End of the road for Cain?
By Richard Cohen
NYT
Herman Cain’s a goner, or so it seems. His campaign announced he is “reassessing” his options after an Atlanta woman said she had a 13-year affair with him that ended only when he decided to run for the White House — not an excuse available to just anyone. I have scant sympathy for Cain, a self-promoter with very little to promote, but he must wonder how he is different from Newt Gingrich. Does one extramarital affair disqualify you for the presidency, but not two? Maybe Rush Limbaugh can supply the answer.
Limbaugh and others on the right were quick to defend Cain when it was revealed that his former employer, the National Restaurant Association, had settled two sexual harassment claims against him. Cain instantly denied knowledge of any such settlement — a monstrous fib, as it turned out — and since the allegation surfaced first in Politico, right-wing bloggers, muggers and moon-bayers were able to blame the press and do a Murdoch Maul on the women involved. The women were called gold-diggers and publicity hounds, and Limbaugh, as witty as he is handsome, was able to turn the name of one of the accusers, Sharon Bialek, into “buy a lick.” Ha, ha, ha.
I do not listen to Limbaugh, but as he is the voice of the Republican Party I want him to explain why having an extramarital affair is worse than sexually harassing a clutch of women. Note, we are dealing with mere allegations, but it is the allegations that are being treated so differently. What’s more, I want to know why Gingrich’s two extramarital affairs, both admitted and, of course, deeply regretted, are somehow not as damaging as Cain’s one — not admitted and still very much alleged. I happen to believe that none of these affairs, alleged or otherwise, is any of my business, and I would still vote for John F. Kennedy knowing what I now know, although I would hope he’d steer clear of mafia molls, possible communist spies and women with literary agents.
(More here.)
NYT
Herman Cain’s a goner, or so it seems. His campaign announced he is “reassessing” his options after an Atlanta woman said she had a 13-year affair with him that ended only when he decided to run for the White House — not an excuse available to just anyone. I have scant sympathy for Cain, a self-promoter with very little to promote, but he must wonder how he is different from Newt Gingrich. Does one extramarital affair disqualify you for the presidency, but not two? Maybe Rush Limbaugh can supply the answer.
Limbaugh and others on the right were quick to defend Cain when it was revealed that his former employer, the National Restaurant Association, had settled two sexual harassment claims against him. Cain instantly denied knowledge of any such settlement — a monstrous fib, as it turned out — and since the allegation surfaced first in Politico, right-wing bloggers, muggers and moon-bayers were able to blame the press and do a Murdoch Maul on the women involved. The women were called gold-diggers and publicity hounds, and Limbaugh, as witty as he is handsome, was able to turn the name of one of the accusers, Sharon Bialek, into “buy a lick.” Ha, ha, ha.
I do not listen to Limbaugh, but as he is the voice of the Republican Party I want him to explain why having an extramarital affair is worse than sexually harassing a clutch of women. Note, we are dealing with mere allegations, but it is the allegations that are being treated so differently. What’s more, I want to know why Gingrich’s two extramarital affairs, both admitted and, of course, deeply regretted, are somehow not as damaging as Cain’s one — not admitted and still very much alleged. I happen to believe that none of these affairs, alleged or otherwise, is any of my business, and I would still vote for John F. Kennedy knowing what I now know, although I would hope he’d steer clear of mafia molls, possible communist spies and women with literary agents.
(More here.)
Powered by Blogger
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home