November 30th, 2011

George Stephanopoulos has a new co-pundit: Ginger White

It would be funny if it weren’t so sad: George Stephanopoulos gives us the earth-shattering news that Cain’s latest accuser, that well-known political commentator Ginger White, is of the opinion that Herman Cain would not make a good president.

This is what passes for reporting these days.

Cain has written an email to supporters calling White “a troubled Atlanta business woman” who is using “national media outlets to promulgate a fabricated, unsubstantiated story.” Whether or not White’s story is “fabricated” or not, the rest of Cain’s characterization of White seems spot on. Yesterday I described how unsubstantiated her story actually is, and although it should be relatively easy for her to offer more proof so far she has not.

I don’t usually make predictions, but I’ll make one right now: she’ll never offer more proof than she already has.

And for most of the MSM and much of the public, what she’s offered has already been enough to tarnish Cain’s already shaky reputation beyond repair. It doesn’t take much these days, does it? Text messages or phone calls, to or from Cain, suddenly get transmogrified into calls from Cain. Money he says he lent her because he was trying to help a person he thought to be a friend becomes money he gave her because she was his mistress (although not payment for sex; oh no!).

With “friends” like White, who needs enemies?

Speaking of enemies, here’s more about what White did to former business partner Kimberly Vay, with whom she had run a cycling coaching business, after the partnership had broken up at White’s request and White had continued to run the business:

On December 9, according to the complaint, White sent a “defamatory” note to a master email list of the company’s clients and to [Atlanta] city officials. The email said that White’s business had “come tumbling down [on] the day I invited Kim Vay into my life and my business” and that Vay had turned her “dream” into a “nightmare.” According to the complaint, the email alleged that Vay, a competitive bodybuilder, injected veterinary drugs into her system prior to contests,” and also said that Vay preferred to date black men but had made derogatory comments about black women’s hair.

Vay’s complaint termed the allegation about drug use “false, malicious, defamatory” and “reckless,” and therefore libelous.

Vay won the suit; White did not contest it because she says she thought the issue “had already been settled.” Right. This sort of defamatory background ought to make anyone suspicious of White as a reliable reporter, but it doesn’t seem to have stopped a press hotly intent on publishing her tale.

You may ask why I’m focusing on this story so much. After all, Cain’s toast, she’s a lowlife, and what’s he doing with her in the first place? So let’s move on. Well, I continue to find it fascinating as a case study in how low media standards have become, as well as the art of character assassination and how little it takes these days to accomplish it. This is true whether Herman Cain proves some day to have been guilty of adultery or not.

26 Responses to “George Stephanopoulos has a new co-pundit: Ginger White”

  1. Gabriel Says:

    “…I continue to find it fascinating as a case study in how low media standards have become, as well as the art of character assassination and how little it takes these days to accomplish it. This is true whether Herman Cain proves some day to have been guilty of adultery or not.”

    This is only true if the accusation will damage a conservative Republican. If the accusation would damage a liberal Democrat, it will be covered up by the media as long as possible, and then dismissed as nothing if it does become public. Compare the media attention to Herman Cain to media coverage of John Edwards or Bill Clinton.

  2. expat Says:

    Even without an affair, Cain sure doesn’t sound like a great judge of character. If a troubled woman sent me text messages at all hours (best case scenario), I would see some red flags and document everything, especially after having gone through harrassment charges.

  3. Mike Mc. Says:

    They win again.

    If we don’t fight back, they will win until we are all slaves.

    They got Palin. They got Perry. They got Bachman, and Cain. They got Santorum in 2008 already. They are sure they can get Gingrich, and they know for a fact they can get Romney.

    Maybe they can and maybe they can’t.

    When do we fight?

    When do we start getting them?

    When do we make slander so unprofitable for them that they never dare try it again? When do we force them to argue ideas? When do we make it so there is one standard again by which both sides are judged?

    Anyone have any ideas?

    If we don’t fight them like it is a winner-take-all Thunderdome Cage match we are going to lose everything. I don’t even think our side realizes the fight we are in.

  4. Libby Says:

    The more I read about Ginger White, the more she sounds like an venomous mess. The June 2011 libel suit won against her by her former business partner alone makes her opinion and version of the facts questionable. Until she provides verifiable facts she should not be given such prominence.

    It’s icing on the cake that it is Stephanopoulos giving her opinions voice, considering he aided Clinton in his lie that Lewinsky was just a “crazy stalker” who had a crush on Stephanopoulos.

  5. Occam's Beard Says:

    George Stephanopoulos has a new co-pundit: Ginger White

    How humiliating! Ginger White must be mortified.

  6. Parker Says:

    Mike Mc asks, “Anyone have any ideas?”

    In all seriousness, prepare for the worst and work for the best. We are indeed at a crossroad. Stacked against a renewed America, based upon the principal of limited central government, are the combined forces of the DNC, the MSM, all DC insiders regardless of party, and large corporations & banks that profit from big, intrusive government. Our side has history, rationality, and common sense in the tool box.

    The contest is for the ~20% of voters who are up in the air, relatively clueless, and frightened about the future. Do we have enough tools in the box? I know not, but I’m preparing while I work door to door in my neighborhood. Talk to your neighbors.

    I take care of my family as priority 1, next I look out for my neighbors, and beyond that I hope for the best for American society at large which should never be assumed to include what goes on inside the beltway. Nirvana is when no one in Iowa cares who is president or walks the halls of the capital unless we are engaged in a declared war because otherwise who cares about DC?

  7. neo-neocon Says:

    expat: I agree with you that any public figure having much of a relationship at all with Ginger White, even a friendship, is showing poor judgment. That’s one of many reasons I don’t think Cain’s a good candidate.

    But whether he slept with her is still an unknown.

  8. Curtis Says:

    “Ass douche.” “Self entitled monster.”

    Good description of this porky pig.

    http://biggovernment.com/mrctv/2011/11/30/adam-carolla-explains-the-ows-generation/

    As far as Cain is not a good judge of character: Yeah, somewhat. But remember the episode of Benedict Arnold and George Washington and Benedict Arnold’s wife, Peggy Shippen.

    Another reason why men and women should remember they are differing creatures.

  9. Curtis Says:

    I still think it all goes back to the kind of brain Cain has: a brain that is mostly gifted towards ideas and math and not people. But what of the character of Cain? Ahhh, there’s the rub and the reason why he was hated and attacked like Sarah Palin.

  10. Mike Mc. Says:

    Cain is held to a different standard even by conservatives.

    His character? By the mere fact that he knew her? This is disqualifying or even remotely so?

    By that standard, no one is ever qualified to do anything.

    It’s not a standard. It’s called surrender. That is what you are doing. Our side does it all the time. We do it and don’t even think we are doing something wrong.

    Well it is wrong. It’s not only wrong it’s a bad character trait. Aristotle is doing back-flips in his grave. It’s turning a vice into a virtue. It’s doing the devil’s work for him for the sake of not being called unhelpful.

    Everything all of these women said could be true – I don’t believe it for a minute but for talking purposes – and if that is all it takes to disqualify a potential President then we are over as a nation. We have then become the Temperance League. Sean Connery is shunned and shamed, but Al Capone has no problems.

    We will never win unless we first start fighting. In this case fighting means we release every ounce of dirt possible on the pother side, on their wives, children, business partners, past associations going back to grade school. We do it all day, every day and never even answer the charge against Cain. The only stipulation is that whatever we release be true. If it is, then no limits until they stop. They do one Cain, we do five people. They do one day, we do five days. You get the idea.

    Instead we get, he may not have done it but the fact that he knew a woman once may make him unacceptable to me.

    That reaction is incredible. Again, a simple “We surrender” would be more to the point.

  11. A_Nonny_Mouse Says:

    I am really sorry for Mr. Cain and the outrages being heaped upon him. It’s worse than appalling. Surely that tells us how dangerous the Leftard Establishment finds him.

    (And take it a step further: imagine Herman Cain has been elected President; the Frothing Lefty Media starts criticizing some policy or speech of his; and conservative media outlets gleefully play back snippets of Liberal pundits solemnly declaring that the only POSSIBLE reason for opposition to anything-Obama is that “those racists HATE the idea of a black man in the White House”. I would LOVE to see the tables turned like that!! Please, Mr. Cain, don’t give in …. ! )

  12. Curtis Says:

    Totally acceptable argument, Nonny, and the reason why Cain has “organic’ possibilities, and the reason why the Left had to destroy him.

    What does the Left care about foreign policy except to defund the military and promote poverty for the Western world. Well, I guess that answers the question.

    Please, Mr. Cain, don’t give in. Become another Clarence Thomas whose influence reaches into the ages.

  13. Don Janousekd Says:

    I hate to bring this up now, but I have been having a 13 year affair with Michelle Pfeiffer. I have my phone records that show I made 61 phone calls to her. I also have a certified copy of the restraining order she obtained against me. What? Whaddya mean I ain’t got no proof?

  14. Curtis Says:

    I don’t agree with Neo’s abstraction. It is important, this fight, this now, this issue, this time. It’s not “the media’s capability;” it’s right or wrong on Cain and we have abandoned him.

    Shame.on.us!

  15. neo-neocon Says:

    Mike Mc.: the problem is not that Cain knew White. The problem is that he had some sort of closer relationship with her than just having her as an acquaintance.

    She says it was an affair. At this point I doubt her word, and think the evidence she’s given to substantiate it is weak. But he either made or accepted a great many phone calls and/or text messages from her, and he gave her money (he has admitted the money part). There is at least an appearance of impropriety about which he should have been more careful, especially since she sounds like a sketchy sort of person.

  16. neo-neocon Says:

    Curtis: I think you misunderstand the point I was trying to make. I didn’t abandon Cain, because I never supported him as a candidate in the first place. But I have defended him in the sense that virtually every article I’ve written since these sex accusations against him have come out has been to say the evidence is weak.

    I have not abandoned him. But it really doesn’t matter, does it, if the accusers, with the help of the MSM, are able to successfully convict him in the minds of most people on such skimpy evidence. The point is that this is bigger than Cain, or what happens to Cain as a result. It sets a terrible precedent for character assassination via sexual accusations, if such a low standard of proof is required.

  17. Curtis Says:

    Cain needed a Jewish idea of charity which provides protection to giving. That’s the ultimate reason why I like Cain: I sense a Jew in the making.

  18. Parker Says:

    “The point is that this is bigger than Cain, or what happens to Cain as a result. It sets a terrible precedent for character assassination via sexual accusations, if such a low standard of proof is required.”

    Everyone who is perceived as a threat to business as usual in DC, especially when a democrat is president, must be destroyed in the center ring of the media circus. First they came for anyone opposing BHO in Illinois, then they came for Palin, next they came for Cain…

  19. Curtis Says:

    Neo wrote earlier:

    “So if the charges were trumped up, it would have been possible for the accusers to have gotten the idea from the Anita Hill hearings against Clarence Thomas, which had such high visibility in 1991.”

    It’s the movement from the particular to the general which annoys me. I don’t really care about the general idea that the MSM smears and convicts without proof. That is a given, but I do care about how unsupported accusations were used to destroy a good man’s reputation. This is a big deal in the particular just like Clinton’s scandal was. It will show the young that it is not as important what is true but what is perceived as true. Truth, then, is not as important as power. That’s the lesson being taught here. And it seems to me one lesson from the Anita Hill episode, which was absorbed and is now being regurgitated, is that there is a reward for being untruthful if it advances the liberal cause.

    Neo, you are much more rational than I am and sometimes that irks me.

  20. Beverly Says:

    Mike Mc., you’re right. We’re on the edge of the cliff, and it’s no time to debate by the Marquis of Queensbury rules.

    I personally don’t give a tinker’s damn if Cain rogered his way across the country: we STILL need to fight fang and claw to get these guys out of office. And we need to go on the offense, not let them perpetually get us on the back foot.

    I know, from my Dimwit days, that they laugh at us every time they make us look down to see if we spilled something on our shirts — even as they uncork another right to the jaw. Our enemies — yes, enemies — will give no quarter.

  21. expat Says:

    How come women can go after a married man with money and then cry victim when the money dries up? She has already established what she is. Now she is simply trying to raise the price.

  22. Webutante Says:

    Neo, on the effectiveness of Keysian theory or the veracity of Herman Cain, I beg to differ with you on so many, many levels.

    In truth, no one ever knows—unless they were there in the room or the bed with them and personally witnessed them in the act and perhaps filmed it—the full truth of Cain’s and White’s relationship. So it will never be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt though you seem to naively be holding out for such outrageous proof.

    So we have to use the best information we’ve got to make some kind of discerning judgment as to whether Cain is really presidential material and should continue in this race.

    I myself have already made my superficial, jump-to-conclusions decision–which by the way I am open to revising if need be. Perhaps I’ve been out in the world too long and understand and experienced FIRST HAND that men will be men and certainly will hit on you even if they’re “happily married.”

    In addition for me, I think far too much time and energy is being sucked into the black hole of is this true or is it a vast left or right-winged conspiracy? This country is teetering on the abyss of so many real problems that I think, if for no other reason, not to mention is poor family and wife, that Herman Cain needs to gracefully bow out—the sooner the better.

  23. neo-neocon Says:

    Webutante: I’m not sure what you think my position is on the effectiveness of Keynesian theory (as opposed to putting Keynesian ideas into practice, which I think has been ineffective in our present crisis). I tend to think Keynesian theory has been quite effective, since it has gained many followers, but I assume that’s a different issue.

    I’m also not sure what you think my position on Cain’s veracity is. I believe I’ve said many times I don’t think we have enough information to know. Are you really saying that we do and that he’s probably guilty, because men in high places often hit on women? I certainly agree with the latter—men in high places, low places, and medium places often hit on women—but I would never use that fact to judge the guilt or innocence of any particular man, or the veracity of any particular woman.

    And I think Cain should quit because he’s not doing well, not because of the attacks (unless they’re true). If he quits because of the attacks and they are not true, he does the country no favor whatsoever. What he does is encourage further attacks of this nature in the future, because they work. And he damages his reputation further, because people will interpret his quitting now as an admission of guilt.

    The more I learn about Ginger White’s past, the more I doubt her word. She has given no proof whatsoever except phone calls and/or texts most of which may or may not be FROM Cain, and may indeed be TO him. No content except friendly inscriptions in two books (that she described to the reporters rather than showed, but I assume they exist). No receipts, no photos on all these trips, nothing, nada. And she libeled someone already, her ex-business partner, and is in desperate need of money.

    I don’t jump to conclusions and judge a man guilty based on that short of thing. You may differ.

    And the same lack of proof and shady background exists in the other accusers as well. Funny thing, isn’t it? And I’m not expecting a legal standard of proof either—beyond a reasonable doubt. Just a decent standard of proof for the real world.

  24. Webutante Says:

    Yes, dear Neo, let’s leave Keynsian economic theory for another day. However we’ll all have the opportunity to see its effects in blazing technicolor on the global bailout stage over ensuing months and few years. It can speak for itself….it’s not going to be pretty.

    What I’m saying about the evidence re Cain is we have what we have have to make a decision as to his efficacy as a presidential contender. I say we DO have enough information because his historic questionable behavior is draining and diverting our attention and resources from the real issues at hand.

    I’m saying—one and only one more time—we can never, ever know for sure unless someone has it on film. So it’s silly to debate it ad nas or wait for full proof. We’ll be waiting a long time.

    Cain knows this, so why would he ever own up to it if were true?

    Now, as to why all these women have similar shady, as you put it, pasts? Because men know that a financially needy woman is prime target for sexual predation. Men know they forever hold the power card over such a woman—and it’s gerat sex for that reason—so they’re much more easily preyed on. And in a sense it’s mutual predation.

    Neo, at your and my ages, do you really, really think in your heart that Cain’s relationship with Ms. White was purely platonic and all business?

    If you do, then you and I live on two different fallen planets. My intuition doesn’t buy it at all my dear. Not at all.

  25. foxmarks Says:

    “I think Cain should quit because he’s not doing well, not because of the attacks (unless they’re true)”

    But the attacks are the primary reason he is not doing well. The attacks gave all y’all a reason to stop any deeper criticism of whatever he might offer. The blogs I haunt haven’t shown any inquiring analysis of 9-9-9. Nor have I seen an curiosity about what he might already know in regard to the most vital foreign policy issues. And I have seen zero about his potential effect on our culture and society.

    The attacks crowded out Cain’s messaging. All y’all just accepted the soundbites that were handed to you, not just by Big Media, but by the factions across the righty blogosphere. It will be easy to make excuses, saying it is up to the candidate to get his message out. That there is truth in that point does not make it sufficient to carry the case that Cain was never worth considering, or that he should quit, because, well, we’re all just tired of it already.

    If this election is such a big deal, we do not get a pass to stop paying attention. I agree with Mike Mc. and Curtis. Y’all have quit. Surrendered. So all you will get is more of the same.

    You want to make a meaningful statement, and piss off the establishments, both left and right? Let’s look at Cain in depth. What is his political history? What are his policies and how might they play out? Go ahead and dismember him for the failings in his ideas. Treat him like a legitimate candidate.

    And if all y’all have as much integrity as you demand from your candidate(s), you will do the same for Bachmann and Paul and Perry.

  26. foxmarks Says:

    One more smartypants comment in place of further paragraphs of ranting: Those who think Cain is a poor judge of character should remember he has been a close friend of Newt Gingrich for over a decade.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>



About Me

Previously a lifelong Democrat, born in New York and living in New England, surrounded by liberals on all sides, I've found myself slowly but surely leaving the fold and becoming that dread thing: a neocon.
Read More >>








Blogroll

Ace (bold)
AmericanDigest (writer’s digest)
AmericanThinker (thought full)
Anchoress (first things first)
AnnAlthouse (more than law)
AtlasShrugs (fearless)
AugeanStables (historian’s task)
Baldilocks (outspoken)
Barcepundit (theBrainInSpain)
Beldar (Texas lawman)
BelmontClub (deep thoughts)
Betsy’sPage (teach)
Bookworm (writingReader)
Breitbart (big)
ChicagoBoyz (boyz will be)
Contentions (CommentaryBlog)
DanielInVenezuela (against tyranny)
DeanEsmay (conservative liberal)
Donklephant (political chimera)
Dr.Helen (rights of man)
Dr.Sanity (thinking shrink)
DreamsToLightening (Asher)
EdDriscoll (market liberal)
Fausta’sBlog (opinionated)
GayPatriot (self-explanatory)
HadEnoughTherapy? (yep)
HotAir (a roomful)
InFromTheCold (once a spook)
InstaPundit (the hub)
JawaReport (the doctor is Rusty)
LegalInsurrection (law prof)
RedState (conservative)
Maggie’sFarm (centrist commune)
MelaniePhillips (formidable)
MerylYourish (centrist)
MichaelTotten (globetrotter)
MichaelYon (War Zones)
Michelle Malkin (clarion pen)
Michelle Obama's Mirror (reflections)
MudvilleGazette (milblog central)
NoPasaran! (behind French facade)
NormanGeras (principled leftist)
OneCosmos (Gagdad Bob’s blog)
PJMedia (comprehensive)
PointOfNoReturn (Jewish refugees)
Powerline (foursight)
ProteinWisdom (wiseguy)
QandO (neolibertarian)
RachelLucas (in Italy)
RogerL.Simon (PJ guy)
SecondDraft (be the judge)
SeekerBlog (inquiring minds)
SisterToldjah (she said)
Sisu (commentary plus cats)
Spengler (Goldman)
TheDoctorIsIn (indeed)
Tigerhawk (eclectic talk)
VictorDavisHanson (prof)
Vodkapundit (drinker-thinker)
Volokh (lawblog)
Zombie (alive)

Regent Badge