Gay Patriot Header Image

Herman Cain, sexual harassment & the media:
Once again, more scrutiny of a Republican candidate
than to a Democratic President

Tongues are waging in the media — and across the blogosphere — about two women who, in the 1990s, accused Republicans presidential candidate Herman Cain of “inappropriate behavior.

When we talk about these things, it seems the inappropriateness of the the behavior depends on the political affiliation of the accused.  A Republican who jokes about pubic hairs on soda cans (even when this story has not been corroborated) acts inappropriately and should be universally condemned, but a Democrat who rapes a woman, well, that’s just not news.

Look, I don’t know the truth to these allegations and will wait for the women to come forward before judging the candidate (about whom I already have some serious concerns and whom I do not intend to support in the California primary).  Perhaps when the hype dies down, the facts will come out.

Color me cynical, but given the eagerness of our friends in the mainstream media to destroy any charismatic Republican, well, I think there’s more smoke than substance to this story.   As we learned in the 1990s when the media tried to bury the story of a corroborated accusation of rape against a sitting Democratic president, our media have become fascinated by the story of a Republican farting inappropriately during a business meeting, yet disinterested in a Democratic candidate carrying on an affair while professing to be a loyal husband to a wife dying of cancer.

As Glenn Reynolds wrote earlier today quoting Roger Simon:

Politico And Cain: The Return Of The High-Tech Lynching. “It took the mainstream media nearly a year to catch up with the John Edwards Affair, but only weeks into Herman Cain’s narrow frontrunner status for the GOP nomination, the goodfellas at Politico are letting the uppity black conservative have it.” Ouch. But let’s correct the record: They weren’t slow to cover the John Edwards story. They covered up the John Edwards story. Keep rockin’!

Can you imagine the headlines we would have read in 2007 had the legacy media devoted the same amount of scrutiny to Barack Obama then they are offering to Cain now (and recently offered to Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry)?

UPDATE:  Reminding us that the article contains “a fair amount of unsourced innuendo,” Simon asks if there’s “any way we can ever know the truth of this? Probably not since the parties are said to have agreed to remain silent for a five-figure payment, a paltry amount in this day and age.”

FROM THE COMMENTS:  SoCalRobert tells us that through the 1990s, he was instructed “that this sort of thing is irrelevant. Only right wing religious fanatics pried into the personal lives of politicians.”  Wonder why they didn’t say that at the outset of the 1990s when the entire liberal punditocracy not to mention a majority of Democratic Senators went apoplectic over allegations that a female employee claimed her conservative Republican boss told her about some pubic hairs he found on a can of coke.

Share

9 Comments

  1. […] duty awaiting Cain’s departure.UPDATE 14:21 PM EST Further linkage at:The Camp of the SaintsGay PatriotReligio-Political TalkRadio PatriotEXPECT FURTHER UPDATES. . .Category: Election 2012, Herman […]

    Pingback by Herman Cain At The National Press Club : The Other McCain — October 31, 2011 @ 2:25 pm - October 31, 2011

  2. If the parties were legally obligated to silence, how did this come to light. If the alleged victims were the tipsters the Herman should sue them in civil court and Politico for libel, if it is true or slander, if false.
    It smells like the slime that was thrown at Judge Clarence Thomas.

    Comment by Roberto — October 31, 2011 @ 3:51 pm - October 31, 2011

  3. Dear Mainstream Media Members:

    When did you stop beating your wives?

    Sincerely,
    Me.

    Comment by Bruce (GayPatriot) — October 31, 2011 @ 4:00 pm - October 31, 2011

  4. I was instructed all through the 90s that this sort of thing is irrelevant. Only right wing religious fanatics pried into the personal lives of politicians.

    Accordingly, I resolve not to care.

    Comment by SoCalRobert — October 31, 2011 @ 6:52 pm - October 31, 2011

  5. […] I also wanted to mention what B. Daniel Blatt had to say about this at GayPatriot, noting the media’s double standard in covering “sex scandals”: Color me cynical, […]

    Pingback by Some Thoughts on Herman Cain’s Alleged Sexual Harrassment « Canadian Rattlesnake — October 31, 2011 @ 9:33 pm - October 31, 2011

  6. Dan, I have a different take on this. First of all, regarding the charges, my guess is that there was no sexual harassment. But, obviously, there was a charge of harassment, and a payment when Cain was leader of the National Restaurant Association. This was going to come out at some point. The interesting thing is that it is happening now. Why not when Cain first announced his candidacy, or next fall (if Cain received the nomination and is running against Obama). If this information was supposed to damage Cain, whom do you think it benefits now?

    Maybe the scrutiny is unfair as you suggest. But the timing couldn’t have been better for Cain. He is running against Republicans right now, and it is pretty much Republicans who will determine who their nominee will be. Since Republicans apparently have a huge mistrust of mainstream media, this should not hurt Cain in any fashion, or perhaps may even help. If this derails Cain, I don’t think you can blame mainstream media (while not absolving them of any bias). It will be because of one or more of the following: 1) The allegations are actually true. 2) Republicans, who are distrustful of media, decided to buy into the story this time. 3) Other Republican candidates use this to their advantage.

    Comment by Pat — November 1, 2011 @ 11:32 am - November 1, 2011

  7. Funny, because I recall Clinton being hounded by Republicans (and in turn the dreaded MSM) for the entire 8 years he was in office. What did they get him on in the end? lying about having sex with a woman who wasn’t his wife; a litmus test, which I wonder how many members of congress, regardless of party, would be able to pass.

    Things like this make me wonder about how today’s conservatives would have treated our founding fathers who had children out of wedlock, illicit affairs, etc.

    Comment by Kevin — November 1, 2011 @ 9:59 pm - November 1, 2011

  8. Kevin, please address the post to which you attach your comments. The issue here is not Republicans going after Clinton, but the media coverage of candidates of both parties.

    Did the various “news” outlets give the rape story the same amount of play they’re giving the Cain story?

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — November 1, 2011 @ 10:22 pm - November 1, 2011

  9. Did the various “news” outlets give the rape story the same amount of play they’re giving the Cain story?

    Dan, I failed to address this point as well. I’m only going from memory, but I recall the coverage being about the same at this point. Perhaps it should have been more regarding Clinton, since rape is a much more serious crime. Also, as someone suggested in another thread, the Monica Lewinsky affair was making news everyday at the time. It does appear that the allegations regarding Cain will overtake the coverage of Clinton’s rape allegations, mostly because Cain mishandled* this.

    * Frankly, I personally think Cain did an okay job with it, but with today’s media, okay is not good enough.

    In any case, I am still curious about the timing of this allegation coming to light. And again, since it is Republicans that are deciding Cain’s fate at this point, how and why do these allegations hurt him?

    Comment by Pat — November 2, 2011 @ 7:32 am - November 2, 2011

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.