A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, Emerson warned. Is it too much to expect in the same sentence?
Appearing on Ed Schultz's radio show Wednesday to weigh in on the allegations against Herman Cain, veteran Democratic strategist Bob Shrum had this to say (audio) --
SCHULTZ: Why is it important something that happened 12 years ago, if there was a settlement, if it was resolved, if there haven't been any problems since? There are people that have come to his defense saying that he's a man of character. You know, somewhere in between all of this is the truth. Why does it matter?
SHRUM: Well, it matters first of all because he didn't tell the truth about it.
SHRUM: And that gave it currency, in real time, in this campaign. Secondly, we don't know what the truth about what happened is. And, you know, maybe it's minor, although I don't think sexual harassment is ever minor, maybe it's minor, maybe it's major, but it matters. Because when you're electing a president you're electing someone not just for their policy positions, but on the basis of their character.
Got that? Shrum says he doesn't believe sexual harassment is ever minor, but in this case, maybe so. There you have it -- mush from a Shrum. Thanks for clarifying, Bob.
A similar inanity came from filmmaker Michael Moore when he spoke with Rachel Maddow last night about the Occupy protest in Oakland that erupted in violence.
This could be blamed at least in part, Moore said, to a long history of "police abuse" in Oakland, particularly toward its black residents, that is virtually embedded in the city's DNA. Then Moore added this (audio) --
But you're also going to have groups that come in wanting to co-opt this movement, whether it's slick politicians that want the endorsement of what they think is a liberal tea party, or anarchists or others who don't like the non-violence approach and want some form of violence.
But my experience, and I've been around since the anti-Vietnam War days, is that generally, and I tell the crowd this over in Denver here just an hour ago, if you see someone trying to incite violence, start with the assumption that that person is an undercover Homeland Security or cop or whatever, because this is the history of America, where those in charge have tried to ignite people, incite them to commit acts of violence. And I tell them, don't be incited. Just assume right away that person is not part of the Occupy movement if that's what they're calling on people to do.
In other words -- yes, Occupy protests are marred by violence from anarchists and "others."
But blame police anyway.
Let's not forget how law enforcement and OWS protesters are all in this together, as the latter strenuously claim.