Herman Cain is under attack by the press lately because of allegations of sexual misconduct. The real story is unclear as of this writing, but it looks as though more than one woman accused Cain of harassment when he worked for the National Restaurant Association. Those cases are not in the public record because of settlement deals made at the time. Cain has repeatedly denied that there ever was any sexual harassment.
But the media wants to paint the settlement deals as proof of the allegations. This is not only bad journalism, it is bad legal interpretation. Settlements are often reached between parties when no wrongdoing has been discovered, or sometimes even when the innocence of the accused has been established. Because of our flawed tort system, it is often easier and less expensive to settle a case than to take it to trial. (If we rewrote the law so that the loser in civil suits paid all associated costs, the number of these cases would dwindle. If we made losing attorneys pay everything, they would cease.)
This is bad journalism because it presents a perfect case of ad hominem attack. Make the man look bad and you can discount everything he stands for. This media tactic may also involve another logical fallacy known as a red herring. Because Cain's message is resonating with a growing number of voters, his opponents would like nothing better than to have the focus taken off his popular policy proposals and shifted to something essentially irrelevant.
The irrelevance stems from the media's own admission that a politician's private habits are no concern to voters. Remember their mantra ceaselessly blared during the Lewinsky scandal which embroiled their beloved Bill Clinton: so what if the President was a philanderer, an adulterer; that fact has no bearing on his ability to run the country. Remember how little was made of the fact that media darling Jesse Jackson fathered an illegitimate child and apparently supported child and mother with funds donated to his organization. Other examples abound.
But let a conservative public figure have private problems and suddenly they become the basis for a complete rejection of the person and everything he or she stands for. And this is a good approach for liberals to take since most conservatives who are stained by misconduct generally step out of public life (Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin being notable recent exceptions.)
It is precisely this propensity to exit the stage which proves there is no double standard in most conservative circles. Private misdeeds do effect public performance. Someone once said that who you really are shows up best when no one is looking; good character is being good when you don't have to. And good character is essential for anyone seeking to represent in our representative republic. (Note please: we are not a democracy.)
So does that mean that what goes on behind the bleachers in high school and in dorm rooms in college and everywhere there are adults behind closed doors has a bearing on how we judge character? Simple answer: yes. The Bible and most other religious books teach that integrity is more than skin deep. In fact, it comes from within, from the heart. Perhaps this episode with candidate Cain will help to reveal his true heart. It has already revealed the heart of the liberal media -- as if we didn't know that already.
