For a campaign that hopes to squelch a story about sexual harassment charge by attacking the media for running a story fueled by anonymous sources, is it any more responsible to point a finger at the Perry campaign because a former aide of Cain who knew about about the sexual harassment allegations now works for Perry? Basing an accusation simply on circumstantial evidence seems less responsible than Politico running the story in the first place, a story that now seems to have been borne out.
And as Charles Krauthammer points out, on Monday Cain first said that he didn't know of the settlement and now we find out that he told an aide in 2003. Come on, get the story true and straight and then stick to it.
All that charm which was the real reason that Cain rose in the polls now doesn't seem quite so charming this week.
And think about that part of the story - did Herman Cain tell an aide before a senatorial run about these accusations, but didn't tell his aides about it before a presidential run? Was he less serious about running for president than senator?
Mitt Romney must be the luckiest guy around. And that's why sometimes it's better to be lucky than good.