...And Then There Were Two

On November 28th, I posted an article defending Herman Cain against the takedown being perpetrated against him by the Republican establishment and the media. For several hours, readers sent supportive comments, appreciating my effort to refocus the lens onto Cain’s policy strengths and personal appeal. Suddenly, however, the comments turned in a new direction, as news broke of a woman alleging a 13-year affair with the candidate, and one which had continued into very recent times. “It’s over,” shouted those who never liked him anyway. “It’s over,” furthermore, lamented some who, like this writer, had wished to believe that the very worst claim against Cain, even if it were true, represented a moment of moral weakness more than a decade ago, an episode that ended—according to the accuser—with Cain accepting the premise that “No means No.”

---

My main reason for refusing to accept the assault on Cain was that, for all the hype about a few moments of making women “uncomfortable,” what was lacking was any serious evidence of Cain’s actually having engaged in an inappropriate relationship with anyone. “Where are the affairs?” I asked. Surely, a powerful and appealing man like Herman Cain, were he actually any kind of womanizer, would have had a few successes on his resume, and not merely an extremely short list of rebuffed propositions. Now, however, it appears that there is such a ‘success,’ a long-term affair with a woman who has a string of text messages to Cain’s private number in her cell phone to back up her story. No, cell phone records are not proof of guilt. There are a number of women whose cell phone numbers will appear repeatedly in my “History” folder, too—as, I assume, would be true of many people with jobs that involve regular professional and social interaction with a lot of people. Cain’s new problem becomes disturbing, however, when we read his lawyer’s official response to the alleged affair.

---

---

“... [T]his appears to be an accusation of private, alleged consensual conduct between adults—a subject matter which is not a proper subject of inquiry by the media or the public. No individual, whether a private citizen, a candidate for public office or a public official, should be questioned about his or her private sexual life....” In other words, ‘even if it’s true, this allegation is none of anyone’s business, because it involves consensual sex between a married presidential candidate and an adult woman.’ The Clinton defense is not acceptable from a Republican candidate, and it smacks of desperation even to try it. Cain’s defense—if indeed he signed off on it—looks like an attempt to escape scrutiny, which suggests that his campaign would like this particular matter not to be scrutinized. Given the motivations of the mainstream media, however, one can rest assured that it will be scrutinized, unless such scrutiny is judged unnecessary, given Cain’s poll numbers. My difficulty is this: One can want Cain to be innocent—I do—but one cannot deny the squeamishness induced by his lawyer’s statement. Had the official statement been a forceful and unequivocal denial, then it would have been prudent to suspend judgment. A legalese statement reminiscent of a quibble over the meaning of the word “is,” is not acceptable. President Cain, R.I.P. My November 28th article on Cain was intended as the first of three articles, one devoted to each of the strongest Tea Party candidates in the Republican primaries. I concluded the article this way: “If you care about the survival of the United States of America, and you’re not with Bachmann or Santorum, you had better be with Cain.” Correction: If you care about the survival of the United States of America, and you’re not with Bachmann or Santorum, then I recommend you stay home for the remainder of the process, particularly on voting day. I stand by the principles underlying everything I said in the previous article, and I stand by my criticisms of the other candidates. However, barring a complete retraction by the accuser, or a complete undermining of her credibility (not a Paula Jones hit job), I can no longer feel comfortable standing by Herman Cain. I wish I could. But I can’t.

---