Reuters, Jack Shafer Backhanded Support for Herman Cain

Jack Shafer editor for Salon and contributor for Reuters

Presidential Candidate Herman Cain

Reuters, commentator, Mr. Jack Shafer offered up the left's version of a mea culpa article on Herman Cain here.  But if this is impartial journalism, who needs a lynch mob?  The way Mr. Cain has been treated by the press is deplorable and Shafer's article doesn't really address this reprehensible behavior on the part of his colleagues.  Shafer bends over backwards to establish he still feels Cain is or probably could be, at a minimum, guilty of "something".  He's not quite sure what, maybe he's guilty of being a "creep"?  Shafer's idea of impartiality and being an objective journalist is to say he's  "...open to the possibility that (Cain) he’s no rampaging sexual monster. " That's all?  That's really big of of him.   Mr. Shafer certainly doesn't suffer from probity or from being objective.  But we've come to expect this type of behavior from the left.  This article by Shafer is an obvious and pathetic attempt to lift himself "above the fray".   I'm convinced Mr. Shafer thinks he really is being objective and unbiased in writing this article.  That is how divorced the left has become from reality.  Mr. Cain has never even been accused of sexual harassment and yet Mr Shafer jumps easily from the initial claims in Politico of "inappropriate behavior" to "sexual harassment" early in his article and then continues to modulate and repeat the phrase until in the end the reader assumes Cain has been charged with "sexual harassment".  But where was Shafer on Clinton and the semen stained dress of Monica Lewinsky?  Mr Shafer has a history of attacking anyone who would dare to tell the truth.  Unfortunately, Mr. Shafer doesn't know the truth or understand the meaning of  objective journalism. Instead of attacking Herman Cain, Matt Drudge and Marvin Kalb he might want to take a few lessons from them.