Monday, September 27, 2021
HomeRecommendedPrejudice and Herman Cain

Prejudice and Herman Cain

You all know the new story, a woman in Atlanta has stepped forward to claim she’s had a 13-year affair with Herman Cain.

I’m inclined to ask, after 13 years of glorious behind closed doors, under the sheets fun with Herman Cain, why is this women suddenly filled with regret about an “inappropriate relationship”?

After one week maybe. I can see that. But 13 years? And again, why did Herman Cain suddenly become a horn dog in his mid-50’s? Where was she when he ran for the Senate? Or preached moral conduct on his radio show for several years?

And why, in God’s name, would Herman Cain, knowing he had a roomful of buxom skeletons in his closet, ever run for public office in the first place?

But I’ll leave parsing the sordid details to others. I’m busy, need to be other places, so can only give this a few minutes.

Let’s cut to the chase.

As an old trial lawyer I know this single one thing about this sort of accusation:

The same amount of evidence is required if 100% true as is required if 100% false.

And that is the word of one person.

The objective of these accusations…remember, there were others, the credibility of who were so suspect that they all but disappeared…is to cause women especially…WOMEN…to tilt that 100% true versus 100% false in favor of guilt, based on the cumulative effect of several accusations.

It is based on the fact that Herman Cain is 1) a man, therefore more likely to be guilty, and 2) a Negro, therefore far more likely to be guilty. So, when a second, then a third steps forward, he’s definitely guilty. My mother would have hung him a month ago.

Again, a judge would never have allowed a jury to even hear this evidence, it is so outlandish standing alone, without corroboration.

There’s nothing subtle about this form of racism, and since it benefits not only the Left (closet racists of the worst kind anyway) but the other candidates, some of whom are opportunists of the worst kind, I won’t lay this sin at any of their feet. But by their silence, they deserve to be counted among the culpable.

It’s the old “where there’s smoke there’s fire” intuitive response my mother always applied. To her, you could never tell five lies about a person. Maybe one, but if there were two, then they were probably true.

What my mother didn’t know, but my dad did, and every high school kid I knew who was interested in girls, that if a kid got a girl in trouble he could procure at least five other guys to swear they’d been with her too. And my mother would have easily condemned that little slattern with nothing else required.

You’re seeing the same thing here.

Ladies, you are the objects of this campaign.You are supposed to withdraw your support from Mr Cain based on your superior instincts. It’s that simple.

So, get thee to your closets.

vassarbushmills
Citizen With Bark On

14 COMMENTS

Leave a Reply

14 COMMENTS

  1. Somehow, I wasn’t surprised by this latest effort to take Cain down. As you noted, Vassar, where were all these complaints (is an affair a complaint?) when he was in the public eye running for Senator or having his very successful conservative talk radio show?

    Count me as a woman who isn’t afraid to vote for him…

  2. I’ve always thought that for any “affair” of a certain duration, there would be a giving of gifts (jewelery, cars, domiciles,bank accounts, etc.) and time spent quietly away in lush tropical locations from the hum drum everyday duties. Thirteen years is a long time for her to be silent and waiting for what?

    Besides, looking at Mrs. Cain, if her HUSBAND were to have carried on something of that nature for any amount of time, certain body parts would have been served up to him on one of his pizzas.

    Get out the voice recognition software and the Secret Service Polygraph. Should be interesting.

  3. Based on what I see of this woman’s past, there is indeed a conspiracy afoot.

    Forget the politics, this sort of conduct should never be subsidized, (as Mark Steyn cynically did on radio today)by a shrug and “hey, that’s politics”. No it’s not. It needs to be weeded out and punished in the most severe fashion.

  4. The other side must be truly afraid of Mr. Cain as a contender against whomever they finally decide to parade out as their knight-in-slimed-armour-talking-points-strawman.

    Any way someone from our side can have a quiet conversation with Mr. C on dealing with these small time grifters.

  5. This line of argument (Cain being singled out in a conspiracy) might hold less water in light of his campaign suspension announced today. Maybe he is doing it out of the goodness of his family and seeing the toll it has taken on their private life. But then again, maybe there was some truth, however small or large, to these accusations of his past. Either way, I doubt there was some conspiracy to oust him from being a contender.

    In my personal opinion, this isn’t either left or right, this is simple sensationalism and giving the public what it wants, which is sordid scandal, and truth is the least necessary quality to satiate the public. And I don’t think anybody is immune to this, regardless of politics. If you haven’t seen dirt (true or untrue) on somebody, it isn’t because people aren’t out there trying. (Well, if you are Huntsman, Bachmann, or Santorum,the need to dig is probably considerably less).

    “But hey, that’s politics.”

  6. “I doubt there was some conspiracy to oust him from being a contender.”
    There are conspiracies of one kind or another going on all the time. To quote Clinton, it depends on what the definition of conspiracy is. There was this little thing called the JournOlist. There is no longer any excuse for anyone to say that journalists don’t sit around figuing out how to slur conservatives; it’s a matter of public record. There was also the matter of the Palin e-mails. There is also the current matter of the WAPO bloger wanting people to send him dirt on Newt Gingrich. I guess if it’s blatant partisan politics being practiced by “journalists”, maybe it’s redundant to call it a conspiracy.
    As far as the women, if they are smart enough to engage the likes of Gloria Allred and stage press conferences and all the rest, how come they are dirt poor, have liens against their property,judgements against them can’t pay the rent, even, in the case of the last one, with Herman helping them out? As VB said, none of this doesn’t mean Herman didn’t try to cop a feel, just that
    the list of people “handling it badly” extends far beyond Herman.

  7. The line between “concerted-effort” and “conspiracy” might be fine to some, might be clear-cut to others. Being able to assume/presume/flat-out guess what the intentions are of certain words keeps comments sections and forums thriving and contentious. [And JournOlist might be a bad example for conspiracies. 40 members of 400+ signed that ‘conspiracy list’ but then it was extrapolated out to mean ALL members of journolist are in on it (and eventually that ALL of journalism was).] Accurate details and fact-checking are lost when time-to-print trumps everything in an instantaneous information age. Post-hoc retractions and corrections are increasingly justified when a hungry public will consume the initial mistake-laden stories in droves (and conveniently miss the small square of text on page 3 admitting it). And none of those driving forces requires a political slant or leaning to be the cause which is why i dont look at things like Cain-smearing as being ‘a conspiracy of the left’. Since I take EVERY bit of information (and their sources) with a grain of salt, I might be in for a very early heart attack. Maybe I need to go on a diet.

    • Who extrapolated it out to mean all are “in on it”? Or are you under some mad rush to get to print? The fact of it’s existence should be enough, but only 10% coming out and explicitly saying “we need to get dirt on these guys” means, I guess, that the rest of the Nazis were just following orders. When was the last time you saw a post-hoc retraction or a correction?
      But you’re right, it’s the hungry public responsible for it all. Damned public! That rush to get to print is a new twist though. Maybe Bill Keller will pick that line up and use it in his next offering….nah. He’s never apologized for anything. Let’s see here, just trying to think of the last time one of ’em had a come-to-Jesus moment….thinking…..thinking….

      • Wow, you trotted out Nazis as a comparison to the 10% of JournOlist that signed a pact. I know what kind of crowd gravitates to this website now. I’ll wander elsewhere, maybe to a more rational website capable of a respectful discourse. Keep producing rhetoric, it’s good for this website. Might bring in a lot of hits.

        • Well, wander if you must. just hope you didn’t hurt yourself contorting from telling us not to judge the JournOlisters (and by the way that *is* a capital “O”)by forty of them exhorting each other, and by association the rest, to dis whoever the R’s put up in ’08….. and then spinning on a dime to take my comments and presume to know “what kind of crowd gravitates to this website.”

  1. Somehow, I wasn’t surprised by this latest effort to take Cain down. As you noted, Vassar, where were all these complaints (is an affair a complaint?) when he was in the public eye running for Senator or having his very successful conservative talk radio show?

    Count me as a woman who isn’t afraid to vote for him…

  2. I’ve always thought that for any “affair” of a certain duration, there would be a giving of gifts (jewelery, cars, domiciles,bank accounts, etc.) and time spent quietly away in lush tropical locations from the hum drum everyday duties. Thirteen years is a long time for her to be silent and waiting for what?

    Besides, looking at Mrs. Cain, if her HUSBAND were to have carried on something of that nature for any amount of time, certain body parts would have been served up to him on one of his pizzas.

    Get out the voice recognition software and the Secret Service Polygraph. Should be interesting.

  3. Based on what I see of this woman’s past, there is indeed a conspiracy afoot.

    Forget the politics, this sort of conduct should never be subsidized, (as Mark Steyn cynically did on radio today)by a shrug and “hey, that’s politics”. No it’s not. It needs to be weeded out and punished in the most severe fashion.

  4. The other side must be truly afraid of Mr. Cain as a contender against whomever they finally decide to parade out as their knight-in-slimed-armour-talking-points-strawman.

    Any way someone from our side can have a quiet conversation with Mr. C on dealing with these small time grifters.

  5. This line of argument (Cain being singled out in a conspiracy) might hold less water in light of his campaign suspension announced today. Maybe he is doing it out of the goodness of his family and seeing the toll it has taken on their private life. But then again, maybe there was some truth, however small or large, to these accusations of his past. Either way, I doubt there was some conspiracy to oust him from being a contender.

    In my personal opinion, this isn’t either left or right, this is simple sensationalism and giving the public what it wants, which is sordid scandal, and truth is the least necessary quality to satiate the public. And I don’t think anybody is immune to this, regardless of politics. If you haven’t seen dirt (true or untrue) on somebody, it isn’t because people aren’t out there trying. (Well, if you are Huntsman, Bachmann, or Santorum,the need to dig is probably considerably less).

    “But hey, that’s politics.”

  6. “I doubt there was some conspiracy to oust him from being a contender.”
    There are conspiracies of one kind or another going on all the time. To quote Clinton, it depends on what the definition of conspiracy is. There was this little thing called the JournOlist. There is no longer any excuse for anyone to say that journalists don’t sit around figuing out how to slur conservatives; it’s a matter of public record. There was also the matter of the Palin e-mails. There is also the current matter of the WAPO bloger wanting people to send him dirt on Newt Gingrich. I guess if it’s blatant partisan politics being practiced by “journalists”, maybe it’s redundant to call it a conspiracy.
    As far as the women, if they are smart enough to engage the likes of Gloria Allred and stage press conferences and all the rest, how come they are dirt poor, have liens against their property,judgements against them can’t pay the rent, even, in the case of the last one, with Herman helping them out? As VB said, none of this doesn’t mean Herman didn’t try to cop a feel, just that
    the list of people “handling it badly” extends far beyond Herman.

  7. The line between “concerted-effort” and “conspiracy” might be fine to some, might be clear-cut to others. Being able to assume/presume/flat-out guess what the intentions are of certain words keeps comments sections and forums thriving and contentious. [And JournOlist might be a bad example for conspiracies. 40 members of 400+ signed that ‘conspiracy list’ but then it was extrapolated out to mean ALL members of journolist are in on it (and eventually that ALL of journalism was).] Accurate details and fact-checking are lost when time-to-print trumps everything in an instantaneous information age. Post-hoc retractions and corrections are increasingly justified when a hungry public will consume the initial mistake-laden stories in droves (and conveniently miss the small square of text on page 3 admitting it). And none of those driving forces requires a political slant or leaning to be the cause which is why i dont look at things like Cain-smearing as being ‘a conspiracy of the left’. Since I take EVERY bit of information (and their sources) with a grain of salt, I might be in for a very early heart attack. Maybe I need to go on a diet.

    • Who extrapolated it out to mean all are “in on it”? Or are you under some mad rush to get to print? The fact of it’s existence should be enough, but only 10% coming out and explicitly saying “we need to get dirt on these guys” means, I guess, that the rest of the Nazis were just following orders. When was the last time you saw a post-hoc retraction or a correction?
      But you’re right, it’s the hungry public responsible for it all. Damned public! That rush to get to print is a new twist though. Maybe Bill Keller will pick that line up and use it in his next offering….nah. He’s never apologized for anything. Let’s see here, just trying to think of the last time one of ’em had a come-to-Jesus moment….thinking…..thinking….

      • Wow, you trotted out Nazis as a comparison to the 10% of JournOlist that signed a pact. I know what kind of crowd gravitates to this website now. I’ll wander elsewhere, maybe to a more rational website capable of a respectful discourse. Keep producing rhetoric, it’s good for this website. Might bring in a lot of hits.

        • Well, wander if you must. just hope you didn’t hurt yourself contorting from telling us not to judge the JournOlisters (and by the way that *is* a capital “O”)by forty of them exhorting each other, and by association the rest, to dis whoever the R’s put up in ’08….. and then spinning on a dime to take my comments and presume to know “what kind of crowd gravitates to this website.”

Must Read