Posted on 11/11/2011 5:56:26 AM PST by TBBT
I think I understand why the audience at Wednesday’s CNBC debate booed Maria Bartiromo’s question to Herman Cain about sexual-harassment allegations. They don’t believe there is any truth to them. They suspect, along with the candidate, that the women concerned are part of a liberal lynch mob out to smear another strong, conservative, black man. They know that accusations of sexual harassment are often nebulous and PC. If I guess correctly, they also believe — with considerable justification — that the press is less interested in the dry details of policy than in salacious tales of misbehavior. They resent being dragged into another smutty distraction.
Yes, but. As someone who was well-disposed toward Herman Cain as a public figure (if not as a potential president), I cannot help recalling the response of Democrats to revelations about Bill Clinton. “We know all about it,” one exasperated reader wrote to Newsweek magazine, “and WE DON’T CARE.” In fact, the majority of Americans did not care — and it was not our finest moment as a nation. Liberals, who professed to be appalled by the one accusation against Clarence Thomas (just one non-contemporaneous accusation — not four or five), dismissed Bill Clinton’s behavior as no big deal. Stuart Taylor noted at the time that even if everything Anita Hill said about Clarence Thomas were true, it would not be nearly as serious as the allegations against Bill Clinton. Conservatives argued at the time that character mattered. Liberals replied, in effect, that it didn’t...
Read the rest here: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/282909/booing-character-issue-mona-charen
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
You’re welcome to them but your views are over the top and really crude.
I don’t see how conservatism wins your way.
Look at your language..I understand your anger at the media and double standards but you can fight back without becoming them.
The charges were NOT provable in the beginning. It took Monica’s blue dress to finally prove them, and that was much, much later. Everything else was he said v. she said, and we took the side of the victims.
At the time, I honestly thought everyone on FR picked that side because it was the good and decent thing to do. Now I wonder if freepers picked that side because Clinton as a Democrat. Now that it’s Cain, suddenly all the accusers are automatically wh*res.
In this case, I cannot really judge the veracity of the accusers, because most of them haven’t really come forward to speak about it. But I am keeping an open mind.
Here’s the one thing you need to consider about political hits. They always save the worst for the very last minute, when it’s impossible to mount a defense. These could well be warning shot, not the main event. If this is coming from a Republican rival, the big news will come just before the primary. If it’s coming from the Democrats, it will come close to the election. If Cain has skeletons rattling around, this can destroy Republican chances for winning the Presidency.
This is the thing that has truly upset me about this. Hearing supposed conservatives proclaim that it’s OK because Clinton did it and got away with it - and in this case, I’m referring to the lying, which Cain clearly engaged in at the start - is just disgusting.
Hearing them say that even if Cain did these things - a married man, clearly using sex in an abuse of power over workplace subordinates and people who were his social inferiors - it doesn’t matter because it’s “just about sex” shows how far we have sunk as a culture. Guess what: one’s attitudes to sex and power are an absolute indicator of one’s character, and they sure don’t make his character look good.
His immediate attack on a rival coupled with the appalling smearing of the accusers - and even attacks on the verified victims, since the women who filed the original claims have been blamed and then intimidated into not defending themselves or even revealing their identities (I wouldn’t either, if I read some of the things said about them on this site) - is exactly like Clinton. But it’s okay this time because “Herman” is doing it.
I see absolutely nothing positive about this for our nation in general or conservatives in particular. We have provided no ethical leadership in this affair and I think have seriously damaged our own moral standing.
I posted these comments over at the Corner:
Even putting these accusation aside - Cain has provided on his own plenty of evidence to question whether he is ready for prime time. His “gaffes a minute” smack of a lack of depth and seriousness on many issues. Has there been a substantive issue that he’s staked a position on that he hasn’t had to “clarify” later in the day? The claims of being taken out of context when clearly he hasn’t been are very politician like for the non-politician in the race. Cain has stated that he’ll make up for his shortcomings by surrounding himself by the best people but his campaigns handling of this crisis has been abysmal. The hypocrisy has been deep when the campaign make baseless accusation about others and at the same time bemoans the baseless accusations against Cain. There are plenty of reasons to question Cain beyond this scandal.
I for one think Mona’s article made some good points...
No the one lying is you. If you bothered to actually listen to the facts of the matter there was no "payoff". Two problem employees were dismissed with a severance package. Mr Cain had not part of those agreements. They were made AFTER he left NRA.
So rather then pimp the smear based on nothing but emotion, how about you learn the FACTS of the matter before posting about it?
I’ll start caring when they start proving it.
BRAVO! Spot. On.
Anyone with a brain could see these accusations were BS from the beginning.
I see. So now that the accusations made in Mona’s article are proven absurd, you want to change the argument to more mythology about “Cain’s gaffes”
How about instead of engaging in the usual Leftist style sleazy politics of personal attack at Cain, you quit wasting our time and try making a case FOR your candidate instead.
Yep. Unless the left manufactures a blue dress, complete with DNA, to go along with their evil plans - I ain't buying it.
There have been uncountable accusations against leftists in high power over the years, but the media immediately bursts into flames of outrage every time they're mentioned. They claim they're ALL lies (until the proof rises up above the ashes).
All of a sudden, a bimbo hit job with absolutely no proof at all becomes the absolute truth and the black conservative has to be hung up in the public square without question.
To the MSM, when it comes to conservatives, they're guilty until they can prove themselves innocent. A liberal is always innocent.
Cain and Newt did something akin to the Lincoln/Douglas debates; i.e., rational, measured, civilized; etc., but we really cannot do that with the Democrats. And we can't be so guilt ridden about things.
So, because he can’t play the political game well, he cannot be president? His years of executive decision making and leadership mean nothing? Do you think he was ever on the hot seat these past decades when he was leading companies?
Dear Mona Charen...
“sklar” is correct, THIS IS FREEREPUBLIC. We ARE independent thinkers and highly encourage others to be also. Unfortunately we don’t allow asshats to like you to tell us what to think, nor do we accept RINO’s and their supporters. So piss off.
Now please do us a favor: Shut-up and go away. And take “sklar” with you.
Thank you for your cooperation,
Ernie
C’mon, MNJohnnie. The evidence, complete with dna, did not appear until just before the impeachment. Up until then, it was all “I did not have sex with that woman.” Don’t re-write history.
Chris Wallace on FNC this morning talking about the polls showing “significant” erosion of support amongst women for Cain. He could hardly contain his pleasure.
Why don’t any of these pundits talk about Hussein’s tanking numbers..or his propensity for all things Larry Sommers and Co.? /s.
Um, Gennifer Flowers' tapes came out before the election. And a strong whiff of tom-catting had followed Clinton all through his Arkansas years.
Those of us defending Cain against completely unsubstantiated accusations are not the one who “damaged our moral standing”
People like you, who refuse to defend the truth, and routinely lie about Cain, because you think it helps your candidate of choice are the ones who have damaged their moral standing.
Bearing False Witness is still a sin. So I suggest you clean up your own filthy shameless behavior before lecturing anyone about “moral standing”
Ditto SW!
Actually, over the last few days, I can’t help but think Cain’s accusers have more in common with the stripper who accused the Duke Lacrosse Team of rape or the hotel maid that accused that French clown, than with ordinary women. Their records are bad enough that they’re not credible witnesses.
Oh so NOW doesn’t matter if the accusations are completely fraudlent, we must reject Cain because they accusations have been made?
Shame on you people. There is more at risk here then merely helping your candidate of choice win an election. If they can get away with this guilt by accusation smear at Cain, YOUR candidate will be next.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.