[Newsbot]

Filibuster Cartoons
Title: Cain's harassers (click to view)
Date: November 10, 2011
When it comes to gossip and innuendo about public figures, I've noticed there are two types of rumours that seem to have an ominously high accuracy rate. The first is allegations of homosexuality, which, from Rosie O'Donnell to Ricky Martin to Clay Aiken, always seem to be confirmed eventually — regardless of how firm and numerous the initial denials are. The second is gossip about infidelity and womanizing, which, again, very rarely provide smoke without fire — particularly when politicians are involved.

It's hard to imagine now, but there was a time when any talk of Bill Clinton's alleged cheating would generate angry skepticism from his partisan supporters, just as other equally valid charges of promiscuity were angrily rejected by fans of Gary Hart, Jesse Jackson, Arnold Schwarzenegger, John Edwards, and so on, ad infinitum. It's for this reason, and the fact that I've been personally burned by such naiveté in the past, that I have almost no doubt that Herman Cain, the latest high-profile politician to see his career totter amid lurid allegations of sexual misconduct, is probably guilty, guilty, guilty too.

While the shrill, feminist attorney Gloria Allred is obviously an odious figure in her own right, I don't see how anyone could find her Monday morning press conference, in which she paraded alleged Cain victim Sharon Bialek before the world, anything less than compelling. A recently laid-off employee of Mr. Cain's National Restaurant Association, Ms. Bialek was desperate to find work. Pleading with Cain to help her, she claims the CEO responded by propositioning her for oral sex. "You want a job, right?" he said when she recoiled in revulsion.

As one pundit noted, there's a reason no one is directing these sorts of allegations against Mitt Romeny. The whole reason the Cain charges are believable — aside from the vivid first person testimony, corroboration from other victims, and sworn affidavits of Ms. Bialek's friends — is because the whole persona of Ms. Bialek's assailant is so thoroughly compatible with our existing image of Mr. Cain. It's hardly a stretch to believe that this sassy, showy, undeniably witty, yet awkward man would employ all the same charms in attempting to bed women (or, as he insists on calling them, "ladies"), or that his cocky and stubborn personality would make casual sexual conquest high on his priority list in the first place.

Clearly, this isn't a particularly scientific method of determining guilt. But it says something about the pathetically predictable nature of political personalities that the "if you can believe it, it's probably true" standard is usually pretty reliable all the same.

One of the big problems with modern politics is that so many proud partisans refuse to acknowledge the unglamorous fact that an enormous number of men are motivated to seek office for reasons that are far more psychological than altruistic or ideological. And the forces that bring them down, in turn, usually stem from personal flaws, rather than the elaborate machinations of their opposite party opponents, or the system, or whatever else.

By blaming such a myriad of enemies — Rick Perry, the mainstream media, the non-mainstream media, the "Democratic machine," liberal racism, etc — for a scandal that is very clearly the result of their candidate's human weaknesses, the Cain campaign is trying desperately to make politics seem far more theatrical and interesting than it actually is. It's been depressing to see how many Republicans uncritically gobble it all up. Hardwired partisanship has evidently rendered vast armies of them unable to take politics at anything beyond face value, where everything is, in fact, a ferocious horse-race with everything on the line, and nothing a mundane drama of vainglorious men play-acting to satisfy their own egos.

If Cain was a more mature human being and more honest politician, he'd hold a press conference and just admit that his wandering eye has led him to violate his marriage vows — in both spirit and letter — on a number of occasions. He could say it's not something he's proud of, nor something he plans to continue, yet ultimately a matter between him, his, wife, and God. I don't know if he'd recover, or if he even should recover, but he'd leave American politics a better place for having had the honesty to do it.

There are always those who argue that sex scandals are the worst sort of distraction in our political process, since human drama and morally-dubious personalities have absolutely no constitutional relevance in a results-oriented democracy. Such people evidently believe that the ideal politician is no more than a policy delivery vehicle, and deserves to be judged solely on his effectiveness in fulfilling that modest mandate. In reality, however, that very effectiveness will only exist so long as the policy vehicle in question is sufficiently on-task, and in possession of the bare minimum of honest principle required to pursue the causes he purports to care about without getting distracted or bored. The fact that sex addicts don't usually care much about anything — political or otherwise — beyond themselves, is, in fact, a reasonably fair indicator that their ability to govern in any style beyond superficial, short-term, and image-conscious will be severely limited.

Cain is still polling well and raising lots of money. Some say despite his troubles, some — more creepily — say because of them. The Republican Party should think long and hard as to whether they'd want either story on their epitaph.

[Thanos]

"Our blacks are better than their blacks."

Ann Coulter

Fucking LOL.

[Psudo]

I think these allegations plus his deeply flawed tax plan have destroyed any chance he once had of being the nominee.

The election is going to be Obama beating Romney. [sarcasm]How exciting it will be to wait a year for that twist ending.[/sarcasm]

On the issue of sex scandals, Alexander Hamilton is an interesting case study. He was accused of embezzlement and mismanagement of government funds for years and with increasing specificity until he proved himself innocent of the charges by admitting he was busy having an affair with a married woman instead. Though history proved his claims true (his only secret financial dealing was paying the husband to keep quiet), the critics of his public activities were only briefly quieted and were quickly joined by a chorus accusing him of every sexual affair with every woman he spoke to (and some young men).

In essence, JJ is advising Cain choose the path Hamilton chose: admit the truth, come what may. He should still do it, since honesty is intrinsically moral, but I don't see how the consequence of an honest admission of guilt would inherently include a better political environment. It didn't in Hamilton's time, it certainly didn't make the Clinton years better, and I don't think it would improve our immediate future. The reasons he should be honest are largely or entirely of personal consequence.

[Teikiatsu]

Psudo wrote:

I think these allegations plus his deeply flawed tax plan have destroyed any chance he once had of being the nominee.

It's going to be up to the moderates at this point. The GOP/Conservatives are tired of character assassinations against good people. It's sad that we live in a society where allegations and indictments can be treated as fact without proof.

I don't want to nominate or elect a sexual predator, but then again that's why I didn't vote for Bill Clinton (rimshot). I want more proof than three anonymous undefined settlements and a woman with a shady background playing "he said/she said" before Cain falls off my radar.

[sandorski]

Allegations of a sexual nature are so hard to deal with for any Politician. It's not only how the Voting Public will react, but also one's spouse/family. Making it very personal, potentially not only destroying one's Political Career, but everything around them. Not that they shouldn't be exposed, but it's perfectly understandable as to why the accused almost always Denies such things.

The way Cain has dealt with the whole issue has been beyond pathetic though. In one day he started being unable to recall anything about the allegations, then merely hours later having a flash of, "Ahh, that's right, I remember now!"[smacks head]. Now again he has began the whole Memory Game with yet more allegations, I fully expect he'll suddenly recall that too.

The wheels have completely fallen off his campaign, not that he was doing all that well once people started scrutinizing his 9/9/9 plan, but from hereon he'll be dogged by this until he becomes irrelevant.

[CKASlacker]

sandorski wrote:

Allegations of a sexual nature are so hard to deal with for any Politician. It's not only how the Voting Public will react, but also one's spouse/family. Making it very personal, potentially not only destroying one's Political Career, but everything around them.

Which in the Republicans' case is very much worse, since they've tied themselves very strongly into the social conservative/God-fearing camp. It's hard to argue that you stand for high Christian morals... "but oh yeah, I'm a bad example. Do what I say, not what I do."

Not that a Dem candidate wouldn't be tarred as well, but not to the same extent for partisan supporters. Look at Clinton -- despite getting a blow job in the Oval Office he's still thought of quite highly. Stupid yes for thinking that an intern would keep everything on the downlow. But a thumbs-up for it in the first place.

[Zipperfish]

What good is it being the most powerful man on earth if you can't even get a blowjob out of it?

[Zipperfish]

Not much to worry about with Harper and Obama though.

[N_Fiddledog]

If I'm reading the OP right the point seem to be if there's smoke there's fire. If there's allegations there's guilt.

Very well, so that means Obama did have an affair with Vera Baker, right? And Obama did snort coke and have hired sex in the backseat of a limo with homosexual prostitute Larry Sinclair, is that what you're saying?

Concerning Cain, there's holes in Sharon Bieksa's story you could drive a truck through, and Karen Kraushaar made similar claims against her next employer. She wanted a Harvard fellowship on that one.

I'm a Newt supporter myself. Cain has proven himself too sloppy, and unpresidential to get my support, but as far as these sex allegations go, the juries still out.

[Teikiatsu]

CKASlacker wrote:

Look at Clinton -- despite getting a blow job in the Oval Office he's still thought of quite highly.

Careful about blanket statements. Some may revere the man, others see a man who cheats on his wife, had no respect for the presidency, claimed credit he never earned, and is generally lauded for his ability to lie and backstab.

[angler57]

Very interesting new concept.
Guilt proven by accusation.
Not evidence.

[Gunnair]

Zipperfish wrote:

Not much to worry about with Harper and Obama though.

Obama failed!

[JJ]

I'm not saying every random allegation of any random crime is automatically valid. Obviously I could dream up six scandals for any politician right now. My point was more that credibly argued allegations of promiscuity against politicians tend to have a very high record of accuracy, especially when the guy in question has the archetypical alpha-male type personality that makes him highly predisposed towards promiscuity in the first place.

[Psudo]

Zipperfish wrote:

What good is it being the most powerful man on earth if you can't even get a blowjob out of it?

This attitude is why people can't run the country worth a crap. Government office is supposed to be public service, not proof of entitlement.

[CKASlacker]

Psudo wrote:

This attitude is why people can't run the country worth a crap. Government office is supposed to be public service, not proof of entitlement.

Maybe that's the rub though? The ones most attracted to the position *are* the ones who want the entitlement too? And by corollary, the ones who would actually do a good job in the public's interest aren't attracted to politics or are "unelectable" by some other criteria.