Friday, December 02, 2011


I guess a few words about the end of the Cain campaign are in order. What annoys me is not Cain's sexual history, which is not my business. I'm annoyed at my fellow Americans for caring about this man's private life.

Not many years ago, Americans used to kid themselves whenever a sex scandal erupted. Because we did not want to seem puritanical or prurient, we relied on a familiar euphemism. "It's not the sex that bothers me; it's the poor judgment." Remember that one? It was very popular during Monicagate and the Gary Hart affair.

Nowadays we are more honest. It is the sex. Nothing else. We are completely unashamed about our lurid and indefensible interest in what a candidate does with his weewee.

(Please understand that my sentiments here are directed at news accounts of political figures involved in consensual affairs. Allegations of sexual abuse belong in a different category. Such charges are a legal matter, and their veracity should be determined by a court of law, not by a cable news host. In the past, some feminists have become very angry at me for pointing out that a man is innocent until proven guilty.)

I don't care whether Cain had an affair, and neither should you. Only his political beliefs -- which I personally find odious -- should matter.

The intriguing question is why the alleged mistress came forward at this time. What was her motive? Clearly, Cain felt that he could depend upon her silence, or he would never have dared to run in the first place. It is telling that her story broke on Fox News -- which would never have pursued the story if the Republican party leadership wanted Cain to be the nominee.
I think it was his denial. I think Cain had no choice to deny because it appeared he was using his position of authority to get ahead, so to speak.

Can't compare to Lewinsky, who actually initiated the encounter by lifting her skirt when no one was looking except the president.
Ginger White came forward with the story because there had been a leak in the media about it.
Its Cain that bothers me. And his backers the Kochs. Having Fox hate him is a plus but not not enough of a plus.

Sex was a lucky break for the GOP. They got the chance to get rid of a candidate without facing charges of r*cism (Hey, he was leading in the polls - GOP is A-OK!). I wonder if they allow the scandals to grow sufficiently as to overshadow the "R" question, before actually taking steps to pull the plug
Is it something in the water here?

Not having traveled much, I'm under the impression that our attitude toward anything to do with sex is less healthy than the other developed nations. See the Penn state scandal for example, is pedophilia so prevalent in other countries?

Anyway, Cain's tax plan would have put undue stress on lower income families and that's a deal breaker for me.
The harassment allegations are credible enough for me to have questions about his character.

If it was just a consensual affair, without his record of condemnation and hypocrisy about other folks sexual orientations and choices, not so much. It matters to me because of the hypocrisy.
I am glad someone mentioned the Penn state scandle. I was quite puzzled by the lack of massive public out rage at what happened there and Sericuse too. It seems that consentual sex acts get more public attentions than children sexual assult. What is wrong with people. I thought there will be something close to a popular uprise against college sports and demands for investigations flying around from different organizations etc but games are going on as usual and people continued to watch without any care. Is that normal
Look at the difference in the physical appearances of the women he has had consensual sexual relationships with (e.g., his wife, Ginger White) and the women he is accused of sexually harrassing. Then think about the statement that sexual attacks are not about sex but about power and anger. It is not surprising that someone with Cain's background would have racial issues and anger that he must act out in indirect ways, but I do think his "issues" are relevant to whether he should be president. This is not about sex.
What do you mean "lack of outrage" over Penn State? You obviously haven't been following it.

By the way, I have come to the conclusion there is FAR less to the scandal there than what meets the eye, hence Sandusky's seeming foolishness to talking to the media.
The thing to keep in mind in regards to the PSU "scandal" is that he has not been proven guilty of anything in a court of law. No one has. Why should "college sports" have to change when nothing has been proven? I think people are a bit quick to forget the Duke "rape" case, which turned out to be a complete fabrication by the alleged "victim". I'm not saying that is the case with PSU, but why would every college in the country, let alone PSU, overreact to something that has yet to be proven. Obviously, there has been incredible amounts of outrage over it, by people who might want to hold off until all the facts are known.

As to Cain, good riddance. I think Joseph has a point, even if many here claim otherwise. There were a lot of things against him for those on the left, who would likely have never supported him regardless of harassment or affairs. This country as a whole most certainly has an archaic and messed up sense of morality, where it is an unforgivable offense to have an extra-marital affair, but it's a-okay to kill thousands of innocent children in Iraq and Afghanistan in the name of "freedom".
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is 

powered by Blogger. 

Isn't yours?