It was an interesting week for Herman Cain

I’ve got plenty to write about on Tuesday or so, and I want to include my last take on the Block video, but this does sum it up.


  1. Anonpolito says:

    Insider Republicans and Democrats have two things in common.

    1) They don’t like Herman Cain.

    2) They like Mitt Romney.

    That’s as good as any reason why I think I might consider voting for Herman Cain.

    I don’t know the full story behind the accusations made against Cain, but it is very interesting to watch how much the establishment is undertaking this “high tech lynching.”

    Kudos to Justice Clarence Thomas for introducing that phraseology decades ago.

  2. J. Strupp says:

    Kudos to Clarence Thomas for introducing a phrase that equated his issues with the burning of innocent black folks at the stake by angry mobs of white people?

    Dude you’re nuts.

  3. Well that criticism is a decade too late. :/

  4. Well I was 13 at the time so I guess I’m making my criticism known now. 😉

  5. Randy in Richmond says:

    To be historically correct I suspect Clarence Thomas was referring to actual lynching-not burning at the stake. While there are isolated incidents of this barbaric deed it was not the method of murder Mr. Thomas had in mind .

    Clarence Thomas, a descendant of slaves from Georgia, has as much right to refer to the hanging or enslavery of blacks as Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, or any other liberal black American. Here is another example of the left treating conservative black Americans differently because they differ politically.

  6. Anonpolito says:

    It is too bad that a) Herman Cain is guilty of said accusations b) his political enemies made all of this up. His message was starting to resonate with me.

    I guess we’ll learn more after today’s presser.

    But, alas, now we have another Bob Dole type in Mitt Romney running for the White House in 2012. (I respect Bob Dole a lot and although he was fairly conservative, he was not the right man to challenge Bill Clinton.) I’m just not excited about this, and I’m to the point of nearly being grieved.

    There’s a Marxist in the White House and it appears that our best hope is this moderate governor from Massachusetts?

    I don’t always agree with Bill Kristol, but his recent “It’s Not 1980 Anymore” column in the Weekly Standard echos my sentiments precisely.

    Here’s a teaser:

    “But that was then, and this is now. Now is 2012, and it seems clear that 2012 isn’t going to be another 1980. The reality seems to be that we’re not going to have a chance to replay that election, with (at least in the hazy glow of retrospect) a compelling conservative leader of long standing but ever youthful, a man who stood tall and spoke for us and for America, riding gracefully to victory over the GOP establishment in the primaries and over decadent liberalism in the general election. Assuming the presidential field stays as it is, 2012 won’t be a repeat of 1980.”

    Let me continue.

    I still get goosebumps when I think about what the election of President Ronald Reagan in 1980 meant to the conservative movement and America.

    Yet, now, in our not so infinite wisdom, we cannibalize true conservative values for the sake of political convenience and expediency.

    I’m not going to go down the road of “what would Reagan do,” but only in my wildest dreams could I ever see a debate between Mitt Romney and President Reagan.

    It would have been a wild spectacle, and one that would have haunted the collective conscience of today’s “conservative” movement.

  7. J. Strupp says:

    “To be historically correct I suspect Clarence Thomas was referring to actual lynching-not burning at the stake.”

    Thanks… in that case I take back everything I said!

    I don’t care who made the comparison. You don’t do it. It’s wrong. And you certaintly don’t give someone Kudos for making the comparison. That’s just being a dummy.