Mark Block: Crazy or Dishonest
Actually, Dave Weigel puts it more colorfully: is Block a schmuck or a liar? Do we have to choose? But that seems to be a theme on the blogosphere. Check out Jennifer Rubin:
This is flat-out bizarre. Not only does their specific allegation not hold up, but the notion that this is all a Politico plot — at this stage in the game — strikes one as nutty or hopelessly cynical.
Either Cain and Block are crackers (truly believing that witnesses have been cooked up, even though settlements with two of the women we know about date back more than a decade ), or they think the public will buy utter nonsense. With each accusation, the alternative — that Cain is lying — seems more and more plausible.
We’re now really into high farce. Block, currently under investigation for violation of campaign finance laws, tosses wild accusations hither and yon, never concerned with his or Cain’s credibility. Cain and Block — and they certainly are joined at the hip — are not innovative campaigners or new age marketers. They sure aren’t policy wonks. They aren’t disciplined executives or problem solvers. They are cavalier with the truth, indifferent to the harm they may inflict and in very far over their heads.
Then there is Michelle Malkin: Who, she asks, is Herman Cain's worst enemy?
It’s not any of the women coming forward.
It’s his top aide and chief of staff Mark Block. This is now the second time he’s popped off with bogus assertions and insinuations. Not ready for prime time — or 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Just gobsmackingly amateur-hour:
And finally, Weigel:
This would be funny if it happened once, but we're talking about Mark Block, who said just six days ago that Rick Perry's campaign leaked the story, and never backed that up. We're talking about a guy so inept at managing a campaign that he has an independent counsel looking at whether he broke campaign finance law. There's got to be a breaking point for the conservative base's dislike of the media. How about we start with outright lies?