Drip, drip, drip.

Shades of the Clarence Thomas lynching. Politico is reporting that two women have accused Herman Cain of "inappropriate behavior" back in the nineties when he was head of the National Restaurant Association. Pretty thin gruel, but you know they'll keep dribbling out more details. But will Democrats really want to dredge up the Lewinsky scandal?

Doug Mataconis gives a reasonable rebuke to George Will's assertion that Romney is the GOP's Michael Dukakis. I've gotten fed up with George Will's sneering opinions in the past, particularly when he criticized the nomination of Harriet Miers because she was not a "leading light" of law in the U.S. What a loathsome elitist attitude for a supposed conservative to have! Anyway, back to Mataconis:

I tend to disagree with Will that a Romney candidacy would really hurt the GOP down ticket. Whatever one might say about Mitt Romney, the prospect of being able to defeat Barack Obama and take control of the Senate is going to make it hard for even the most bitter Romney-haters on the right to stay home from the polls. When it comes right down it, they want to win and, presuming that Romney placates them with an exciting Vice-Presidential choice (although one that is hopefully, for his sake, more competent than John McCain’s choice in 2008), they’ll show up at the polls. Some will point to GOP turnout in 2008 as evidence that nominating “squish” will keep Republicans home from the polls, but that analysis misses several key differences between 2008 and what we’re likely to see in 2012.

Read the rest. With all his supposed liabilities, Mitt's intellect is not one. He's proven himself in business, the Olympics and in government. He's no squish, and conservatives will be surprised, if they ever pull their heads out and recognize that all the things he's changed his mind on have been in the right direction. With Perry hinting at sitting out the debates and Cain talking about less press availability, Romney may be getting more chances to make his case. But I'm nothing if not pessimistic, Ron Paul could be the next one to surge.

Bernie Goldberg:

[I]t isn’t often that the name of a company tells you as much about itself as does Progressive Insurance. It seems that Peter Lewis, who inherited the business from his father, is dedicated to using his considerable profits by funding every leftwing enterprise that comes courting. While he has every right to donate millions of dollars to the ACLU, MoveOn.Org and America Coming Together (ACT), there’s no reason on earth why conservatives should remain with Progressive. ACT, by the way, was co-founded by Mr. Lewis and George Soros, and is basically a front group for the SEIU thugs who ran ACORN, as well as a major contributor to Barack Obama’s re-election campaign. Another cause to which pothead Peter Lewis has contributed millions of dollars is the legalization of marijuana.

If you can't place Progressive Insurance, it's the company with a heavily made up spokeswoman named "Flo"

Breaking News

Economists can't be trusted on Tax plans. I've been saying this since Cain started his mantra of "9-9-9." And when he and others claim their plans have been vouched for by economists, I can feel all the tea partiers and Not-Romney voters running to them. I think Romney is experienced enough to know that adjusting fiscal policies and cutting spending are dynamic processes that involve more than just the President. He's constrained from admitting it, because he's already been branded a flip-flopper, and people are making fun of his 59 points, but I have never believed that things could be made this simple. Large businesses view lobbying as just one more way of competing. They don't really believe in the free market as much as we'd like to believe. (Thanks, Instapundit for the link.)