Syndicated columnist Cal Thomas has reached the heights of absurdity in defending Herman Cain. He uses the first quarter of an article republished in the November 5 Albuquerque Journal to describe the extra-curricular sexual exploits of Bill Clinton, JFK and John Edwards. Although the tactic of trying to extricate a leader of your political party or ideological belief from a mess created by egregious behavior by referring to similar egregious behavior by a leader of the other major political party or opposing ideological belief, has been used by political moderates and leftists, it seems to be becoming more of a tactic used by right-wing conservatives.
Thomas tries to excuse Cain of blame for revising his story several times in the course of a few days, because the media — called the “wolf pack media” — revises its stories; however, the media usually revises its stories when it receives credible new information.
Cal Thomas asks if Herman Cain, “a relative media novice,” is expected to have “instant ad total recall” of events that happened long ago. We all have trouble remembering what we had for breakfast a week ago or what night we saw a particular movie; however, when there was a very traumatic event in our life, lit almost invariably becomes indelibly lodged in our mind. Also, Cain doesn’t need to have “instant and total recall,” as he was given 10 days of advance notice before publication by Politico. In lieu of total recall, Cain could have acknowledged that there were sexual harassment claims made and there was a settlement of some kind.
In Cain’s case, he remembered the sexual harassment allegations as recently as 2003, when he discussed them with Kurt or Curt Anderson, who was or was under consideration to be the campaign manager for Cain in a run for a seat in the U.S. Senate.
Thomas isn’t about to forsake the use of the race card in his all-out effort to rescue Herman Cain from his self-created problem. He claims that the story of sexual harassment has the “noxious odor of racism,” which replicates the worst stereotype directed at African-American men, whom are called “oversexed and constantly on the prowl for female conquests.”
Then Cain reveals his animus for liberal Democrats when he writes that Cain becoming president would “threaten the political and economic prison liberal Democrats have built to keep disenfranchised minorities down and voting for Democrats for fear their government programs will end.”
Perhaps “odious” is not a strong enough word to apply to Cal Thomas for his denigration of liberals, many of whom either risked their lives or devoted large chunks of their lives trying to make this a more equal society.
Yes, Herman Cain has qualities that have appealed to many people in this political campaign; however, he is not a truth teller and he has proven to be one who is not reluctant to smear others — without any proof, as he has acknowledged — while portraying himself as the victim of smear campaigns.
In a story breaking this morning, November 10, a Chicago-based reporter said she saw Herman Cain and Sharon Bialek in a conversation at a Tea Party event earlier this year. It has been verified that both Cain and Bialek were at the event; furthermore, Bialek had mentioned talking with Cain at the Tea Party event when she held her initial press conference.
Herman Cain has vigorously denied ever meeting Bialek, so now the Cain camp will need to discredit the reporter’s account. Will this necessitate calling another woman a liar?