The End of Herman Cain
WASHINGTON – It’s just another T.K.O. for Ego.
If you want to know how these things happen, the story of Herman and Ginger is the most common. Having had the title of “relationship consultant” at the LA Weekly back in the mid-1990s, I know more than most about these things. The latest news was always inevitable, from the moment we saw Gloria Allred behind the microphone.
“Obviously, you’re all aware of this recent firestorm that hit the news yesterday,” Cain began, his voice somber. “First thing I want to do is say to you what I have said publicly: I deny those charges, unequivocally. Secondly, I have known this lady for a number of years. And thirdly, I have been attempting to help her financially because she was out of work and destitute, desperate. [...] That being said, obviously, this is cause for reassessment,” he continued.” – BREAKING: Cain ‘Reassessing’ Candidacy
The man has the opportunity and the means. The woman is bored and takes the offer. From there it’s pretty ordinary.
Well, except for the part where the man decides to go on a book tour that turns into a political farce in a year that has every Republican except the dog catcher taking his or her turn in the spotlight.
“He made it very intriguing,” White told FOX 5. “It was fun. It was something that took me away from my humdrum life at the time. And it was exciting.”
She says he gave her his newly-published book, Leadership is Common Sense, and he wrote: “Miss G, you have already made a ‘big difference!’ Stay focused as you pursue your next destination.”
She says during the next 13 years, he would fly her to cities where he was speaking and he lavished her with gifts. She says they often stayed at the Ritz Carlton in Buckhead and dined at The Four Seasons restaurant. She says he never harassed her, never treated her poorly, and was the same man you see on the campaign trail.
“Very much the same, very much confident, very much sure of himself,” White said, describing Cain. “Very arrogant in a playful sometimes way. Very, ah — Herman Cain loves Herman Cain.”
Yep, that’s the bottom line for most male adulterers. They love themselves and indulge their every whim, thinking of no one else.
From the start of the accusations I never had one doubt about Herman Cain. The first woman with Gloria Allred was not only credible, but Herman Cain’s rolling response was just too predictable.
There’s also the reality that where there is one there is usually another. Then another. Then another.
Sitting on the sidelines is the pitiful Mrs. Cain, another woman who didn’t want to know the man she was married to and thought religion made Herman righteous.
If Herman has any decency he’d— Never mind.
But if his conference call is any indication, at least he’s finally finding some, as he finally realizes he’s delivered complete and total humiliation not only to himself, but also his wife.
Moral of this story is simple. If you let your ego control your life it will eventually take you out. That goes triple for a man on a simple book tour. Who in an unpredictably sparse political year for conservatives, found himself unexpectedly in the upper tier of the ultimate brass ring game, with his pants pulled down on camera.
Taylor Marsh is the author of the new e-book, The Hillary Effect – Politics, Sexism and the Destiny of Loss, the view from a recovering partisan, chosen by Barnes and Noble as one of 4 books in the launch of “NOOK First” Featured Authors Selection. Marsh is a veteran political analyst and commentator. She has reported from the White House, been profiled in the Washington Post, The New Republic, and has been seen on C-SPAN’s Washington Journal, CNN, MSNBC, Al Jazeera English and Al Jazeera Arabic, as well as on radio across the dial and on satellite, including the BBC. Marsh lives in the Washington, D.C. area. This column is cross posted from her new media blog.
28 Responses to “The End of Herman Cain”
The Clintons comes to mind.
Not really, Allen.
Except for Monika Lewinski, Mrs. Clinton was aware her husband was a class A philanderer, which is why Lewinski hurt even more. After her “60 Minutes” “not standing by my man” moment, she reportedly thought they’d come to an agreement. Once Lewinski broke, it wasn’t pleasant for anyone inside 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., by *all* accounts.
The classic picture was Chelsea walking between Hillary and Bill, with Buddy on a leash. Who can forget that one?
When Cain withdraws I just hope he does it without his wife beside him.
It’s an age old story that might be funny if it weren’t so tawdry and sad. A man with means, an itchy zipper and an opportunity. A wife, with blinders on and so very sure of her husband’s fidelity (at least when there’s camera rolling). And the other women, typically with little power or money, desperately seeking SOMETHING–an approximation of a lifestyle, or the illusion of being cared for.
The cycle repeats ad infinitum.
Well said, VeratheGun.
What’s most interesting to me is that it all played out because of a PR book tour, disguised as Cain’s candidacy for president, which was never meant to go anywhere.
There’s another lesson in there somewhere.
Great post, Taylor — 100 percent agreement, especially:
“From the start of the accusations I never had one doubt about Herman Cain. The first woman with Gloria Allred was not only credible, but Herman Cain’s rolling response was just too predictable.”
Don’t feel sorry for this clown, nor for the gullible Republicans — only for Cain’s wife and kids.
It’s a shame that he wasted our time and I really feel sorry for his wife and family.
However, Clinton the candidate and the president set a poor standard of reference.
The truth is that many of our presidents have been serial cheaters. Even FDR cheated on Eleanor. I’m still glad he was president, even with his character flaws– just as I’m glad that Clinton was president for 8 years. I’m glad despite their character flaws not because of them–because they managed to also be good presidents. There is nothing in Herman Cain that makes me think he’d be a good president so the affair and his denials are just the icing on the cake.
BTW, if Clinton’s affairs still bother you, I would avoid Gingrich as well. Which only leaves one candidate with any chance– Mitt Romney.
I predict we will soon see the return of Joe the Plumber. Who, if I remember correctly was not actually a plumber. And his name wasn’t Joe either.
Maybe Palin? If they promised to supplement her salary? And promise she can quit at half of the term.
The Clinton’s are still married cause, “she still luvs him” Hillary said.
The message from Hillary is: Class A philanderer Means nothing, I gotta run for the Senate. Power is the only thing that counts.
The Clintons are no better than Herman Cain. Except that Herman Cain is on higher moral ground because nothing he was ever accused of was anything more than here say. Bill Clinton was caught lying to America right there on the Tee Vee.
The list of presidents who didn’t have any sexual dalliances is actually a bit dodgy. Nixon, Ford, Carter (only in his mind!) and W.
I’d say just on form we’ve done much better with adulators!
Herman, I’ve found the angle to get you back in! I am an adulator and damn proud of it! Put another stud in the White House!
BB, I guess you would have had no problem with John Edwards “character flaws” either.
P.S. I knocked out Clinton as pres. material and now Cain as well and any other a——-, that comes down the pike. There should be no double standard.
BTW: lying to federal investigators and I think also Congress, plus lying to us, ain’t too nice a character flaw.
Clinton was a serial cheater which is a big character flaw. But at least he was a competent president and has done a lot of good with his foundation. And Nixon may have been faithful to his wife, but he certainly lied to the entire nation about Watergate. The truth is that politics drives out the more ethical types of people and attracts those who can make people believe black is white and white is black. If I’m going to have someone in the oval office like that at least they should be competent and care about the country. Cain has too many failings in other areas– so we can’t just overlook his womanizing.
Don’t start with Nixon, that’s a whole different kettle of fish.
The competent VS incompetent argument leaves a lot to be desired, since it is often based on hypotheses, maybes and what might have been. (Clinton could have been a GREAT president if he used his desk more appropriately.)
Bluebelle-
Clinton was never faced with the Tea Party d-heads.
Remember, yesterdays hard-headed Republican conservatives are todays Republican liberal moderates. What we have today in the Republican party is crazy people. Nobody can deal with crazy people.
You can’t blame incompetence on Obama. You need to blame it on the intransigent republican insurgent congress. These are very special times.
“Clinton could have been a GREAT president if he used his desk more appropriately.”
Well said duck, but amid all the WJC piling on, let’s not forget that he left a budget surplus. We all remember what a budget surplus is right? It’s that thing we lost after 8 years of republican “governing”. If the price of responsible leadership by GWB had been a little philandering, I could have easily lived with it. That said, in today’s world, we all know candidates will be under a microscope. Anyone who thinks they can hide a past that would throw their campaign into a tailspin is a fool and is wasting everybody’s time.
I never said he was great, but he was competent. Our economy was in much better shape and he had some major accomplishments. Its true that he didn’t reach his potential because of the scandal but he regained control and left with a surplus and a 70% approval rating. That’s pretty impressive when you consider what we are dealing with now. I just don’t think he’s in the same league with Herman Cain- even though they are both serial womanizers, and have both lied repeatedly about it.
JSpencer-
There is no way in hell ANY president could have gained back a “budget surplus” in just three years after G.Dubya went on the world’s craziest, crazy arse Republican borrow and spend spree for war material and tax cuts.
No way that anybody can legitimately blame President Obama for the economic mess this nation is in.
To do so means that you therefore EXPECT a 2012 replacement for president Obama to be able to correct all of these economic horror stories immediately after inauguration….if that president just had the “competence” Obama lacks.
What a load.
Allen, were you just too young, or were you deaf in the 1990s? Clinton had nation-wide hour-on-hour haranguing from AM talk radio to deal with, and the people that listened to it and agreed with the hosts.
He also had to deal with the Black Helicopter crowd in their tinfoil hats, and even (on rare occasions) hostility from the Press as Whitewater dragged on.
by way of comparison, Allen, the “Tea Party” is less effective than “Code Pink” was against Bush Junior.
Now, if you said “Occupy D-heads” with their venting bowel on cop-cars, numerous rape charges, single (so far) murder, etc. etc., you might’ve been able to make a case that Obama’s got more hassle than Clinton did.
Mildly.
Fact being, of course, with “Progressives” that kind of behaviour’s a bonus, not a defect, so maybe not.
Clinton was both effective, and good for the country, once he got a congress NOT run by his Party-because he could then afford to say “No”, and he had leverage to actually GOVERN, instead of having to cope with runaway elements from his own side exploiting the perception of a rubber stamp.
Presidents gain more leverage when they can threaten Legislators with vetoes, than when they’re on the same putative side, because Party Bosses have less of a hold on them, and radical elements within their party have less of an opportunity to abuse the advantage.
In politics, it’s not the guy on the other side who’s going to hurt you most, it’s your own.
“Presidents gain more leverage when they can threaten Legislators with vetoes, than when they’re on the same putative side, because Party Bosses have less of a hold on them, and radical elements within their party have less of an opportunity to abuse the advantage.”
It also helps if you have a pair.
“Fact being, of course, with “Progressives” that kind of behaviour’s a bonus, not a defect” – Cannonshop
What utter nonsense.
“Allen, were you just too young, or were you deaf in the 1990s?”
No need to imply, cannon, that deaf people might have a hard time understanding things. They can’t hear, but they can think.
I am bemused by this thread. I’ve made technical error and other’s have done the same. Blast the interlocking idioms!
It’s OK, Allen, a “verbal malfunction” is better than a wardrobe one.
Of course Clinton was a great target, sort of a W.C. Fields caricature of a politician.
Obama, who used to walk on water, is much harder to criticize lest we we disturb his halo.
Nothing wrong with criticism as long as you can see both the good and bad in a candidate. There’s no one who’s going to be a clean slate after decades in politics. That’s why people always seem to think they want a Washington outsider– that is until they get one and realize he can’t function here. Obama may be an ethical person but there certainly has been a lot of criticism of his policies– from the left, right and center.
Allen, your response to me had almost no connection to what I said. I think you need to read my comment again – more slowly this time.
Bluebelle-
That’s the problem, nobody sees the good in Herman Cain because they refuse to look. The very fact that all these accusations are nothing more than hear-say tells me that nobody wants to look deeper into the accusations because nobody has weighed Cain’s good in the balance. Not because Cain is perceptibly evil in any way, but simply because they have not bothered to look for good.
JSpencer-
Have. Four times. Keep on reading my posts and you’ll get to an error message.
Duck-
I’ll make sure people don’t grab my velcro.