Political Animal
Blog
Herman Cain’s campaign was faltering anyway, but accusations from an Atlanta woman, who’s alleging a 13-year affair with the Republican presidential candidate, certainly won’t help.
The woman, Ginger White, made the disclosure in an interview with Fox 5 News in Atlanta, becoming the fifth person to accuse Mr. Cain of improper behavior. Ms. White is not, however, claiming that harassment took place. Rather, she described what amounted, in her words, to a romance.
“It was pretty simple,” Ms. White said. “It wasn’t complicated. I was aware that he was married. And I was also aware I was involved in a very inappropriate situation, relationship.”
Ms. White showed the news station some of her cellphone bills that included 61 phone calls or text messages to and from a number she said was for Mr. Cain’s private cellphone. The contacts were made during four different months — as early as 4:26 a.m. and as late as 7:52 p.m. The most recent were in September.
Hoping to get ahead of the story, Cain appeared on CNN yesterday afternoon to acknowledge the allegations, but insist that he did not have an affair. How does Cain explain the 61 times he contacted White? The Republican says he was “trying to help her financially.”
If that seems hard to believe, it’s because the explanation is hard to believe.
According to the accuser’s version of events, during Cain’s tenure at the National Restaurant Association — the same position he held when he was repeatedly accused of sexual harassment — he began an adulterous affair with White, including flying her to meet him at various events. The relationship reportedly ended about eight months ago, when Cain began moving forward with his campaign plans.
White says she came forward in part because reporters who’d heard rumors were beginning to contact her, and in part because of how Cain and his campaign had mistreated the women who accused him of sexual harassment.
The story took an awkward turn when Cain’s lawyer issued a statement that didn’t deny the allegations, but instead argued that it’s no one’s business: “This appears to be an accusation of private, alleged consensual conduct between adults — a subject matter which is not a proper subject of inquiry by the media or the public.”
This reinforced suspicions that the allegations are true, but it’s worth considering whether the lawyer’s statement has a point. There’s a reasonable case to be made that political candidates are entitled to some degree of privacy, and whether Cain engaged in a consensual, adulterous relationship is between him and his family. He wouldn’t be the first Republican adulterer to run for president, and the public has shown a fair amount of tolerance in this area. Politicians shouldn’t get away with sexual harassment — which directly speaks to a person’s professional conduct — but infidelity is quite different.
There are, however, some relevant angles to keep in mind in this instance. Part of Cain’s pitch to voters is that he’s a morally-righteous minister who celebrates traditional marriage. Bad judgment in one’s personal life is one thing; hypocrisy is another. Americans have shown far less patience for the latter.
What’s more, the question that I keep coming back to is why in the world Herman Cain even decided to run for president in the first place. He had to realize that the sexual misconduct allegations would surface eventually, which would prove humiliating to Cain and his family. He doesn’t seem to understand government or public policy; he’s never held public office at any level; he seems to have a Bush-like level of intellectual curiosity; and he appears to have a scandal-plagued personal life.
Cain realized all of this and decided to launch a presidential campaign anyway? What was he thinking?
Facebook
Twitter
Daniel Kim on November 29, 2011 8:08 AM:
"Bad judgment in one’s personal life is one thing; hypocrisy is another. Americans have shown far less patience for the latter."
Are you sure about that? If this were the case, then the ranks of sitting GOP politicians should be much thinner.
c u n d gulag on November 29, 2011 8:13 AM:
"What was he thinking?"
Well, maybe that despite all of that, he might get a gig on FOX News!
Sure, he'd be nothing more than another sexually harassing, ex-presidential candidate with a TV show - but he'd be THEIR sexually harassing, ex-presidential candidate with a TV show.
And, he's chocolate!
And that's a flavor you rarely find at Ailes and Ruperts Ice Cream Shoppe, where you can have any flavor you want, as long as it's vanilla.
And not 'French' vanilla either.
J on November 29, 2011 8:14 AM:
Republicans don't give a toss about that, they still love David Vitter (he of the diapers) and look at Newt riding high in the polls!
Danp on November 29, 2011 8:15 AM:
the question that I keep coming back to is why in the world Herman Cain even decided to run for president in the first place.
To become rich and famous? He never expected to become president, and if he weren't the flavor of the month, none of this would have surfaced. While I certainly don't want to accuse anyone of infidelity, would anyone even care if Ron Paul, Roehmer, Kucinich, Gravel, Hunter, Tancredo or Santorum had affairs? Some people just run to get one issue out there. Others are mere narcissists. Cain is clearly the latter.
walt on November 29, 2011 8:15 AM:
Cain the human being is easy to understand. He's got more ego than self-awareness. Much better politicians have stumbled over similar rocks so even here Cain is not exactly trailblazing. What is different about Cain is the obvious mismatch between his pretensions and his skills. He has no business being on the national stage yet Republicans are so eager for any black face to validate their sub rosa racism that they gave him a pass. They'll be other Herman Cains, of course, willing to sell out the black community for fame and fortune. Ultimately, Cain's legacy will be little more than a spectacularly pathetic failure to accomplish a Republican aim.
DJ on November 29, 2011 8:16 AM:
What was Cain thinking? He wants to sell books and get a Fox News gig. You don't need to be well-thought of by intelligent people to acheive that.
berttheclock on November 29, 2011 8:18 AM:
Just another liberal plot to derail the chances of Herm becoming the Black Warren Harding.
SteveT on November 29, 2011 8:19 AM:
One good thing will come of all this:
Herman Cain will learn what it's really like to be poor and unemployed in 21st century America after Mrs. Cain and her divorce attorney take him to the cleaners.
sick-n-effn-tired. on November 29, 2011 8:19 AM:
CUND FTW
Eeyore on November 29, 2011 8:19 AM:
I'm sure someone will say this is the inevitable result of allowing gays to marry.
bleh on November 29, 2011 8:22 AM:
What was he thinking?
"You can't BUY publicity like this!"
DAY on November 29, 2011 8:24 AM:
Celebrities write books(or have them written)- because they are celebrities, and publishers see a quick buck can be made.
No-celebrities (radio talk show hosts- and regional, at that!) need to do the ground work to BECOME celebrities, so the book sales and speaking fees are profitable.
Cain's next book : "Pussy Hound- Baying at the Moon!"
Marko on November 29, 2011 8:29 AM:
What was he thinking? He was thinking of himself, just like all sociopaths do.
Brenna on November 29, 2011 8:29 AM:
The man has gall and no sense of guilt or shame. This is how you make money today. Nothing mysterious about it. Look at the bankers and Wall Streeters. Money is their god and nothing else matters. Not decency, not a sense of fairness, just pure greed and make no apologies for it.
Grumpy on November 29, 2011 8:42 AM:
...the public has shown a fair amount of tolerance in this area.
Exactly. Being a notorious horndog probably made Bill Clinton a more effective president.
RepublicanPointOfView on November 29, 2011 8:43 AM:
Herm Cain's lawyer is absolutely correct!
To paraphrase what he said "It is nobody's business if a Baptist Minister running as a Family Values Candidate for president has a consentual sexual relationship with a woman who is not his wife."
Besides that, anyone who seriously believed that Our White Republican Party was going to give the nomination to a black man is seriously delusional.
Herm is running for a full time gig on Fox News to add to his credentials as a front man for the Koch brothers.
Rathskeller on November 29, 2011 8:50 AM:
To be honest, I envy Cain's style. I fret about books I haven't read, the mathematics I haven't attained, the news I haven't kept up with. Cain? He doesn't know what we did in Libya -- and he's proud of it! He's one smug little idiot. The GOP deserves him.
del on November 29, 2011 8:51 AM:
To say it is nobody's business when it's consensual activity did not hold true when it was John Edwards when he was running for Prez. In fact, that's all they talked about. Now when rethugs do it, no one wants to talk about it and gives them a pass. That's also all they talked about when Gary Hart made his run years ago. Why is it everybody's business when a Dem is caught but not when Gops are caught?
Snarki, child of Loki on November 29, 2011 8:55 AM:
"What was he thinking?"
Thinking? A GOP candidate? That's crazy talk! It would be like INSTANT disqualification from the GOP: the party of Dubya, Perry, Bachmann, Palin. Acephalic and proud of it!
You obviously had them confused with some other political party.
jdog on November 29, 2011 9:07 AM:
Herman Cain is the (Monty Python) Black Knight of Presidential Candidates. Arms cut off? Just a flesh wound. Loss of all limbs? I'll bite your knee caps off.
Why be concerned about what he was thinking?
T2 on November 29, 2011 9:17 AM:
if Gingrich/Cain make it to the White House, all the women in D.C. better put their running shoes on.
N.Wells on November 29, 2011 9:25 AM:
Next up from Cain's lawyer: "I will now read off this list of 100 million women that we have determined that Mr. Cain has in no way harassed or slept with. We feel that this speaks very well of his character."
mellowjohn on November 29, 2011 9:30 AM:
“This appears to be an accusation of private, alleged consensual conduct between adults — a subject matter which is not a proper subject of inquiry by the media or the public.”
does that mean the clinton impeachment never really happened?
Rich2506 on November 29, 2011 9:39 AM:
mellowjohn beat me to it, my first thought on reading Cains' lawyer's statement was "Gee, that means the Monica Lewinsky affair was okay, then!"
g on November 29, 2011 9:50 AM:
The Republican says he was “trying to help her financially.”
Oh, like that's an answer that will shut the media up.
What exactly does it mean, to help a woman financially? Loans? Gifts? How much money? From which funds?
berttheclock on November 29, 2011 9:52 AM:
However, the erudite Lawrence O'Donnell said it best, last evening, when, he said the most egregious words from the mouth of Cain had to do with calling African-Americans brainwashed for voting for Democrats. Mr O'Donnell, then, spoke of Mrs Cain voting in Democratic primaries, the year Obama ran for the Presidency, and, had voted in past Democratic primaries, as well. So, Herm, not only cheated on her, but, called her "brainwashed". Perhaps, she had been brainwashed to have stayed with such as cretin as Herm for so many years.
RalfW on November 29, 2011 9:55 AM:
No matter whether Cain was trying to stake some ground as "a morally-righteous minister who celebrates traditional marriage," it is fair game to bring this adulterous affair forward.
Why?
Because the entire GOP has used marriage - the bogeyman of same-sex marriage to be precise - as a hateful wedge issue for the past dozen years.
They wanna play with the private lives of a couple of million gay and lesbian Americans? Well then they damn well gotta have squeaky clean personal lives.
Let these chickens come home to roost. I will be spending the next 11 months reminding as many people as possible that Newt was having an inappropriate workplace-based affair with someone while married and while attempting to skewer Bill Clinton.
The entire "protect marriage" theme of the GOP is hogwash, hypocrisy and hatred of gays all rolled into one. Cain deserves to be a laughingstock for his marriage-sundering antics.
Kathie on November 29, 2011 10:01 AM:
As Cain is a pompous, imperious ass who somehow thought thrusting himself into the arms of his adoring fans in a U.S. Presidential campaign would still afford him secrecy leaves me with no compassion for the mess he, and only he, has created. But you've got to wonder if he even had a passing thought of "how would this impact my wife and family if my affairs and sexual harrassments went public?" And don't anyone compare him to Bill Clinton because Bill Clinton was supremely qualified to be President, this guy is an ignorant dickwad.
PTate in MN on November 29, 2011 10:06 AM:
"What was he thinking?"
What is Herman Cain thinking? Maybe,"What have I got to lose? I get some great publicity, and, maybe, I get to be POTUS. That would be some fun gig. I could blow stuff up and cut taxes for guys like me."
But you could ask the same question of everyone running for the Republican nomination. They don't want to govern, they don't want a functioning economy, they despise the common welfare and the constitution. They don't even want to deal with reality. So why are they running for POTUS? The only reasons I can figure out is "to blow stuff up," "cut taxes for rich guys" and "impose fundamentalist Christian norms on the nation."
N.Wells on November 29, 2011 10:13 AM:
It is ironic that of the leading Republican candidates, the only one-woman man is the mormon.
As to what Cain was thinking, it's looking like it might have been along the lines of "Imagine all the women who won't say no to a President!"
Anonymous on November 29, 2011 10:21 AM:
"and the public has shown a fair amount of tolerance in this area"...I think you want to change this to the GOP BASE has shown tolerance in THEIR CANDIDATES ONLY. If it's a Democrat or a GAY person then we need a LAW or AMENDMENT to stop them!!!
Anon on November 29, 2011 10:22 AM:
What he was thinking is that he looked at Gingrich, Thompson, Giuliani, Vitter and the rest of the long line of Republicans with clear, absolute cases of marital infedelity that still had viable, thriving political careers.
It's kind of hilarious how this whole thing has been just a steady process of elimination and once one GOP candidate has just a few minutes in the spotlight they implode. Bet Newsweek wishes they'd waited just a week longer on that Cain cover.
burro on November 29, 2011 10:36 AM:
"Part of Cain’s pitch to voters is that he’s a morally-righteous minister who celebrates traditional marriage." - Mr. B
Maybe this is Cain's idea of traditional marriage. Or at least Cain's concept of an acceptable version of traditional marriage. He has an accommodating and supportive wife at home, he provides an aura of financial security around the picture, and he maintains, and markets, his religious obeisance for all to see.
And he wonders, "Isn't that enough?".
This is a quote from The Grio by Dr. Boyce Watkins, who I never heard of until a few minutes ago, but I didn't have to Google deep to find it:
"First and foremost, the idea that (Martin Luther), King's memory as a great American patriot is tarnished by his infidelity is both illogical and problematic. A great man is not defined by his weaknesses, but by his strengths. Regardless of what Dr. King may have done during the course of his marriage, those actions are almost completely disconnected from the manner through which he inspired billions with his courage and led people of color to the life we share today. It is our fault, not his, that Dr. King has been placed on a pedestal so high that we've forgotten that he was human."
http://www.thegrio.com/black-history/does-dr-king-alleged-adultery-damage-his-legacy.php
I think Herman would find observations such as this not just comforting, but encouraging and affirming. He is operating on a higher plane. He is not subject to the restrictions of mortals. King is revered, not chastised, at least that isn't his primary legacy. Cain thinks he should be afforded the same broad boundaries to be judged on.
Herman just thinks he's really, really special. He is baffled that we don't see it. It's been a mystery to him for a very long time.
jeri on November 29, 2011 10:37 AM:
Oh, for Pete's sake, Steve, you know exactly why he ran. Because he has a particular kind of egotism that requires adulation and attention to survive, because he thrives on the admiration of people who are as incurious and lazy intellectually as he is, and--wait for it--because he's going to parlay this into a gig that will dwarf anything he's ever done before. Who would have bought a book by Herman Cain, former president of the NRA? He watched Sarah Palin, and, by golly, he's going to be this year's version of the out-of-the-box gadfly. For as long as it lasts.
biggerbox on November 29, 2011 10:43 AM:
Political candidates are entitled to some degree of privacy, but I don't think that degree extends to the point where a long affair is none of my business.
If someone wants my vote for President, I do think it's relevant that he's been lying to his own wife for 13 years. I may be old-fashioned, but I'd still like to vote for a President who isn't a total douchebag.
I'll be willing to ignore this just as soon as I hear her say that Herman had told her about it and it was OK with her, or it turns out that Ginger White has made it up.
If you're asking to be MY President, you have to show your dirty laundry. Sorry. That's just how it is.
Anonymous on November 29, 2011 10:44 AM:
Cain did it because he wanted to be "somebody." As with Brando's Terry Malloy, he wanted to be a contender.
Thank you, N. Wells, for pointing out the irony that "...the only one-woman man among the candidates is the Mormon." But there are two Mormons, remember?
bluestatedon on November 29, 2011 10:44 AM:
"What was he thinking?"
Cain is a perfect example of the same human phenomenon that characterizes Sarah Palin: ignorant, stupid people are incapable of discerning just how ignorant and stupid they are. They don't know what they don't know, and if you combine that with an aggressive, "I can do anything I set my mind to" kind of personality, this amazing lack of self-awareness results. If you add to this already toxic brew the "God has spoken to me" belief so common to Christian fundamentalists, you get Herman and Sarah and Michele and Ricky.
zeitgeist on November 29, 2011 11:23 AM:
objection - the question about Cain's thinking assumes facts not in evidence.
Gregory on November 29, 2011 11:36 AM:
It's worth noting that Grover Cleveland was elected president despite revelations that he was paying child support to a baby born out of wedlock (though the baby was never proved to be his, he was a bachelor at the time and Cleveland otherwise had a reputation for honesty -- indeed, he directed his campaign to "tell the truth" about the matter).
Of course, this fact also reveals that "opposition research" is hardly a recent phenomenon.
The statement from Cain's campaign is a classic non-denial denial. And while I agree that extramarital affairs do not disqualify one as presidential material, I also agree with Steve that Cain's public posturing as a paragon of propriety makes the matter an issue due to its implication of hypocrisy.
Anonymous on November 29, 2011 12:30 PM:
“trying to help her financially”
Translation: quid pro quo
or friends with benefits
or f*ck buddy
or hook up
or ...
chi res on November 29, 2011 12:54 PM:
If someone wants my vote for President, I do think it's relevant that he's been lying to his own wife for 13 years. I may be old-fashioned, but I'd still like to vote for a President who isn't a total douchebag.
That.
And, btw, Clinton using his power to get a BJ from a young intern was total douchebaggery.
Lex on November 29, 2011 1:50 PM:
c u n d gulag nails it: This was all about the wingnut welfare. I imagine he was as surprised as anyone else when his campaign briefly took off and prompted the revelations.
MNRD on November 29, 2011 1:54 PM:
Steve, you weaken your argument by claiming that Cain "seems to have a Bush-like level of intellectual curiosity". Bush is far more intellectually curious and knowledgeable about public policy than Cain. You are too good of a blogger to fall into such a lazy and distorted comparison.
Sammy on November 29, 2011 3:09 PM:
"Bush is far more intellectually curious and knowledgeable about public policy than Cain."
No, he is not. Cain is equal to G.W., Bachmann, Perry, and Palin.
And to a box of rocks.
Anonymous on November 29, 2011 4:09 PM:
Sammy,
Bush is far more intellectually curious and knowledgeable about public policy than Bachmann, Perry, and Palin. Bush did not win those debates against Al Gore and get eight years in the White House by accident. By contrast, Cain is less intellectually curious and knowledgeable about public policy than Bachmann, Perry, and Palin. Cain actually implied that it doesn't matter if he lacks knowledge about foreign affairs. None of the others go to that extreme.
Zorro for the Common Good on November 29, 2011 5:44 PM:
Why did Cain run when he knew he had these skeletons? Why did Bill Clinton get a BJ in the Oval Office when he knew his enemies were looking for an excuse to destroy him? (And why did he lie about it when, as he later admitted, he never expected Monica to keep quiet?) Why did John Edwards start an affair in the middle of his campaign? Why did Gingrich carry on an affair even as he was impeaching Clinton over his?
I don't see this as a partisan issue at all. Having never committed adultery, I can't really understand the minds of womanizers, but based on these cases (and countless others), it would seem men who are reckless enough to carry on affairs in the first place are also reckless enough to think they can get away with it amidst the white-hot spotlight of a national campaign. 'Twas ever thus.
JD on November 30, 2011 1:43 AM:
As my father would say, he wasn't "thinking."
Neither was John Edwards when he ran for President in 2008. Imagine if news of his affair and child with another woman (as his wife was dying) had surfaced after he had won the Democratic nomination.
We could be living with President McCain.