Is Cain the biggest loser in WaPo’s hit on Perry?

posted at 12:05 pm on October 3, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

Sometimes, competition can make people abandon their natural common sense.  That arguably happened yesterday to Herman Cain, who must have seen the Washington Post exposé on Rick Perry about a Texas hunting ranch lease from the 1980s as an opening to hit one of the frontrunners in the race.  Cain appeared on ABC’s This Week and blasted Perry as “insensitive” (mildly NSFW):

This certainly seemed like a gift in the middle of a tough campaign, but as Jazz wrote yesterday, the Post’s story had a lot of holes in it — starting with the problem that they didn’t even find the rock in question, and that Perry’s family didn’t own or name the ranch, but in fact found the name offensive enough to cover with paint and flip over. Instead of waiting for more information, though, Cain accepted the premise of the Post’s article, which raised the ire of some conservatives, if my Twitter feed yesterday was any indication.

The Boss Emeritus provides some needed context to the Post’s attack:

The Post interviewed dozens of people. The New York Timesfollowed up with another crack investigation of hazy memories of bygone days.

They’ve given “stoning” a whole new meaning.

Has Perry actually used the racial epithet himself — you know, like the late, former KKK leader Robert Byrd did as recently as 2001?

Did Perry condescendingly refer to a black politician as “articulate and bright and clean” like Biden did when he described Barack Obama in 2007?

Did Perry racially stereotype Hispanics for political gain or refer offensively to President Obama’s “light skin” and “lack of a Negro dialect” like Senate Democrat leader Harry Reid did just last year?

No.

This prompted Michael Tomasky at The Daily Beast to write that the biggest loser of the ranch flap is likely to be Cain, and not Perry (via The Week):

And it is instructive, is it not, that no other candidate jumped on this revelation? Think about the conversations that must have gone on in Mitt Romney’s camp, or in Rick Santorum’s. I bet they weren’t even very long conversations. It’s a charge that emanates from the liberal media, and the last thing in the world, and I mean the very last thing, a candidate chasing Republican primary votes wants to do is sound like that. It’s a dead certainty that we won’t hear another peep about this story from them.

As for Cain, one wonders what synapse snapped into action there. He has been reliably on message on such matters, saying things like (as he said even yesterday) two thirds of black Americans are victims of “brainwashing” against conservatism. I guess he just doesn’t know his steam-locomotive history. But he said what he said, and now he’s going to have to prove to these people, just as he was gaining a little momentum, that he isn’t morphing into Al Sharpton.

As for Perry himself, he seems unlikely to be hurt very much. One supposes it is possible that some group of GOP panjandrums will send up a smoke signal, gather in lower Manhattan, and decide that this is another sign that Perry isn’t the man to put forward next November. If he’d been coming off three dominant debate performances and was still running away with it, he could wrap himself in the highest possible dudgeon and try to chop the Post to pieces for the amusement of a salivating base constituency. But since he’s on the downswing for now, he needs to play defense, which is what his camp did yesterday. This charge may make some conservatives feel that Perry is a tad embarrassing. But how many will it personally offend? Let’s face it, based on the evidence of the last debate, the GOP base thinks Perry isn’t racially insensitive enough, giving $100,000 college-education discounts to all those illegal brown children.

I don’t find it at all surprising that Cain, who grew up in poverty and oppressive state-backed racism, would have an immediate and emotional reaction to this story.  It seems almost churlish to scold him for calling it “insensitive,” a rather mild criticism considering the nature of the term.  The other candidates in the GOP race for the nomination don’t have a history with this term as Cain does and could approach it more coolly, perhaps, while looking at the greater strategy of avoiding the potential backfire when the story came apart.

That said, the media has quite a track record of highlighting tenuous connections to racism when it comes to Republicans while, pardon the pun, whitewashing it when it comes to Democrats.  Conservatives who were angry with Perry over his harsh reaction to criticism of his state-based tuition breaks for children of illegal immigrants might tend to rally around him after watching a national media outlet accuse him falsely of perpetuating an ugly term that Perry himself said “has no place in the modern world.”  They’re not likely to look kindly on those who bolster the case of the media, regardless of the context of life experience from which the reaction originates.  That’s why it’s always best when these media “exposés” arise to withhold judgment until all of the facts are on the table.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5 6

As I have consistently said all along… this race is Sarah Palin’s to lose. She is the missing piece here! Her absence in this campaign is becoming more and more apparent every day!

JellyToast on October 3, 2011 at 6:25 PM

She will be crushed if she decides to get into the race and she knows it.

CannedTomatoes on October 3, 2011 at 6:39 PM

As I have consistently said all along… this race is Sarah Palin’s to lose. She is the missing piece here! Her absence in this campaign is becoming more and more apparent every day!

JellyToast on October 3, 2011 at 6:25 PM

Have another drink I am buying.

CW on October 3, 2011 at 6:40 PM

. I hope those ankles you are biting on are clean.

kim roy on October 3, 2011 at 6:36 PM

Kimmie get some new lines dearie.

CW on October 3, 2011 at 6:40 PM

Look to be called a “Palin cultist” who is “gleeful” about the smears against Perry any minute now.

steebo77 on October 3, 2011 at 4:55 PM

Whine on Stevie.

CW on October 3, 2011 at 6:41 PM

She will be crushed if she decides to get into the race and she knows it.

CannedTomatoes on October 3, 2011 at 6:39 PM

I don’t think Christie’s running…:)

idesign on October 3, 2011 at 6:41 PM

The Usual suspects out in force.

CW on October 3, 2011 at 6:41 PM

Nistas clicking their heels. What a sight.

CW on October 3, 2011 at 6:42 PM

MJBrutus, is that the cue for Romney and his attack dogs to begin the take-down of Cain? They promoted him – don’t you think they need to enjoy at least another week of Cain-flavor?

:)

TheRightMan on October 3, 2011 at 6:37 PM

Do you have any proof of that absurd comment? Link please.

CannedTomatoes on October 3, 2011 at 6:42 PM

The Usual suspects out in force.

CW on October 3, 2011 at 6:41 PM

Hey, the “Chronic Wanker” is back…

idesign on October 3, 2011 at 6:44 PM

How and what do u know, canned tomatoes? Her inner circle doesn’t even know what she’s thinking. Seems like she’s the only viable conservative left out there with name recognition.

gracie on October 3, 2011 at 6:48 PM

I don’t think Christie’s running…:)

idesign on October 3, 2011 at 6:41 PM

I wasn’t talking about Chris Christie, nor addressing you. Do you have a point or do you just like trolling around poking people with a stick in order to become relevant?

CannedTomatoes on October 3, 2011 at 6:50 PM

I wasn’t talking about Chris Christie, nor addressing you. Do you have a point or do you just like trolling around poking people with a stick in order to become relevant?

CannedTomatoes on October 3, 2011 at 6:50 PM

I like squashing rotten Tomatoes..:)

idesign on October 3, 2011 at 6:52 PM

Have another drink I am buying.
CW on October 3, 2011 at 6:40 PM

Kimmie get some new lines dearie.
CW on October 3, 2011 at 6:40 PM

Whine on Stevie.
CW on October 3, 2011 at 6:41 PM

The Usual suspects out in force.
CW on October 3, 2011 at 6:41 PM

Nistas clicking their heels. What a sight.
CW on October 3, 2011 at 6:42 PM

Five posts in two minutes and not a thing of substance or usefulness.

kim roy on October 3, 2011 at 6:53 PM

Fla poll: Romney 28%, Cain 24, Gingrich 10, Perry 9

Interesting.

steebo77 on October 3, 2011 at 6:49 PM

The survey was conducted 9/30. The prior survey was conducted 9/20. In those ten days

- Romney rose 3.2%, from 25.0% to 28.2%
- Cain rose 18.8%, from 4.9% to 27.7%
- Gingrich rose 1.1%, from 8.7% to 9.8%
- Perry fell 15.6%, from 24.7% to 9.1%

steebo77 on October 3, 2011 at 6:54 PM

I love how the main stream propaganda machines want to make Cain out as a dummy. They want to make a souffle out of this none issue. It’s only going to get worse for Mr Cain as his polling numbers improve. The loony left cannot tolerate a conservative let alone one that isn’t WHITE! This is why thet attack Cain and Col West. How dare they leave the democrat plantation.

ColdWarrior57 on October 3, 2011 at 6:56 PM

Cain still didn’t apologize when given the chance on Sean Hannity radio show today. He repeated most of what he just said above again race baiting Perry.

Hannity asked what if I told you, Perry …..(going on to tell him what happened.) Cain responded, “IF he…” Hannity interrupted him with the date 1983, even gave him another opportunity. Cain doubled down saying 1983 was still 20 years too late and mentioned Civil Rights Act. He said Perry should have done it much earlier than 1983. Huh? Hannity tried once again. Cain repeated “If he did then I would commend him…” That’s political maneuvering and keeping the story alive.

Ridiculous!

He repeated it for his gain. Then used the politically infamous “If he…” If he…then Cain would commend him. Perry did yet Cain didn’t.

And the answer is “I take him at his word and commend him then.” or something like that and apologize to him.

Definitely a political opportunist. Also after his stunt yesterday I went researching on him and not liking a whole bunch of stuff I found. He is hiding information, outright lying about his principles and flip flopping for political gain.

I was for Cain until he said he woulnd’t support Perry if the nominee but would support Romney. I was even madder that all these sites we trust never mentioned it at all. If they had mentioned it, perhaps one of the reasons given by someone would be maybe he did it because Mitt Romney bought Clear Channel Communications and could make or break Herman Cain’s radio career.

If it was Rick Perry or any of the other candidates, we’d be hearing it for days.

So I admit I went searching for dirt on purpose as I’m tried of being conned by these politicians and I do not want any surprises when they face Obama. When I saw Cain do this I knew something was very wrong.

I found a whole lot I’m not liking like says believes in 2nd amendment but gun legislation should be left to the states Huh? (Who does that sound like? Obama)

Cain was pro affirmative action, race quotas for college admissions and believes the Federal govt should regulate business into hiring blacks and minorities. He believed all this until starting to run for Pres. Even had it prominent on his website when he ran for Georgia US Senator in 2004.

He was pro abortion.

And so much more……

TriciaNC on October 3, 2011 at 6:58 PM

ColdWarrior57 on October 3, 2011 at 6:56 PM

Cain made himself look like a “dummy” all by himself yesterday.

Not taking the MSM’s bait is the most basic thing to know as a conservative.

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on October 3, 2011 at 7:00 PM

kim roy on October 3, 2011 at 6:11 PM

Perry never pretended that he didn’t say what he said. Cain is.

Perry owned his mistake.

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on October 3, 2011 at 7:01 PM

This is food for the trolls and the two-bit media provocateurs. Herman Cain’s right on the issues and has the solutions to America’s most pressing problems. Did he lie? Move on – nothin’ to see here….

DanaSmiles on October 3, 2011 at 6:20 PM

I like Herman Cain BECAUSE he is not a seasoned politician.

Seems that so many have fallen into a Cain v. Perry paradigm instead of seeing the real situation here: An inexperienced politician was taken advantage of by the LSM. Amanpour/Washington Post look for a soft spot to the “feelings” of Herman Cain. “Feelings”, advocating decisions because of them or tearing people apart because of them, are the left’s bread and butter.

There is no easier target when dealing with a black person who grew up with Jim Crow laws than to stir up the “how do you FEEL about this racial slur?” mess.

Herman Cain got fooled by the LSM because he is inexperienced with dealing with their cutthroat daggers. It looks like he has learned quickly here and I am impressed that he has introduced the “distraction” terminology, accepts Perry’s excuse and moves on.

I like Perry, too, but his debate performances worry me as to electability (not whether he would be a good President). I am also worried as to whether there are some complications going on from his spinal operation in the summer that are causing Perry to be so different from previous appearances and videos I have seen of him prior to the last few months.

Overall, if I am going to like an out-of-the-box candidate like Herman Cain, I have to accept that he is going to make rank amateur mistakes and fall into metaphorical “tiger pits” every once in while. Hopefully, this “trap” that Herman fell into will put him on his toes for future such incidents because the LSM WILL try again and again to catch him in the race card.

Greyledge Gal on October 3, 2011 at 7:01 PM

Five posts in two minutes and not a thing of substance or usefulness.

kim roy on October 3, 2011 at 6:53 PM

Has CW ever posted anything of substance or something thoughtful?

sharrukin on October 3, 2011 at 7:06 PM

Has CW ever posted anything of substance or something thoughtful?

sharrukin on October 3, 2011 at 7:06 PM

Nutter!11!11!/

steebo77 on October 3, 2011 at 7:09 PM

New Connecticut poll shows average results for Paul at 10%

6% of the sample was 18-29%
24% of the sample was 65%

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_CT_1003.pdf

PRESIDENT – CONNECTICUT – GOP PRIMARY (PPP)

Mitt Romney 25%

Rick Perry 18%
Ron Paul 10%

Newt Gingrich 10%

Herman Cain 10%

Michele Bachmann 8%

Jon Huntsman 3%

Rick Santorum 3%

Gary Johnson 1%

But….

Paul takes 50% of the age 18-29 group. All the other candidates combined can’t equal Paul with this group.

These numbers should tell you who the real leader of the GOP is.

Spathi on October 3, 2011 at 7:09 PM

TheRightMan on October 3, 2011 at 6:37 PM

Nobody needs to attack Cain. He’s like the secret tape that begins an episode of Mission Impossible. He will self-destruct in 10 seconds. That’s the consequence of inexperience in this arena.

If Romney is smart he will stick to being positive and attacking PBHO. He can only punch down against primary opponents at this point and he should know that.

MJBrutus on October 3, 2011 at 7:11 PM

I posted earlier Cain’s walkback of his comment, which illustrated his weakness: foot-in-the-mouth disease.

But what will this story be without Romney weighing in?

OT: Romney: N-word at Perry hunting camp “offensive”

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney on Monday said the informal name of a hunting camp long leased by rival Rick Perry’s family — reportedly known as “Niggerhead” — was “offensive.”

Romney told Sean Hannity during a radio interview that he has followed the controversy over the name “from afar,” Politico reports, telling Hannity: “I think it’s offensive. I think most people think it’s offensive.”

Romney then said he did not want to discuss the issue further. His comments, however, will likely help keep the controversy in the headlines, particularly since most of the other Republican candidates have elected to stay quiet over the story even as it has exploded online and on cable news.

Talk about being dumb. And this is the guy you want me to vote for as President?

Hell will freeze over before I vote for Romney.

TheRightMan on October 3, 2011 at 7:11 PM

But….

Paul takes 50% of the age 18-29 group. All the other candidates combined can’t equal Paul with this group.

These numbers should tell you who the real leader of the GOP is.

Spathi on October 3, 2011 at 7:09 PM

You do realize that older Americans vote at much higher rates than younger Americans, and also make up a greater percentage of the total population, right?

steebo77 on October 3, 2011 at 7:12 PM

These numbers should tell you who the real leader of the GOP is.

Spathi on October 3, 2011 at 7:09 PM

That if the trend stays the same, Paul will have a chance…in 20 years?

I prefer to think that the entire electorate is turning more libertarian.

cozmo on October 3, 2011 at 7:12 PM

kim roy on October 3, 2011 at 6:11 PM

Perry never pretended that he didn’t say what he said. Cain is.

Perry owned his mistake.

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on October 3, 2011 at 7:01 PM

I’m not entirely sure that “I’m sorry you were offended” a number of days after the fact is “owning” it, but YMMV.

kim roy on October 3, 2011 at 7:14 PM

These numbers should tell you who the real leader of the GOP is.

Spathi on October 3, 2011 at 7:09 PM

Why yes they do, and it’s not Ron Paul.

CannedTomatoes on October 3, 2011 at 7:14 PM

You do realize that older Americans vote at much higher rates than younger Americans, and also make up a greater percentage of the total population, right?

That was accounted for in the poll as I previously states.

6% of sample was 18-29
24% of sample was 65+

My point is that in four years 18-29′s will be the 22-33′s.

While the 65+ will be the 69+

Paul is the real leader of the GOP. It’s kind of pathetic when the entire field’s support combined can’t equal Paul’s numbers alone.

Spathi on October 3, 2011 at 7:20 PM

The survey was conducted 9/30. The prior survey was conducted 9/20. In those ten days

- Romney rose 3.2%, from 25.0% to 28.2%
- Cain rose 18.8%, from 4.9% to 27.7%
- Gingrich rose 1.1%, from 8.7% to 9.8%
- Perry fell 15.6%, from 24.7% to 9.1%

steebo77 on October 3, 2011 at 6:54 PM

Okay, but who does that help?

cozmo on October 3, 2011 at 7:21 PM

I’ll pass commenting specifically on your passive aggressive posturing and note that you proved my point as I did not mention any specific group. I hope those ankles you are biting on are clean.

kim roy on October 3, 2011 at 6:36 PM

I am not biting ankles..I guess you overlook the ones that do!..:)

Dire Straits on October 3, 2011 at 7:23 PM

My point is that in four years 18-29′s will be the 22-33′s.

Paul is the real leader of the GOP. It’s kind of pathetic when the entire field’s support combined can’t equal Paul’s numbers alone.

Spathi on October 3, 2011 at 7:20 PM

That’s great, but it won’t make statistical difference for 20 years.

cozmo on October 3, 2011 at 7:23 PM

That’s great, but it won’t make statistical difference for 20 years.

It’s already making a difference, and it’s why Ron Paul is doing better in 2011 than 2007.

Also take Ames Straw poll. We more than quadrupled (400-500%) our number from 1300 to close to 5000.

Even if we increase our numbers for Ames in 2015 by even 25%, we will have such high numbers than Rand Paul will be unbeatable.

The other candidates may as well not even bother competing.

Spathi on October 3, 2011 at 7:26 PM

Spathi on October 3, 2011 at 7:20 PM

Out of his 534 collegues in the House and Senate, how many of them have endorsed Ron Paul? My last count is ZERO.

Really Right on October 3, 2011 at 7:27 PM

Okay, but who does that help?

cozmo on October 3, 2011 at 7:21 PM

Are you stupid or something/////

It clearly shows that the Thrilla from Wasilla will win the nomination and be the next President of the United States according to unseen, Steebo and the rest of their pals.

Can’t you see it?

CannedTomatoes on October 3, 2011 at 7:27 PM

Okay, but who does that help?

cozmo on October 3, 2011 at 7:21 PM

Theoretically, no one, since it is a measurement of voting intention at a given point in time.

Likely, it will be used to further the narrative of Cain emerging as the anti-Romney candidate for a final Romney/anti-Romney showdown. It will probably also feed into the Cain-Perry rivalry narrative.

That would probably tend to help Cain to the extent that he is seen as a viable conservative alternative to Romney. It might also hurt Cain marginally in that it serves to keeps alive the story of the N-word stone even longer. It’s probably bad news for Perry since it can be seen as evidence of further post-debate implosion. I think it is mostly neutral for Romney and doesn’t affect the rest of the field at all.

steebo77 on October 3, 2011 at 7:27 PM

Are you stupid or something/////

It clearly shows that the Thrilla from Wasilla will win the nomination and be the next President of the United States according to unseen, Steebo and the rest of their pals.

Can’t you see it?

CannedTomatoes on October 3, 2011 at 7:27 PM

You’re deluded.

steebo77 on October 3, 2011 at 7:28 PM

No way Rand losses CPAC Florida next time either. The Paul movement learns from it’s mistakes, and we come back and win after we’ve been burned.

Spathi on October 3, 2011 at 7:28 PM

Out of his 534 collegues in the House and Senate, how many of them have endorsed Ron Paul? My last count is ZERO.

Only four endorsed Reagan in 1976.

They all want to keep their jobs, collect government pensions, work up the party leadership so they can get a good job as a lobbyist.

I have no problem and very much supporter firing all 434 of them except for Ron Paul.

Spathi on October 3, 2011 at 7:30 PM

No way Rand losses CPAC Florida next time either. The Paul movement learns from it’s mistakes, and we come back and win after we’ve been burned.

Spathi on October 3, 2011 at 7:28 PM

You can’t even keep your Pauls straight, can you?

steebo77 on October 3, 2011 at 7:30 PM

Are you stupid or something/////

Can’t you see it?

CannedTomatoes on October 3, 2011 at 7:27 PM

Now now, at some point those folks will need to be talked off the cliff. My intent was to see which of them was salvageable. We cannot just tease them forever…

cozmo on October 3, 2011 at 7:31 PM

I’ll pass commenting specifically on your passive aggressive posturing and note that you proved my point as I did not mention any specific group. I hope those ankles you are biting on are clean.

kim roy on October 3, 2011 at 6:36 PM

I am not biting ankles..I guess you overlook the ones that do!..:)

Dire Straits on October 3, 2011 at 7:23 PM

Now you’ve moved onto circular logic and strawmen. For a reminder I will repost my original post:

Yep. This is not the first time we’ve seen it and it will happen a lot more in the coming months. Get used to it folks. Act like you’ve been here before, because you have.

The infighting and bickering is just amazing. The LSM and Obama are the “enemy”, not each other. When Obama gets his second term because everyone’s too busy gnawing on each others ankles I hope you’ll be happy with yourselves.

You will note that I did not identify anyone in particular. There are plenty of “offenders” here of each particular “tribe”.

You responded pointing fingers, which only proved the point I was making above and one could say is gnawing on ankles.

I’m really sad that I have to explain this. Either you are being willfully ignorant or trolling, both of which is worrisome when the country is in such sad shape and needs clear eyed thought and hard work. Oh well.

kim roy on October 3, 2011 at 7:32 PM

You can’t even keep your Pauls straight, can you?

Rand Paul will likely run in 2015 if Ron Paul loses.

Not hard to figure this out. That’s why we went all out for his senate win.

Spathi on October 3, 2011 at 7:33 PM

Rand Paul will likely run in 2015 if Ron Paul loses.

Not hard to figure this out. That’s why we went all out for his senate win.

Spathi on October 3, 2011 at 7:33 PM

So you don’t think Ron Paul will manage to secure the GOP nomination this go ’round?

steebo77 on October 3, 2011 at 7:34 PM

kim roy on October 3, 2011 at 7:32 PM

I should submitt that I was speaking about a couple of posters myself..I see your point..Well taken also..:)

Dire Straits on October 3, 2011 at 7:37 PM

Now now, at some point those folks will need to be talked off the cliff. My intent was to see which of them was salvageable. We cannot just tease them forever…

cozmo on October 3, 2011 at 7:31 PM

They will jump before getting talked away from the edge.

CannedTomatoes on October 3, 2011 at 7:44 PM

I think the Left/MSM will be sorry it touched this story. Texas DEMOCRATS have come out to support Perry:

http://www.texastribune.org/texas-politics/2012-presidential-election/perrys-critics-say-hes-no-racist/

This is blowing up BIG time in the Left’s faces.

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on October 3, 2011 at 5:14 PM

Oh, Yeah:-) I just finished reading that. Glad you posted that. This smear should backfire on those that posted this. I saw a link for Cain’s original comments on Wash Po “can’t be found” now, LOL

I see Cain is not as fast in apologizing to Gov. Perry as he is as siding with the Wash Po’s smear. I noticed Cain was on TV quite a bit repeating the same thing.

bluefox on October 3, 2011 at 7:47 PM

A post from c4p.

The skunk has replaced the Eagle as the new symbol for the President.It is half black, half white, and everything it does stinks!

derft on October 3, 2011 at 7:53 PM

They are all doing Huntsman’s bidding.

steebo77 on October 3, 2011 at 5:29 PM

I don’t think so. Huntsman doesn’t have that much support or money.

Something else is going on, either in support of Romney or with Santorum & Bachmann just to simply get some traction. What else, I don’t know, but it certainly stands out.

bluefox on October 3, 2011 at 7:54 PM

Tempest in a teapot. Next.

alwaysfiredup on October 3, 2011 at 7:55 PM

So you don’t think Ron Paul will manage to secure the GOP nomination this go ’round?

Probably not but you never know. I believe he can win Iowa if Cain cuts into Perry’s lead there.

If Perry imploads in Iowa, Ron Paul is GOING to win it. Then we run all the way to the convention, and get behind Rand Paul for 2015.

Spathi on October 3, 2011 at 7:57 PM

kim roy on October 3, 2011 at 7:14 PM

He said he was wrong the very next day after the debate on Hannity’s radio show. And he never said he didn’t say it. That’s what Cain’s done today.

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on October 3, 2011 at 7:57 PM

“For him to leave [the N-word] there as long as he did before I hear that they finally painted over it is just plain insensitive to a lot of black people in this country,” GOP candidate Herman Cain told Fox News, picking up the Democrats’ race card.

That is a classic example of playing the race-card using the Liberal Democrat playbook. I was thinking of supporting Cain until he told us that he could support Romney but not Perry. I won’t support him now, he’s just the same ol’ same ol’ that we have already. People say they like Cain because ‘he’s not a politician.’

If he isn’t, why does he insist on acting like one?

JonPrichard on October 3, 2011 at 7:58 PM

I see Cain is not as fast in apologizing to Gov. Perry as he is as siding with the Wash Po’s smear. I noticed Cain was on TV quite a bit repeating the same thing.

bluefox on October 3, 2011 at 7:47 PM

He clarified the statement today.

“All I said was the mere fact that that word was there was ‘insensitive,’” he said to reporters outside the Trump Tower Monday after meeting with Donald Trump according to National Review. “That’s not playing the race card. I am not attacking Gov. Perry. Some people in the media want to attack him. I’m done with the issue!”

Knucklehead on October 3, 2011 at 8:00 PM

it is very interesting that no one has gone after mitt isn’t it in all the debates. even the second tier refused to do so. like timmy instead he attacked Bachmann then endorsed Mitt.

Paul I think it’s personal with him and Perry. I keep thinking about thos ephotos that Paul “couldn’t remember” what was said. That was not a friendly conversaiton form the looks of it. By why would the others not attack Mitt and Perry. and instead simply attack Perry. doesn’t make sense.

unseen on October 3, 2011 at 5:27 PM

Mitt is the 100% “true” Conservative? LOL Pawlenty couldn’t shout down Bachmann and then after that, I think he received an “offer he couldn’t refuse”:-) and endorsed Romney. Yes, I agree with Paul & Perry; it would be hard to get along with Paul:-)

Now if Christie gets in, it will be interesting to see what these same Candidates take issue with him about.

I read somewhere or heard that Cain is going to Texas….:-)

bluefox on October 3, 2011 at 8:01 PM

He said he was wrong the very next day after the debate on Hannity’s radio show. And he never said he didn’t say it. That’s what Cain’s done today.

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on October 3, 2011 at 7:57 PM

You Perry fanbois are the only ones that care about this. Your guy is not going to be president. Deal with it.

alwaysfiredup on October 3, 2011 at 8:02 PM

Sometimes, competition can make people abandon their natural common sense.

His taking the MSM bait on the leased hunting grounds rock, redoubled by his stated intention not to support the GOP nominee if it were Perry, is just too much to bear.

It was a sad mis-step for my hope, Herman Cain. My/his best hope now is to come clean and retract it. I may get over it, if he will do that. But it has been a bad blow.

petefrt on October 3, 2011 at 8:02 PM

This is what he said:

“For him to leave [the N-word] there as long as he did before I hear that they finally painted over it is just plain insensitive to a lot of black people in this country,” GOP candidate Herman Cain told Fox News, picking up the Democrats’ race card.

This is his climbdown (but not apology):

“All I said was the mere fact that that word was there was ‘insensitive,’” he said to reporters outside the Trump Tower Monday after meeting with Donald Trump according to National Review. “That’s not playing the race card. I am not attacking Gov. Perry. Some people in the media want to attack him. I’m done with the issue!”

He might be done with the issue, but, as a measure of his character, we should not!

JonPrichard on October 3, 2011 at 8:03 PM

JonPrichard on October 3, 2011 at 8:03 PM

Exactly. Cain did not call the “word” insensitive, he called Perry “insenstive” for what Cain thought was leaving the word up for too long (which turns out to be Cain believing the MSM’s lies b/c Perry said they covered the word up quickly).

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on October 3, 2011 at 8:08 PM

Voter from WA State on October 3, 2011 at 8:03 PM

ITA on both points. Obama today was attacking both Romney and Perry (for catering to the evil Tea Party, of course) which shows O is scared on them both.

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on October 3, 2011 at 8:09 PM

Where is your evidence that Rove had anything to do with this. There is no more evidence that Rove had anything at all to do with this nonsense, than there is that Perry is a racist.

Perry has a lot of enemies right there in Texas..besides the Washington Post is quite capable of digging up some obscure crap like this and running with it. They don’t need any help.

Terrye on October 3, 2011 at 5:29 PM

Terrye, we know you are a supporter of Romney, but you don’t have to try to defend every mention of him. You need to get a perspective. The only reason that you are trying to defend Cain, is because there may be a shadow of Romney hanging over this latest smear. The Wash Po smeared Perry and Cain joined in. Politics is just that.

We don’t need to have evidence when we express an opinion, so stop asking for it. We could ask you the same thing.

You may want to recall that when I called Romney a liar and a hypocrite, it was not only my opinion, but I furnished the links to prove it to you, i.e. evidence.

bluefox on October 3, 2011 at 8:10 PM

bluefox on October 3, 2011 at 8:01 PM

Well, if the fix is in, and Mitt going to be the nominee, then you might as well get with the program. President Romney sounds a lot better than President Barack Obama.

Really Right on October 3, 2011 at 8:13 PM

Bachmann, Santorum, Ron Paul, Romney all have attacked Perry. And now Cain. That makes me say, Hmmmmmm, and why?

bluefox on October 3, 2011 at 5:20 PM
They have all attacked Romney too…and each other, largely because they are running for the same job. Sheesh. Is that such a surprise? Really?

Terrye on October 3, 2011 at 5:31 PM

I think you do a lot of guessing:-)

I do remember that several Tea Party Locals in New Hampshire confronted Romney, LOL

bluefox on October 3, 2011 at 8:15 PM

He clarified the statement today.

“All I said was the mere fact that that word was there was ‘insensitive,’” he said to reporters outside the Trump Tower Monday after meeting with Donald Trump according to National Review. “That’s not playing the race card. I am not attacking Gov. Perry. Some people in the media want to attack him. I’m done with the issue!”

Knucklehead on October 3, 2011 at 8:00 PM

I thot the videos and his several appearances on TV since this came out was clear that he did go along with the Wash Po smear against Gov. Perry.

If he has changed his mind, then he needs to take back what he said and apologize to Gov. Perry. Simply saying now that he didn’t say what he said isn’t enough in my opinion. If it was, then I would have to say that I didn’t hear what I heard on the videos nor what he said on the TV appearances:-)

bluefox on October 3, 2011 at 8:45 PM

petefrt on October 3, 2011 at 8:02 PM

It must be difficult to say, hey I made a mistake and I apologize.
I should have done this or that, etc. But Cain just can’t move on and pretend he didn’t say what he said. That to me is the biggest problem. He doesn’t seem to be able to admit a couple of things.

Until he does, they will just hang there., too bad since he was gaining support. I don’t know what happened, but hope he corrects it.

bluefox on October 3, 2011 at 8:51 PM

He might be done with the issue, but, as a measure of his character, we should not!

JonPrichard on October 3, 2011 at 8:03 PM

Thanks for posting what he said and what he is now saying. He was not calling the “rock” insensitive. Well, the ball is in his park, so we’ll see. Not supporting Gov. Perry if he’s the Nominee is a statement I can’t get past either.

bluefox on October 3, 2011 at 8:55 PM

. . . Overall, if I am going to like an out-of-the-box candidate like Herman Cain, I have to accept that he is going to make rank amateur mistakes and fall into metaphorical “tiger pits” every once in while. Hopefully, this “trap” that Herman fell into will put him on his toes for future such incidents because the LSM WILL try again and again to catch him in the race card.

Greyledge Gal on October 3, 2011 at 7:01 PM

You sum up my feelings.

My personal Opinion: Perry did nothing wrong, he did right in getting rid of the word and Cain said nothing wrong in saying it was insensitive for that word to still be there in the 1980’s. And saying something is “insensitive” is not saying it is racist.

Being from NJ and being 52, I found it jarring to learn today that there ever were places with that word as a name and that they still existed even to this day. That is how sheltered and ignorant I’ve been. I too would find it “insensitive” to say the least to see that anywhere I would visit and would remove it immediately if it were in my power.

Nothing wrong with Cain saying that. He clearly said the first time “sign of insensitivity.” He did not say “racist.” And I don’t for a minute think Cain wasn’t sincere in his comments or using them for political gain. He speaks his mind, right or wrong. Like someone said above, that is refreshing and we have to take the good with the bad with that trait.

The most I would fault Cain for was falling victim to the media’s trap. And it was not much of a stumble.

I don’t think any of us should let the media blow this out of proportion and reflect badly on either candidate.

Cain explained further on Sean’s radio show and spoke very well about this.

Elisa on October 3, 2011 at 8:56 PM

Cain on Sean’s radio show today.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmh-5eKobvk

After the 3 minute mark they discuss the Perry rock situation.

Cain saying it was “insensitive” for that word to be there in the 1980’s. “You would think by the 1980’s that someone would have said, it’s insensitive, let’s take it off.”

Cain also said, “I don’t think that it reflects how Gov Perry feels about Black people in this country.”

Sean: “The word on the rock was painted over and obscured many, many years ago and Perry’s saying in fact his family was involved in getting rid of it. Would that mean something to you if it turns out to be true?”

Cain: “If the Perry family was involved in trying to get rid of it, then I’ll applaud that because that meant that they recognized how insensitive that word was. And so as far as I’m concerned, I’m done with the issue.”

Right after that Cain talks about growing up in the segregated South. I’d heard one of the stories before. Well worth listening to. Inspiring. Funny too.

Cain will be on Sean’s TV show tonight and will be on the View tomorrow (uggh!) The “girls” were talking about the N word and how Barbara couldn’t say it, but Whoopi could. I only saw it because Drudge linked it. I never watch those women, they annoy me.

Elisa on October 3, 2011 at 8:57 PM

Elisa on October 3, 2011 at 8:57 PM

Thanks for the heads up on the View tomorrow. I’m taking radiation therapy this week and haven’t been sick …yet. I hate to chance it by watching such a vile show. It will probably be the first televised Cain interview I’ve missed, BTW. I may DVD it.

DanaSmiles on October 3, 2011 at 9:07 PM

Cain took a lot of heat for standing by his remark that ‘black people were brainwashed’ in voting Democrat. I think he couldn’t go soft on this issue, because he still wants to connect with black voters and not be the black guy who doesn’t see racism or offensive words.
It’s a small, explainable mistake, not like going to a church with a reverend Wright who hates the USA.

FrenchguyinTaiwan on October 3, 2011 at 9:11 PM

Thanks for the heads up on the View tomorrow. I’m taking radiation therapy this week and haven’t been sick …yet. I hate to chance it by watching such a vile show. It will probably be the first televised Cain interview I’ve missed, BTW. I may DVD it.

DanaSmiles on October 3, 2011 at 9:07 PM

I feel bad that you made me laugh by your post. Because I’m sorry that you have to have radiation. You will be in my prayers and thanks for the laugh.

God bless you.

Elisa on October 3, 2011 at 9:13 PM

bluefox on October 3, 2011 at 8:01 PM

Well, if the fix is in, and Mitt going to be the nominee, then you might as well get with the program. President Romney sounds a lot better than President Barack Obama.

Really Right on October 3, 2011 at 8:13 PM

You may be Really Right in some things, but Gov. Perry sounds a lot better than B.O. and Romney:-)

Have you ever asked yourself why it is that Gov. Perry is getting attacks from all sides? Rove/Romney/Bachmann/Santorum/Paul/Hunstman/Cain/? The MSM doesn’t count since they attack all Republicans and especially Conservatives. I look at which Candidate is getting the most attacks, just as Sarah Palin did.

What I do see as I’m sure others do as well, is that there must be a split in the Establishment R’s. Romney vs Christie backers. ??

bluefox on October 3, 2011 at 9:15 PM

Or did you not know that PLAs have been in use for a long, long time in AK? What you insinuate is that she is somehow beholden to unions/Thanks to the Eagan, Hickel, Knowles, Stevens & Murkowski dynasties, they are the epitome of crony capitalism writ large in Alaska.
AH_C on October 3, 2011 at 3:27 PM

Yeah. So what? I thought she was a maverick who goes rogue. Many other governors have overturned PLA rules in their states (Iowa, Arizona, Tennessee,……). You know who just signed a bill protecting PLAs despite acts by the state legislature to the contrary? Gov. Moonbeam.

And surely you know that Obama supports them, while Bush was against them, as is our current GOP controlled Congress.

Buy Danish on October 3, 2011 at 9:24 PM

Elisa on October 3, 2011 at 8:56 PM

I posted a definition of the “word” on this post:
It appears the meaning of the word isn’t what is has been deemed to be.

bluefox on October 3, 2011 at 1:43 PM

Maybe Cain can persuade the MSM that has posted his original comments and videos to now post his new statement. That would help in addition to apologizing to Gov. Perry. He has a couple of other issues to clarify also. Not going to support Gov. Perry if he’s the Nominee of the Republican Party; saying he should have aplogized to the gay soldier for the booing(not)at the debate.

He really needs to think before speaking, but he must retract and clarify. He can’t just change a word and pretend as if he didn’t say what he said. That is the problem.

bluefox on October 3, 2011 at 9:27 PM

They are all doing Huntsman’s bidding.

steebo77 on October 3, 2011 at 5:29 PM

I don’t think so. Huntsman doesn’t have that much support or money.

Something else is going on, either in support of Romney or with Santorum & Bachmann just to simply get some traction. What else, I don’t know, but it certainly stands out.

bluefox on October 3, 2011 at 7:54 PM

Yeah, that was meant to be a joke.

steebo77 on October 3, 2011 at 9:33 PM

Thanks again. Thanks for supporting Cain. He’s a good man with loads of experience and this place is as bad as the huff and puff sometimes for bashing conservatives. That’s sad.

DanaSmiles on October 3, 2011 at 9:35 PM

Yeah, that was meant to be a joke.

steebo77 on October 3, 2011 at 9:33 PM

Oh,sorry, LOL With me, you’ll need to add the :-) Now that you tell me, it is funny, Ha-Ha, Thanks!

My dtr tells me I’m blond:-)

bluefox on October 3, 2011 at 9:43 PM

Thanks again. Thanks for supporting Cain. He’s a good man with loads of experience and this place is as bad as the huff and puff sometimes for bashing conservatives. That’s sad.

DanaSmiles on October 3, 2011 at 9:35 PM

It can get rough in here, I agree. Just wanted to say that I hope your therapy goes well and you continue to not have any effects.

Prayers and the best of health and healing for you:-)

bluefox on October 3, 2011 at 9:47 PM

bluefox on October 3, 2011 at 9:47 PM

Thanks.

DanaSmiles on October 3, 2011 at 10:02 PM

Buy Danish on October 3, 2011 at 9:24 PM

Palin is not and has never been a Party girl. She is not doctrinal or orthodox. She governs according to what is important and desired by the majority of people she governs.

I am aware that you and I share a party label, but you represent everything I detest about the GOP. I am not at all surprised you hate Palin.

alwaysfiredup on October 3, 2011 at 10:10 PM

I thot the videos and his several appearances on TV since this came out was clear that he did go along with the Wash Po smear against Gov. Perry.

If he has changed his mind, then he needs to take back what he said and apologize to Gov. Perry. Simply saying now that he didn’t say what he said isn’t enough in my opinion. If it was, then I would have to say that I didn’t hear what I heard on the videos nor what he said on the TV appearances:-)

bluefox on October 3, 2011 at 8:45 PM

+1

Cain is asking us to believe him over our “lying ears”.

-Aslan’s Girl

Aslans Girl on October 3, 2011 at 11:51 PM

Spathi on October 3, 2011 at 7:20 PM

Ron Paul couldnt lead a 3 piece marching band down a one block street without getting lost and confused. Much like the idiots who think he is even remotely relevant.

Wolftech on October 4, 2011 at 2:16 AM

I am aware that you and I share a party label, but you represent everything I detest about the GOP. I am not at all surprised you hate Palin.
alwaysfiredup on October 3, 2011 at 10:10 PM

Blah blah blah. I don’t hate Palin. I hate her populist class warfare shtick. You represent everything I hate about Palinistas. You’re now reduced to making ludicrous claims that catering to the unions makes her a rebel cause she’s bucking the GOP or something cause. Not bucking the unions, bucking the GOP. Rah Rah. Hilarious.

Buy Danish on October 4, 2011 at 7:41 AM

The ofay hipster wannabes at WaPo would be totally down wit dat name if the property was leased by some rapper and they wrote a “song” about it.

curved space on October 4, 2011 at 8:14 AM

Blah blah blah. I don’t hate Palin. I hate her populist class warfare shtick. You represent everything I hate about Palinistas. You’re now reduced to making ludicrous claims that catering to the unions makes her a rebel cause she’s bucking the GOP or something cause. Not bucking the unions, bucking the GOP. Rah Rah. Hilarious.

Buy Danish on October 4, 2011 at 7:41 AM

Class warfare? When has Palin ever advocated hosing the rich, passing punitive legislation against them, or redistributing wealth to the poor? You’re now reduced to making ludicrous claims about Palin once signing a PLA and some non-existent Marxist streak within her. You are hilarious.

steebo77 on October 4, 2011 at 8:28 AM

This is more of the media picking at nits and pointing at trivia while our candidates jump on every thing that comes their way hoping for some traction. Kinda reminds me of a cat fight where they just sit there and pfffft at each other. I’m going to take a 2nd look at Newt(that’s how bad the field really is)anyone care to join me.

Kissmygrits on October 4, 2011 at 8:52 AM

Class warfare? When has Palin ever advocated hosing the rich, passing punitive legislation against them, or redistributing wealth to the poor? You’re now reduced to making ludicrous claims about Palin once signing a PLA and some non-existent Marxist streak within her. You are hilarious.
steebo77 on October 4, 2011 at 8:28 AM

Oh please! She constantly engages in populist class warfare (blue against white). One does not have to be a Marxist to engage in this routine. Huckabee did it in 2008 and I criticized him for it at the time. Here C4P pushes her shtick:

6. Working class.

At a time when so many Americans simply want to get back to work, Sarah and Todd Palin’s working-class background might prove a welcome contrast to the Ivy-League-attorney-power couples and bluebloods who have graced the White House in recent years. Uniquely attuned to the concerns of the hardworking little guy, the Palins don’t just pay lip service to working families: they are a working family. Indeed, Todd Palin, the former “First Dude” of Alaska, is proudly blue collar – a member of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and United Steelworkers unions. Perhaps unlike any first spouse before him, Todd’s life work requires him to get his hands dirty, really dirty, both as a commercial fisherman in summers on Bristol Bay and also as a former oil-field production operator on Alaska’s remote North Slope.

Buy Danish on October 4, 2011 at 9:46 AM

Buy Danish on October 4, 2011 at 9:46 AM

OK, I get it. You’re the one using class warfare.

You’re just an uppity elitist that thinks only those of degrees and pedigree should deign to rule/lead us. How dare a hick rise above their standing.

I bet when you first heard “tea Party”, you thot it’d be a Polo event where you and peers could gather around to sip tea (pinkie in the air) and compare high society rank and status.

AH_C on October 3, 2011 at 3:27 PM

Yeah. So what? I thought she was a maverick who goes rogue. Many other governors have overturned PLA rules in their states (Iowa, Arizona, Tennessee,……). You know who just signed a bill protecting PLAs despite acts by the state legislature to the contrary? Gov. Moonbeam.

And surely you know that Obama supports them, while Bush was against them, as is our current GOP controlled Congress.

Buy Danish on October 3, 2011 at 9:24 PM

Like I said, you must really be obtuse, either that or you don’t understand the difference between EOs, legislative laws and everything else in between.

You cited Iowa’s PLA. You mean where a donk governor issues an EO, and the incoming GOP governor cancels that EO?

You do realize all states are not the same regarding PLA and that some were enacted by the legislature. Just as Oboobi issues EOs to enact PLA on case by case projects.

You know who just signed a bill protecting PLAs despite acts by the state legislature to the contrary? Gov. Moonbeam.

OK, maybe you’re not obtuse, just dyslexic. Follow the link and see that Moonbeam signed Senate Bill 922 over the objections of contractors and republicans. The bill was passed on party-line votes. This is what happens in democracy, bills get passed all the time over the objections of some.

Again, with Alaska, I don’t have heartburn with PLA there, since Alaskans, as a people, own the resources, so I can see where a PLA would ensure that workers get very well compensated for helping companies extract said resources — sort of like profit-sharing

AH_C on October 4, 2011 at 10:22 AM

She constantly engages in populist class warfare (blue against white).

Here C4P pushes her shtick:

Buy Danish on October 4, 2011 at 9:46 AM

C4P is not Sarah Palin.

steebo77 on October 4, 2011 at 10:45 AM

Buy Danish on October 4, 2011 at 9:46 AM

Also, there is nothing inherently critical of the privileged or wealthy in your excerpt from C4P. You do know that it is possible to celebrate the “little guy” without taking swipes at the rich, right?

steebo77 on October 4, 2011 at 10:49 AM

AH_C on October 4, 2011 at 10:22 AM

I stated that many states have overturned PLAs. Iowa was one example. Who is being obtuse here? And yes I know that Governor Moonbeam worked with the legislature. So did Palin. The powerful, entrenched interests of certain, er, “special interests” like unions are self-evident.

As for you witless statements about the Tea Party and Polo, the Tea Party is not about class warfare, pitting one group against another (in Palin’s case it’s “blue collar workers” against white collar workers who aren’t really workers cause they don’t get their hands dirty).

The Tea Party is about fiscal discipline, taxing and spending. PLAs force states (taxpayers) to spend more on projects. George Bush and the GOP majority in the House under the leadership of Jeff Flake are opposed to PLAs. Obama is for them. Palin is for them. Your explanation that this is about “profit sharing” is hilarious. Of course you’re all for these PLA’s as you “share the profits” as a union member. Palin also hit oil companies with a windfall profit tax. She’s the most mavericky conservative ever, forcing oil companies into “profit sharing”.

Also, there is nothing inherently critical of the privileged or wealthy in your excerpt from C4P. You do know that it is possible to celebrate the “little guy” without taking swipes at the rich, right?
steebo77 on October 4, 2011 at 10:49 AM

The hell there isn’t:

At a time when so many Americans simply want to get back to work, Sarah and Todd Palin’s working-class background might prove a welcome contrast to the Ivy-League-attorney-power couples and bluebloods who have graced the White House in recent years

Sarah and Todd are “working people” but the implication is that married white collar workers are not. Palin complains about “blue bloods”, as if there is something inherently shameful about not being a blue collar worker like her and Todd. She told us that Herman Cain is a superior candidate because he has a blue collar background. I love Cain, and think it’s great that he worked his way up, but Palin implies that if you didn’t begin at the bottom you are an inferior candidate because you can’t “relate” to “ordinary Americans”.

I reject this assumption and resent the attempt to divide Americans by class. This is not a “conservative” value, it’s a populist trick. Unlike Palin, I respect all working Americans, and I don’t give a flip if they are blue, white, pink, green, or polka dot-collared.

Buy Danish on October 4, 2011 at 1:11 PM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5 6