Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    Cain’s mistake?

    Cain’s mistake?

    In tagging Rick Perry with the “painted-over rock” allegation without first learning the facts?

    Yes, I think so.  It certainly is fine to point out that the name was offensive, but to suggest that Perry somehow was responsible was a bridge too far (transcript via MVOPOV):

    WALLACE: I want to ask you, there is a troubling story on the front page of “The Washington Post” today about Rick Perry, governor of Texas, and it indicates that for years, his family had a hunting camp in west Texas and the name of it written on a stone was N-head. But, obviously, it wasn’t just N-head.

    CAIN: Right.

    WALLACE: And he was part of that camp even as governor.

    Your reaction, sir?

    CAIN: My reaction is, that’s just very insensitive. That is on a much — that is in a more vile negative word than the N-word and for him to leave it there as long as he did, before I hear that they finally painted it over is just plain insensitive to a lot of black people in this country.

    I will chalk this up to Cain not being alert to the media’s (even Fox New’s) desire to create news on these shows.

    Prof. Reynolds points out:

    I think that Herman Cain hurts himself by joining in on these attacks.  His big appeal is that he’s not just another black race-card-playing politician.  Climbing on board with the Post’s hit piece suggests that actually, he is.  It reminds me of Tim Pawlenty’s weak and opportunistic reaction to the attacks on Sarah Palin.  I think that’s what killed his campaign.  If you side with the media establishment against other Republicans, you won’t help yourself in this election cycle.

    What goes around comes around.  Defend one and defend all when the media plays the race card, the extremist card, or any of the other cards in their deck.

    Update:  Cain clarifies:


    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.


    I wonder at what point in time the Washington Post stopped using the “N” word in its articles? I did a search of the word in 6 years worth of their papers from the early 1900’s and had 865 hits. It was used rather casually by their staff in describing events from that period.

      lichau in reply to gasper. | October 4, 2011 at 10:06 am

      Very interesting question. The “N word” has changed in my lifetime. When I was a child (50’s) it was considered bad English (proper word was “Negro”); use of it reflected negatively on the user. Probably was mildly insulting, although that was more context driven. How you said it more than simply saying it. I knew some people that used it routinely–no offense intended. Same sort that said “aint”.

      Now, it seems to be the supreme proscribed word–more than any of the four letter words, which can be used with impunity.

    iambasic | October 4, 2011 at 9:12 am

    Mr. Cain made a big mistake on this one – the mistake was taking the media setup and thinking he has to act a certain way now that he’s in the top tier. I wrote him through his campaign about this because I like him as a candidate. I hope he comes around quickly on this and maybe does some reflecting on how the media likes to play these kinds of games.

    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend