Skip to content

J’Accuse!: The Besmirchers Of Herman Cain [Updated Below]

09 November 2011 @ 18:06

Thoughts and quotes / links to commentary on the situation with Herman Cain and his accusers…

-One of the reasons I did not post last night was that I wanted to watch the whole press conference and then surf the Interweb seas on a ship made of indignation to read commentary and analysis of the whole situation from people I respect.  While I can not link every one of them here, I would like to present a sample of the insightful comments I found.

But, first, let me say that I thought Mr. Cain did very well and I agree with the spirit of Mark Levin’s comments on his radio show last night.  The man was resolute and came off to me as honest.  There are indeed dark forces surrounding him, trying to destroy him as a candidate and as man, seeking to rob him of the dignity and respect that he has worked hard to earn.  Do I believe there is a grand conspiracy coordinated from some dingy room somewhere?  No.  But there is most definitely a mindset at play, shared by many people, that runs from the Left end of the spectrum through and into the Establishment circles of the GOP.  That shared mindset looks down on The TEA Party Movement and it’s allies and sympathizers.  Mr. Cain is the symbol to them of that and, therefore, he must be annihilated utterly.  For, if you discredit him, they believe, you discredit the whole Movement and anyone associated with it.  And, perhaps most importantly, you discredit it’s beliefs.  The Left and the GOP Establishment are feeling hubristic these days because they were successful in their similar campaign against Sarah Palin.  Now, Herman Cain has stepped into the breech and he must be brought down and laid low.

I am of a mind to say that this is the time to make our stand and fight it out now; let’s fight the rat bastards all the way on this one.  My disappointments with Mr. Cain and his campaign are well-documented in my Dispatches, but I’m starting to think it may be imperative to rally around him as a symbol of our struggle to restore our freedoms and liberties.  I feel like shouting: ‘Let’s lance this Leftist boil so we can drain the vile pus that poisons the American body politic’.  Your thoughts would be appreciated.

-I’ve heard a good number of conservatives today criticize Mr. Cain for the things he said at the press conference and even that he held one at all.  They’re once again chanting that ‘it’s over’ and ‘time to drop out’.  One GOP consultant I heard being interviewed on Fox News Radio seemed to be saying: ‘This is not the way you do things in politics’.

I think Jeff Goldstein has written the best response to these people:

…Cain is telling the truth, telling the truth to the press to the best of his ability and recollection, and we’ve become so cynical that we no longer even recognize that — from the (hypothetical, let’s say) perspective of a man being falsely of multiple instances of sexual harassment, at least one instance of which he says he can’t even place the accuser — the Cain press conference looks exactly as it should: a man literally telling you what he knows, what he remembers and what he doesn’t, and explicitly denying the charges against him.

Really, are we so comfortable in the gutter these days that we feel somehow emboldened to distrust those who simply refuse to get down in there with us?

And what do we make of conservatives and constitutionalists praising the Cain presser, while the more “pragmatic,” establishment type “conservatives” found the whole thing to be troubling, for reasons having largely to do with its having broken from the defensive playbook they consistently counsel we not stray from.

Since when does answering questions to the best of your ability, and demanding that accusations be scrutinized alongside the party being accused, constitute “discrediting” yourself?

Hey, Jeff, it’s a world turned upside down.  These droogies should just take some more Soma and STFU.

-Former anonymous accuser Karen Kraushaar, it seems, has a penchant for suing her bosses and making outrageous demands.  Stacy McCain has the details here.

There’s more:

The complaint also cited as objectionable an email that a manager had circulated comparing computers to women and men, a former supervisor said. The complaint claimed that the email, based on humor widely circulated on the Internet, was sexually explicit, according to the supervisor, who did not have a copy of the email. The joke circulated online lists reasons men and women were like computers, including that men were like computers because “in order to get their attention, you have to turn them on.” Women were like computers because “even your smallest mistakes are stored in long-term memory for later retrieval.”

I agree with what PGlenn wrote over at Stacy’s joint:

…It looks like Kraushaar is a serial sexual harassment accuser. If you were her boss, reviewing one of her written reports, and you told her that her margins were too fat, she’d lodge a complaint to HR.

I wrote in response:

I got the same impression too.

Having worked in government for over thirty years, I’ve seen this type of person a number of times.  It’s as almost if they spend their time looking for excuses to be offended.

He wrote back:

Two seconds after seeing a picture of Kraushaar, I was thinking, “yep, I know that (type of) chick. I’ve seen dozens of ’em.” Who she is, it was written all over her face.

At the same time, I was afraid that I was seeing what I wanted to see. Nope, I was right.

This type of person plagues every type of organization these days.  They’re profoundly ideological and supremely silly and always dangerous to the organization’s efficiency and morale.  They’re typical Chaotics.

William Jacobson has got this woman’s number:

I’ve seen this movie before when I was in private law practice. There are certain people whose radar is up, like cats waiting for the mouse. And when they see an opportunity to cash in, they take it, and usually more than once.

This woman’s idiocy is even making Ace less anti-Cain Hysterical and the revelations about Mzzz. Kraushaar are causing Utahprez to hum.

-So-called conservative Jennifer Rubin’s behavior throughout this story has been reprehensible and William Jacobson eviscerates her like she deserves.  A highlight:

Rubin repeatedly invokes her prior career as a lawyer, but has had a completely unlawyerly lack of concern for facts. The demand for facts is portrayed by Rubin as a slavish adherence to some mythical conservative cabal, when facts are what we all should be demanding.

-By the way: Stacy remains hopeful about Herman Cain surviving all of this:

Assuming that the parade of accusers is finite, assuming that we will not be discussing Accuser #11 and Accuser #12 this time next week, Tuesday’s press conference may prove to be the turning point, the high-tide of the “scandal” tsunami which gradually begins to recede. If so, it will fade away in the rearview mirror after Thanksgiving and by Dec. 3 — with one month to go until the Iowa caucuses — the campaign narrative shifts. If Cain reaches early December still at or near the top of the polls, his survival will be the story: Here is the guy who stood up to the Politics of Personal Destruction and lived to tell the tale.

Good points.

-On the positive side: Clint Eastwood likes Mr. Cain [tip of the fedora to Drudge Report]:

When it comes to the current crop of Republican presidential candidates, if Eastwood is enthusiastic about anyone, it’s Herman Cain. “I love Cain’s story,” he says. “He’s a guy who came from nowhere and did well, obviously against heavy odds. He’s a doer and a straight-talker, which I don’t see enough of from either party.”

-Regarding the whole sexual harassment issue, I think John Derbyshire was dead solid perfect when he wrote this a week ago:

There has never in the history of the world been a people better mannered and less inclined to insulting acts of prejudice than today’s Americans, yet we’re supposed to believe that the nation is seething with “harassment” and “discrimination,” women being groped in every business office and crosses burning on every lawn. For Heaven’s sake. Aren’t there any grown-ups around?

Not many anymore.  What few that do exist are just trying to survive these dark times and protect their loved ones.

On second thought, let’s not go to Camelot. It is a silly place.

According to Robin Givhan of The Daily Beast, the fact that Herman Cain favors the double-breasted suit transmits that he is a serial sexual harasser.  In solidarity with HC, Paco outs himself as a ‘smooth operator’.

-In the Turnabout Is Fair Play Department: we have this from Kevin DuJan at HillBuzz [tip of the fedora to Zilla]:

Last week, the agenda-driven, drive-by media trashed Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain with unsubstantiated and poorly sourced sexual innuendo.

This week, let’s all talk about Democrat President Barack Obama being gay, him sexually harassing male actor Kal Penn, and his frequenting of Chicago gay bathhouse “Man’s Country” — using the Left’s established precedent for journalistic integrity when it comes to rumor and gossip.

Fair’s fair, right — in love, politics, and what’s apparently allowable in the 2012 election now that all-out war was declared on the black Republican presidential contender. Why shouldn’t conservatives treat Barack Obama the way the Left treated Herman Cain? If the operating assumption is that anything whispered about by anonymous sources is true about Herman Cain, then I guess everything people in Chicago have talked about for years related to Barack Obama being a closeted gay man into younger Pakistani guys must be true too, right?

During the 2008 election, I campaigned for Hillary Clinton in the Democrat primaries. Repeatedly, I heard over and over here in Chicago that Barack Obama is gay and that his marriage to Michelle is one of mutual convenience.  In the black community, this is called “being on the down-low”, where a closeted gay male weds an often-times gruff and demanding woman (typically without other male suitors of her own) to take public scrutiny off them both and afford the pair a successful life they’d never achieve separately.

There are, apparently, a lot of such relationships forged at Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago — where Barack Obama’s pastor, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, oversaw the coupling of down-low gay black men with sour and caustic black women.

This apparently happens not just in Chicago at Trinity United, but in black communities all over the country.  Author Terry McMillen and talking-head Star Jones married down-low gay men to benefit their careers and help their public image too.

Black women who marry gay black men are lavished with all the social perks these marriages of convenience afford them, while the men get to go off together on “camping trips”, to “basketball games out of town”, or to other “social events” where they can engage in gay activity with one another secure in the knowledge that no one in the Reverend Wright’s “down-low club” would rat the other fellas out.  You need to understand how much homosexuality is despised in the black community to appreciate both the need for gay black men to stay “down-low” and the willingness of some black women to become “beards” for these men when they think they can benefit from the arrangement in some way themselves (usually because these are difficult-to-deal-with women who were unable to find anyone willing to marry them otherwise).

Oprah Winfrey and her longtime “boyfriend” Stedman Graham were for many years also members of Trinity United Church of Christ, and you can read whatever you may like into that.

There’s much, much more here.

Open the door and people are going to eventually go through.

The final word goes to Stacy McCain:

Our Guy is in a fight, getting pounded like hell by our common enemy and, instead of sitting around wringing our hands about the niceties of tactics, we ought to be jumping into the fight and pounding the hell out of Our Guy’s attackers. Whatever the ultimate fate of Our Guy, we cannot rally people to our cause by appearing to be weak.

Weakness is not an attractive quality, in politics or anything else, and it is an error in political combat to worry about making the “smart” argument when what is needed is a winning argument, or at least a gesture of solidarity and a show of force that lets our opponents understand that we’re not a bunch of gutless weaklings.





UPDATE at 2015…

-Ann Coulter uncovers some interesting information.  The introduction to her latest column:

Herman Cain has spent his life living and working all over the country — Indiana, Georgia, Minnesota, Nebraska, Kansas, Washington, D.C. — but never in Chicago.

So it’s curious that all the sexual harassment allegations against Cain emanate from Chicago: home of the Daley machine and Obama consigliere David Axelrod.

Suspicions had already fallen on Sheila O’Grady, who is close with David Axelrod and went straight from being former Chicago mayor Richard M. Daley’s chief of staff to president of the Illinois Restaurant Association (IRA), as being the person who dug up Herman Cain’s personnel records from the National Restaurant Association (NRA).

The Daley-controlled IRA works hand-in-glove with the NRA. And strangely enough, Cain’s short, three-year tenure at the NRA is evidently the only period in his decades-long career during which he’s alleged to have been a sexual predator.

After O’Grady’s name surfaced in connection with the miraculous appearance of Cain’s personnel files from the NRA, she issued a Clintonesque denial of any involvement in producing them — by vigorously denying that she knew Cain when he was at the NRA. (Duh.)

And now, after a week of conservative eye-rolling over unspecified, anonymous accusations against Cain, we’ve suddenly got very specific sexual assault allegations from an all-new accuser out of … Chicago.

Herman Cain has never lived in Chicago. But you know who has? David Axelrod! And guess who lived in Axelrod’s very building? Right again: Cain’s latest accuser, Sharon Bialek.

Please do take the time to click here and read the rest.

Ooo-ooo that smell
Can’t you smell that smell…

-Over at The Corner, David French comments:

This is unjust . . . to Herman Cain. He faces old claims from women who obviously felt that the initial incidents (if any) didn’t merit a legal filing. In some ways, Herman Cain faces a more difficult challenge than Clarence Thomas. At least Justice Thomas had the opportunity to confront his accuser in a format where Americans were able to weigh their competing stories, saw them competently cross-examined by senators from both sides, and were able to reach a judgment, a judgment that was decisive at the time: Justice Thomas had been wrongly accused. As painful as that experience was, I wonder if it is ultimately less painful than shadow-boxing against accusers whose celebrity attorneys parade them on the morning shows, making allegations that are impossible to disprove yet equally impossible to ignore. Herman Cain is being forced to prove a negative — without access to contemporaneous evidence.

There is obviously no statute of limitations on accusations, and it is certainly possible that the claims are true in whole or in part, but the very age of the stories themselves — combined with the total absence of tested (or testable) legal claims — should shape our judgments. As for me, after more than a week of excruciating public controversy, I’m still giving Herman Cain the benefit of the doubt.

Me too more so than ever.

I have heard a number of pundits on both the Left and the Right assert that, since these charges against Mr. Cain are not being aired in a court of law but in ‘the court of public opinion’, Mr. Cain has no right to face his accusers.


The right to face one’s accusers in a court of law evolved out of the practices of common law and is even mentioned in The Bible.  Therefore, this principle is one that has been around longer than it’s codification in law and is one of the basic tenets of a civilized society trying to be just.  It is a moral principle.

-I will have more to say on this posting by Stacy in a separate posting tomorrow, but please do take the time to read it.

  1. loopyloo305 permalink
    09 November 2011 @ 18:16 18:16

    I tend to think that this is just a little too much and therefore is piling on instead of anything real! I haven’t seen any evidence, the fact that charges were made and settled with what could be considered a pittance, sounds more as if they were petty annoyances that the company was trying to make go away and there wasn’t anything there. If this woman had a complaint before and didn’t make it then, she does not have credence without evidence of which there doesn’t seem to be any. I like Herman Cain, and I haven’t seen anything yet to change that opinion. That doesn’t mean I will vote for him, I haven’t make up my mind yet, but he is at or near the top of my list!

    • bobbelvedere permalink*
      09 November 2011 @ 18:48 18:48

      Well put.

  2. 09 November 2011 @ 22:03 22:03

    Of course Eastwood endorses Herman. It reminds him of “Play Misty For Me…”

    • bobbelvedere permalink*
      09 November 2011 @ 23:38 23:38

      Good one. You win a cookie.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: