Skip to comments.5 Reasons Hermain Cain is Unfit for the Presidency
Posted on 10/29/2011 11:38:28 AM PDT by bullypulpit
Herman Cain was on Fox News Sunday in May. When Chris Wallace asked about the Arab propaganda movement to give Palestinians the "Right to Return," Herman Cain indicated that he was ignorant of the propaganda intricacies of that policy. The entire duration of the Barack Obama administration has been openly hostile towards Israel. There is some indication that the 2012 election will not repair this travesty if Herman Cain is the Republican nominee. He's not smart enough on the issue to turn things around. And if you believe he'll hire smart people around him, look at his record of hiring loons to run his presidential campaign.
Cain's ignorance on the intricacies of Arab propaganda against Israel, particularly the so-called "Right to Return" reveals how little Cain is prepared to direct a conservative foreign policy. "Yes, but under but not under Palestinian conditions. Yes. They should have a right to come back if that is a decision that Israel wants to make . I don't think they have a big problem with people returning," Cain said. See video:
Appealing to the fringe right nativists, Herman Cain suggests that in order for a Muslim to serve in his administration, he will require them to take a "loyalty oath" to the United States. How will this go over in a general election? Transcript of Herman Cain on the Glenn Beck TV show on Fox News:
GLENN BECK: You said you would not appoint a Muslim to anybody in your administration.
HERMAN CAIN: The exact language was when I was asked, would you be comfortable with a Muslim in your cabinet? And I said, no, I would not be comfortable. I didnt say I wouldnt appoint one because if they can prove to me that theyre putting the Constitution of the United States first then they would be a candidate just like everybody else. My entire career, Ive hired good people, great people, regardless of their religious orientation.
BECK: So wait a minute. Are you saying that Muslims have to prove their, that there has to be some loyalty proof?
CAIN: Yes, to the Constitution of the United States of America.
BECK: Would you do that to a Catholic or would you do that to a Mormon?
CAIN: Nope, I wouldnt. Because there is a greater dangerous part of the Muslim faith than there is in these other religions. I know that there are some Muslims who talk about, "but we are a peaceful religion." And Im sure that there are some peace-loving Muslims.
(Source: The video below: )
On CNN, Herman Cain proposed a position on the Second Amendment (the federal right to bear arms). In an exchange with Wolf Blitzer:
BLITIZER: Lets talk about gun control. Do you support any gun control?
CAIN: I support the Second Amendment.
BLITZER: So you dont? Whats the answer on gun control?
CAIN: The answer on gun control is I support, strongly support, the Second Amendment. I dont support onerous legislation thats going to restrict peoples rights in order to be able to protect themselves as guaranteed by the Second Amendment.
BLITZER: Should states or local governments be allowed to the gun situation . . .
BLITZER: So the answer is yes?
CAIN: Yes. The answer is yes, that should be a states decision.
(Source: CNN Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer Oct. 18, 2011 .)
When confronted at a meet and greet after the Blitzer interview, Herman Cain refused to clarify his remarks that states can regulate guns, or impose gun control:
That the federal Constitution guarantees the right to keep and bear arms completely escapes Cain, as he stakes a position to the left of Al Gore, suggesting that state law should be allowed to override federal law if a state desired to ban all firearms. Herman Cain apparently isn't aware of the Supreme Court ruling in Supreme Court in McDonald v. Chicago. In this 5-4 decision, the court ruled that the Second Amendment applies equally to the federal government and to individual state governments.
In a May 2011 interview after the first Fox News Debate, Herman Cain said that terror suspect Anwar Al-Alwaki, an American citizen, should not be unilaterally assassinated by the CIA without due process, as Al-Alwaki was in a drone strike. "He should be tried as an American citizen," Cain said, emphatically. Here's the video:
Later, at the TeaCon conference in Chicago of Tea Party activists at the end of Sept. 2011, Herman Cain reversed his earlier declaration, in variance with the Fifth Amendment, and declared that he supported President Obama's drone strike to kill Al-Alwaki:
I will not delve deeper into the whole "was it Constitutional" argument. The point is that Herman Cain is clearly confused about the Constitution, and vagrantly flip-flops his positions depending upon his audience. Herman Cain sounds so Romney-esque. Or, rather Barney Fife-esque.
A common refrain of those supporting Herman Cain (neo-Constitutionalists) is that we all must "read our Consitution" and then they wave it in everyone's face. But when a so-called Tea Party leader named Herman Cain demands that his audience knows the Constitution, it helps if that leader actually knows what's in the Constitution.
Here is Herman Cain "educating" the masses on The Constitution:
"We dont need to rewrite the Constitution of the United States of America, we need to reread the Constitution and enforce the Constitution, Cain said. And I know that there are some people that are not going to do that, so for the benefit of those that are not going to read it because they dont want us to go by the Constitution, theres a little section in there that talks about life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
"Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" is not in the Constitution, it's in the Declaration of Independence, a beautiful document in itself, but not binding law of the land. I won't link to the source. Google it.
Rino alert!Rino alert! But really, if 0 is qualified any dogcatcher is to.
Idiotic. Cain admitted he didn't know what it was. So what? He said he "went to school" and learned all about it. Did Perry know what it was? We'll never know. What we DO know is that Cain can actually speak the English language properly, make speeches without looking down at notes 100 times, and debate above a junior high school level. Perry fails at all three.
Or any other Kenyan for all that matters.
Perry supporters - doubling and tripling down on stupid.
The article above is a classic hatchet-job democrats often use to diminish those they fear most.
1) Blah. 2) Blah. 3) Blah. 4) Blah. 5) Blah
Perry is an idiot. He introduced an excellent tax plan and then proceeded to kill his own message with the birth certificate distraction ("Trumps says it's not real, so I don't know"...."Uh, I meant to say there's no doubt Obama is a citizen"). Obama will eat this lame brain for breakfast. But Cain would eviscerate Obama in a debate. Man vs. Boy.
So Cain is anti-Israel, anti-Muslim, and Perry is pro-Israel, pro-Muslim?
Rino alert!Rino alert! But really, if 0 is qualified any dogcatcher is to.
Item 2 is a huge plus for me.
Islam is not a religion. It is a totalitarian political system that uses religion as a beard. It is anathema to Western ideas of individual freedom in general, and to our Constitution in particular.
Is Herman Cain, candidate for U.S. Senate, really just a guy who was born a poor black child, who then worked himself out of poverty into a smashing success as a CEO of Godfather's Pizza and other companies, and now he just wants to run to represent the people of Georgia in the U.S. Senate?
Not quite. Everything may be true up until the point where Herman tries to make himself out to be a humble candidate for U.S. Senate. After that point, the similarities between himself and Hillary Clinton become much clearer...and, they are not merely that both their first and last names start with an "H" and a "C".
Consider this timeline of events in Cain's life:
In 1995: In an interview with the Omaha World Herald (Date: September 10, 1995) Cain expressed no desire to move to Georgia, saying he "...'knows of no better place to live' and for his company [Godfather's Pizza] to be headquartered than in Omaha, Nebraska. 'And you can quote me on that,' Cain said."
In 1997: Cain backed Democrat Brenda Council's challenge to Omaha Republican Mayor Hal Daub, and, in the process, making Nebraska GOP leaders quite unsettled about his dedication to the Republican Party (Source: Omaha World Herald, December 14, 1998)
In 1998: From the December 14, 1998 edition of the Omaha World Herald:
"As far as me not running for Senate [in Nebraska], it's a final decision," Cain said Sunday. "But I am giving some consideration to running for the presidency [in 2000]. I probably will make my mind up by the middle of next year."
In 1998: From the October 5, 1998 edition of Nation's Restaurant News, with special emphasis by the PV on truly remarkable statements by Cain:
"The notion [to run for U.S. Senate in Nebraska] is a rush," Cain admitted. 'It's a very prestigious thing to conceive. But my motivation for running for Senate was not for the stature of being a senator, but because I wanted to make a difference on issues I feel passionate about.'
"After meeting with political consultants and past and present senators, Cain said he had determined that while he has very strong and distinct opinions about business-related matters, he is less clear-cut in his stances on social issues and was not ready to appease voters by taking stands on those issues.
"'Too many people in the electorate are single-issue voters,' he commented, 'and to try and cater to the single-issue voters and the single-issue pockets out there felt like I was compromising my beliefs. As an example, with the pro-life and pro-abortion debate, the most vocal people are on the ends. I am pro-life with exceptions, and people want you to be all or nothing.'
[Cain added] "I am not a social-issue crusader. I am a free-enterprise crusader."
In 1999: Cain contemplates running for President, even going so far as to establish the Omaha, Nebraska-based Citizens for Cain Exploratory Committee, and ends-up filing a statement with the FEC for "Cain for President, Inc." to run against George W. Bush (Source: FEC Website).
Here's some analysis from Louis Jacobson in the March 6, 1999 edition of The National Journal:
"If he runs, Cain says he will advocate market-oriented reforms of health care and Social Security, plus a simpler and fairer tax system. Each of these issues ranks high on the GOP's economic agenda.
"But unlike many in his party, Cain opposes school vouchers for private schools and backs efforts only to 'revisit,' not eliminate, affirmative action. He declined to give his position on abortion rights. In the primaries, Cain's moderate social stances could pose problems."
In 1999: When his own run against Bush fizzled, Cain endorsed Steve Forbes, who was (and, likely, still is) known to be quite moderate on the abortion issue and continued his anti-Bush campaign, saying that by electing Bush, Republicans will have "shortchanged ourselves as a party." (Source: Conservative News Service, July 1, 1999)
Year 2000: After moving to Georgia in early 2000, Cain becomes a Georgia voter. Cain finally gets around to registering to vote in Georgia on September 11th of 2000. (Source: Henry County Board of Elections)
Years 2000-2003: Cain demonstrates no partisan political activity in Georgia.
2003: Herman Cain becomes a Georgia Senate candidate. "Herman Cain, a 57-year-old businessman, motivational speaker and author is apparently entering the GOP primary, the fourth candidate to do so." (Source: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, May 29, 2003).
Where has Cain raised his funds?
The Center for Responsive Politics has released an analysis of fundraising in the Republican Primary for Georgias open U.S. Senate seat. It shows that Mac Collins and Johnny Isakson have only raised about 10% of their funds from out of state. By contrast, Cain has raised over 70% of his funds from out of state.
Of the top ten zip codes on Cains reports, only three are in Georgia. Others include Houston, TX, Paradise Valley, AZ, and Saint Joseph, MI. Also appearing twice is Omaha, NE.
The top ten zip codes in Isaksons report are all located in Atlanta, Marietta, Roswell and Alpharetta. Similarly, Collins contributors are heavily concentrated among the counties south of Atlanta that he has represented for years.
PV's Analysis: It is extremely ironic that for the latter part of the 1990s, Herman Cain considered himself quite the moderate on the abortion issue, going so far as to state that he was "pro-life with exceptions." Hmm...what exceptions? Could those exceptions be the same exceptions that Cain is currently flogging Isakson over?
In fact, we suspect that, until Cain entered the Senate race in Georgia and was told that he had to take these extreme stances on abortion, that he probably agreed 100% with Isakson's positions on abortion, and supported his votes.
But Cain, like so many other "do-anything-for-an-endorsement" politicians before him, agreed to modify his position for political expediency. We suspect that every day that Cain spends hammering Isakson on votes, Cain has to lock himself into a room and flog himself for those very same positions he held until he decided to sell-out his own moral views to fit the abortion views of the special abortion interests in this state.
We would be willing to bet some moolah that the fundraising by Cain outside of Georgia is from people who don't hold his political view on abortion, and, if they discovered the kind of race and the platform he was REALLY running on, they would not be giving him money (anyone in Cain's camp wanna pony-up to the betting table?).
The fact is, if the view on abortion by the GRTL ("Georgia Right To Life") is what you use to judge a candidate, then, seriously, Mac Collins has more consistently held that view for the last 10 years of his service in Congress than Herman Cain has for the last 1.5 years. That's right. One and one-half years. That's the only public record anyone has of Cain's stance on abortion that is significantly different from Johnny Isakson's.
It must be some sort of psychological trick that people like Cain play on themselves to cause them to become the most vocal and act the most self-righteous on an issue that they themselves are just as guilty of (if not more so because they are dishonest about it, both with themselves and with the public), than the target they are focused most on beating-up.
Cain is a charlatan on a number of Republican issues, as evidenced by the record of his own statements with the afore-mentioned newspaper articles, his support of Steve Forbes, and his slap at then-candidate George W. Bush in 1999.
He wasn't in favor of school vouchers in the late 1990s...how will he vote on them if a bill is presented in Congress?
He wasn't in favor of doing away with affirmative-action programs that treat one class of people special and discriminate against another class of people, so what WOULD happen if a bill was introduced in Congress on that issue? Hmmmmmm...
He accuses Johnny of being "pro-abortion" when he himself held those very same views not 4 years ago. Heck, Cain probably held those positions on abortion when he announced to run in 2003. It wasn't until his Washington, D.C. and Georgia consultants beat him over the head about how he had to position himself in Georgia if he wanted a shot at winning.
His track record of dabbling in the Nebraska senate race and in the 2000 presidential race reminds us a lot of people like Hillary Clinton who just want to be elected to anything from anyplace, just for the right to serve their own ego.
Again, if the GRTL's views on abortion match yours, then you should be voting for Mac Collins. Of the two endorsed by the GRTL, Collins has the longest, documented record of his abortion beliefs and is, therefore the one most intellectually honest about his position on abortion.
***Herman Cain sounds so Romney-esque. Or, rather Barney Fife-esque.***
Perry just lost North Carolina with that snarky!!!!!
Please the proper expression freely and often!
LOL... sounds like Cain is simply unfit for liberal consumption.
That’s exactly who we need for president.
Yessir, you know you’re over the target when...
Perry sucks. Check out how HELLBENT he was on Hispanic judges on high court with no appellate court experience. the Hispanic judge he appointed was eventuallyindicted for arson but then top attorney Deguerin got him off.
ONE reason Perry is unfit for the presidency:
Tid bits, sound bites, yup, sounds like Palin all over again.
Du vill vote for Romney und Perry, ve who know how Govt. verks vill decide who you should vote for. Ja ve do der Best fur You. Who you want, does not count. Ve are die Elite political class, why vould you vant a common person?
Give me reasons to vote FOR your guy.
This type of stuff turns people like me off.
Cain is out for the destruction of Israel? Really dude? Cain was one of the few high profile people who went to Beck's pro Israel rally unannounced and with out fanfare. He is a solid pro Israel guy by all accounts.
Good Luck with all that. Maybe he should become a community organizer and just trump everybody.
Herm got a Masters in Comp Sci from Purdue.
That’s enough smarts for me.
With supporters like you, Perry doesn't need critics.
Here's a hint - your lame-ass bashing of Cain does NOTHING to help Perry. It only reinforces the growing notion on FR that he attracts some real ahole idiots.
Because Perry will DESTROY Obama in debate! /s
Is all this true about Cain? That is the issue.
OK, I see this is not affiliated with the Perry campaign. I still want to know if this is the truth.
I like Rick Perry but, to be fair, he did state that the nation was founded in the 16th century so maybe his apologists might want to back off a bit on factual gaffes by other candidates.
Aren’t you just so relieved that you know everything? May we be so privileged to bow in your presence? Please, pretty please?
As an engineer, I never profess to know everything except to know where to find the information I need at the time I need it, in my “smart books”. The key word here is need, not answering a gotcha hypothetical.
I want Cain to run so I can tell libs they are racist de supporting a half white man over a black man.
Does anyone see the Cain campaign tearing the other candidates down in a poor attempt to elevate himself? Not at this time we don’t, no. Maybe that will come, but so far, Cain has stayed above all that childish behavior.
The Perry camp, in the other hand, seems to think that it will elevate Perry if they tear down Cain.
It sure would be nice if the Perry camp would post something that elevates PERRY and shows America what PERRY has to offer us.
For starters, Perry’s new ad boasts that he will create over 2.5 million new jobs. He does realize there are over 14 million without jobs, right? So 2.5 million jobs isn’t exactly going to change things much.
He goes on to say that Texas created over 1 million jobs. Soooo... his state creates 1 million, but he’s only going to creat 2.5 million for the whole country?? So are we to believe that he’ll create 1 million jobs for his state, and the rest of the country can divide the other 1.5 million jobs among the other 49 (or is it 56?) states?
Either he doesn’t have anyone critiquing his ads to give them feedback on how the ad comes across, or no one in his camp knows how to do math, or this is the best they can come up with. Or all of the above.
I am trying to give Perry a chance, because some people here say he’s a good guy. But every step he takes is further from my vote.
Calling the stance very pro-choice, [Mike] Huckabee argued that even with Cain trying to backtrack by calling himself 100% pro-life, there was little repair he could do to his comments. The damage has been done, Huckabee concluded, particularly with religious voters and social conservatives. He cannot win Iowa by offending them, Huckabee argued, noting that being pro-choice was far too radical a position for many voters who choose candidates based on their stances on social issues, no matter what his stances on other policy issues that come up in the campaign.
And I'm sorry, your use of nativist is pure bashing. Right in line with Perry's heartless comment. So I see why you are drawn to him, you both like to bash conservatives.
There's just so many illegals to go around...
Looks like the Perry winks are getting desperate to keep their candidate relevant.
I ask again, is this the truth?
LOL! You really think ANY of the GOP candidates other than Newt knew what the "right of return" was? Obama probably knew - because his "Palestinian" terrorist pal Rashid Khalidi advocated for it. Do you think Reagan knew every detail of international relations prior to his swearing in? Absurd. John Bolton would be Secretary of State. HE knows all about this and would advise a President Cain. Grow up.
And that loon you're talking about got Cain millions of dollars worth of free advertising time on radio and TV all across the country.
And that loon you're talking about got $2 million in cash pumped into the Cain campaign in one week, due to him being a “loon.”
Looney like a Fox.
I have no idea. Judging the source I’d steer clear of thinking abut it too much.
I like Cain on #2 Q & A.
What the exchanges revealed is that Cain lacks a flair for metaphor as well as a working grasp of his own platform. He emphatically denied the charge that his 9 percent business levy would function as a value-added tax. But the analysis commissioned by his own campaign, which he urged everyone to read, takes a somewhat different view.
"Each business would pay tax on gross receipts less payments to other businesses," it explains. "Allowing the subtraction of payments for intermediate goods yields the value added by the company. Subtracting investment as well yields a subtraction method value-added tax (emphasis added)."
Obviously, the Herminator has managed to avoid contact with the most basic facts about his own tax plan. He describes it in terms that even his own advisers reject. And he exhibits no curiosity about what it contains. Cain brings to mind basketball great Charles Barkley, who complained of being misquoted in his autobiography. (Source: "Cain's Glib Confusion on Just About Anything)
I am not a candidate, or even Jewish, and *I* knew about the “right to return” propaganda. But that’s okay. President Cain will know everything. The Smoking Man will fill him in on Middle East policy.
Bwahaha!!! No supporter of Rick Perry should be casting aspersions on Herman Cain’s understanding of our country’s founding.
Here’s Rick Perry on the stump:
“... the reason that we fought the revolution in the 16th century...”
I like honesty not a bullsister.......A successful businessman and president is only as good as the people he surrounds himself with.
I worked almost 35 years for a manufacturing company, went thru many plant managers and not one of them could rewire the control panel on a 4 ton press.
Maybe they should do an ad with Perry smoking. Maybe that will keep him hanging on a little longer.
Cain was exactly right (in the post he made trying to bash Cain), that there are far too many people who are one-issue voters.
Let's not vote for Cain because he didn't know what Right of Return was. That sounds like a plan. Let's stick with Obama. Yeah, let's do that.
If I only voted for candidates who believed everything I believe, or knew the answer to every gotcha question, I dare say I would have never voted in my life.
This isn't about the ideal candidate, this is about the best of what we are offered. Life is hard, and sometimes you have to make a call. Leaders know that. Cry-babies don't.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.