status_txt' in /homepages/24/d232285398/htdocs/ddr/wordpress/wp-content/plugins/share-and-follow/share-and-follow.php on line 1997

Warning: Illegal string offset 'status_txt' in /homepages/24/d232285398/htdocs/ddr/wordpress/wp-content/plugins/share-and-follow/share-and-follow.php on line 1997

Warning: Illegal string offset 'status_txt' in /homepages/24/d232285398/htdocs/ddr/wordpress/wp-content/plugins/share-and-follow/share-and-follow.php on line 1997

Warning: Illegal string offset 'status_txt' in /homepages/24/d232285398/htdocs/ddr/wordpress/wp-content/plugins/share-and-follow/share-and-follow.php on line 1997

Warning: Illegal string offset 'status_txt' in /homepages/24/d232285398/htdocs/ddr/wordpress/wp-content/plugins/share-and-follow/share-and-follow.php on line 2009

Warning: Illegal string offset 'status_txt' in /homepages/24/d232285398/htdocs/ddr/wordpress/wp-content/plugins/share-and-follow/share-and-follow.php on line 2036

Warning: Illegal string offset 'status_txt' in /homepages/24/d232285398/htdocs/ddr/wordpress/wp-content/plugins/share-and-follow/share-and-follow.php on line 1997

Warning: Illegal string offset 'status_txt' in /homepages/24/d232285398/htdocs/ddr/wordpress/wp-content/plugins/share-and-follow/share-and-follow.php on line 2026

Sometimes hustlers get hustled.

. . . that he should have to answer for thinly sourced, vaguely written news stories attacking his character.  That’s just one of the myriad problems with the establishment political press.  Aside from their blatant bias against conservatives, the lack of any objective standard for credible sourcing gives them a free hand to use whatever means at their disposal to take down any candidate at any time.  And, of course, the use of anonymous and “unnamed” sources frequently serves to shield their journalism from any meaningful critical analysis.  After all, if you don’t know who the source for a given piece of information is, you can’t very well examine that source’s credibility, can you?

But, before conservatives start rushing to the aid of the “victim” in this case, it’s worth remembering just how Herman Cain reacted when he was asked to comment on an even more thinly-sourced, vaguely-worded report in a higher-profile publication about one of his rivals for the GOP nomination.  It didn’t happen so long ago that it should have fallen down the memory hole by now.

In fact, it was just a few short weeks back that Herman Cain, when presented with the opportunity to demonstrate some semblance of personal integrity by withholding judgment against a fellow conservative, chose instead to use a flagrantly biased piece of shoddy journalism as an opportunity to gain an advantage over Rick Perry.  For all the endless complaints about dirty tricks and “another high tech lynching” from Cain’s defenders, no one can make the case that Cain is somehow above exploiting similar attacks on his conservative Republican rivals when the opportunity presents itself.

Again, let’s re-examine what he had to say to Christiane Amanpour when asked to comment on the painted-over word on a rock located on a piece of property on which Rick Perry’s family leased rights for a hunting camp in west Texas:

AMANPOUR: … And it’s been — it’s been painted over. But the report raises questions about whether this rock, this stone, with that word on it, was still on display even quite recently in the last several years. What is your reaction to that?

CAIN: My reaction is that is very insensitive…. And since Governor Perry has been going there for years to hunt, I think that it shows a lack of sensitivity for a long time of not taking that word off of that rock and renaming the place. It’s just basically a case of insensitivity.

AMANPOUR: It was painted over.

CAIN: Yes. It was painted over. But how long ago was it painted over? So I’m still saying that it is a sign of insensitivity.

Again, it’s worth keeping in mind that the story these questions were based on was even more thinly-sourced and vaguely-worded than the accusations currently being leveled against Herman Cain.  And yet, he chose to run with the implication that was embedded in the “reporting” — that Rick Perry is too tolerant of racism, and perhaps is even a little racist himself.  Given the choice to hold off on commenting on the character of one of his Republican primary opponents until more substantial detail and more credible sourcing could be unearthed, and slurring that opponent as some sort of crypto-racist, Herman Cain opted to take the latter option.

And now . . . now . . . his supporters are suddenly feeling the effects of the same journalistic methods Rick Perry was subjected to, and just as suddenly they understand how the nasty business of political reporting works.  Now they rise up and decry the filthy tactics of the Beltway press — less than a month after the man they have thrown their support behind used those tactics to gain an advantage over his opponent.

Only one thing has changed since Herman Cain exploited the slimy reporting of the Washington Post to attack Rick Perry, and that just happens to be the polling numbers of the two men involved.  When Rick Perry was riding high in the top tier, Herman Cain and his followers thought it just fine and dandy to use the sleazy, underhanded reporting of the D.C. press corps to take him down a notch.  But, now that they’re getting a taste of Rick Perry’s medicine, suddenly they’ve developed an aversion to such things.  Suddenly, they’re wrapping themselves in Clarence Thomas’s robes — despite the fact that the differences between the two men and the nature of the accusations against them are so vast as to elicit a horselaugh upon comparison.

And now . . . now . . . we’re supposed to rally around a purported conservative simply because the press has launched a hit against him?  We’re supposed to rally around that purported conservative despite the fact that he was not only unwilling to decry the use of even shoddier journalism against a fellow conservative (if you truly believe Cain falls under that description), but eagerly sought to benefit from it?

I’m sorry.  It just doesn’t work that way.  Until Herman Cain offers a full, unqualified apology for what he did to Rick Perry when the Washington Post accused him of tolerating racism in his midst, he deserves absolutely no defense from anyone who considers himself a conservative of good faith — and it would be questionable even then.  After all, he used two separate Sunday morning political talk shows as platforms for his race-hustling demagoguery.  Prior to what he told Amanpour on ABC’s This Week, he told Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday:

There “isn’t a more vile, negative word than the N-word, and for him to leave it there as long as he did, until before, I hear, they finally painted over it, is just plain insensitive to a lot of black people in this country,” said Cain, who is running against Perry and a group of others for the Republican presidential nomination.

Herman Cain is flat-out unworthy of the support of conservatives right now, and as far as The Damn Dirty RINO is concerned, he always will be.  His disregard for the basic human decency of Rick Perry in tarring him as a man who tolerates racism along with the accusations against him — however thinly sourced and vaguely worded — mark Cain as a man of deeply questionable character.  And conservatives can do better.  Much, much better.

And for all the conservative commentators who think it’s a good idea to stand behind this particular man out of loyalty to the conservative movement, I have one question:  Where the hell was Herman Cain’s loyalty to the conservative movement a month ago?

UPDATE:  Welcome readers of The Transom (to which EVERYONE ought to be subscribing) and the ‘Rons and ‘Ettes from Ace of Spades.  Many thanks for the links and for stopping by!

UPDATE II:  Welcome readers of The Tatler‘s Bryan Preston, at PJMedia!

About Walt

I'm the administrator of this here site. I also write and take pictures. Lucky you.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to What a shame for Herman Cain . . .

  1. wooga says:

    I wholeheartedly agree with this post. I have no sympathy for Romney’s whines either, after he so quickly decided to demagogue Perry on Social Security. It’s one thing to honestly criticize the other candidates on ideological grounds and true facts, but Romney (SS), Cain (N*head rock), and Bachmann (Tardisil) all preferred to embrace sleazeball tactics for short term gain.

    Of course, Cain also went so far as to say that he would consider being VP of any of the other candidates… EXCEPT Rick Perry. Singled Perry out as the lone unacceptable candidate. Seriously, Cain would support Hunstman, Romney, Johnson, etc, before Perry. That puts Cain into a whole ‘nother level of douchebaggery.

    • wooga says:

      Oh, and forgot to mention that Cain made his comment shortly after Perry said his ideal VP candidate would be the Cain/Gingrich hybrid. Way to return the compliment, Cain!

      • Walt says:

        I remember that debate, wooga. And I remember having kind words to say about Herman Cain at the time.

        Thing is, normally when I babble such outlandish, brainless tripe, I have the mitigating excuse of being stewed to the gills. But, in the case of Herman Cain, it seems I have no better excuse than simple stupidity. And, in that light, you’re free to ignore any charitable word I write about that dirtbag.

  2. DRW1960 says:

    Well, if it isn’t Cain it’ll be Newt or Romney. I, for one, will stick with Cain, because well I’m not “heartless.”

  3. Jeff says:

    Well, now that we have dispatched that “kook” Bachmann, the mumbling racist Perry, RINO Romney, and misogynist Cain, who will be the Republican standard bearer in 2012? The ever-helpful MSM (Scripps Howard News Service in this case) has the solution: Hillary Clinton! Look at the advantages: the media will never brand her as nutty, racist, misogynist, or even a RINO. ‘Course there is that little problem of her radical socialist political philosophy, but she can WIN! And that’s the most important thing, isn’t it?

  4. Diane Carder says:

    i also agree with the author wholeheartedly. Cain is a hypocrit and he was quick to jump Perry without knowing the facts, but expects tolerance for himself. the conservative commentators are bending over backwards something they wouldnt do for perry. it isnt over though just wait till all talk

  5. workingclass artist says:

    Totally agree with this post. I think Cain like Bachmann will try and pin his problems on Gov. Perry (As the source of the politico leak)

    Who does this help? Willard.

  6. Patriot4Freedom says:

    Thanks for the great post . . .
    We need to hold onto our standards that we require of any candidate for POTUS. There is no reason that Mr.Cain should get a pass for his response to the “rock” story, nor for his handling of the instant “scandal”. We still don’t know what he actually did/didn’t do vis-a-vis the harrassment claims, but we do know that he has totally mismanaged his responses to the story. His campaign’s blaming of the Perry campaign is simply unacceptable. There has to come a time where conservatives decide a candidate has simply shown himself to be unqualified for the office he seeks. Mr. Cain has now reached that point.

  7. Hello my family member! I wish to say that this post is amazing, great written and include almost all vital infos. I’d like to peer more posts like this .