Cain steps into Letterman's lion's den and gets devoured

The American Thinker ^ | November 19, 2011 | Stu Tarlowe

[Cincinatus' Wife]

On Friday night, Herman Cain was a fly and David Letterman was the spider cordially inviting Cain to "step into my parlor." Didn't Cain or any of his advisors see the potential for disaster in Cain appearing on Letterman's show?

Didn't anybody say, "Herman, don't go in there! It's a trap!"?

I desperately don't want to be seen as one of those just itching for clear proof that Herman Cain's candidacy is over. But it's hard to have watched Cain on Letterman and not come to the conclusion that neither Cain nor his advisors have sufficiently good judgment for him to be president.

I've been aware of Cain, and impressed by him, ever since I first heard him on the radio in Atlanta. I was ecstatic when he announced he was seeking the Republican nomination.

I have long maintained, long before anybody ever heard of Barack Obama, that a backlash of conservative Blacks might be the only thing that could save this country. The election of Barack Obama seemed to make that less likely, but I "kept hope alive".

And Herman Cain re-kindled that hope. I saw him as the man who could lead Black Americans off the Democrat plantation and, when that happened, many liberal whites would follow.

I was not deterred by the allegations of sexual harassment, nor by the "pause that depresses" when he was asked about Libya. I was not deterred by Cain's apparent lack of comprehensive foreign policy knowledge; I figured he would surround himself with competent advisors and that his own instincts and managerial and leadership skills, and his belief in America and its -- and his own -- general goodness would see him through.

But Cain's appearance on Letterman's show has seriously undermined my confidence in Cain's judgment and in his ability to.....

[Cincinatus' Wife]

If you want to see implosion, then just look at the Perry camp........

Here is how an interview with the NH Union-Leader would have been conducted with Herman Cain. I've posted this on threads since it first came out. I was frankly shocked that Herman Cain blew off this important interview, especially because of the time they afford a candidate to give their positions.

Oct 28, 2011: Rick Perry Interview with NH Union Leader

Over an hour of discussion - a normal conversation - not "gotcha" or high-octane, political talking points.

economy
education
balanced budget
drilling
regulations
debates
Romney Care
in-state tuition
HPV shot
border security
Barack Obama
Federal mandates
no pandering for votes
terrorists using U.S. Mexican border
immigration reform
no Fed Dream Act or amnesty
AZ law
work-visa program
examine what our national work force needs are
jobs in Texas - full picture
free-trade
manufacturing in China vs U.S.
wages hurt by the cost of doing business - onerous regulations
Texas right to work state but he's always been endorsed by Teamsters Union (jobs)
multi-national companies (U.S.)
jobs, spending, taxes, regulations
trade laws and tariffs
subsides and tax credits
energy and market place
taxes and lobbyists
Marcus Luttrell
family decision re presidential run
Parade interview "birther" "news"
Afghanistan -- special ops war, troops, Obama policy, war on terror, more funding for technology and R&D
Foreign policy dependent on our economic strength
debating Obama
campaign commitment in NH
review candidates' track record
roughness of campaign -- in to win -- facts can be hard-hitting
Social Security, jobs, national security, being truthful
discusses education, EPA, Energy, HHS
states rights
state transportation infrastructure
ObamaCare, medicare, medicaid, healthcare
Tom Cobrun, Bobby Jindal, Paul Ryan
health care insurance - state by state
health care in Texas, access, tort reform
judges, Supreme Court, federal courts
baseball

[Cringing Negativism Network]

This is a Cain thread.

Does Rick know you’re here?

[expat1000]

Did you actually watch it? Cain did fine!

I didn't watch it. How did this part come across to you?

And it also didn't help that Cain's response to one of Letterman's questions struck me as one of the most vapid things he could possibly have said.

When Letterman asked, "What's the difference between you and Donald Trump?", Cain responded, "He's white and I'm black."

[JennysCool]

Whoa, Lancey! You’re just buying the “Cain did bad” posts. He held his own just fine. It wasn’t a “lion’s den” thing — just an interview. It was a-ok.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

As I was addressed regarding Rick Perry I replied and kept it civil and on message regarding interviews given and not given.

[Scutter]

I don’t think Cain is toast because of what the media did to him, although I still think the whole sexual harassment thing was a scam. I think he is toast because he and his campaign staff have shown phenomenally bad judgement. Going on these interviews unprepared - “winging it” - just blew his credibility. Sorry if that is an unpopular opinion here, but look at the polls. I wanted to voted for him as much as anyone - more than most probably - having lived for years in Atlanta and heard him on talk radio many times.

Yes, Gingrich has lots of baggage, and the media have already started to turn on him, but at least he is able to defend himself in pretty much every situation.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

I’m thinking you should post threads which are actually about Perry, or else include a disclaimer in your many anti-Cain posts, that you are a Perry supporter.

Just saying.

All you seem to do is go negative. Just saying, you should let readers know what you’re up to.

[JennysCool]

You don’t get it?

[Jonty30]

I don’t think going on Letterman is going to hurt a candidate’s chances, unless he’s going on their to grovel for lying and skipping out on an earlier interview, just so you can be interviewed by Katie Couric.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

Cain’s not toast.

Cain is still the one, the left is worried about.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

......Yes, Gingrich has lots of baggage, and the media have already started to turn on him, but at least he is able to defend himself in pretty much every situation.

He's had a lot of practice as he repeatedly shoots himself in the foot.

Newt's page dedicated to defending his past problems and positions.

[Darkwolf377]

Using, let’s call them what they are: Saul Alinsky tactics.

Admitting up front that I did the same thing myself yesterday, let's call calling something a Saul Alinsky tactic what it is: a Saul Alinsky tactic. :)

I seem to be defending the OP a lot, and in response get called a Perry fan. I am not. But she posts interesting stuff pro-Perry, even though I'm not supporting him.

While I don't much care for folks posting anti-other-candidate stuff when they clearly have a vested interest, is it really so outrageous? How many Romney articles do we see posted here, and how many Romney fans are there?

Most of these threads seem to be made up of posts attacking the motive for posting them, which kind of makes the original article's point. If Cain weren't so severely wounded, his fans wouldn't be wasting their time here, they'd just shrug and say, "Obviously that's goofy" and ignore it, and it would go away.

Or they could offer supporting evidence, if it exists.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

I ridicule Saul Alinsky.

And “Gardasil” Rick Perry.

[expat1000]

I guess not. It is supposed to be humorous?

[Cincinatus' Wife]

I’m thinking you should..........

Think harder.

Of course I'm promoting my candidate. Do you think FReepers are stupid and need your advice on my motives? Really? Or do you just want to take your usual shot at me?

It's important to me that Rick Perry get a fair vetting and if another candidate is being treated with kid-gloves I will post articles by conservatives that give a different opinion.

This election isn't reserved for Cain supporters, or Paul supporters or Palin supporters or Gingrich supporters or Perry supporters. I have as much right as other posters to speak my mind (I certainly hear plenty on Perry threads).

If you can't address the facts that's your problem but your continued personal insults don't help your candidate.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

Au Contraire.

You are criticizing the opposing candidate.

I see nothing in your OP which is pro Rick Perry. Your intent is only to tear down.

[JennysCool]

No, Letterman is cool for candidates. A lot of people think Dave is bad for a candidate but it usually just ends up as a buncha jokes.

[Jonty30]

I think Perry scares them more.

It’s just that the media thinks they’ve neutralized Perry, so they aren’t focused on him anymore.

[MestaMachine]

Didn’t Rick Perry also appear on Letterman the day after his so-called ‘brain freeze’ and do the top ten reasons, (which were just awful, by the way,) for why he forgot his third agency? Yes, he did. Was there an article like this one about his going into the ‘spider web’? And did you post it, if there was?

See, one of the things that has stopped me from going after Perry was his guts for looking these leftards in the eye without flinching. Same with Cain.
Fair is fair. This article was unfair by a mile.

[Darkwolf377]

I ridicule Saul Alinsky.

You're missing the point. A "Saul Alinsky tactic" is a phrase used here to indicate a smear meant to suggest all kinds of negative things, using certain code words, that renders the other side less-than-equal, or even inhuman--demonization if you will.

Around here, "Saul Alinsky" is just such a code word. When we accuse someone of an Alinsky tactic, it's like a liberal calling someone a Nazi or racists--it avoids discussing the actual topic, and the difficulty that might be involved, in favor of a smear.