When innuendo is
enough to kill
By Wesley Pruden
PrudenPolitics.com
This was once a serious country with serious
newspapers, back in the day when they were edited by
serious editors and a man had the right to confront
an accuser before she was allowed to destroy his
reputation, career and even his life.
Herman Cain doesn’t look like Jack the Ripper, but
Scotland Yard never pursued Mr. Ripper with the
passion of the newspapers and television networks so
hot after Mr. Cain. He may be guilty of whatever it
is that he is accused of—so far little more than a
wink, a predatory smile, or even a suggestive smirk.
Or he may not be guilty. But in the wonderland of
Washington journalism, we demand the verdict first
and only then the evidence (if any).
“Sexual harassment” has been established as a crime
that only the accuser is entitled to define, and
then at her lawyer’s convenience. The accused is not
necessarily entitled to know who accuses him, or
even to know what he is accused of. The crime is so
heinous that the mere accusation is enough to
convict. Why waste time on evidence?
Scotland Yard never pursued Jack the Ripper with the
passion of the crowd so hot after Mr. Cain.
Politico, the political daily of liberal pedigree
that set the hounds on Mr. Cain, has not said what
he is guilty of, or when, or where, or who says so.
Innuendo is enough. Politico says it has a
half-dozen sources “shedding light on different
aspects of the complaints.” Once upon a time, a
reporter trying to get a story merely “shedding
light” on “aspects” past a gruff old city editor
would have been thrown down the stairs if the gruff
old city editor was having a particularly bad day.
The more sensational the story, the more skeptical
the editors ought to be. Newspapers traditionally
withheld the name of a rape victim, for example, but
if the man was acquitted of the crime the victim was
then identified. Rape, alas, is not regarded as a
crime as serious as sexual harassment. The new rules
hold that women are the equal of men, with all the
rights and privileges pertaining thereunto, except
when it’s more convenient to be “the little woman.”
The most unlikely ladies want to be “the little
woman.” In one celebrated complaint, a three-star
general of the U.S. Army got a male colleague, a
mere two-star, cashiered for touching her “in a
sexual way” and trying to steal a kiss. Lt. Gen.
Claudia Kennedy said nothing at the time, holding
her fire until ready, and she was ready several
years later when the man who offended her was up for
promotion. Nothing shrinks a man’s passion, even for
patting a bottom or stealing a kiss, quicker than a
firm and furious rebuff from the lady. The delicate
lady general retired, satisfied, to the rank of
Miss, never aspiring to be remembered as Stonewall
Jackson or George S. Patton.
Like the “he said-she said” skirmish between the
generals, the accusations against Herman Cain have
smelled from the beginning, The case against Mr.
Cain smells like an exercise manipulated by one of
his rivals for the Republican nomination. The Cain
camp’s blaming Rick Perry, whose campaign then
blamed Mitt Romney, was about par for inexperienced
newcomers to a presidential campaign. As a third
woman emerged to say she was offended, or shocked,
or affronted by something Mr. Cain said or did at a
dinner party, descent into a circus was inevitable.
Neither Mr. Cain nor his accusers seem to want to
waive confidentiality and let the record of
settlements between the accusers at the National
Restaurant Association be opened to public review.
For their part, the accusers and their lawyers
continue to get good mileage out of anonymous hints
and intimations. The Cain campaign is reluctant to
feed fuel to the fire, tempted to think the episode
will recede into another news cycle.
The Republican establishment clearly wishes Herman
Cain would go away, and let Mitt Romney, whoever he
is or turns out to be, get on with the coronation.
But the natives in the grassy reeds and roots are
restless, and the Republican establishment has yet
to figure out how to deal with peasants newly
empowered by Facebook, YouTube, tweets and other
novelties and toys of the Internet.
A new Rasmussen poll of Republican voters
nationwide, taken Wednesday night, shows Mr. Cain
leading Mitt Romney 26 percent to 23 percent, and he
has opened a wider lead in South Carolina, in a poll
taken two days after Politico set off the carnival
of allusion and implication. He’s not dead yet.
Wesley Pruden is editor emeritus of The Washington
Times.