Subscribe By Email

Worthy Causes


October 2016

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31          

« "The party will explicitly abandon the white working class" | Main | What could possibly be worse? »

Monday, November 28, 2011


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Cain has denied it. From what I see, she has presented no proof, only made an allegation. What is there to be discussed with supporters or otherwise?

You know, I could just as easily say, "I have had a 13-year relationship with Mr. BH. It wasn't complicated. I knew he was married. I was aware I was involved with an inappropriate relationship." Does that make it so? Would you, Mr. BH, deny it? Would I have any proof? (No, because it didn't happen.) Is there any further discussion needed? Would you discuss it with your supporters here at BH?



The update changes noting. NOT. ONE. SINGLE. SOLITARY. THING. BH is better than this. Would be nice if it would live up to it.


This speaks to honor, and it is proper to examine. A man that can't be trusted in private, doesn't earn my trust in puplic. Situational ethics are a no go for me.


Who said anything about situational ethics? This woman has proof that she had phone and text communication with Herman Cain. So do a lot of people. Not proof of an affair. Until she produces photos of the two of them "doing the nasty" or until Cain utters admission with his own lips, I will not believe this latest edition in a long line of those seeking their 15 minutes of fame at the expense of a presidential candidate. And until such time as she does, no one has any business poking around the man's bedroom.


"Rather, 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."

I'd call that a tacit admission of guilt by Cain's attorney.

Cain is toast now. In light of the initial allegations of sexual harassment, I have to agree with Rick, Nail? Meet coffin.

Cain is gone before the first primary...


Agree all you want, MEN. This survivor of childhood sexual abuse and formerly cheated on WOMAN says something smells, and it's not Cain. It's this woman. Call it "tacit admission" all you want. Your opinion doesn't equal fact. Again, until there is real proof or an ACTUAL admission, I will not believe it. You'd think I would side with the woman, right? Yeah, well, I can usually spot a poser a mile away.



BH wouldn't be BH if he didn't call them as he sees them...

I'm going to state up front that I'll allow that I'm wrong though I think I am not...

The question is... will you?

It seems you will not and that's... well... not sure what it is but it suggests being invested in this emotionally...

I like Herman Cain and I like his message... but I can't simply read something like this and immediately jump to the conclusion that this is merely another bimbo eruption...


AllyHM, the non-denial denial is where I get my "proof", and by situational ethics I mean he seems to be making a case for private ethics to "not count" when evaluating the public man. That doesn't work for me.


Rick, but you can immediately jump to the conclusion that he's guilty? It's a two-way street, dude. If actual proof is given or an actual admission is made, I will admit I am wrong. Until then, I choose to believe that the man is innocent. Too many men's lives are ruined on false allegations that are never proven. Do I have some emotional investment about that? You betcha!

Katherine, you are entitled to your opinion. Mine differs.


I'm sorry if I seem harsh about this, but I have friends whose lives have been ruined by this very thing, so when I see it happening to a man that I admire, it REALLY gets under my skin. These men did nothing wrong, but because an allegation was made, they can no longer work in the career of their chosing in some cases, or they can no longer maintain the social relationships they had prior to the allegations due to the collateral damage it would cause to their (former) friends. I have learned to wait for the facts or for the allegations to be confirmed by the alleged perpetrator before believing such allegations. It pains me to see people that I have come to admire on here (BH) reaching conclusions without all the facts. And, yes, it angers me, too. So apologies for anyone who may have been caught in my crossfire.


The woman's words are NOT the words that indict Cain for me... it's the release Cain approved that indicts him...

They're weaselly words... they're carefully chosen words... they're words meant to obfuscate, to skirt, to distract...

The woman's words by themselves are mere noise... coupled with the Cain statement, they are a cacophony...


Ally: I have a dear friend who was molested by her father - and his friends! Seems it was open season on this little girl. To this day (she is 63) she hates men, so it definitely affected her. But I'm on the fence about Mr. Cain. Politics is a nasty business and the little devils are ready to pounce on the best. Gotta wait on this one!


Would it be snarky of me to allege that perhaps this woman needed a lot of money and needed it fast, and since she could no longer milk it out of Herman Cain, she decided to exploit what he calls a friendship (where he had been helping her financially) to her financial advantage? Can't wait to see who paid her to "come forward."​business-partner-ginger-white-m​entioned-herman-cain/​story?id=15047698



What I'm hearing from most who consider Cain to be the victim of yet another smear is that he is innocent until proven guilty and that he should not be condemned until then.


Might we also, as a matter of principle and consistency, grant that same leeway to Ginger White?

Is she not innocent until proven guilty? Or should she be condemned outright?

Color me curious.


The burden of proof is always on the accuser, Rick, not the accused. And if one is going to make accusations, one needs to be prepared for scrutiny. Those in glass houses....right?

I'm not condemning her outright. What I am doing is showing that she may have an motive for "coming forward" that isn't as pure and justice-seeking as she claims it is.

Now, do I think the Cain camp has failed miserably in handling this? Yes. Do I think he is probably done? Yes. And so, we have the leftist media choosing the GOP candidate for us....again. This is bigger than just "is Cain an adulterer." No one else on the GOP short list has what it takes to beat Obama. Cain was the only viable threat. Now, we can kiss our country as we know it goodbye because Obama will win in 2012 thanks to the all-out assualt on Cain. The fact that otherwise intelligent people can't see this ploy for what it is totally amazes me.


The notion that only Cain can beat Obama is pure conjecture and requires crystal ball knowledge that no one this side of heaven has. And there are polls out there, for what they're worth, that show any generic Republican beats Obama.

And I beg to differ that you're not condemning Ms. White outright. In fact, I'm not sure I understand what that means. If Cain is innocent, and frankly, there are only two people in this world who know this, then logically, Ms. White is a liar. And calling a person a liar is condemning.

What I'm claiming is that Ms. White seems credible. And Mr. Cain does not.

What I'm claiming is that Mr. Cain's initial statement on this allegation and his statements on the other allegations, don't seem to bear the mark of consistency that flow from someone who tells the truth... and that he's shown this same tendency when answering policy questions...

So, I personally am questioning his character based on the evidence as I see it...

And no one can question where I stand as to defeating Obama...

As to intelligent people not seeing ploys...

I'll agree that someone is 'ploying' with us... time will tell as to who that person is...


One more quickie before I get back to work...

I completely agree with the notion that the burden of proof weighs completely on the accuser...

Cain's defenders are claiming, either directly or indirectly, that Ginger White is a liar and has financial or other nefarious reasons for coming forward...

Where does the burden of proof lie for that claim?


Where does the burden of proof lie for Ms. White's claim that she and Cain had a 13-year affair? Yes, she has phone/text records. Let's see transcripts of those texts. Let's see photos of them in together in a way that can only be construed as inappropriate. Until she produces such or until he admits the affair, then it is strictly an unfounded allegation. I don't understand why questioning her motives, based on her past (which includes a stalking charge that was dismissed), is a bad thing. You're right: I don't have a crystal ball to tell what the future holds, but I have no faith that either Romney or Gingrich can beat Obama...unless they add someone like Allen West or Marco Rubio to the tickets at VP. That MIGHT do it. Regardless, I will vote for whoever the GOP candidate ends up being; I just don't like the remaining options. And I think Cain is being railroaded and politically lynched. I'm entitled to my thougths and opinions, as you are entitled to yours. I think we need to be done with this thread. It is clear that you and I cannot come to any sort of agreement. We should let time tell who had the better instincts. I'll be happy to admit it if I'm wrong in the long run.


Ms. White claims she's coming forward because the story was about to break anyway... which is completely plausible...

And you have every right to question her motives... I'm simply looking for consistency... why would we not question Cain's motives given how he's answered this and other charges, how he's responded to policy questions... is Cain's history not relevant? I don't understand the inconsistency... neither do I understand the insistence that White is part of some vast left wing conspiracy... I guess this gives credence to Hillary's claims that Bill's bimbo eruptions were all part of some vast right wing conspiracy... and I guess society should immediately delve into the past of any woman making similar accusations of any future male running for office, and society should default to the position that she's lying and has ulterior, nefarious, motives...

We probably are done with the thread, but let the record show that I'm not questioning anyone's intelligence...I'm questioning their principles...

There is a difference.


So noted. For the record, I never questioned anyone's intelligence. I expressed dismay that intelligent people can't see what I see. That's not questioning intelligence, but if you need to see it that way, I can't really help that. And truly one can be highly intelligent and yet purposely obtuse about certain issues. I'm guessing you think that about me in this particular instance. So be it. :)


My friend Jerry had this to say on his Facebook: "So, Herman Cain was supposedly carrying on with all these women during the 3 years he was head of the National Restaurant Association. During a period of time he was fighting Stage IV cancer. And 2 of the women have been shown to be pretty shady. Yeah, ok. Might as well cast him and his solutions aside for the slick RINO with nice hair, aka Obama Lite, and let them take it all back in 4 years. Typical GOP fumbling."

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)


Tip Jar

Plainly Offsetting Costs

Search Brutally Honest

  • Google




Creative Commons License

Plainly Quotable