CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, left, and Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain (TV grab from cnn.com)
In keeping with the glorious tradition of overanalyzing everything on this blog, let me make a few comments on the interview that CNN’s Wolf Blitzer had yesterday with Herman Cain even as an Atlanta businesswoman was preparing to claim a 13-year-long relationship with the Republican president candidate.
I was struck by the rather Freudian usage of the words such as “teasing” and “premature” not to mention that the woman was claiming a 13-year-long relationship whose definitions Cain disagreed with.
Wolf, “Was this an affair?”
“No,” said Cain.
“There was no sex,” persisted Wolf.
“No,” said Cain.
That opened the door for Blitzer, whom Cain had mistakenly called Blitz only a few days earlier during a CNN TV debate.
So Blitz persisted, “None?”. I almost envisioned Wolf nudge-nudging, wink-winking, with a thought balloon carrying the words, “ No sex at all? Really?! Why oh why?”.
What is “None” supposed to mean in this context? I can guess but what would be the point of that?
Then it was pointed out by Blitzer how the Atlanta TV station that broke the story had been “teasing for the past hour or so.” So an hour-long tease was already underway even as Cain was talking to Blitzer.
Then came the suggestion from Blitzer, “Without giving us her name tell us what was she like? The nature of the friendship.” What was she like?? As in what, Wolf?
Cain, “No, not gonna to do it, Wolf. That would be premature.”
Wolf, “Did you work with her?”
Cain, “No, that would be premature.”
Can you figure out the meaning of premature in these two contexts? Is Cain saying it would be premature to say what she was like? Or is he saying that it is premature for him to say what she was like before she said what their relationship was like?
And what about the second premature? Is Cain saying that it would be premature to say that she worked with him? Perhaps he is saying everything that happens with him these days is premature articulation.
