My problem with the Herman Cain sexual harassment story is that even if it turns out to be a vile hit piece of the lowest sort designed to bring down a candidate with false accusations, I'm still bothered by his response to it. Jennifer Rubin gets it right:
Herman Cain was in the center of a firestorm, largely of his own making, yesterday. He knew before he entered the presidential race that he had a sexual harassment settlement in his past. He knew, ever since Politico started questioning his campaign, that a story was afoot. He knew he had to get the story out quickly and truthfully. And yet, by the end of the day, the business executive peddling his leadership skills and know-how looked somewhat like the hapless PBS executive who eventually got ousted for screwing up the Juan Williams firing.
Cain's response to the scandal failed in at least four significant ways. First, his story changed multiple times, giving the impression of untruthfulness. Second, he didn't make sure everyone on his campaign was on the same page. Third, he made wild accusations of a witch hunt without denying the substance of the original story (e.g., his employer settled at least one sexual harassment claim brought against him). Fourth, he dominated the news for an entire day without resolving key questions.
Cain's biggest problem, which we've seen indications of before and which is on clear display here, is the belief that he can always wing it. He doesn't have to study or prepare or make plans or do research. He can just make it up as he goes along. Kind of scary to consider that such might be his inclination as president, too.
Comments
John Steele Gordon over at Commentary Magazine offers a point that needs more emphasis in this kerfuffle:
But one thing should be pointed out: the fact that a settlement was made in no way indicates anything about the guilt or innocence of the accused party, especially if it
Leo:
Gadfly brings up a damn good point.
(the system reacted similarly to Clarence Thomas - you're roght, and they detest a CONSERVATIVE black man...or woman)
That's patently wrong.
If Cain wants to "wing it", it would be LIGHT-YEARS ahead of anything the current administration can muster.
I suspect reaction to this story is going to depend on the age of the listener.
Young people are going to hear "sexual harassment" and assume that Cain did something wrong, and that he's an evil man.
Older people are going to hear "sexual harassment" and wonder whether the accusation is well founded. Telling a subordinate to prostitute herself or get fired is obviously objectionable. Telling off-color jokes as a way to relieve the pressure in a stressful job is a time-honored tradition, and while some women take offense at such jokes being shared with her, others take offense if they aren't treated like one of the boys.
And then there are the ones that make false allegations....
Ask yourself, "How would a man act if he'd been falsely accused?" and you get Herman Cain. A guy who'd done it would have a cover story already polished and ready to go. And just as everybody lies about sex, I suspect everyone becomes discombobulated at false accusations of sexual crimes.
And the ability to "wing it" would probably be an asset to the president when he receives 3 AM phone calls.
That's not to say that Cain is a perfect candidate; he's far from that. On the other hand, there's nobody else running who's much better.