I’d like to see Cain do well. I disagree with this opinion.
There is no slippery slope. Citizen or not, he was an enemy combatant on a foreign field. I would have preferred that Awlaki was given his citizen due rights. I’m not upset that, since that was not an option, he was otherwise neutralized.
I would like to make a side comment because it seems that Cain’s hardest opponents here are Perry supporters. I think that the Perry people consider that Perry’s fall was a case of fratracide (I think he vetted himself negatively by calling Conservatives heartless and doubling-down on illegal alien subsidies). Since Cain has been the primary beneficiary of Perry’s fall, I see the Perry people as more than invested in some fratracide of their own in hopes that people will turn their attention back to Perry.
I’ve been accused of basically this very same thing here. I’m a Palin supporter that would be equally happy to see Cain move forward. I have serious problems with the idea of Perry as the nominee based on his record in Texas.
I see in-state tuition as just an operative example that stuck.
My problems with Perry is not a case of electioneering for Palin. I would - and do - have those same problems with Perry regardless if Palin gets in the race or not. I classify Perry in the same category as Romney as far as being a conservative, which is why I find it cute and not-on-any-sort-of-point for the Perry people to claim that he’s the only alternative to Romney. I believe in ABO, but Perry is no better than Romney.
If my only goal were to clear the path for Palin, I’d have the same problems with Cain. I do not. From years of listening to Cain on the radio, I know that he is a Conservative whereas I also know, as a Texan, that Perry has a history of being a Conservative six months before every election. I’d like to see Cain do well, even if that ultimately hurts Palin. If Cain can outdo Palin, so be it. I hope to compare them both in the Primary before this is over.
It’s not fair to say that Palin supporters had it out for Perry just to buck up Palin. I think the contrast between the Palin supporters here being fairly supportive of Cain points that out. We want the best Conservative elected possible. For many of us, the rules out Perry.
I don’t support Cain on this issue, or several things he’s done or said this weekend. I am willing to give him and his new communications director a chance to right that ship. That said, I’m more than willing to call Cain out on something that I consider to be wrong, while still offering qualified support that he might be the man. It strikes me as crazy that some of Perry’s supporters have now pretzeled (for the gas jets, or something like that) their positions into something even THEY wouldn’t have agreed with 2 months ago in order to support their man.
What exactly is the definition of an enemy combatant? We have not declared war on an enemy, so what could possibly be a sound criteria? Perhaps one criterion could be kills or is associated with killing Americans. Would planned parenthood and the Democratic congress then be considered enemy combatants and subject to assassinations? Perhaps those who speak of the destruction of the American economy and way of life, even actively requiting disciples to do the same. But then would most university collage professors be enemy combatants and subject to the assassins whim? Perhaps being Muslim makes him an enemy combatant, would fundamentalist Christians be also future targets? Perhaps the the most basic criterion might be that an enemy combatant is working against our national interest without a recognized national government overseeing it - like code pink for instance.
Without a legal definition of enemy or combatant, anyone or everyone can executed by a government unrestrained by legal process.