Posted on 11/14/2011 2:59:28 PM PST by Bigtigermike
You won’t believe me until you click play but this is much worse than Perry’s brain lock at the debate last week. Perry lost his train of thought; Cain doesn’t have a train at all here, to the point where he needs confirmation from the interviewer of what Obama’s position on Libya actually was.
Eventually he produces some boilerplate about not supporting the opposition until you’re sure who’s in it and of course not making a decision as president until he has all the information, which is a standard Cain fallback talking point whenever he gets in trouble on a question, but the first two minutes or so are pure agony. The board actually took pity on him, I think, by not following up.
And that still only barely qualifies as the worst answer he gave today. Here’s what he told them when asked, predictably enough, about Scott Walker’s righteous crusade against public employee unions:
"On the issue of collective bargaining, Cain said he supported the right of public employees to bargain collectively." But not collective hijacking. What I mean by that, if they have gotten so much for so many years and it’s going to bankrupt the state, I don’t think that’s good. It appears that in some instances, they really don’t care.”…
Cain also appeared to be unclear on the issue of collective bargaining as it involves federal employees. Asked if he thought federal employees should have the ability to bargain collectively, Cain said: “They already have it, don’t they?”
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
THen I suggest you post to them personally.
And for the record, I am still VERY MUCH on the Cain train. I know where he stands on these issues, and I trust him to the right thing. His character means more to me than whether he has the perfect, polished answers.
He doesn’t have a clue. There is no way he can win against Obama when he can’t even say anything about Obama’s Libya policy. He doesn’t even seem to know what we (NATO) are doing.
He has answered on Libya, many times.
You make it sound like he has never heard of Libya or what is going on there.
Presser
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJylwgRHrgQ
South Carolina FOX debate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWX8lckeH38&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PL0CC93A67FC94A391
CBS debate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2s2eMm1rgdo
I was initally responding to your post that seems to lumping others together.
I have no problem with strong Cain supporters. He does have many great strengths and I am certainly still looking at Cain.
I think his and that clown Block’s responses and claims regarding the allegations have hurt him more than the low strenght allegations.
Honesty is never the wrong response to false allegations.
Well, Ghadafi was killed off because he was going to upset the fiat money apple cart with implementing a gold based currency on the african continent based on the gold dinar.
“...According to more than a few observers, Gadhafi’s plan to quit selling Libyan oil in U.S. dollars — demanding payment instead in gold-backed “dinars” (a single African currency made from gold) — was the real cause. The regime, sitting on massive amounts of gold, estimated at close to 150 tons, was also pushing other African and Middle Eastern governments to follow suit.
And it literally had the potential to bring down the dollar and the world monetary system by extension, according to analysts. French President Nicolas Sarkozy reportedly went so far as to call Libya a “threat” to the financial security of the world. The “Insiders” were apparently panicking over Gadhafi’s plan.
“Any move such as that would certainly not be welcomed by the power elite today, who are responsible for controlling the world’s central banks,” noted financial analyst Anthony Wile, editor of the free market-oriented Daily Bell, in an interview with RT. “So yes, that would certainly be something that would cause his immediate dismissal and the need for other reasons to be brought forward [for] removing him from power.”
According to Wile, Gadhafi’s plan would have strengthened the whole continent of Africa in the eyes of economists backing sound money — not to mention investors. But it would have been especially devastating for the U.S. economy, the American dollar, and particularly the elite in charge of the system....”
so what is worse?
Cain’s Libya pause
or Obama’s Brethalyzer/Teleprompter Fail Gaffe?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxxxGUeZtno
It was an unplanned hostile interview. Those are always difficult for any campaign to navigate. Everyone other than Cain and Gingrich have been having difficulties with the planned interviews, let alone the unplanned ones.
Remind me the last time Obama had one where he didn’t get the questions before hand and had days to set up the teleprompters?
"And you don't think they were assessed."
"I don't KNOW that they were or were not they were assessed. I didn't see reports of that assessment."
He made a firm statement and then at the end he freely admitted it was groundless.
What exactly is your problem with the above exchange?
Cain says what should have been done. Cain then says that he doesn't know if what should have been done, was done.
You really have a problem with that?
“Cain’s answer gives no indication he understands the issue, especially the nuance of what has happened with the public employees in this state.”
Nonsense. He said that he’s fully in support of Scott Walker. If you’d rather stab someone in the back for supporting you, that’s your deal.
Actually, any decent truly conservative FReeper could have hit these questions out of park on the first swing. The interviewer teed them up.
Oh, well then let me know when your campaign starts and I’ll be sure to show up and interview you. :)
Well, I sure couldn’t run GOP. Only Politburo-approved candidates are allowed.
I must have addressed this in half a dozen posts. Look them up if it isn’t clear to you and you have some notion it might become so.
And you’re helping the process along nicely. Why wouldn’t you support the politburo?
must have addressed this in half a dozen posts. Look them up if it isn’t clear to you and you have some notion it might become so.
I read your posts. You really say nothing. The comment in my post stands.
The “nuanced” understanding of this is that collective bargaining rights have been limited, not eliminated.
The non-nuanced understanding is that “for all practical purposes collective bargaining does not exist in Wisconsin for public employees.”
Both approaches (the nuanced and the non-nuanced) have their place, but I don’t see why you are insisting that Cain had to use the unions’ perspective as his starting point, else be found ignorant.
We disagree.
Huh?
This screw up is worse than Perry’s:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/cain-stumbles-on-libya-question/2011/11/14/gIQAxLaLMN_video.html
That's your opinion.
Cain answered a more complicated question correctly.
Perry forgot one of the items in his talking point and never completed the answer.
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.