The reason that I've chosen to use a diary to respond to Leon's front page posting is that I believe that my comments encompass concepts that certainly need to be discussed on their own merits. I believe that the gist of Leon's position is that insufficient evidence has been presented to allow anyone to arrive at an objective conclusion as to the veracity of the accusers or the strength of their either moral or legal positions. In this I concur.
It has certainly been demonstrated that people have a wide range of tolerance for moral turpitude exhibited on the part of political leaders. I will enter Bill Clinton as my Exhibit "A". As such, were we to become privy to even the most detailed accounts of the complaints involved and offered ample opportunity to judge the character of the accusers, there would still be a wide range of acceptance or rejection of Cain’s actions which led to these settlements. Of course, without this information, we are all limited to speculation and conjecture, neither which has any chance of producing a conclusive result.
Consequently, I must take the position that investing in speculation and conjecture to determine the guilt or innocence of the candidate and then, somehow to conflate the guilt, if guilt there be, to making a determination of whether Cain possesses a sufficient degree morality and self-control to be entrusted with the presidency is really a moot point.
However, Bill Clinton proved that the office of President can certainly be held by a person of alley cat morality. Subsequently, Obama has proven that the office of President shouldn't be held by a person who exhibits; a lack of experience, an uneven temperament, a lack of preparation, a lack of judgment in picking competent advisors, a willingness to resort to obfuscation, omission and fabrication, a fragile ego that lashes out when challenged, a narcissistic intensity to blame others for failures, a victim mentality and a willingness to claim racism as the basis for any criticism.
Unfortunately, the events of the last several days have illustrated that Cain can and has exhibited all of these traits in his response to this matter. Further, Cain has also exhibited these traits in a way that should give any objective observer long pause in considering how he would respond to the multitude of challenges which he would face in a general election.
Because over the next several months Republicans from across the country will be choosing a nominee to do battle with the most unethical person to ever be elected President, it is incumbent upon each of us to make a thoughtful judgment as to the qualities that our nominee must have to overcome a formidable opponent and an unrelenting liberal press. Personally, regardless of the depth and breadth of the sexual harassment allegations, and regardless if they are ever revealed, Herman Cain has not exhibited the qualities and traits which I think our nominee must possess to win back the White House. As such, I don’t believe he deserves the nomination.