Here’s a question it doesn’t take a Zen Master to figure out: If Herman Cain was willing to hide a thirteen-year relationship, “friendship,” call it what you will, to a woman (to whom he made “repeated” financial payments!) from his own wife, as he has now admitted, should he be trusted to be candid with the American public?
Well, duh. Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus is not one of the hoariest of legal principles for nothing. Do you want to see a liar — or, more politely, a prevaricator — as president of the United States? We’ve had enough of that already.
And, no, I don’t know whether the allegations of sexual harassment are true, nor do I even know if Cain actually had an affair with Ginger White, although, if he didn’t, that would put him among the roughly .003% of males who gave money to another woman for years without telling their wives, indeed not disclosing the “friendship” to them at all, and didn’t.
One of the more disturbing sidelights of Cain’s devastating interview with the Manchester Union Leader was his refusal to tell the exact amount he paid to White, “on advice of counsel.” Why was that, if he is so innocent? Beats me, but it could have something to do with possible divorce proceedings. Wouldn’t his wife be entitled to a quid pro quo for the money given White that she was never informed about? Or maybe the number was just so big it would look really strange. Needless to say there are other possibilities, few of them positive for Cain, however.
These revelations are of course very sad and our hearts should all go out to Gloria Cain. But the real mystery of Herman Cain is why he ran for president in the first place.
Forget the putative affair with White and what that says, or doesn’t, of his “family values.” (At the very least his vision of how to treat a spouse is reprehensible.) When someone running for president of the United States has been involved in sexual harassment cases that have had legal settlements, whether fair or not, there is no way that will not come out.
Cain tried to blame the Perry campaign, David Axelrod or whatever unnamed person or persons he could think of, Democratic and Republican, but sexual harassment charges are serious business, especially when they are on the books. And these were on the books. Cain showed no judgement at all not getting out in front of these charges at the very outset of his campaign. He acted like someone who was either clueless or guilty. Either one disqualifies him as president of the United States.
I’m frankly less and less optimistic about the whole electoral process, in that whoever the Repubs run, you know the Dems will have all sorts of interesting little fun traps waiting for them. Their emails will get hacked (competently this time) and broadcast on the internet, anything they ever signed under seal of confidentiality will be publicized, and of course everything they say will be taken out of context in the worst possible fashion. In a weird way, this makes either Palin or Gingrich more attractive as candidates. Her email already *was* hacked, and he’s had enough scandals to sink 2 regular politicians. Much of the stuff that was used to attack him was bogus, and virtually all of what was used to go after her was…when the dust cleared, there wasn’t anything worth prosecuting them for. Perry, Cain, and so forth haven’t had the real treatment yet, because they’re not the nominee. Romney of course is the choice of the media and the Democratic party, so of course he’s been left alone, and will be until the nomination process is through…then he’ll be dunked even harder.
I don’t think Cain neccessarily imploded, he just had things in his background that aren’t completely average and normal. The sexual harassment claims against him seek silly to say the least (his organization fires her, so she calls him *after being fired* to see if he’ll help her get a job? yeah right…) and this latest allegation of an affair just seems weird…the woman almost apologized for having the affair, while saying that it happened. And there was no allegation of illegality or anything like that, not even ethics (other than cheating on your spouse) and she even acknowledged that she knew he was married. Just strange.
I’m a bit more concerned about his answers to policy questions, but frankly his performance in the various jobs he’s had mean a lot more to me than the beauty contest stuff that the media focuses on constantly.
Still convinced that the Dems and the media are trying to convince the Republicans to nominate Romney.
So you haven’t seen or heard all the Dem attacks on Romney, from Obama on down?
You haven’t seen the attack ads the Dems have already aired on Romney?
Because you want to believe that Romney is no threat to Obama, you choose to ignore the fact that Romney has been attacked incessantly by the Dems.
Actually no, I haven’t. Post some references please.
I dont have a reference, but I remember Fox discussing an anti romney add from the dems that was attacking romney for flip flopping, on issues like health care and abortion. A bit ironic that, since Obama has flip flopped from his statements prior to his election far worse than romney ever has. I do agree though that the anti romney adds will get far worse once if it becomes apparent he will be the nominee.
They are holding their fire because they calculate Romney will get the nomination.
Attacking Romney next September with fresh meat will be a lot more effective than rehashing year-old claims.
Of course, an alternate and more sinister explanation is that Romeny is the guy they want to run against. They wouldn’t try to knock-out their prefered candidate, would they?
Curiously, there seems to be no lack of attacks on Newt.
I think proreason has nailed why there is a relative lack of Romney bashing by the media. It’s certainly NOT that they like him, nor that they can’t find ANY dirt on him (Hell, innuendo is more than adequate for the MSM hacks). No doubt that they are trying to keep a card or two up their sleeve. For all we know, there are high confederates in the media who already know what these bombshells are, and are currently polishing up their exposes.
It is, as a poster on another thread termed it, the “Hiroshima” strategy. You save your big weapons for last when your enemy has no time or options to counter. I think there will be at least two big bombshells (Hiroshima and Nagasaki, if you will) dropped on Mitt if he wins the nomination. I predict one to drop immediately following the Republican convention to counter the usual bump in the polls and momentum that follows, and then the “October surprise” bunker buster. Plus there will be a daily saturation bombing that would be given to any Republican nominee.
As Cain found out in 2008, thanks to our biased media, the real ugliness won’t show itself until mid-summer.
Ahem, I meant MCCAIN in 2008, not Cain. Sorry.
You’ve voiced a lot of what I think down to the lib media’s treatment of Romney and why. And isn’t it remarkable about Palin? – all those emails and diddle. I’m rooting for Newt, like you say he’s gone through an anal exam once already. I can like him but don’t trust him, but I can’t stand Romney and trust him even less. And I think Newt has what it takes to speak for himself and debate Obama.
All I’m going to say is if you think Perry hasn’t had the full treatment you’ve never seen a Texas election. Remember, this was LBJ’s finishing school, where making your opponent deny he’s a pig-f*ck*r isn’t a surprise.
Speak for yourself, Roger. When we learn to recognize evil at a distance we save ourselves so very much trouble! We knew, out of the box, that Cain was an ignoramus, and not very bright. He espouses the twin false notions that one is put right with God by a simple mental assent and that ones subsequent behavior has no significant effect on that relationship. No sane, literate person really believes that sort of theological scam. He is a creation of the Federal Reserve, a cruel joke foisted on the politically blind among us, to exhibit the awesome power of the International Bankers who really control the world. He is a faux-conservative, and a candidate for Hypocrite of the Year. Even the slow learners got that right when we learned he paid 80K to two of his accusers.
Some of us still have difficulty connecting the dots. Because we don’t know how to discern the difference between good and evil. If the good Guys wear white hats, then all with hats of other colors must be suspect, even at a great distance. But how many have correctly assayed the socalled Arab Spring as a conspiracy of islamic jihadists, intent upon uniting the entire arab middle east into a confederacy ready to morph into the grand caliphate.
“He espouses the twin false notions that one is put right with God by a simple mental assent and that ones subsequent behavior has no significant effect on that relationship. No sane, literate person really believes that sort of theological scam. ”
The Bible is a scam? It’s very clear that accepting Jesus is the only way to salvation, and that no one can earn their way to heaven. The bible doens’t rank sins. Obese gluttons are as sinful in gods eyes, from what we have to go by, as murderers are. Everyone sins, every day. There are no little sins.
That said, he should have known that only a liberal pol gets away with having those kinds of accusations in his past.
Not true: 1 John 5:16-17 and John 19:11. The Torah also contrasts sins committed deliberately with those committed due to ignorance, negligence or other weaknesses. Furthermore, the Torah never commands the death penalty for crimes against property, no matter how flagrant and malicious. God Himself threatens to smite those who abuse widows and orphans, but He does not authorize the community to execute people for such an offense, in clear contrast to adulterers, blasphemers, idolaters and false prophets, who were to be put to death if sufficient evidence was produced to convict them, as well as murderers, who were to be executed even if they had to be dragged out of the Temple Sanctuary to do it (or even killed inside the Sanctuary, if they could not be removed).
No ethical violations “other than cheating on his wife”? Are you out of your cottonpickin’ mind? What is more unethical, sinful, low, dirty, than adultery? Why would you trust a man who broke his lifetime commitment to be faithful to his wife? Do you not understand that the lying, hypocritical SOB is on his way to Hell, still in denial, still lying, still unrepentant?
Your inability to tell good from bad is contagious, and it is the root cause of our current political dilemma. Our electorate is composed in the main of morally ignorant persons. If one can’t tell right from wrong, how can he go to the polls and vote right?
I still think he was a red herring, a smoke screen…take the thunder away from others…always something ensational going on with him…taking away from what Obama etal are up to..
White is a pathetic woman..she acts and looks “whiney”..she just wanted to be honest and get it out in the open, bull…in other words..Cain didn’t give her more money and she had to find a way to get some money, as she is also being evicted, so she sold her soul.
I don’t believe he was a serious candidate..I was wishy washy about him anyway, one day I liked him the next I didn’t..
As said..he was there as a trouble maker to make Republicans look stupid, and that’s not too hard to do. They don’t care about the country, they only seem to care about trying to destroy each other with dumb azz advertisements.
Obama and his boys must be hysterical with laughter..and the press is salivating as usual..
I also have little use for “any” of the republican candidates..ANY….
Newt best get ready to be shredded, though I feel he has a very thick skin. AND you know Megan McCain said that Bachmann was “more smarter” than Palin, puke.
I am surprised that you or anyone else with half a brain would admit to reading, let alone citing, anything that Megan McCain has to say. It not like she has any qualification to comment on anything – the woman is a total and unrepentant airhead with no redeeming qualities other than being an heiress.
Hang in there, Herman!
This latest round of accusations is completely implausible. A man battling Stage 4 colon cancer will not carry on a “thirteen-year affair” with anyone, and that’s that. Not gonna happen. Back in the day, reputable news outlets would refrain from publishing groundless accusations that obviously conflicted with known facts. That was the difference between respectable journalism and sleazy supermarket tabloids – a difference that no longer exists.
Also see: How David Axelrod and the Chicago Machine Smeared Herman Cain
It’s all about the framing.
I’ve been chatting with someone of the opposite sex for years over the internet — met her twice IRL, my Significant Other met her one of those times. The SO and I sent her a wedding gift for her first marriage some years back. She’s had financial difficulties as long as I’ve known her. She’s done craft-a-thons for causes like her cats’ vet bills where I’ve contributed — she’s sent me a birthday gift or two. I’ve tried to be a mentor when I could, a friend when I couldn’t.
Viewed through a Cain lens, this could be a massive scandal. Neither I nor my SO would see it that way. I’ve sent this woman more cash than I told my SO about, but I’ve also bought more t-shirts than I discussed with my SO — we work on a “yours, mine, and ours” system, where each of us has expenditures that are not joint.
I could easily see my relationship with this woman blown up in the MSM to the same fever-pitch that the Cain allegations have been. It’s what the MSM does. I’ve lived in canyons where the breathless media talked about “deadly fires threatening homes” and calmly watched the flames pass by on ridgelines. People acting like people and doing rational things make lousy headlines — it sells more papers if you can gin something up out of innuendos and partial truths.
I’m just not impressed by level of character assassination that Cain has been bombarded with. I think the 9-9-9 plan is asinine, and the foreign policy gaffes have been cringeworthy — but the disgusting media pile-on regarding his relationships with women face high hurdles before I’ll give them credence…..and the blatant media bias makes him more appealing rather than less.
very well put cthulhu. I no longer pay any attention to the lsm. quit reading their news papers years ago. the national enquirer is a much better source of news any more,
Agreed. I have given friends and family and charities money, without my husband’s knowledge, just as he has. Big deal – we maintain separate checking accounts for our personal expenses, and a joint one for common expenses. Big ticket items from any account, we discuss. But what might seem like a major amount to Roger may in fact be a trivial amount to Cain ($1000 for someone’s rent is a blip when you are worth millions).
I’m also not as impressed as Roger is by the fact that his attorney told him not to disclose the amount, FWIW. Hell yeah you don’t, until you’ve gotten it all documented by your accounting team on a minute by minute basis, and ideally cross-referenced it against a copy of her tax records as well, because with an Obama-run IRS, think of the leverage Obama would have over Cain if Cain gave her or other individuals over 13K in a single year and mistakenly didn’t report it on his gift tax schedule attached to his taxes. Or if she didn’t report it as income, the IRS would start an investigation into whether he conspired with her to “defraud” the IRS. Cain would get Gibson guitared in a big way…and the hostile media would have a field day.
The woman just told MSNBC that it was a sexual affair. Purely physical, no love involved.
The woman has two children. The reason that Cain kept sending her money is obvious. At least one of those two children is his.
Then she’ll have a paternity test to prove it.
No paternity test is needed.
Sinz54 said it was so, so the kid is his. End of discussion.
</sarc>
you sound like you are a member of the MSM
…no facts..just throw it out, try to hurt someone with the barbs..if you draw some blood, go in for the kill..if not, go on to someother mud pile
Anne, you hit the nail on the head for me. All this stuff about his alleged affair and sexual harassment just came at a time that was just too convenient. Where is the proof? Yes, adultery is a sin but I really don’t think this gossip about is any more than that. I have a real problem with he said/she said. Where is the proof of any of this? Do any of these women have witnesses, receipts, or any other hard evidence? I was not convinced that Herman Cain was the man I’d vote for at all. It just infuriates me that once again the LSM had nothing better to do to him than this. What about the substantive issues Cain espoused? The media never talks about the issues only ugly rumors. Any time there is this much attention paid in the news to a single event or person, I wonder what is going on in the background that no one wants us to know. Well, I found out – the Senate passed a bill that would make it legal for the military to arrest anyone they consider dangerous, hold that person with no trial or even told of the crime! The LSM should be up in arms over this as we should be. Instead we are beating Cain up on unsubstantiated poppycock.
100% agreement with you, cthulhu. This latest smear caused me to remember several occasions in my life that I have helped struggling entrepreneurs. Sometimes they were male, sometimes they were female. Sometimes my wife knew, sometimes she didn’t. I’m sure my wife has done the same. . But I guess this rules me out as a presidential candidate.
The real issue is that smearing candidates in this manner will continue until the left sees that it no longer works.
I have a strong hunch that the Obama team is behind these smears. Since the news that they have written off the white working class, they know they’ll need every black vote they can get. The possibility of Cain splitting off even a small percentage of the black vote was seen as a threat. The commander gave his orders and the foot soldiers in the MSM dutifully complied.
Dream on, Mr Framer. Get your own house in order before you have a similar crack up to the one Cain is experiencing. Unless, as I suspect, your circumspection is a fabrication.
“It’s all about the framing.
I’ve been chatting with someone of the opposite sex for years over the internet — met her twice IRL, my Significant Other met her one of those times. The SO and I sent her a wedding gift for her first marriage some years back. She’s had financial difficulties as long as I’ve known her. She’s done craft-a-thons for causes like her cats’ vet bills where I’ve contributed — she’s sent me a birthday gift or two. I’ve tried to be a mentor when I could, a friend when I couldn’t.
Viewed through a Cain lens, this could be a massive scandal.”
What???? Can DID NOT TELL HIS WIFE. You did. That’s all the difference in the world. Didn’t you read the post above?
It’s Cain’s apparent lack of preparation that has been the problem; I think the media attacks through their attempted ‘scandalization’ have backfired, and if anything have increased his support. In other words, the media’s sword has been blunted by over-use, and it may be that they are damaging themselves more than their conservative targets these days, at least among conservative voters – and perhaps eventually among all except the die-hard left … now that we have an alternative to the MSM. *wink*
Anything can be made salacious when put under the microscope. So far, we have had nothing but he said, she said. Where is the proof of a 13 year relationship? Where was White when Herman Cain ran for U.S. Senate in GA? I still remember thinking that Clinton was finished in 1988 after Gennifer Flowers’ statement was plastered far and wide in the media. And, then there were a string of others including Paula Jones, Kathleen Wiley, Juanita Broderick and a few more. Each of these women were far more credible than the any of the Cain accusers and actually presented evidence that was serially dismissed, suppressed or contorted in Clinton’s favor by the media. Where are the independent, disinterested eye witnesses of a 13 year relationship?
Until there is proof of romantic/sexual trysts between Cain and White, I continue to believe that Cain is the victim of a left-winged conspiracy. And, I actually do find his story about wanting to help a friend believable–especially within the black community. Successful blacks are pseudo celebrities within the black community as a whole. There is far less degrees of separation between successful blacks and their fans/constituents/consultants/, etc. within the political. media and entertainment industries than there is within the white community. I have had black friends (I am a white) over the years in Atlanta and have always been amazed at how anybody who is anything knows everybody even those far down the social ladder. I have seen black doctors who knew hospital housekeepers at a huge hospital on a first name basis. And in turn, these guys/women would have an inner circle of all levels of black celebrities and pseudo celebrities, local politicians, city mayor, high level company execs and the like. That is just not the case within the white community–our circles are very small and concentrated.
The black community is a much more close knit community than whites. I have witnessed first hand how successful blacks really do feel an obligation of service and humbleness around their black brethren. Cain could have been just a friend to White and really did want to help her financially because that is what successful blacks do within their communities.
As far as keeping it from his wife, that is the only part that I find myself dismayed. However, Cain has had an eventful lifelong career advancement across many states and has crossed paths with many many people his wife would not have known. So, unless/until we have more information about this supposed affair that provides solid evidence that this was indeed a sexual relationship, I continue to give Herman Cain the benefit of the doubt and will continue holding the finger to the media.
Did Herman Cain explain how he met this woman? Has he said whether or not he has ever been in another town and state in her company? Well, not yet anyway. Herman is very polished at softening the landing. Now the real issue about Herman…he has a pecadillo. He will trade with a woman as far as I can tell. In each case…she is white, a mother and somehow financially dependent and vulnerable. Herman helps her with money or a job…and she helps him the old fashioned way.
This scenario by all accounts has been repeated numerous times…True or false. If true, Herman Cain is a pathological liar, unfit to serve as President. If false, it is a crying shame…
I think Ginger White is black or mulatto.
“When it comes to politicians, caveat emptor. They are almost all very flawed human beings. The incumbent president is a good example of that. Trust (a little), but verify (a lot).”
Cain’s saga is just another sad datum. What is really important is Mr. Simon’s conclusion derived from many data points. It certainly is a sad conclusion, but from my experience at very local politics (City, County, Neighborhood Association and Homeowners Association) it is an unassailable conclusion. Those who seek power most often do so either because of character flaws related to narcissism, or because they plan to use their power for personal gain.
Perhaps things were different during the nation’s founding period. Perhaps the magnified media coverage attracts narcissists more nowadays. Perhaps celebrity culture even creates more narcissists. Certainly the size of government offers a greater resource pie for the self-serving politician to feast from than in the early days of the nation.
Full Disclosure: I support Michele Bachmann. Someday Mr. Simon will write an article telling us who he’s supporting while writing about another candidate, but I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting.
There is zero mystery about why Herman Cain is/was running for President. He had no ambition of actually winning when he started out. He was running for money. He was selling his book (he sold 100,000 copies to his campaign) and his “campaign stops” were often in states that didn’t have early primaries but did have large potential book-buying populations.
Then Herman started believing his press. He was far more entertaining than the other candidates which gained him a lot of support. His 9-9-9 plan was simple and simple people took to it. Herman started to believe he could take the nomination which would have led to a lot more money win or lose.
Unless Mr. Cain is even stupider than I think he is, he should have thought to himself (giving him every benefit of the doubt) “O.K., is there anything in my past that would come back to haunt me. Lets see, would having a 13 year relationship with a woman that my wife doesn’t know about where I have given her money and made 4:00 a.m. phone calls be misinterpreted?”
Don’t cry for Herman. He has sold books, his speaker fees will go up after all of this is over and he’s likely to get a contract with Fox so he’ll be just fine.
See Roger, it’s really not too hard to figure out.
I’m sorry, but whatever you say about Cain, he’s not stupid. Stupid people can’t get degrees in math.
It’s also doubtful he needed money, considering all the work he’s done in the business world.
“Stupid people” can get a degree in math, law, and most anything else if they fit the right block on the affirmative action form, somebody pays for the classes, and they show up now and again.
Really? In mathematics? Where you answer is either right or wrong? How could someone even sit in a senior-level mathematics course if they never understood calculus? I mean, it would take some serious brass balls to show up for a class that even you could tell you understood nothing about. Mathematics is not the same as a course of studies in which all of your exams are in essay format.
I agree that for something like math/science/engineeering you could not get by just on affirmative action BS. At least you would have to have real intelligence and skill at math/science/engineering. Where a math graduate may seem stupid though, is they might not be good at much other than math. For example, they may be great at math, but have lousy verbal and interpersonal skills, and be short of common sense. But that at least beats a liberal arts graduate, where you might not have any real skill at anything, other than at pleasing professors, and if you are an affirmative action admit, you may not need even that, since the professors might be reluctant to flunk you, even if they dont like you, or think you are stupid.
Simplicity is a poor reason to criticize 9-9-9. Taxes should be simple. Complexity is a cloaking device used by those who manipulate the tax code to reward, punish and distract – all the while covering their tracks.
“Don’t cry for Herman.” But I cry for Mrs. Cain.
Herman Cain ran and turned around 3 or 4 companies- Sorry- not stupid or naive.
I don’t think if he had an affair for 13 years he would have thought that his lover” wouldbn’t show up. Did you know she also worked for the Chicago National Ass. at one pont? Or that he was carrying on this affair when he had Stage 4 cancer?
Now isn’t funny that Newt’s affairs aren’t brought up at all?
The Republican party is out for the scalps of the Conservatives like Cain, Bachmann,and Santorum because Mr. Rove sees himself on the unemployment lineif one wins.
Dems are doing what they always do- but the Republican Party is not innocent.
They are afarid of their power structure crumbling.
The philosophy of ” Anyone but OBama” will bring us the master hypocrital progressive- Gingrich or the straightforward progressive Romney. America Wake up.
Respond To: 8. pschieber
Your Comment on target
Sorry, Roger, but this guy never intended to be a serious candidate…that was an accident, produced by the lameness of the rest of the GOP field. He was trying to sell books and/or get himself a high-paying gig on FNC or talk radio. Period. He’s been dishonest at every turn (well, at least when he wasn’t too busy being clueless). I have no idea why he was as popular as he was for as long as he was, but then again, this is the same country filled with self-deluded adult children who voted Obama into office, so I guess most anything can get elected president these days.
“Self deluded adult children”. I love it! It sings!
Self deluded with the help of the MSM, their clueless parents and teachers, their elected lawmakers, etc.
But, however deluded, still accountable for the proper exercise of their God-given prerogatives and talents.
And not, at this point in time, entitled to any “well done” praises.
Couple this falling star with the fact that my state’s (Missouri) “primary”, or whatever they’re calling it today, is non-binding, and a guy can get kind of cynical. (Newt isn’t even on the ballot here b/c it doesn’t count)
Good grief…why are they even bothering to spend the money to have the thing then? Well, other than the standard “the GOP isn’t known as The Stupid Party [tm] for nothing” reason?
David, your first question is completely legitimate, but as for your second, what makes you think its only GOP primaries in MO that are non-binding? Does the MO Sec of State run the elections or do the parties?
I don’t know…I’m not from Missouri, but it seems a waste of time and money whoever made the decision to do it that way. In most states (all?), the political parties are the ones who decide what sort of selection process they have.
Yeah, let’s nominate Gingrich instead- he’s never cheated. /sarcasm
We still know zero about Obama’s college days at(?) Columbia.
And let’s not even get started talking about Clinton.
The real lesson to be learned here is that every human being has flaws, and if you’re running for President, either get the media to cover it up (John Edwards, BHO, etc) or minimize it. Neither of which can be expected to happen if you’re a conservative, so the only option is to stick it out like Clinton did and weather the storm.
What I can’t get over is all the back-stabbing conservatives in the media. Here is a candidate with a novel economic plan, and what are we talking about?
2 years from now, as we look at our economy, regardless of who is elected POTUS, what’s going to be important? The Ginger White accusation? I’ll bet not.
Agreed, Josh. I wish we had as much print from Simon and others about the candidates’ positions and plans for our country as about their pasts.
Not that their past isn’t important, but we know from history and personal experience that everyone has erred.
The same writers that excoriate the MSM for its lameness (and partisanship) follow its lead in this calculated misdirection.
“A novel economic” plan and a knowledge of foreign policy equivalent to a mediocre high school sophomore. His answers on foreign policy – from not knowing what the “right of return” was to acting like a deer in the headlights when asked about Libya was downright embarrassing. This is the real world here, folks. The man would have been eaten for lunch in the general election.
Your cynicism about a man helping a woman out without requiring sex speaks volumes about your own left-coast perspective.
The man’s a minister, and probably has a soft spot for people in need.
The fact that you resort to the “come ON” plea for all of your readers to immediately disregard all of Cain’s denials as obviously false is a sad statement indeed.
And if anybody supports Newt while specifically citing Cain’s “infidelity,” as a reason for not being able to support him needs to be strung up the Hypocrisy Tree and hung from the highest branch.
If you actually read Cain’s book (feel free to pile on about that, as you will), he tells you why he ran for President. Of course, your dubious nature will force you to search for the ulterior, “unspoken” motive, which you won’t find. He simply doesn’t have one, and this confounds you because you can’t fathom up-front honesty.
The Right looks like a bunch of fifth grade girls on the issue of Cain. If you’re uncomfortable with his politics or presumed lack thereof then by all means have at it.
But demanding that Cain leave due to these unfounded allegations no matter what their nature leads to an MSM victory.
Yes, he does…especially if the “needy” one in question is young(er) and attractive and female. Yep, all out of the goodness of his heart…and other parts of his anatomy. LOL
You are exactly right. The idea that a very rich man SHOULD not engage in personal charity is chilling, to say the least. It is disgusting that this kind of generosity (something our church encourages and stories about which we hear of all the time from ministers and evangelists) is suspect merely because the person given to decides to use that small connection to create a big story. There is no evidence for any of this. Personally, I think White is suffering from erotomania–a false belief that there is a romantic relationship. I do not only believe this because of my admiration for Cain. I primarily think this because of the way she proferred his autographs of two books to her (which don’t even contain her name) as “evidence” of relationship. Also, if the bulk of the texting is FROM her it would indicate erotomania. Now we find that he sent only 17 texts–all in response–while she sent 70. Unless she comes up with better evidence, I have to take him at his word.
“Wouldn’t his wife be entitled to a quid pro quo for the money given White that she was never informed about?”
No, she wouldn’t. It is far more likely that Cain is being advised not to mention specific amounts because his lawyer wants to know what she is claiming first, so that they can investigate to prove her a liar.
Besides, I thought “sex” was none of our business, and “lying about sex” was inconsequential. I believe a former PRESIDENT established that standard.
Yeah, that Gingrich started sleeping around with his new wives before he divorced the previous one each time kind of dulls the effect, doesn’t it? On the other hand, if 2 or 3 women appear and claim to have had an affair with Newt, he could just shrug his shoulders and say, “That was before. I’ve changed.”
Cain is sort of the GOP Al Sharpton. Exactly how did that huckster become a presidential contender. Bread and circuses.
The explanation for Cain’s appeal is that he met a hunger. Americans are hungry for political leaders who will uphold the Constitution. He says what the Tea Party believes in, but his lack of qualifications came out in the debates. This is a huge disappointment. The good and qualified people, like Mike Pence, are not running. This is a huge disappointment. At the least, a husband does not have female “friends” he does not tell his wife about, much less give money to. I think you’re right about the divorce settlement coming. So sad.
This pretty much covers it. Herman Cain’s appeal is “mysterious” only to someone who thinks Romney an appealing or even adequate candidate. Indeed, there was very little not to like about Cain’s stances. Even his foreign-policy ignorance was forgivable: a clever man can quickly get up to speed where needed, and have a look at Foggy Bottom to see what being “informed” can be worth.
To all appearances, though, we’re stuck now. Cain’s revealed himself to be a non-starter: add to his erratic temperament either
a) cretinously poor judgment, or
b) inability to control the misadventures of “little Herman” (take your pick).
Newt has a camera on him now, which all his ex-constituents know to signal an oncoming implosion. For better or worse, Romney’s just won the primary. Damn it all.
At this point, Roger…we will get zero vetting on the leftist and orifice probing on the non-leftist…what qualities should we expect from each side?
In the former, …if you don’t like affairs and sexual harassment, you probably wouldn’t like JFK, (or any politically large Kennedy), Clinton, Roosevelt, …who were all among the worst offenders in this category.
If you don’t like people who throw Israel under the bus, lie about Marxism regularly, engage in coverup of rigged and abusive polling places…then Carter and Obama are not your guy.
The painting of EVERY Republican in EVERY race for President…involves some accusation of either stupidity or malevolence. EVERY single one. Goldwater, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush 43, had their reputations savaged. What was done to Palin set a new low water mark.
The coverups of ACTUAL crimes committed by the Kennedy family, the ugly Jew-hating of Carter, the shady dealings of LBJ, the slandering of the swift boat heroes and the traitorism of John Kerry, the outright lies of Al Gore, the sleazy life of John Edwards, ….and the scandalous coverup of the radicalism of Obama…and some of his unrepentant, violent, criminal, treasonous friends, mentors and closest associations…leaves little doubt that we will NOT know, that which needs to be known about ANY Democrat running for high office.
The hyper-vetting of one side and the complete coverup for the other…leaves us a Hobson’s Choice. Who would run from each side?
It appears that nearly nobody can come through the gauntlet as an opponent of radical leftism unscathed. The propaganda machine will smear any and every contender with a viciousness so vile as to reject anyone with the slightest blemish. Who has led such a perfect life? Who has nothing in his past that can’t be blown out of proportion and have his reputation smeared?
On the other side of the coin…the bar for radicalism has been set so high, treason and overthrow are the benchmark qualities. A willingness to lie, cheat, steal, sellout America are features, not bugs in a candidacy.
The leftists MUST run an anti-America candidate. (and anti-Israel).
The right can run nobody. Who would want to face the smear machine and subject not just himself, but his family to the hyper-vetting and slander? Not Mitch Daniels…his wife couldn’t come through it.
Even Bill and Hillary Clinton got painted as racists. So was Geraldine Ferraro. Joe Lieberman was savaged.
The ONLY ticket I see that can make it through right now…is Ryan/Rubio.
If they don’t run…the radical leftists will rage on, destroying the world as they go. Taking down Europe, propping up Cuba, Venezuela, China, Russia, Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood.
America is next. Israel is on the chopping block.
We have ONE chance. I think Ryan/Rubio is it.
Herman Cain wasn’t the candidate…he was the canary in the coal mine.
I don’t agree with your assessment of the limitations on conservative/Republican candidates v. leftist/Democrat candidates. You’re right that a Democrat can get away with anything as long as he, we’re not sure how it works for women yet, espouses the right policies. The Democrat definition of “good people” is people who believe Democrat things. Good people don’t do bad things, therefore Democrats cannot be bad people. (I know, the syllogism isn’t quite right, but you get it.)
Most everybody aspiring to or holding elected or appointed positions these days is a ‘Boomer, and we all have pasts; a line or a joint here, a DUI there, an affair somewhere. We can’t deny it and “I didn’t inhale” doesn’t work for us; we have to give it up or we face the only two charges that are definitionally fatal in Republican politics, lying and hypocrisy. Where this gets sticky is that you have to know yourself and your spouse has to know you. I know that I would never seek an appointment that required confirmation nor would I run for elected office because there are things in my life that I really don’t want to discuss. You have to know that about yourself and your marriage in order to make a decision to seek high office. Without getting into what Cain’s motives to get in the race were, he was either in a state of deep denial, never thought it would get this far, or thought he could handle it and get away with it. That getting away with it thing is something I think he’s pretty accustomed to.
When this all blew up, I think Cain was more afraid of his wife than anything else and that accounts for his totally hamfisted handling of the whole matter. I’m sorry, but nobody in politics with a brain makes a categorical denial of anything if there is even the slightest circumstantial case against you. And if you’re a man with money and power there is ALWAYS a circumstantial case against you in any allegation made by a woman unless you can absolutely prove you’ve never even seen her before, an unlikely prospect.
The Democrats can’t hang Republicans for sexual or financial piccadillos; they’re guilty as Hell of them too, and while some of them are hypocritical enough to throw stones, the stones don’t leave much of a mark What you can’t do is put yourself out there as some successful, responsible, paragon of virtue and then have a bimbo eruption that you hem, haw, and dissemble about because your wife doesn’t know about it. Then you become a liar and a hypocrite. If while you’re deciding to run, you can’t sit down with your wife and tell her the truth about why she couldn’t reach you that night when you were on the business trip to a faraway place, you shouldn’t run for office because somebody IS going to know why she couldn’t reach you and it will come out. Then you get to have your “Oh, s&*t” moment in the glare of the TV lights as you feel that knife of dread of facing your wife, family, and friends and watch your political career fade to black.
My point, Art…is perhaps a tiny bit of hyperbole for effect, but, take a look at it again, if you would be so kind.
Democrats have painted themselves into a corner. They have pushed the Marxist envelope so far, they no longer can unseal it. Or their fate. The Blue Dogs won’t hunt. Name me a “moderate” who wouldn’t be savaged by a Lieberman-type approach. They have pushed so hard left…and have set the “blackball” list in stone. It’s no longer just the propaganda of your syllogism (which was fine, it works perfectly), it’s the reality of left, lefter, leftist race to hard Marxism.
There are no more liberals, the leftists ate them whole.
As for the Republicans, who would possibly want to put their family through the smear grinder? Someone so narcissistic that family didn’t matter, someone so brand damaged they couldn’t be hurt much worse than they already are, someone so out of tune and out of touch with reality they won’t accept the notion that they are going to get savaged, or someone who believes they are immune and can’t be touched.
McCain was a fool if he believed that he had a “special” relationship with the propaganda machine. (he was a fool for other reasons, but on this particular topic, that belief would have been inane)
The non-leftist has to have character armor, a quick mind, a genteel manner and a thick skin.
And has to be twice as good as his opponent. It’s like being Jackie Robinson every election. Anyone less feeds the negative stereotype. It was wrong, dead wrong…for that to be the case in baseball. It is equally dead wrong in American national politics.
In the former it was a color barrier. In post-modern American politics it’s the small c communist barrier.
There is no turning back for Democrats. They no longer can select anyone who is not on the runaway train toward small c communism.
For the Republicans…in my opinion…it’s Ryan/Rubio or risk the whole enchilada. If we lose this election, we lose the country.
Oh, there are still lots of “liberals,” especially liberal women, they form the cohort of useful idiots for the hard Leftists, many indeed capital C Communists, that are the Democrat apparatchiks and officholders. Pretty much the entire leadership and apparatchik of the big public employee and industrial unions are outright, avowed Communists.
In my early days in labor relations the public employee unions I dealt with were either independent employee associations or old-time trade unions. Both were “liberal,” but decisively anti-communist and did a good job of tamping down the college-educated lefties in their membership, a problem public employee associations all struggled with since they represented a large white-collar, college-educated cohort. The Earth shifted under my feet when our largest association was decertified and replaced by the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME). At first I really didn’t understand them; they were absolutely terrible at true labor relations. They made crazy demands in negotiations but almost never made actual proposals. They grieved everything, took every grievance to arbitration, and usually lost. They filed unfair labor practices weekly, sometimes daily, took most of them to the labor board, and usually lost. I was actually able to make tremendous gains on behalf of the employer in limiting union rights and scope of the bargaining duty by turning their own claims on them as I beat them before the labor board. By ’94, we had them racked and stacked for decertification after the General Election and it was inconceivable that a Democrat could win the Governorship in Alaska. Then, with the help of some “true conservative” fratricide on the Republican side, AFSCME bought themselves a Democrat Governor. My new appointee boss stode into our office and told us that he’d campaigned with the unions for the job and one of the things he’d promised them was that he was going to fire us all and replace us with people acceptable to the unions. It began to dawn that we’d won every battle and lost the war. They never got to fire me; nobody’s that good, but I got my affairs in order and quit in ’96 and worked for the Republican-controlled Legislature until the Democrats couldn’t stand their union friends any more and hired me back to clean up the mess they’d made. Along the way I became a serious student of Saul Alinsky.
The communists aren’t that hard to deal with if you understand that you’re dealing with communists and understand that they don’t want solutions; they want a process of continual conflict and they want to use that conflict to disparage and embarass their opposition. You just have to learn not to give them what they want and you have to learn to be very, very tough with them. They’re like adolescent boys; they only respect those who they know can and will hurt them, really hurt them. Only when they’re made to hurt do they stop the chaos. This is where most Republicans fail; they still talk about “my friends” on the other side of the aisle. Sorry, fellows this ain’t the damned Rotary and those aren’t your friends! That’s whey the Rs never tough it out against the slime machine; the greatest sin in Republican circles is to be the source of controversy. It doesn’t matter that you’re right, that the conflict is necessary, and your enemy is evil and must be defeated; they CANNOT stand conflict and controversy and thus are doomed to failure until they develop a leadership cohort who isn’t afraid to mix it up, but since he or usually better she is a Republican, it has to be done stylishly. It isn’t that hard to learn how to deal with them. It is hard to get Republican officeholders to allow the job to be done or to be seen with the kinds of people who can and will do it.
Even the KGB and CIA stopped exchanging dead agents eventually. But until we start hurting Democrats, we’re going to keep burying Republican candidates and officeholders.
You’re right, of course, Art.
But the brand of small c communist is a mutated and much more virulent strain from your days in ’96 and my days in the 80′s and 90′s fighting them in the courtroom.
The Cooper Union, Midwest Academy, NYTimes, Newsweek, MSNBC, Kos Kidz of today plays a different, deeper, “by any means necessary” game.
The Stupid Party is no match for the array of weapons in the small c communist arsenal. The propaganda machine, the indoctrinators in education, the entertainment/pop culture smear wing, …and they have gone global.
Republicans basically make good bop bags. But, as defenders of our honor, our military, our law enforcement, our borders, our treasure, our information stream, our liberty…we need John Wayne and we get Lil Wayne.
I held my own with them until I retired in ’06; kept them quietly under contract for a whole gubernatorial term. God knows Frank Murkowski had other troubles, not least of all Sarah Palin, but he didn’t have labor problems. They hated him but I kept them sullen but not mutinous for four years.
The Democrats had left us with every single labor agreement the State had expiring in the first six months of the term and we kept them working with no wage increase, then got them all under three year contracts and quiet before the ’04 General Election. The very first task I got from the Democrats back in ’04 was to figure out how to cycle full contract negotiations so they’d all be up at the time of the ’04 election ten years hence. That’s hard to do since our law limits labor agreements to three years for that very purpose. Anyway, come ’04, they had their made-man, former Governor Knowles cued up to run for the US Senate, but instead of having 15,000 pissed off public employees threatening to srike and all revved up to go vote for Knowles, they got their first wage increase in years and were sitting quietly under contract rather than singing songs and carrying signs for Knowles. We didn’t do it by being nice!
But by ’05 I knew the levy was about to break, to borrow a little Led Zeppelin. I was at a high-level conference in Seattle; all appointee labor board members and staff, NLRB types, State directors of labor relations, etc. and one of the presentations is a joint presentation by the LR head of a big healthcare company in CA and her SEIU counterpart about how they’d dune a mutual recognition deal to bring SEIU into all their facilities and how they and SEIU were working together to “bring better and more affordable health care to California and the Nation.” The healthcare industry used to be unalterably opposed to unionization of healthcare staff even down to orderlies and attendants, now here was the VP for LR doing mutual recognition deals with the most scumbag union in America and working together in politics with them “to make healthcare more affordable. I knew that was code for government funded healthcare, and I said to myself, they’ve taken over; this is coordination like the NSDAP did it. Just make the interested corporate entities a part of your cabal, litigate or regulate their competion out of business, and you have the whole economy under your heel. When you have people by their wallet, their hearts and minds follow.
“The very first task I got from the Democrats back in ’04 …”
Should be ,,, back in ’94 …
You are dreaming cf.
Pick Romney or Newt and make the best of it. Those are the two choices.
I also have this stange feeling that Paul Ryan and Marco Rubio might not be the snowflake conservatives we yearn for either. I have this sneaking suspicion that Ryan is a RIIIIINNNNNO, and that Rubio might have one or two views that are not pre-certified.
Pretty much anybody who’s ever won an election, cast a vote or made a decision as an elected or appointed official is going to be a RINO to the “true conservatives.” It is all so pure and simple when you don’t have to face the whole electorate but rather just your buddies online or when you have to find 50%+1 to get your bill out of committee or passed or when your budget is being held hostage because somebody wants something. Life is a LOT less black and white then.
Art, this is an exaggeration “Pretty much anybody who’s ever won an election, cast a vote or made a decision as an elected or appointed official is going to be a RINO to the “true conservatives.””
But it does touch squarely on something. Movement Conservatives are probably more anti “establishment Republican” than are Democrats. The Democrats are of course delighted with this and are busy making a Great Schism out of the tensions between Movement Conservatives and and they call Establishment Republicans.
This has always been true, by the way, especially when the Republicans were not as toady as they are today – when Buckley and his friends purged Taft Republicans from government offices and purged a whole swath of Americans from their self appointed Conservative Movement. The expulsion of the Birchers, of course, wasn’t done for the reasons used to justify it, and it wasn’t limited to the Birchers either.
The reasons were to prevent the strong anti-Communist domestic and foreign policies the Taft Republicans had every intention as governing with. Truman’s tack to the right happened for two reasons. One, the KGB was running around Europe shooting everyone of value, and their relatives were in America, they were Democrats and they became anti-Communists. But second, and equally important, Truman announced his intention of purging the anti-Communists publicly. They joined ranks and Truman had to cave. Significant was his aggressive confrontational containment foreign policy – this was what his opponents wanted and Truman had no choice but to give it to them.
But along comes Eisenhower who quietly purges them, and our foreign policy goes from confrontation and containment to peaceful coexistence and the beginnings of detente. And along comes Buckley and the domestic purges as Buckley creates a Conservative movement to be friendly with the left.
Those purged are now coming back into American Politics. They are the Bachmans, the Palins, the Pauls and the Tea Party. This is the divide in the country and what remains to be seen are the two pillars of contemporary politics – one, how far will the Liberals let the radicals push them, and two how strictly will Movement Conservatives enforce the doctrinal censorship of the Buckley purges.
Most of the self-identified “true conservatives” I’ve dealt with both in Alaska politics and online wouldn’t know a “Taft Republican” if hit in the head by one and have never read a word of Wm. Buckley. And they sure don’t know anything about the ideological battles of the late ’40s and early ’50s both with the Soviets and their allies and within US domestic political parties and alliances. They range from just a visceral anti-governmnent to the tin-foil hat wearing, black helicopter crowd to the SIVVs who don’t care what a candidate is about so long as s/he is anti-abortion or, to a lesser degree, anti-illegal immigration.
To relate it more to my area of expertise, I watched lots of employees become union stewards because they thought the employer didn’t recognize their talents and promote them. Likewise, I watched lots of union stewards become radical dissidents inside a union because they never could manage to get elected to union office. I watched Sarah Palin throw a hissy-fit because she didn’t think the Republican Party of Alaska properly recognized her talents when she ran for Lt. Governor (and she only got the best patronage job in the State as her reward for losing to the better known candidate). She and her proxy Joe Miller, also one of the “unrecognized,” set about to both bring down the leadership of the Republican Party, at which they failed, and to destroy all things Murkowski, at which they’re one and one. All the examples demonstrate the same dynamic; people who either can’t adequately work the system or who can’t get enough support within the system set out to radically change the system in such a way as to get the recognition and power they think they deserve.
I’m sorry, the Libertarians and libertarians can’t dominate the Republican Party. If they want to dominate a party, they can go over to the Libertarian Party, where a lot of the libertarians won’t actually be welcome either, and there they can be happily irrelevant but pure. Likewise the SIVVs; there are some districts around the country where they can dominate, but they cannot win statewide elections outside The South and the rural West. Both the Libertarians/libertarians and the SIVVs have to accept that the Republican Party won’t do anything to them but is limited in what it can do for them and that is the best they can do against the Party that is dedicated to doing things to them.
The RINO thing annoys me…and I know I’m dreaming.
Roger,
The reason Americans enjoy a clean environment, a free press and booming private charity is due to men like Herman Cain. With wit and labor they identify the wants and needs of their fellow man, buy material, supply labor, then ship and sell them to a willing buyer for more than the cost. Cain has a magnificent story of success spanning 40 years most notably from rebuilding existing franchises that were failing. With testimonials from bosses, co workers and subordinates throughout it strikes me as odd that a man who sits alone at a typewriter for a living so easily dismisses him. This smells funny AND it stinks.
Throughout history, many famous men who had achieved many great things, became real weird when it came to sex.
How did Theodora become Empress of the Byzantine Empire? A former prostitute who then became an exotic dancer (i.e. a stripper):
“Theodora made a name for herself with her portrayal of Leda and the Swan, where she stripped off her clothes as far as the law allowed, lying on her back while some attendants scattered barley on her groin and then some geese picked up the barley with their bills.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodora_%28wife_of_Justinian_I%29
Those performances turned on Justinian I and he asked her to be his wife. And after his death, she became Empress.
All that for a striptease and a lap dance.
Eusebius, who wrote that, was a total gossip-hound. Theodora had converted to Christianity, and was living in poverty, spinning wool for a living. She was still remarkably beautiful. She had been the companion of several high- ranking military officers. She had been involved in politics. Justinian met her at wheel, in her little one room apartment, and fell enchanted, proposed marriage, and was accepted.
Most historians consider the best part of Justinian’s reign the parts where she was advising him.
In the Nike Riots- people would riot for grain and entertainment ( bread and circuses) the rioters had deposed several emperors in very short order ( I don’t know anybody occupying any riot-ish anything right now, do you?) Justinian had decided to flee the city. Theodora said ” The Purple makes a fine winding sheet”- in other words- be willing to die an emperor- and she encouraged him to herd the rioters into the coliseum, which his troops did. Then the troops massacred the rioters. The riots stopped. The nation was stable for the first time in a century. Justinian restored peace and order. Later, with the peace, he was able to task scholars with regularizing the law code- the Codex Justinianis. It’s still the basis of Roman law, French Law, and Louisiana law.
He’d be just another military officer, and, at best, dead emperor without Saint Theodora at his side.
(besides- cracked magazine, or mad, sent a reporter to the major porn convention during an election year. they were trying to make fun of porn stars by asking them serious policy questions. and the women answered, with really great, serious proposals. the writer ended up writing- why can’t we elect porn stars? they’re better than the clowns who are running) ( friend told me. haven’t been able to find it)
And, she preceded him in death.
So after 40 years and more than 10 presidential elections is there enough evidence in to show that the primary system for selecting presidential candidates is inferior to the party convention process that preceded it? Certainly someone like Cain would never have seen the light of day in the old system.
For me, he was Obama but on our side. I didn’t understand how people could jump to him so quickly and with so much enthusiasm especially as he immediately proved he was not up to the task. Then everyone made excuses that his insufficiencies were actually assets. Where have we seen this before? Did we learn absolutely nothing in the past 3+ years?
You can phone your vote to 1-800-PresidentIdol, but only after the show is over.
There’s no comparison to Obama. Cain has multiple accomplishments–his work as a ballistics analyst with the navy, his business success, his years with the Federal Reserve, etc. He was just inexperienced in politics. I don’t know whether any of the charges by these women amount to anything. He was certainly a flawed candidate, but not obviously moreso than any of the others, just differently flawed. But I’d prefer him (and any of the others) in a heartbeat to Obama.
“Why do we flock to politicians (amateur or otherwise) so quickly when we know so little about them?”
Usually we don’t.
When Carter, Reagan, Mondale, Bush Senior, Dukakis, Clinton, Dole, Gore, McCain, and Bush Junior ran for the Presidency, we already knew quite a bit about them. Because they all had prior experience in government (or state government).
The few who ran whom we didn’t know much about–Ross Perot, Obama, and Herman Cain–came to the fore in difficult times when the public got desperate for a magic answer to our severe problems.
It’s similar to medical quackery. Most of the time, most of us stick with mainstream medicine. But when we’re battling a very serious illness which mainstream medicine hasn’t been able to cure, we can get desperate enough to try any quack we can find.
The answer in both cases is the same: Don’t let desperation cloud your judgment. If you’re appalled at the parlous state of the nation under the Obama Administration, don’t become so desperate that you’ll flock to some completely unknown businessman from Godfather Pizza.
Roger,
The real mystery about Herman Cain’s campaign is why you, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin and so many more of the Conservative guide-ons defended him.
Anyone with brains enough to fill a thimble could see from the get-go that Cain was lying through his teeth. The man made as much; actually more of a mockery of you guys and the GOP than the Clinton and Obama did to the Democrat Party and entire nation combined.
No one bought the line that you guys were simply trying your best to “protect” the Republican Party either.
But, I’ll give credit where credit is due Roger. You are the first to come forward and shoulder the responsibility for your own lack of foresight in this mess. Something tells me that you will be a lone wolf in that department though. Apologies coming from the rest of the “right wing” Cain defenders? Don’t bet on it.
Now, here is the really sad truth.
Because of this Conservative / GOP mess:
(1.) The everyday people that looked to you guys for the facts, information and wisdom that they needed, no longer listen to or respect what you have to say.
(2.) The Republicans wasted every opportunity to defeat Obama. He will be re-elected!
I think you are correct. It started out as a game and then he caught the fever. And perhaps he could be forgiven for thinking that since Clinton, Edwards, Obama and a whole host of other demorats have gotten away with that type of behavior and other sordid associations, why not him? In that respect he is clueless. The only question remains as far as I am concerned is this: why did SHE come forward now, and to what purpose? What she attempting to extort money from him in exchange for his silence and it failed? Is she looking for a big hit so she can pay her bills? What is the story? She is just as much a sleazebag as the man she was carrying on with and to try and come across as the injured little woman is a bit much. She has destroyed a family and perplexed a nation. She is a cheap hustler and not a good looking one at that. On top of all his revealed transgressions, perhaps bad taste might be added to the list.
I hope this doesn’t double post. Posted this several hours ago and still not displayed.
Anything can be made salacious when put under the microscope. So far, we have had nothing but he said, she said. Where is the proof of a 13 year relationship? Where was White when Herman Cain ran for U.S. Senate in GA? I still remember thinking that Clinton was finished in 1988 after Gennifer Flowers’ statement was plastered far and wide in the media. And, then there was a string of others including Paula Jones, Kathleen Wiley, Juanita Broderick and a few more. Each of these women were far more credible than the any of the Cain accusers and actually presented evidence that was serially dismissed, suppressed or contorted in Clinton’s favor by the media. Where are the independent, disinterested eye witnesses of a 13 year relationship?
Until there is proof of romantic/sexual trysts between Cain and White, I continue to believe that Cain is the victim of a left-winged conspiracy. And, I actually do find his story about wanting to help a friend believable–especially within the black community. Successful blacks are pseudo celebrities within the black community as a whole. There is far less degrees of separation between successful blacks and their fans/constituents/consultants/, etc. within the political. media and entertainment industries than there is within the white community. I have had black friends (I am a white) over the years in Atlanta and have always been amazed at how anybody who is anything knows everybody even those far down the social ladder. I have seen black doctors who knew hospital housekeepers at a huge hospital on a first name basis and would go out of there way to strike a conversation with them. And in turn, these guys/women would have an inner circle of all levels of black celebrities and pseudo celebrities, local politicians, city mayor, high level company execs and the like. That is just not the case within the white community–our circles are very small and concentrated.
The black community is a much more close knit community than whites. I have witnessed first hand how successful blacks really do feel an obligation of service and humbleness around their black brethren. Cain could have been just a friend to White and really did want to help her financially because that is what successful blacks do within their communities.
As far as keeping it from his wife, that is the only part that I find myself dismayed. However, Cain has had an eventful lifelong career advancement across many states and has crossed paths with many many people his wife would not have known. So, unless/until we have more information about this supposed affair that provides solid evidence that this was indeed a sexual relationship, I continue to give Herman Cain the benefit of the doubt and will continue holding the finger to the media.
It is astounding to me anyone believes these stories. You’ve taken the bait and the hook is set deep. Good luck to you when you’ve hit the frypan!
Shame on you! Newt Gingrich covered his relationships up when he was calling Bill Clinton a liar. Newt had 3 affairs and G-d knows how many more. And I don’t believe that it was a 13 year affair. Come on the man had Stage 4 Colon and Liver Cancer major surgery and Chemo. (btw I worked oncology) with 30% chance of survival. Do you have any idea how sick he was? You all can’t see the forest through the trees can you? I suggest you go listen to Rush Limbaugh’s radio show from yesterday 12/1/11, you might learn something. These women have Chicago written all over them. Obama is after Cain because if Cain gets in there is a good chance the Dems would never win again! Think about it Cain is a real Black man. Dems own the blacks for now. Obama wants to make this a racial issue. He can’t if the GOP nominee is BLACK. Obama would love Romney or Newt. He can and will go after them. There is plenty of meat to attack there.
The point being…when is the last time that “all those fact checkers and editors” broke a story that hurt a major Democratic politician?
In fact, when is the last time that those paragons of journalistic integrity didn’t attempt to BURY a story that was unfavorable to leftism?
Can someone name ONE instance in the last forty years that a major story was NOT buried, that severely damaged a major leftist politician?
1)John Edwards
2)Ted Kennedy
3)Al Gore/global warming emails, fourteen years of decline being “hidden”
4)Obama and Ayers, Frank Marshall Davis, Cooper Union, Midwest Academy, Jeremiah Wright, the New Party, Rashid Khalidi, the tapes at the Edward Said fete, the turning off of the credit card check system on campaign donations
5)Barney Frank and the prostitution ring, Fannie Mae’s cooked books, Jim Johnson, Franklin Raines
6)Anthony Weiner
7)Dan Rather and Mary Mapes
8)John Kerry and the swift boaters
9)Solyndra
10)Eric Holder and the polling place cases, Fast and Furious, the hiring of radical extremists
11)ACORN/SEIU
12)The NLRB abuse of power
In thinking of ALL the stories, that ALL those fact checkers, editors and “investigative” reporters have dug up and pushed hard on the American people…please name ONE…that they have broken that severely damaged a Democratic major politician….not in order to favor a MORE leftist politician?
Please name ONE issue that did damage to the leftist narrative…to the Marxist advancement?
For ALL the stories they have broken that assaulted the free market, advanced class warfare, racial warfare, ethnic warfare…please name one that went the other way. Name one that didn’t bury the lede, when it damaged Marxism.
When the story outgrew their attempts to bury it…then, and only then…did they give it the limp wrist play. Soft, weak tea…bare minimum coverage. Moral relativism and alibis mostly. But, they never BROKE the story. They always try to bury it…and they NEVER raise it again in any context.
Now…go back to the stories they DID “break”. How many were fabricated, exaggerated, hyperventilated…AGAINST any free market champion, business, military, law enforcement…all the usual suspects …the “enemies” of Marxism?
We will not EVER “know” the Democratic candidate.
And the portrayal of the non-Marxist will ALWAYS be unflattering. Slandered. Smeared. Scandalized.
The world is going to hell in a hand basket…woven by the lies and distortions of the Marxists…and their propaganda machine.
to cfbleachers:
Man, I wish that didn’t sound so true!
As for Simon’s article, why would we go with the known? What do we know about Newt that makes him a better candidate than Cain. Just the fact that we already know all his flaws? So, in the next election, when Cain’s flaws are known from the get go, then it will be okay to vote for him? So, the problem isn’t a lack of family values but rather the concern that we might get surprised by the discovery of them at the last minute.
The pathetic truth is that most Republicans are not conservatives. The establishment Republicans cannot even fathom having a Bachmann, a Palin, or a Paul as president. Because then the establishment Republicans might not get to suck off the system as their liberal friends have done.
You must make an exception in Weiner’s case. As you know, he resigned this past summer in the wake of his well-known sexting scandal. But your points, as usual, are well taken.
There can be no doubt that the MSM are guilty of practicing a double standard to help guarantee leftist pols’ hold onto power. The Pubs need to come down off their moral high horse in order to help suck some of the punch out of the left’s ability to put them over the proverbial barrel at every turn.
I think Cain wanted to serve. The harrassment accusations looked like Axelrod’s work. Ginger is another matter. Cain should have resolved that before asking anyone for a dime of support.
You can accurately determine how conservative a political candidate is by the intensity of coverage of irrelevant scandals the legacy media produces. Sarah Palin is a recent good example. Cain is too. Newt will do although I would prefer Sarah.
Good piece, Roger. But a mystery? Nay, nay!
Cain was a fairly successful black businessman with a huge ego and a nice ‘Christian’ family who obviously lived a double life at home and on the road. His good, low-profile Christian wife bought into the false idea of never challenging her man, buying into decades of his obfuscation by supporting and going along to get along. Because she was so easy to hoodwink for decades, Herman naturally thought—wrongly—the American people would be too.
The rest is history. We may not have all the facts, but fortunately we’re not as stupid as we must look. Though Ann Coulter sure is, imho.
As far as I’m concerned, this isn’t a real mystery at all. You can’t blame Herman for trying…all he wanted was a cookie.
Any woman who broadcasts her sex life is sleazy.
Yes, and if she isn’t sleazy then she is lying. This is an old trick of the Left. Attack a person’s integrity and make sure the accuser is a person of some integrity. It thus becomes a question of credibility.
Re creditability, as another post so brilliantly points out – in this period of 13 years for most of them Cain was in a obsessive fight for his life battling colon cancer. No man has an affair under such circumstances.
So, there was a 10+ year sexual relationship with Cain and she produces four months worth of phone records as evidence.
The verb pay is used by third parties. Not loan, not give. Why?
She had this long affair but fails to produce photographs, video, receipts. Why?
Why not produce 10 years worth of phone records?
Why not reveal the content of the text messages?
I had a female friend of 37 years. During which, I gave her money on many occasions, in addition to driving her around, making her dinner, and in general, supporting her in any way I could.
I never had an affair with her. I considered her family, and for many years, I introduced her as my sister. Over the almost 4 decades, I had many girlfriends and even one wife. Successful, long-term relationships are easy; I’ve had a dozen of them. None of these women, were ever intimidated by this relationship.
In June, I wrote an article on racism, in which I said that Barack Obama was the worst President, and she, an African-American, called me a racist. I told her never to call me again, because even after having known me for many years, she still judged me by the color of my skin and not the content of my character.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/06/racism_injustice_and_the_left.html
Mr Simon hits it on the head. Mr Cain had no clue about the forces that would be unleashed on him as front runner. It’s a boiling pot.
Ginger White in her interview with George Stephanopoulos:
“When you enter into a private relationship that you really do not care to share with the public, you really don’t enter into something like that holding on to receipts. Holding on to gifts or if there were any notes or anything like that, to come out eventually and say, “Yeah, this is what happened and here is my proof.”
In other words, Ginger has no evidence of a 13 year affair with Herman Cain. Would you talk about a 13 year affair with your friends? Apparently, Ginger didn’t. Wouldn’t you keep mementos of a 13 year relationship? Apparently, Ginger didn’t.
Ginger says Cain has been giving her money for the last 2 and ½ years. It all seems incongruous in the context of a 13 year “affair”, especially after Cain had cheated death with stage IV colon cancer. We are suppose to believe Cain was still doing Ginger, who is rather plain to retain as a mistress.
Jennifer Flowers had plenty of evidence of for her affair with Clinton when she made her CNN debut, but Ginger has only a couple of pages from her phone bill. Wouldn’t a reasonable person conclude that Ginger is lying?
There won’t be anything dispositive from Ginger to back up her story, but Herman is assumed to be the liar. Too bad so many Republicans are so eager to throw Herman under the bus. Cain may have many flaws but he is the perfect anti- Obama and the only candidate who could be transformative in the way Ronald Reagan was.
Conservative talk radio host Larry Elder has been saying from the start that Cain’s campaign was a book tour and a way to increase his speaking fees. Look at the “advisers” Cain had. His 9-9-9 was put together by a small Ohio town Wells Fargo financial adviser. Contrast that with Rick Perry’s flat tax plan that was created by Steve Forbes. (I’m not a Perry supporter, but I would gladly support him over Cain, Gingrich, Romney, Huntsman, Paul or Johnson.) His campaign manager is totally incompetent. Are these the type of advisers Cain would surround himself with as president?
We still have no proof the affair existed. This is a take down of a Republican. Sexual affairs would have been covered up if this was a Democrat. Heck, the only thing that got Edwards in trouble was his use of campaign money to pay off a mistress and even that was covered up by the media and the Democrats.
Oh, you say the Republicans must be different and, thus, we must get rid of Cain because of the accusation? Really?
Again, there is no proof and what evidence we have is hearsay and circumstantial. Even the text messages are not indicative of guilt. What was in them, who sent the majority of them over the last 4 months? Hmmm?
Cain may not be the nominee, but I will not damn him because of the accusations. Not when you take into account of the history of slander, lies, and distortions against ALL Republicans running for president, especially Palin. Aside from covering for a birth for her daughter, many “journalists” believed it would have been better if trig was killed in the womb. Even the dork slimeball who moved in next door couldn’t find anything, yet still breathlessly was reported on and about.
It’s disgusting. This is disgusting. Shoot, even a 3-way sandwich with Edward Kennedy can’t keep a Democrat down, but Republican … well … accusations will kill!
Cain was simply trying to do what Obama did, not mention things in his past that he believe would work against his election efforts. It is exactly what Obama did. No medical records from Obama? It is because he is hiding something that, if known, would have worked against him in the 2008 elections and would in 2012.
Obama has the media to protect him (who’s Larry Sinclair?) and attack his competition.
Cain thought he could get away with it. Newt knows how sleazy and corrupt the dems and media are and should be able to handle them. I believe Cain felt he could cover this just as Kerry covered sending his girl friend to Africa, but didn’t have a friendly media.
The god thing is that Cain has helped end the racist thing; it won’t stop the commies from shouting racist at Republicans, but, at least those of us who vote only once, will know that race isn’t an issue, Obama is just an incompetent doofus!
Garbage. The Republicans are being played for fools.
Republicans seem to buy into every stupid meme the Democrats can find, and they fail to even look at the slimy underpinnings of any of it.
We have a sock puppet for a President because the Republicans couldn’t get enthusiastic about a principled war hero with a superb legislative background. Now we have a great field, including two governors who know how to deal with the jobs situation, and elder statesman who has wonderful ideas, and a businessman who really understands how democracy works at its best and the practical level.
And you knew in advance that the Dems were going to launch all kinds of slimy attacks on these people, and you bought into it. You stood back and let Sarah take it, instead of standing up for a game-changer.
What have the Dems got so far? Nothing. They have David Axelrod unearthing sick puppies, and George Stephanopolus bragging ahead of time, which leads me to believe that he has far less than he claims. And you take the bait like it was real. What ever happened to the 3-day moratorium on stories that are “too good to be true” (for the Dems, no less)!
Grow a crap detector.
Stupid. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.
Roger,don’t your realize how many Presidents have had affair’s ? Some were good for America.
Albeit all this hoopla about Cain’s alleged incidents of sexual harassment & now this alleged affair might have successfully served to undermine his candidacy, the major point here is his glaring lack of knowledge & expertise regarding important political issues. There has not been any evidence that he has tried to learn much about these things, instead preferring to rely on advisers to keep him properly apprised as needed. That just isn’t good enough; most (if not all) on our side never accepted Obama’s case of doing the very same thing.
Better to support pols who are experienced & have a relatively vast knowledge of issues foreign policy & domestic.
CFB is absolutely right. And because he is right, politics may be appealing to people with delusions of grandeur, but not to anyone who dearly loves their family and friends.
Why would any man or woman worth his or her salt and affiliated with the Republican party, subject themselves to the most intimate personal scrutiny, harassment, and lies to hold a public office? I’m no large fan of Sarah Palin because frankly I don’t find her terribly bright. But what has transpired and allowed to happen to that poor woman over the last three plus years has been beyond belief. These wolves have gone after her own kids. And the response from large parts of America? Egging them on. I admire Sarah Palin for no other reason than she is still standing. Most people would have long wilted by now.
I’m not seeking the perfect candidate, because they don’t exist. What I am looking for is someone that I trust to be honest and forthright, one who loves America and its ideals, and one who can clearly distinguish friend from foe. Apparently, even that is becoming difficult, and it most certainly is not the narcissistic fraud that resides in the Presidency now.
If you’re frustrated like I am that our politicians appear to be worst of breed, look no further than a corrupt MSM with an obvious bias, in conjunction with an amoral, fickle and weak American public that is too lazy to become informed, and accepts the spoon feeding. Who else would politics appeal to but mad men?
I suspect that Herman Cain has indeed been a skirt chaser – his responses alone make me suspicious. And if he did, then Herman Cain doesn’t have the sense of a mule to run for public office, because in all likelihood, he just destroyed a 40+ year marriage and hurt most the one he loves. That alone disqualifies him in my book.
Ladies and Gentlemen. Our biggest problem in America today is a dearth of moral, clear thinking leadership. And we are running out of time to resolve it, because we are in clear and present danger. I have this palpable feeling we are in for really bad times in 2012, no matter who we elect.
“Our biggest problem in America today is a dearth of moral, clear thinking leadership.”
As our politicians are a reflection upon us, what does this tell you about the issues of morality & clear thinking? Ours is a very materialistic, shallow, morally bankrupt, fickle society that is dotted with far too few among us who are endowed with strong moral principles, clear minds, depth & consistency. Until this few somehow becomes the majority, we will continue to live on with this “dearth of moral, clear thinking leadership.”
Couldn’t agree more. It is a pathetic commentary about our country. The people that went before us deserve better.
I knew we were in serious trouble thirteen years ago when Bill Clinton went on national TV, looked into the camera and lied to the American public, lied under oath, the moral coward allowed his wife to provide cover while making her look the fool later, and Americans chose to go after Kenneth Starr for Clinton’s egregious transgressions.
And now Clinton stands as admired spokesperson for at least half the country. I really don’t know what to say besides we’ve been going down the wrong road for a long time.
Assuming every negative thing said about Cain is true,
I would still pick him out of the current field of Pubs
for his positives, with the country headed into Hard Times
which will require the ability to turn the economy around.
The discouraging thing about the attacks on Cain in not their truth
but the bitter truth that they _work_ – they persuade people.
Next subject. It is time to get back to the task at hand and that is to extricate the communists from the Executive branch.
I’ve defended Cain because the charges previously presented did not have enough credibility to rise above what could have been a typical smear. If we fell for that everytime, we would never be anything but a Chis Matthews approved president – a scary thought.
I must admit, I have been leary of Cain since I saw the old you-tube of him singing with choir girls – putting robes on him ike a god. I pushed it to the back of my mind knowing that the dems would eventually uncover all. It would have been great if he had passed the vetting process, but he did not. I am grateful to the democrats for doing it now rather than after the primary.
Sadly, I agree with Roger’s analysis completely. I feel for his wife.
His 999 plan was interesting and it brought tax reform to the debate forum. I’m glad for that. If he had any other great ideas it might justify more support and defense even with all the stuff in his past, but his answer to every question was his “bold plan” of 999. He might as well drop out now…the media won this.
I am for Cain for he is a self made man and the opposite of:
Obama’s brand of socialism, which is an amalgamation of the Nationalist and Communist varieties, despises America.
Except Islamic America, which is an excellent example of both types since it is a religion that through Sharia Law controls every aspects of one’s life(virtually enslaving the believer).
National SOCIALIST German WORKERS Party which in English is known as the NAZI Party (Hitler’s socialism for the German ‘Teutonic’ Race). In reality though no different than the left’s socialism.
Like Stalin, for the white Russians, or Pol Pot, for the Khmer Rouge, or Ho Chi Minh, for the Viet Minh, or Mao, for the Han Chinese.
Socialist Gods that brought death and misery to tens if not hundreds of millions of humans.
Let us not forget our SOCIALIST God, Mein Lord God High Führer Obama, for America’s liberal elite, Muslims, OWS and welfare voters on the dole.
Oh man…We’ve had “Hope and Same”, “Climate Same” and now were going to end up with “RINO Same” just like last time with ‘McSame’. President Bush wasn’t perfect either, but I find that I miss him now more than ever. Now that it looks like Cain is out of it, a Palin candidacy looks better and better, maybe the democrat hate machine will end up overloading and destroy itself through utter ridiculousness, which I think would be the case.
Then that means you have to vote for Ron Paul. Since Palin isn’t running, the only chance we have of nominating her comes from a brokered convention. How do we get a brokered convention? By making sure Ron Paul has enough delegates that neither Romney nor Gingrich can attain a majority. Then, once the delegates are no longer bound, draft movements can begin.
Cain has had a pretty good run through life. It looks like he has overcome all of his setbacks, if he even had any, with ease. He has been a smart black guy in an era when that opened a lot of doors and he has the personality and skill to have walked through them all. Life, even for the talented and hard working, requires a lot of luck. Herman has had his share.
So I can easily understand why someone like that might assume it will all just continue, possibly even to the very pinnacle. It did for Obama, not that he has much in common politically with Cain. For Obama, it was even easier. At least Cain actually worked and made decisisions that worked out for him. Obama has been carried on a silk pillow for his entire life.
Like Roger, I have no idea and don’t much care whether Cain has a secret sex life. I’d like to believe he hasn’t abused or taken advantage of women. If it is ever proven that he did, it will be even more embarrassing for his groupies who ignored his total lack of experience and who assumed that the inch deep conservative platitudes he spoke so well flowed from a Reaganesque depth of thought and commitment.
The key lesson isn’t about human weaknesses, or irrational exuberation, or even another proof of the rabidness of Pravda (or perhaps even his Republican opponents).
The key lesson is that politicians without track records are, as somebody has been saying on PJ Media for a long time now, extremely risky propositions.
Romney and Gingrich, for all of their flaws, are known commodities. Lets quit trying to destroy them and begin appreciating them for their achievements and skills, and because we know enough about them to know their flaws as well as their abilities.
It was always foolish to roll the dice on somebody we knew nothing about.
Romney and Gringrich, for all their flaws …
Gringrich, who was whipped out of office for his … aghast … affair.
Romney, whose RomneyCare was the inspiration for ObamaCare and whose advisers advised the President and Democrats in Congress.
Known quantities aren’t always a good thing.
To not support Cain on things like his apparent lack of knowledge and experience is fine. I have no issue with that.
However, to not support him because of the accusations is wrong and means that all someone has to do is yell, “Rape!”, or scream, “He did me!”
Enjoy your serfdom. There will probably be plenty of government benefits for you.
You make no sense.
from the guy who says
“However, to not support him because of the accusations is wrong and means that all someone has to do is yell, “Rape!”, or scream, “He did me!”
To him, that makes sense.
And your accusation has no substance. There is just vacuous statement and nothing more.
I asked you to explain yourself and you refuse. That tells me you have no argument other than bitterness.
That means, in my book, you are not serious and just a provocateur.
I have no problem debating folks willing to debate issues on the merits and, when questioned, they respond cogently. What I have issues with is people like you who do hit and run responses that make no sense and refuse to clear matters up.
That is not a debate. That is what the mainstream media does to Republicans all the time.
“To not support Cain on things like his apparent lack of knowledge and experience is fine. I have no issue with that.”
After what all we have been through with Obama, you should be anything but fine with that. Obama’s ineptness has been just about as significant as his rigid, far-leftist ideology as forces which have severely undermined the interests of this country and some of our allies abroad.
To NOT support …
which means …
To NOT support
If you do NOT SUPPORT Cain on substance, you know like on …. “his apparent lack of knowledge and experience”, then that “is fine,” and “I have no issue with that.”
Does that help?
So I overlooked the word “not” in your rather befuddled post. My bad. Sorry.
To say that Mr. Cain was “willing to hide” something from Mrs. Cain suggests that he was devious. Perhaps he was; I don’t know. In retrospect, he should have realized that someday he would likely seek the presidency and should therefore structure his private and public life on the basis that the media would inflate quite innocent gestures into something titillating. Hindsight can be quite useful for some purposes but we don’t and can’t act retrospectively, guided by prescience.
If I wanted to assist someone financially, male or female, I would first discuss the matter with my wife; we have limited funds to give away. Mr. Cain’s financial situation is different; he apparently has lots of money and in their relationship there may have been no reason to discuss an apparently trivial matter.
Mr. Cain must deal far more effectively with the most recent accusations and seems to have figured that out. If Mrs. Cain makes a public statement telling of the financial assistance Mr. Cain had previously given to others, male and female, of which she had not been contemporaneously aware and otherwise reaffirms her trust and confidence in him as her husband and as a man, that will go a long way to reviving his now infirm campaign.
At the end of this article I am left with a bad taste in my mouth. It reads like a set up for choosing Romney.
I came to Atlanta from an outpost of the former British Empire. It has always puzzled me how much stress Yanks put on the moral qualities of their leaders. Frankly, I want the leader of the free world to be a wily, lying, conniving, tough, practical politician who has the benefit of common sense developed by experience. I am hiring a President, not a Preacher. Eisenhower was perfect (Nixon capable but less so). Jack Kennedy is over rated but he certainly did well during the Cuba crisis. It would seem to me that the capability of hiding affairs with one’s mistress from one’s wife is a perfect qualification. Who do you want as leader? A vegetarian, non smoking, non drinking idealist with strong principles (Hitler), or a drunkard of dubious moral reputation who changed parties twice (Churchill)?
Candidate comparisons, under your logic Cain was an atrocious candidate. He was unable to hide anything one year out from the election.
It’s all Obama’s fault, because he proved that one can become president without his past being delved into by the media! Cain made the mistake of thinking that if Barry could hide his shady past, so could he.
At question seems to be the “vetting” process. What and how is it, or should it be done, where and by whom?
Was current White House occupant vetted? no! Accepted, yes!
Are current members of Congress and Senate vetted? no! Accepted, yes!
Is american electorate capable (or interested) in participating in any vetting process? no! Accepted any candidate, yes!
Are politicians by their very nature (greed) prevaricators? Yes! This is politics, where a candidate is going to try and garner as many votes of their constituency +1. By it’s very nature, invites shades of gray.
Cain is a case in point. Many decisions he made, some good, some not so good, but none rising to lacking a moral compass. His helping countless numbers of people seemed to him to be almost compassionate. Certain people he helped saw this compassion as a weakness…and profited from it.
Now, on the national level, in a political campaign, these compassionate actions he performed are seen as a weakness, instead of a strength…and he’s being crucified for it.
OWS is a perfect example of man’s inhumanity to man. Food and handouts were available to all. Homeless appeared, only to be turned away. Mr. Cain’s compassion to help was measureless…anybody seeking help found a soft touch in him…and now, abused his compassion. Seems there is a corollary to another historical figure in this compassion towards fellow man… one facing a nailing to a cross, the other nailed to a cross. Vote this 2012. God Bless America. A Bachmann/Palin ticket is the answer.
I’ll vote for that ticket.
Meh, one Prevaricator-in-Chief is as bad as another. (How I miss Reagan.)
Perhaps it’s time to hold a national lottery for the offices of President and Congresscritters.
Could the average Joe and Jane be any worse? At least it would eliminate the elite who steer their children into politics.
The why of people gravitating towards supporting people like Cain is beyond me. I am not a super social person. I have never felt the need to be on the inside of any group. While I might feel unhappy when I am left out of opportunities for not being part of some group or another, it is quickly overwhelmed with the enjoyment of being my own man. I would imagine that it is an inner need of many of these people to be part of something larger than themselves, and as you look at who his most ardent supporters are, they are far from attached religious people. I think it is an ingrained part of humanity to want to be part of God’s group, and if a person has declined to join that group, then they are left with an unmet need in their soul, and they reach out to many other groups to try and fill that need. It never satiates them, and it leaves them bitter and angry. This could be part of why there is such an immense amount of hatred people who do so feel entitled to lay upon those of us who do not jump on their train or at the very least don’t just shut the hell up and let them be part of something bigger than themselves. It is like taking away their ability to live if you allow or help take down their group leader.
Cain was an outsider. Supporting Cain was a way to be part of an eclectic group, and being eclectic meant that they were somebody in that group. As the group grew and went beyond that description, many were comforted by the idea that they helped bring the group to a larger number of people. They put themselves into it, they built it up, they were there from the beginning and they therefore have partial ownership of the Cain Train. They are heavily invested into the project and anything that threatens it is an enemy, and as it stands, nothing is considered proof to them anymore, not even Cain’s own words.
Glad to see at least one Cain Train member who has gotten off at one of the terminals and is not out for revenge against those of us who have been looking on and wondering how did they ever think the price of the ride was worth it?
It is really refreshing to see so many of the comments above show that Herman Cain has still so many defending him. I continue to hope that he will come roaring back and once and for all make the U.S. a truly post-racial society by breaking the stranglehold that the ‘Progressive’ wing has had over the Black Americans. I refuse to call them African-Americans because they are and have been living in the United States, albeit as slaves until and even after emancipation and another 100 years of effective slavery. The multi-generational history of slavery has to have had a considerable residual effect which a few more generations will need to pass before dissipation, but has been, in my opinion, deliberately perpetuated by what Herman Cain appropriately calls the “Plantation” of the Democratic Party. Even these trumped up dirty tricks by the fanatic ‘Progressive’ partisans will end up toughening Herman Cain, his family and the quality of his campaign.
As to his ‘Gaffes’ and so-called lack of knowledge on Foreign Policy and other stuff that has been nised about, only a truly humble person would make statements like the ones he has made. After all, he is the only of the 8 who has had no significant experience in the political, one-liners and sound-bites that the other 7 pros have become used to. To my humble mind, it is really refreshing to have a man who is confident in himself and basic common sense that God endowed him with and polished by experience in the private sector running for the highest office in the land. The political landscape that we are in is the inevitable result of the Bush 41, Clinton, Al Gore v GWB battle follwed by the Bush 43 presidencies followed by the most recent “crowning” achievements of the Barack Obama debacle. Only a unique Neophyte of Herman Cain’s antecedents as the next president of the United States can usher this country into the next phase of the history of the United States and I believe it will happen and we will know on Monday! And, by the way, his 9-9-9 plan with some adjustments will be the ‘Bonus’!
He is the only one of the candidates that continually speaks in the third person. That is a sign of arrogance, not humility.
Stop making excuses. And get out of your dream world. There is no such thing as a post-racial society, you’re delusional or brainwased to even think it is possible. Diversity is a death sentence to a society, a society where ther is a protected class that is exempted from following societal norms will implode sooner or later. Cain is a con who has skated his entire life protected from accountibility because he is the right slin color. Do not make excuses for him, that’s the reason he has the sense of entitlement that he does now. He has never really had to do anything but be black before and he just wasn’t prepared for what would happen when he became a vanity candidate as a Republican.
As Deeg alluded, it’s all about the gift tax. Which means he gave her more than $13,000 in a year. Apart from the legal issues, it would be hard for anyone, perhaps including his wife, to believe that he gave such a sum to a platonic friend kept secret from his wife.
Vetting a person is one thing, to dismiss a person due to unfounded accusations, supposition, and, apparently, gut feelings, is wrong.
Dismiss Cain due to “999″ or his flubs. No problem there.
People that keep things hidden from their spouses shouldn’t be allowed to own blog sites.
I’d feel better if at least one guy he knew mentioned the mistress. Just one. Guys gossip. If he’s not gossiping- is he dipping his wick elsewhere?
and why is the mistress coming out of the closet? Ben Stein writes about giving money to long-term acquaintances in financial binds. I doubt he’s cheating.
I want Perry for the nomination. I don’t think Cain is a good candidate. But I don’t know that he’s got hot and cold running mistresses.
Although, for all future Republicans- can we run internet ads where we show our people doing stuff- hunting moose, jogging, repairing fences, riding horses, etc- and say ‘ of course our people are hot! yours are not!’ and show O wearing a helmet riding, or flinching from a karate exhibition. “Of course people fantasize about ours! Yours are girly-men!”
“When it comes to politicians, caveat emptor. They are almost all very flawed human beings.”
It takes a big man to admit when they have made a mistake.
“I chopped down the cherry tree”
I have always learned the most from my mistakes, my successes teach me little.
I think we need someone that has balanced the budget before, and can admit to the mistakes they have made.
Perhaps Mr. Cain ran because he had some ideas that he thought would be good for the country. Its called patriotism and he has my respect for it.
Did he underestimate the rabid media attention? Probably. It is too bad that people of his caliber get dogged by these problems. I would have liked to see his economic ideas in the oval office.
Thank-you for your service Mr. Cain. I’m sorry this isn’t working out.
Mr. Simon, I was pleased by your last two posts. You showed courage and an independant spirit.
I think your take on Newt and immigration was just right. There is still room for some “compassionate conservatism,” I hope.
I also agree with your Cane assessment. The women problem is bad enough. I can’t even get beyond thinking of him as an upscale carnival barker.
http://hamptonroads.com/2011/12/cuccinelli-quiz-presidential-candidates-saturday-forum
Quick quiz. There are three candidates missing. Gary Johnson. John Huntsman. and who else?
I’ve heard that Mr. Cain is making an announcement tomorrow.
I have no inside information and what I’ve read on line might be wrong.
Full Disclosure: I support Michele Bachmann. She’s still in the race.
He will not back out. These kinds of accusations is incredibly easy to create. And typically it’s the more gullible people like Roger L Simon who believes in them. Roger L Simon and other talented word smiths has some cloud on forming public opinion. But if you are yourself the person who has been wrongly accused, you don’t just give up.
And Roger L. Simon who doesn’t seem to possess much insight into the human condition will surely miscalculate Cain’s next move.
On a side note. Mr Simon’s lack of understanding of human nature is probably also the reason why his Hollywood career didn’t take of. Nobody want’s to watch “serious” subjects treated as superficially as Simon’s limited mental capabilities allow him to do. People can recognize truth instinctively in movies – and the lack of.
And what do I mean when I say that Simon doesn’t understand human nature? He does not grasp that humans do in fact artificially create scandals like this. They also artificially creates false evidence in court cases. They will artificially make it look like a president was killed by a single lunatic. There are people that will take advantage of the Roger L. Simon’s of the world and their naivety and trust in authorities.
How do they do it? How do the “bad guys” manipulate the public like this? Answer: First they identify, what type of authorities people tend to blindly believe. Then they corrupt those authorities. And then they make those authorities perpetuate the lie. And authorities come in many forms.
Example: People trust the authority of police evidence. So the really sinister and ambitious “bad guys” will corrupt the department that handles evidence. And then use those corrupted individuals in that department to plant fake evidence.
People trust the authority of 5 women separately making accusations of sexual misconduct. So the sinister bad guys will corrupt 5 women and make them put forward false accusations.
Etc. etc.
I know i can’t reach people like Roger L Simon who is definitely a stubborn minded self inflated kinda guy. His main objective in life is to be with the cool crowd. So he’ll never have the guts to stand with the accused, if it is somehow viewed as an uncool conspiracy theory or if the accused himself is uncool and lack social skills.
He backed out.
I have spent several months trying to defend Herman Cain but not any longer. In my opinion, Mr. Cain needs to bow out and leave the platform.
I hear conservatives condemn Romney and Gingrich for their “flip-flops,” or changinging opinions but I am not hearing many come out and admit how toxic Cain is now to the republican party.
I feel that we have several good candidates, Romney and Gingrich being two of them. Instead of concentrating on their negatives, I prefer to find some positive.
Changing one’s mind and opinion is a normal process of aging. Wisdom does not stay stagnant. Of course Romney, Gingrich and any other normal adult has at some point re-evaluated their positions and had a change of heart.
Can you imagine any human ever keeping the same thought process throughout their entire life? Flexibility and changing times forces people to acknowledge old ideas are not always the best ideas.
I do not see Romney nor Gingrich as flawed, I see them as confident, intelligent men who both bring good intentions and fresh solutions to the problems that our ever changing world is presenting.
As for Mr. Cain, his numbers disturb me: 999 and how many women – no thanks.
I have spent several months trying to defend Herman Cain but not any longer. In my opinion, Mr. Cain needs to bow out and leave the platform.
I hear conservatives condemn Romney and Gingrich for their “flip-flops,” or changinging opinions but I am not hearing many come out and admit how toxic Cain is now to the republican party.
I feel that we have several good candidates, Romney and Gingrich being two of them. Instead of concentrating on their negatives, I prefer to find some positive.
Changing one’s mind and opinion is a normal process of aging. Wisdom does not stay stagnant. Of course Romney, Gingrich and any other normal adult has at some point re-evaluated their positions and had a change of heart.
Can you imagine any human ever keeping the same thought process throughout their entire life? Flexibility and changing times forces people to acknowledge
I’m going to go with clueless. He’s listening to bad advice, coming from advisers who either have a malicious agenda or think Cain is Mitt Romney (not saying they are Romney supporters who infiltrated the Cain campaign, but rather that they are giving Cain advice as though he were an establishment candidate, which is not helpful to Cain). He doesn’t know what he’s doing, so he asks for help from people he expects know better, but they are either unwilling or unable to give him the advice he needs.
At this point, Cain’s only hope of winning is for his wife to reassure everybody that there was nothing improper going on here AND for Mike Huckabee to throw his support behind Cain (Palin won’t make the first move, and even if she did it wouldn’t carry enough weight). If that happens, MAYBE Cain can be the beneficiary of Ron Paul’s attack ads against Newt Gingrich.
I am away late and few will read this, but I am dumbfounded at the manner in which Cain has been abused by both sides, by commentators and bloggers, both professional and otherwise. It reeks of the Duke Lacrosse team episode. I thought that those on the right believed that the burden of the proof is on the accuser, not the accused. Why is it demanded that he produce. down the smallest detail, evidence that what is being said is false. Why should failure to do so make you suspicious? He reacted as I would have in such circumstances: simple denial at first, in the expectation of the support of those who knew my character; confusion when I found, instead, that others gave credence to unsubstantiated allegations; astonishment that I was expected to answer, in public scrutiny, to charges which were totally fabricated and impossible to address in any manner than flat denial. And on a scale that required dropping everything else to provide evidence that can’t exist because the accusations are falsehoods.
It is absolutely unsurprising that Cain sounds insecure and fumbling. You would too, Mr. Simon, in the same circumstances. If you were innocent, accused of misdemeanors that never entered your head, faced with fabricated details that would require expensive investigation to dispprove, in the harsh flodlight of a rush-to-judgment trial in the public press, how do you think you would come off? What option would YOU have other than continuing denial? This whole sorry affair is a demonstration of the incredible, filthy, evil gutter tactics of the Brave New Obama World. You should be ashamed for demanding that the victim prove himself innocent, and criticizing him for not doing so in a slick manner. You would have a lot greater reason to be skeptical if he had ready answers.
Mr.Williamson- just step back and think- were lots of these things going
on “all at once’? From what I have heard- looks like Mr. Cain may have been
molesting more than one woman -for example in a given day and -rendezvous with
a girlfriend before coming home for dinner with is lovely wife of 43 years.
Busy man and busy pervert?
“The real problem is us. Why do we flock to politicians (amateur or otherwise) so quickly when we know so little about them?”
Steady on there, Roger. I yield to no one in my contempt for the way the American People blame politicians, when the real problem is good old fashioned baseball playing, apple pie eating Americans themselves – grandma, Uncle Joe, and Tommy all have a sense of entitlement from the government.
With that said, this is an awful GOP field, and Cain was not some kind of Howard Dean grassroots cult of personality phenom. Voters turned toward him after Trump, Bachmann, Perry all had turns holding the co-frontrunner spot with Romney.
You might as well ask why the voters have flocked to all of those, plus Gingrich, each in their turn. We may very well be smitten fools who have learned nothing from the Kennedys, but in this case the answer is simply that we have to pick *someone.*
This article is right on. The only person to blame for this debacle is…Herman Cain.
1. If your a Republican candidate for president don’t expect anything in your past to be secret.
2. If you do have anything that would harm your run you handle it before you get in the race not afterwards or if your honest you don’t run.
3. If your really innocent you better know how to handle the howling liberal press, in other words a plan.
4. You actually have to have enough interest in being president to do your homework and not rely on conservative soundbites, platitudes and a good speaking voice.
It’s obvious Cain did not care enough about his wife, his supporters or the party he was representing to do 1,2, or 3. As for number 4 that is why I never supported him. Blaming the hacks in the liberal press is just BS. Cain himself could have handled all of this beforehand and if it couldn’t be handled so he could be honest about it he should never have run.
“Why do we flock to politicians (amateur or otherwise) so quickly when we know so little about them?”
My way of thinking – and I really think most conservatives think similarly – is “This is who I’m leaning toward given what I know now.” Some people “fall” for candidates much more easily but I don’t think it is all that common on the conservative side. That it is probably rampant on the liberal side is evidenced by the electoral success of our current thumb-twiddler-in-chief who had absolutely no resume whatsoever. This is because all of their ideas (and by extension their minds) are vapid anyway.
Why did he run? Because he thought he could get away with everything and pull it off with a few tropes like “9-9-9″. Delusional.
I’ll admit I liked some of what he said. But I never joined his camp. I lean toward Perry and Bachman only because I don’t think Santorum has a chance at this point. I won’t vote for Romney, PERIOD. Maybe Gingrich will clinch it. We’ll see.
The way I looked at it, with so many people voting for Barack Obama solely on the color of his skin,if we could put up a black CONSERVATIVE,he might actually have a chance of defeating Obama. Cain looked especially good because he made himself into a successful businessman who even turned Godfather Pizza around. Hey,someone who knows and applies ECONOMIC REALITIES!! Who would know,firsthand,the problems that over-regulation and high taxes cause for business and employment. Suddenly, I was once again hopeful for my country. Alas,alas,like so many prominent men,he yielded to the temptation of an extramarital affair. That is,seemingly,an asset for Democrats (as witness the Kennedys, John Edwards,and Bill Clinton,just to name a few),but the Republicans generally eject such men from their political careers. Which is why we are apparently stuck with a couple of experienced political candidates who are more of the same old same old,and we are DOOMED. Even if one of those guys WINS,it’ll be more George Bush,more “crossing the aisle to get things done”,and the country will go to blazes in a handbasket,maybe more slowly than under Obama,but I fear we will see far too little needed change.
And explain to me how a man can have a 13-year relationship that he didn’t tell his wife about, and he can still claim that God urged him to run for Pres ? Was that so God could humble him in front of a National audience ?
To err is human, but, in a sense Cain tarnished all of the worthy causes
he stood for while constantly evoking God and the flag. Cain
is/was a “stink bomb”…and he walked out the door bragging about
his virtues and values.
People aren’t “flocking” to candidates they know nothing about, they are giving their best assessment to pollsters based on their current knowledge of the candidates. In this case the media did its job, and voters appropriately shifted away from Cain when they learned more. The media outrage is that the press does NOT do its job on flawed Democratic candidates like John Edwards because it is too busy chasing down ridiculous stories about Republicans they happen to disagree with (Sarah Palin.) Democrats should be just as frustrated with this scenario; they have just as much to lose.
When will these people who run for elected office get it? That if they have so much as a skid mark in their undies or shorts they will be found out? If they are so naive as to think that it won’t matter then they should bring it out in THE OPEN at the outset. Don’t they ever discuss this amongst themselves at political meetings or pow wows? Isn’t this common sense at the very least?
I recall learning in nursing school over the course of mental health study that the strongest of all psychological defenses of man is denial. Most certainly it is at play here with these presidential candidates, particularly Herman Cain.
Yep, Bobbcat(Goldtwait?)Mr. Cain is out
paddling away today on the Nile again…
Mr. Simon. We love you very much and your heart and your mind are exactly in the tight places. But not your memory,and I have some doubts about your political, uh, instincts.
First, for the easier of the speculations – doubts and speculations about the accusations themselves. This one is easy – I give you Bill Clinton. Period, full stop, end argument.
But now for the more difficult speculations – why has Cain handled things as he has, why hasn’t he handled them as forthrightly as some of us would like, up to and including, now, why did he run in the first place?
These doubts are in effect trashing a Conservative hopeful. Are you sure Mr. Simon that a candidate MUST handle themselves as you indicate? Aren’t I right that Justice Thomas also refused to directly refute his accusers but did vigorously deny, and only deny, the vile accusations?
And wasn’t that rightly OK with us? And if we are principled should we say that well it was OK in the Justice Thomas case because it did not derail him? More, if it had derailed him would we want to publicly speculate that maybe Anita Hill was right? Why didn’t Thomas defend himself directly, why didn’t he prove or give strong proofs that his accusers were, as he himself said, lying?
As to your question if a husband has hidden things from his wife, how can we expect etc? The answer is – his career.
Mr. Simon, why are Movement Conservatives attacking small “c” conservatives? And while we are at it, when did we lose our minds? Cain is being held to standards no candidate would be held to including Justice Thomas. Why were these standards OK for Justice Thomas and not Cain?
And don;t give me this claptrap, well Cain was running for President.
It takes a big man to admit when he has made a mistake.
“I cannot tell a lie, it was I that chopped down the cherry tree”
I have been undecided until recently. But, Gingrich has come clean on his mistakes, I like his flat tax, and he is the only one that has ever balanced the federal budget. He has done excellent in the debates, hasn’t burnt bridges by attacking the others, and has attacked Obama and the biased Lame Stream Media. This election is going to be about Obama’s failures, not about Republican failures no matter how often Obama blames Bush, the TEA Party, Lazy Americans, Corporate Greed, etc…He now owns all the failures of his first term. I believe Newt is the best equipped to highlight all those failures, and contrast them with what he helped Reagan do, and what he did do in balancing the budget, reforming welfare, and the Contract with America’s 94 Republican takeover.
Cain just announced he’s no longer running.
I love reading all these comments, even though the subject is a big disappointment for me. Everyone’s analysis is helpful to me. My bottom line is this: I’m getting behind the GOP candidate no matter what bombs are dropped. I wish everyone else here and out there in the country who is a Republican or an Independent or a Libertarian of any persuasion whether Conservative, Moderate, or Liberal, THE SAME DETERMINATION I AM DECLARING. If ever there were a time to be united against a corrupt, lying, thieving, (what I believe to be Communist team=Obama and his puppet masters all over the globe) group of radicals IT IS NOW UNTIL THE GENERAL ELECTION IN NOVEMBER 2012—-AND EVEN AFTER THAT DATE!!! We Republicans and Independents and Libertarians must unite for the bigger cause which is the defeat of the Obama Team. We must never rest from here until death releases us from this mortal coil.
Hmmm, accusations by 3 troubled women. Coincidence that they have in common multiple lawsuits, personal bankruptcies, poor employment history, past history of accusations, homelessness, etc.? Combine these with the MSM’s history of destroying conservatives, especially black conservatives and who does PJ Media choose to believe? The screwed-up women who’ve provided no proof, of course.
Congratulations, Roger for doing your part. Herman’s done. Next Republican nominee up for personal destruction?
Don’t be so quick to blame the women or to disbelieve everything they say. Did you ever stop to think the similarities in their stories might be a good sign of a pattern by Cain? Pick vunerable women and prey on them and give them money and help in return for sex. That sounds as likely as you version, Cain the innocent falsely accused by those lying women.
It’s not what they find in your trunk when trying to cross the border so much, as who finds it. Good luck Mr. Cain, and please, endorse the candidate that best fits your liking, if ever their likness rises above this awful fog.
Cain jumped at the “acting job” of being a “black conservative” running for
president. There ARE black conservatives out there. Colonel West for one,
but Mr. Cain has made it more difficult in the future for “black conservatives”
to come forward and run for office.
Sorry, but it has always been hard for a black conservative to run for office. At the very least, they are painted as Uncle Toms and sell outs.
This is a classic political take down, nothing more, nothing less.
I think Cain took himself down. Lets get on with finding a way to take Obama down.
Herman Cain struck a cord with many ordinary “folk” (as we are so oten called) — but not with many pundits, professional politicians, members of the establishment, the liberal mudslinging media or the 5th grader (hat tip above) Republicans/Conservatives who are just so “above” this.
I don’t know what Mr.Cain did personally. But then again, none of us do. These were allegations at best. As or selling books — please.
But what finally did it for me today was that George Will comment about Cain and entrepreneurs, charlatans, and charlatan entrepreneurs — that would be specifically Herman Cain and Donald Trump. I find it ironic that these men–entrepreneurs who have built successful companies, employed many people, paid a boatload of taxes, patriots,– are deemed not good enough to play in the elite political arena. Really. What hubris.
I was taken in by Ross Perot, once upon a time. I was a county coordinator for the campaign. He led us a merry chase. Then I met the man, and realized what a farce the genial uncle Ross image was. The man’s ego was palpable in the room. I imagine it’s what you would feel walking into Napoleon’s presence, or at least one of the lesser French absolute monarchs.
I was reminded of West Wing on how Barlett never thought he’d win and the MS issue got buried. I’m still hoping for Perry- nix on global warming, actually wants to rid us of govt departments- heck, he can forget the third one if at the end of the day it’s put in the ash heap of history. To the might Repubs- how can you, in the end, cut spending if you don’t eliminate whole pieces of govt.