Tuesday, November 01, 2011

The Mark of Cain

The big story over the last few days has been a concerted attack on GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain. I haven't said much about it yet because I deliberately wanted to see how deep the story went and more importantly,how Cain was going to handle it.

The attack on Cain involves some vague accusations of sexual harassment that date back over 15 years, from when Cain headed the National Restaurant Association. A couple of unidentified women who worked there apparently accused Cain of 'conversations allegedly filled with innuendo' and 'physical gestures that were not overtly sexual but that made women who experienced or witnessed them uncomfortable.'

So the Association apparently gave the women a small settlement to avoid the expense of litigation, a common tactic in these politically correct times. As anyone with any experience in these matters knows, just the initial dealings with the EEOC can involve a cost of $10 to $15,000 based on nothing more than a complaint,no matter how insubstantial.

For that, based strictly on hearsay, Herman Cain is in the headlines today accused of 'sexual harassment', even though numerous female employees who worked for the NRA at the time have come forward publicly to state that they never heard, observed or experienced any conduct from Herman Cain even remotely suggesting 'sexual harassment'.

Cain's real sin doesn't appear to be inappropriate sexual conduct but being an independent minded black conservative who strayed off the Left's reservation. For that, he has to be destroyed. Florida Senator Marco Rubio, who's been mentioned as a possible vice - presidential nominee got the same treatment last week from the Washington Post for the exact same reason.

And the attacks on Cain - and yes, they're race-based - have been building for some time, ever since Herman Cain began gaining traction in the polls. And of course, the Left has made sure that the attacks mostly come from blacks...just to emphasize what happens to those who stray off the plantation.



For instance, a MSNBC 'analyst' named Karen Finney recently accused Republicans of racism, saying that Republicans are supporting Herman Cain because of his race:

"One of the things about Herman Cain is, I think that he makes that white Republican base of the party feel okay, feel like they are not racist because they can like this guy," Finney said. "I think he giving that base a free pass. And I think they like him because they think he's a black man who knows his place. I know that's harsh, but that's how it sure seems to me."

Finney is hardly unique or alone in saying this. In fact, it's become a part of the Left's repeated mythology as the election season moves into high gear.

“He’s engaging in a very dangerous, irresponsible type of rhetoric,” said Edward DuBose, president of the Georgia state conference of the NAACP. “It’s almost like he feels the need to be accepted in a different class or community, and somehow, by portraying his own race or portraying the poor as a problem, it’s going to advance his cause. I think he’s going to find that that’s not true.”

Pam Spaulding, the black LGBT blogger and darling of the Left made it even plainer, accusing Cain of 'shameless tap dancing for conservative white voters'.

And those are just a few examples. The most inadvertently comical thing about them is that all of these people probably voted for Bill Clinton - twice. That alone should shoot any pious homilies about 'sexual harassment' or untruthfullness out of the water.

And yet, as despicable and racist as these attacks are,they once again point out something that needs to be said. As likeable as he is, as compelling as his personal story is, Herman Cains not ready for prime time and his handling of this latest attack proves it.

Commonsense would dictate that if you're going to run for office, especially as a conservative black man, your very first practical task is to have your people do opposition research on yourself.

Anything even remotely attackable in your history or background needs to be looked at so that there are no surprises...so that you're prepared if and when it surfaces. Herman Cain either neglected to perform this elementary step or knew about this and simply tried to bluff his way clumsily out of it, changing his story about four separate times in the process. There's no third option, and neither one bodes well for his performance as president.

For a comparison, simply look at Governor Sarah Palin and how she handled media attacks on everything from her family and her very femininity to her generally excellent record as Alaska's governor to see the difference.

These attacks will likely not sink Cain, but it gives us an unfortunate preview of what we're in for if he's the nominee and the real attacks start.

And his continued gaffes, like his latest one on China are going to be easy ammo for the Obama campaign to destroy him:

JUDY WOODRUFF: Do you view China as a potential military threat to the United States?

HERMAN CAIN: I do view China as a potential military threat to the United States... we already have superiority in terms of our military capability, and I plan to get away from making cutting our defense a priority and make investing in our military capability a priority, going back to my statement: peace through strength and clarity. So yes they're a military threat. They've indicated that they're trying to develop nuclear capability and they want to develop more aircraft carriers like we have. So yes, we have to consider them a military threat.


Is it really too much to expect someone who's running for president to realize that China has been in the nuclear club for several decades? Imagine that surfacing in a debate...along with all the other ones he's come out with.

Herman Cain is an immensely likeable and decent man, and the racist attacks on him are despicable. But as I explored here, there are a lot of reasons he's simply not ready for the presidency.

please donate...it helps me write more gooder!

4 comments:

B.Poster said...

"...we already have superiority in terms of military capability..." He's simply spouting main stream media talking points here. The conventional thinking on this greatly under estimates China's vastly superior numerical strength over America and it greatly over estimates America's qualitative edge. Not only is America's qualitative edge over estimated in the main stream analysis. but the fact that America's qualitative edge is steadily eroding and due to its massive debt and struggling economy America does not have the ability to make the necessary investments in its military industrial complex to maintain a qualitative edge over China for much longer assuming it still has one.

Also, in any military conflict with China, most of the world will side with China. This further soldifies China's over all military edge over America.

Admittedly the military analysis is somewhat subjective. Furthermore how humans will behave in any given situation is also not easy to predict, however, the fact that China has nuclear weapons is not subjective. This is generally known by all.

I agree that Mr. Cain is likely not ready for this postion, however, Mr. Romney definitely is not ready and Mr. Perry does not look ready either. It looks like Republicans don't have any good choice. The Republcan candidate with the best chance to actually defeat Barack Obama is likely Dr. Ron Paul.

Finally, as a Texan, I can say with a high degree of confidence that Mr. Perry had nothing to do with the relative success of the TX job market over the last decade. He was simply fortunate enough to be in the right place at the right time and deserves no credit for this. For him to take any credit for this, he is at best misinformed by his advisors and at worst he is being disingenuos. Either way not good!!

As I'm typing this, the TX government is steadily adding regulation upon regulation that the business community must comply with. If not reversed, the relative success that TX enjoyed in the last decade as far as job creation will be over. Mr. Perry deserves no credit for the success of TX and should not take any. If he had the humility to point out that he was fortunate enough to be in the right place at the right time and not try to take credit for the TX economy, it would be muche easier to take him seriously.

Rob said...

Poster,
If you really think a Jew hating, isolationist conspiracy theorist like Ron Paul has any chance of getting the nomination let alone beating Obama, all I can say is you're entitled!

Regards,
Rob

B.Poster said...

While Jews are important to you as a Jew and they are important to me as a Christian and they are generally important to other true Christians, Jews and Israel hold little significance to the majority of the American populace. As such, being a Jew hater, if in fact, that is what he is has little negative impact.

Jews simply don't have the impact that the media lets on they do. As I've explained here and elsewhere before if powers are assigned to a party that one does not like this party becomes much easier to vilify. Hence America, Israel, and the Jews are assigned powers that are far beyond what they actually have.

As far as him being an isolationist, how is this so? He thinks America needs to focus on its own business right here at home rather than waste precious resources in other places. Most Americans will go for that!! Now with that said where I do find him wanting is he fails to evaluate the context of American actions always seeming to side with the country's enemies.

He's also an expert on the talking point regarding the coup against the Iranian leadership in the early 1950s. Most Americans are an expert on this. In fact, more people are aware of this than those that are aware of the taking of our embassy in 1979. Even those that are aware would simply say it was in retaliation for our actions in the early 1950s. Hence we "had it coming." Before any kind of serious muscular response can be made successfully against Iran something has to be done to confront the narrative about this conflict not only here in America bu around the world. At least in the countries whose support we are going to need.

As for conspiracy theories, which ones? If he is a "911 truther" there is little cost among the populace for one who holds such theories. While most people likely don't hold to these theories, those who do are generally respected and shown every courtessy. This is contrast to "birthers" who are not held in high esteem and are generally regarded as cooks.

I'm not suggesting any of the narrative is correct or even that Dr. Paul is the ideal candidate or that I'd vote for him. Its just that among Republican candidates he has the best chance to beat President Obama. This may say more about the nominees for the Republican party than it does about Dr. Paul.

Rob said...

It's not about 'importance' or 'significance' Poster. It's about what's right and what's wrong.

Ron Paul will quite rightly not get the nomination, and if he did,he'd be soundly defeated.

RE: Iran, I suggest you actually read up about Mossadegh. He was a communist who had actually been dismissed by the Iranian majlis but refused to give up power, and the Pahlavis had widespread personal support when they took over.

We just helped things along to bring a friendly regime to power in a strategic region and keep the Soviets out,and it was exactly the right thing to do.

Regards,
Rob