Thursday, November 3, 2011

Andrew McCarthy on Herman Cain and the non-accusations

Andrew McCarthy at NRO Corner on Herman Cain and the sexual harassment imbroglio and liberal hypocrisy and raw viciousness.

It's not entirely clear who began this attack on Cain. It may well be Republican opponents. Karl Rove, who is aligned with Romney, has reasons to go after Cain. Perhaps it's the Democrats, but it seems odd that they would act so early. Tactically it would seem smarter to let Cain get the nomination, then spring this stuff near the time of the general election. But perhaps Democrats are sending a signal to black conservatives. 'We'll get you. Don't even bother trying'. Perhaps Democrats want Romney to get the nomination, figuring he'll be easier to beat than Cain and won't split the black vote.

Whatever the machinations behind the scenes, the allegations against Cain aren't even specific allegations, and he's being forced to answer them. When he falters, the media jumps on him, which is the whole point. Make the man respond to nothing, and catch him on whatever you can. A set up.

Is there really fire here, or just theatrical smoke? Liberals seem unconcerned with facts, and anything will do to bolster allegations against a black conservative. This was predictable, and the sexual nature of the allegations was predictable. The Democratic party has a long history of accusing non-compliant blacks of carnal impropriety. They seem much less interested in the indiscretions of their own. These are the same Dems who maintained tactical silence for John Edwards for several years, and almost made the him vice-president.

Moneyquote from McCarthy:

... the special bull’s-eye fitted on black conservatives: their example of self-reliance and independent thinking makes them such a threat to the “social justice” narrative that, when it comes to destroying them, anything goes...

The only good that may come of this is that a whole generation of people who didn't witness the Clarence Thomas high-tech lynching by Dems are going to see what the Democratic party does to black conservatives who don't know their place.

Many people became conservatives watching the Thomas hearings (Andrew Breitbart was one). I still get angry thinking about what was done to that good man.


  1. Great comment from political pundit Mark Steyn on this attempt at character assassination (from his October 31 column in National Review Online):

    Nobody other than the participants knows what went on in his “encounters” with these complainants, and the entire episode is a cautionary tale in the perils of the odious and far too widespread practice of “settling”. But honestly:

    There were also descriptions of physical gestures that were not overtly sexual but that made women who experienced or witnessed them uncomfortable.

    What does that mean? Because, if you’re going to destroy a man’s life over it, it ought to mean something. A “gesture” that is not “sexual” but that makes women “uncomfortable” enough to threaten sexual harrassment?

  2. @anon:

    Thanks. I love Steyn:

    "Because, if you’re going to destroy a man’s life over it, it ought to mean something."

    He's right.

  3. I love how you jump from "no one knows who is behind these allegations" to "Democrats are attacking a conservative black man" with no real basis for that leap. Like so much of what you think passes for "logic" it is nonsensical.

    The Democrats aren't going to bother attacking Cain because he's a political nonentity at this stage. He's the "front-runner" at a stage of the nominating process where that is meaningless, and he's doing a pretty good job at flaming out on the trail just like Bachman and Paul have done before him.

  4. @anon:

    The MSM are liberal Democrats, to a man (and woman). They want Cain's skin.

    My guess on this is that this was started by Perry's or Romney's team, and that libs are piling on.

    Libs are very concerned about Cain, who would split the black vote and end the Democratic party as a national party.

  5. Libs are very concerned about Cain, who would split the black vote and end the Democratic party as a national party.

    You live in a world of delusions. Cain as the Republican candidate result in a Republican defeat on a Goldwater-esque scale. Democratic party officials should be positively salivating as the prospect of a Cain candidacy.

    It won't happen, for the same reason that Backman and Paul won't be the nominee: he (as they) have no chance whatsoever of winning the general election.