This post originally appeared at Smoking Politics.
Howie Carr, a minor clog in the Right’s noise machine, who writes a column for The Boston Herald among other things, did a beautiful job showcasing what the world looks like when you have the innate ability to look at situations without logic or facts.
In his day, Howie would have done a terrific job telling us how “more Doctors smoke Camels” or that if you smoke Marlboros, welcome to the great outdoors and Marlboro Country.
In his “column” “Lefty Media Pounce On Vague Allegations” Carr addresses the Cain Harassment issue. He starts, fairly enough, by noting that we don’t really know what happened with Cain and the women, but he ignores the fact, conveniently, in the entire column that Cain settled not one but two sexual harassment lawsuits.
Never mentions it.
He then juxtaposes the treatment of Cain with the treatment of Edwards and his affair in 2008.
The mainstream media knew it was all true. But they wouldn’t say boo. Edwards was one of the Beautiful People.
This wonderful ability to think of himself, a writer for a major newspaper in one of America’s largest cities, the host of a daily radio show, and someone who has done this for decades, but is he part of the “mainstream media?” Of course not.
Next, compared to his fair treatment of Cain and the concept of we don’t really know what happened there, he takes an accuser of Bill Clinton’s and makes her word gospel, quoting directly from her allegations.
What’s also missing from his article is the core of the issue. One of his fellow Republicans planted this story, who was it and why did they do it? Are Perry and Romney (and I would presume Carr would have pretty good contacts in the Romney camp) really this afraid of Herman Cain?
Sometimes, it’s nice to take a step back and look at a single article, by one writer, and realize the power of hundreds of men and women writing and dispersing misinformation like this.
If you read Howie’s take on it, Politico is a liberal site (it’s not) Cain never settled the charges (he did) and you would presume that this ‘high-tech lynching’ is the work of the left when it was clearly someone on the right who brought out the rope.
What evedence, if any, does your poster have for asserting that a ‘fellow Republican’ was responsible for ‘planting’ this story? He presents this as fact rather than as his opinion, and takes Carr to task for not mentioning.
The treatment of ‘allegations’ against Edwards and Clinton by the media are too obvious to ignore – both were discreetly held back so as not to hurt ‘campaigns’ and ‘reputations’. And both were backed by DNA from the women involved, not nameless allegations.
And while the Restaurant Association may have made settlements regarding their employee, Cain never made any. Speaking as a former insurance agent who had to explain to outraged accident victims more than once that the company was choosing to settle rather than dispute in a baseless claim, it’s not all that uncommon.
In the case of Edwards, I don’t recall any restraint. VERY few people knew about Rielle, according to Game Change. With Clinton, the large media simply waited for the GOP to push the story. As a political story, they could cover it without fear of criticism. Not the same as restraint.
But I’d bet that much is known, and not reported (for example, who DC reporters are dating).
The only references to Bill Clinton in the column you’re talking about are to Joanna Broddrick. There was NO DNA, she didn’t even make any accusations until twenty one years after the alleged episode — during which she swore in an affidavit that nothing happened (emphasis mine):
This allegation — that Howie Carr resurrects today — was largely ignored because there is sworn written testimony from the accuser herself saying that nothing happened.
Herman Cain was the Chief Executive Officer of the National Restaurant Association when these settlements were made, and was the target of the accusations being settled. If he didn’t know about them, he was incompetent. If he did know about them, he flagrantly lied about the settlements. Either way, he demonstrates that he is utterly unqualified for the office he seeks.
You may, of course, choose to defend garbage like this morning’s Howie Carr column if you like. When you make flagrantly false statements, like your “backed by DNA from the women involved”, please be aware of the impact on your credibility that accompanies such dissembling.
Howie thinks so low of his readers (sorry PP) that he actually noted that POLITICO is a liberal site. The President and CEO is on the board of Reagan’s Presidential Foundation and was his chief of staff. What an idiot (or he thinks his readers are idiots).
It’s all over the place in DC but I don’t recall ever having seen a copy outside the Beltway. Of course you could read it online anywhere.
It’s not a lefty rag, not at all. There are Op-Ed pieces from both sides sorta like Roll Call or The Hill (but it’s a lower rent publication than either of those) but it definitely leans a bit to the right.
Shame on Carr for misleading people who probably don’t know better if that’s what he’s doing. Or maybe he doesn’t know himself, which, for a political columnist, might be more damning.