Why is the media humoring Cain?

I don't want to read too much into this, but why is the media fawning over Herman Cain in the wake of his upset win in a straw poll over Rick Perry? It can't be because Cain matters in the GOP presidential race. He has zero chance of winning the nomination. Cain is an odd duck but he's not delusional. He knows (I hope) that his bid is a vanity exercise. His supporters (minus the loons) know it, the GOP frontrunners know it, and the political media certainly know it. And yet, there he is, everywhere on the mediascape today. So why the coverage? Why the copious ink-spillage on the man who will never be president? The most charitable answer is: it's a slow news day. The less charitable answer is that it's a special form of media paternalism reserved for minority novelty acts. And the self-proclaimed "Hermanator" is about as novel as it gets. "Herman Cain is on a roll," read the misleading lede in Perry Bacon's piece for the Washington Post. (And lest you think this is a black pol/white journalist thing, it's not. Bacon happens to be black.) Then there's the "endorsement" by Dennis Miller (the ex-SNL funnyman). “Can I tell you how jazzed I am about this cat? How proud I am of him hanging in there?” Miller gushed on his radio show, per Mediaite. Again, not to overreact and go all Blaxploitation on you, but would Miller refer to Perry or Romney as "this cat?" And Miller telling Cain that's he's "proud" of him is not unlike a 1870s do-gooder complimenting her charge of unsmiling Indian children on their grasp of "American" instead of their own rich native languages. Needless to say, Cain is "on a roll" to nowhere. Cain of course is only too happy to play his banjo in this vaudeville act before his 15 minutes are up. Not that it truly matters. He'll be confined to history's dustbin soon enough. But shed no tears for Mr. Cain. He's rich enough to revel nicely in obscurity again.