People have had questions about Herman Cain and the loyalty he is getting with a lot of Republicans. Liberal commentators have almost had a look down their nose superiority about how silly this is. They state with the seriousness of the allegations, no one in their right mind would support such a person. When challenged with the Clinton example, they rightly argue, even though it is a weak argument, what happened with Clinton and Lewinsky was consensual, and the Flowers incident was consensual. Herman Cain’s accusers have said the advancements and the tone of the advancements were unwanted and were more of a power play.

Thankfully Melissa Harris-Perry was on a show the other night and said when she used her political models nothing made sense about the support Cain was still getting, so she asked ‘regular people’, and by this I determined she meant people outside of the world of collegians and pundits, to see what their thoughts were. She talked about a woman who had questions about the time frame of the women who have made the accusations, why they have stayed anonymous after making the accusations and basically thought Cain was too nice of a man to do what he was accused of.

Those of us who have been looking at Cain for months, thinking he isn’t fit to be President, have been scratching our heads as to why he has such loyal support. When Harris-Perry talked about the ‘regular people’, it took me a bit to remember way back to the first preliminary debate and Frank Luntz from Fox News did a focus group. The group was unanimous with their support of Cain, then virtually unknown. The result surprised Luntz. When Cain is in his element, talking to crowds, he is very convincing; much like a preacher in the pulpit. Still, I suspect many are still wondering, with all the accusations, why hasn’t his support dropped.

A reason may be gleaned from a developing story that closely resembles the Cain situation.

As the facts have been revealed, Joe Paterno, legendary coach of Penn State, has been caught in a scandal. His assistant coach was accused of having sex with nine underage boys for at least 13 years. In one particular case, the assistant was caught by a 28 year old graduate having sex with a 10 year old boy in the Penn State showers. The graduate fist told his father, both men went to Paterno to tell him and Paterno went to his immediate boss and told him. Apparently it went up to one other person. Paterno never checked to see if anything was done, never called the police. The graduate eventually became an assistant coach and the initial event happened in 2002.

As it has been explained in the news, while Paterno might have been legally covered by telling his boss and that’s all, morally it is reprehensible that he would still work with his assistant coach after learning he had sodomized a boy. To just hammer the point home, the incidents of sex with boys started in the late 90s. The incident in 2002 was seen by someone and reported to Paterno and the incidents continued but he and a lot of other people in the college organization did nothing.

Now that everything is out in the open, with the seriousness of not accusations but things found by a grand jury, Paterno first said he was going to resign at the end of the football season until the board at Penn State decided to fire him immediately. What resulted was a press conference where reporters openly questioned WHY Paterno was fired, saying there wasn’t due process in the case. A good number of sports reporters across the country seemed disappointed that the coach was fired. Students on campus had a march in SUPPORT of the coach. Yes there were a number of sports reporters who did express concern about the outpouring of support for Paterno.

What has angered me has been the voices who have come to the defense of Paterno. Just a few minutes ago I had to turn off the radio because a local radio host, on a liberal radio station, continued to say that Paterno had done his legal part in reporting the incident to his superiors and not following through on what had happened. What should have surprised me but didn't, the first caller he got, a woman, agreed with the talk show host! She was a football follower and repeated how Paterno was such a man of integrity and loyalty. She talked about how much of a moral compass he has, yet just like the host she felt Paterno's firing was an overreaction. When a second woman called, who was not a football fan, said the coach should have been fired, the radio host disputed her assertion. When the woman mentioned that the protection of Paterno was very similar to the protection some gave to Herman Cain, the host became indignant. Even the board operator for the radio host felt the protection of Paterno was much like the people in support of Cain despite the evidence against him, yet the host couldn't see the connection. The next caller, of course, supported Paterno and the radio host.

It has been a terrible day, looking at the moral face of America. Kids getting molested and people care more about a 'revered' football coach than the cover up by that coach and those surrounding him. Sure, legally he did all he had to do but as a person, as a man, it doesn't sit with me that he didn't go to the police, he didn't check with his superiors to see if anything had been done, nor did he confront the assistant coach. Yes, the 28 year old man should have contacted the police right away, or stopped the crime since he witnessed it, but he didn't and that it terrible. That the higher ups covered it up, did nothing and apparently were made aware of other incidents and did nothing was a crime. To think that people would look at this coach, think of him in that cloak of football glory, and not be chilled that he didn't do anything and make excuses for him is a crime.