Replies

He fumbled two questions. That’s simply a fact. Your denial of the fact doesn’t change anything

What did "Right of Return" mean to you?

To most knowledgeable individuals, it was the "Right of Return" of the Jewish people to leave their refuge found in other parts around The Globe after the Diaspora and return to the Holy Land. That is the only "Right of Return" that I was ever aware of.

This so called "Right of Return" that Mike Wallace referred to is an Islamo-fascist construct intended to destroy Israel. The term is a disingenuous Gotcha Question in the US because it was accepted into the history books since 1950. I would give Pallies the right to return to their ancient crypts in Mecca.

If Mr. Cain had answered in a way that indicated he saw "Right of Return" as applicable to Jews who wanted to return to Israel, his answer would not have come across as a gaffe. If he'd said, "Of course I believe in the Right of Return for Jews who want to go back to Israel," no one would have thought twice. Even if Chris Wallace had come back and spoken of a "Right of Return" for the "Palestinians," he could have talked about the issue without appearing unprepared.

Of the two mistakes, the "Right of Return" question is a smaller issue in my mind. Mr. Cain has admitted that he hadn't heard the term, but having his mind go blank on hearing a question would not look so bad to me. We all have our minds go blank at a question occasionally. To me, the bigger issue is his failure to have educated himself enough to give us some idea of what he'd do in Afghanistan.

I understand that he doesn't have access to all of the intelligence on this topic, but plenty of experts have written books and journal articles. He could have read these books and articles and come up with some ideas. As a prominent man in talk radio and to some extent in GOP circles, he could call these people and ask them to educate him in more depth. They couldn't tell him secret information that they had learned in government service, but they could help him put together a guideline for a policy. If he had given us this guideline, we could see how he approaches the problem. He could even preface his answer with a promise to take a fresh look when he was in office to be sure that important facts wouldn't dictate another course. We care about the answers to these questions because they speak to the preparation that the candidate has done and the thought process that he will bring to the office.