Posted on 10/23/2011 6:58:44 PM PDT by SunkenCiv
...In the 18 days between the Sept. 22 and Oct. 11 Republican debates, Cain granted interviews to six broadcast-network programs, the Media Research Center reports, plus 18 national cable-TV news shows. Cain appeared twice on CNN, thrice on the Fox Business Network, and 11 times on the Fox News Channel. He also butted heads with an especially confrontational Lawrence O'Donnell on MSNBC on October 6...
Since Ronald Reagan left Washington in 1989, Republicans have yearned for a presidential nominee who could present free-market ideas with passion, energy, and commitment. They have longed for someone who would labor for limited government.
And they have sunk into disappointment and simmered in rage as two generations of Bushes surrendered to their patrician instincts by ducking fights and letting the left bludgeon them until they barely had a cheek left to turn.
Herman Cain embodies the Reagan approach. He is confident, tough, and combative, yet sunny, funny, and buoyant. Cain permanently could demolish the Democrats' vile, vulgar lie that the GOP is the Vatican of U.S. racism.
Those who oppose President Barack Obama are not wrong, misinformed, or misguided; rather they are bigoted, Democrats too often contend. Last month, Rep. Andre Carson, D-Ind., claimed that pro-tea party Republicans in Congress want to see blacks "hanging on a tree."
If Republicans nominate Cain, the Democrats' default argument against the Right utterly implodes. Liberals then might have to battle conservatives on the merits.
Cain does not need to win 60 percent or even 40 percent of the black electorate. If 20 percent to 25 percent of black voters support this successful, self-made son of a maid and a chauffeur, the Democratic base dissolves, and victory belongs to Cain and many down-ballot Republicans wise enough to clutch his coat tails.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Freeing the slaves will end the GOP race issue forever.
...spoketh the Perrybot.
So far four Democrats here have told me that Republicans would NEVER pick Cain, instead they will pick Romney who Obama will point out is a flip-flopping phony.
Oh, are we now dividing the races on Free Republic? I judge everyone on their character, not the color of their skins. I am white. Do you want to make something of it? I work a minimum of eight hours a day on the computer for Herman Cain. That race has even been brought up on your post is offensive to me. Maybe I’d better find another forum to log onto.
Supplying the deciding votes for the ERA will end the GOP race issue forever.
Just finished a great book on the subject - “Setting the record straight: American history in Black & White” by David Barton.
http://www.christianbook.com/setting-record-straight-american-history-white/9781932225273/pd/008851
Most Black Americans today know NOTHING about Black History earlier than MLK and Malcom X. If they did, none of them would be Democrats, Ever.
The Democrats were clearly the pro-slavery party in the 1800s, and following the Civil War the Democrats fought against giving black Americans any Civil Rights and did everything to prevent blacks from being a part of the political process which is why they formed the KKK to intimidate blacks and whites from voting for pro-civil rights Republicans. And for over 100 years Democrats in congress voted time and time and time again Against any civil rights legislation proposed by Republicans.
Democrats today still have Blacks in a form of slavery, by twisting their knowledge of history. And their new Slave Master is keeping’s them in “Want”, and the Government being the provider.
Did you know?
The First Blacks In Congress Were All Republicans
United States Senate
Hiram Rhodes Revels (1822-1901); Republican – Mississippi; 1870-1871
Blanche Bruce (1841-1898); Republican – Mississippi; 1875-1881
House of Representatives
John Willis Menard (1838-1893); Republican - Louisiana; 1868
Joseph Rainey (1832-1887); Republican - South Carolina; 1870-1879
Jefferson F. Long (1836-1901); Republican – Georgia; 1870-1871
Robert C. De Large (1842-1874); Republican - South Carolina; 1871-1873
Robert B. Elliott (1842-1884); Republican - South Carolina; 1871-1874
Benjamin S. Turner (1825-1894); Republican – Alabama; 1871-1873
Josiah T. Walls (1842-1905); Republican – Florida; 1871-1873, 1873-1875, 1875-1876
Richard H. Cain (1825-1887); Republican - South Carolina; 1873-1875, 1877-1879
John R. Lynch (1847-1939); Republican – Mississippi; 1873-1877, 1882-1883
James T. Rapier (1837-1883); Republican – Alabama; 1873-1875
Alonzo J. Ransier (1834-1882); Republican - South Carolina; 1873-1875
Jeremiah Haralson (1846-1916); Republican - Alabama; 1875-1877
John Adams Hyman (1840-1891); Republican - North Carolina; 1875-1877
Charles E. Nash (1844-1913); Republican – Louisiana; 1875-1877
Robert Smalls (1839-1915); Republican - South Carolina; 1875-1879, 1882-1883, 1884-1887
James E. O’Hara (1844-1905); Republican - North Carolina; 1883-1887
Henry P. Cheatham (1857-1935); Republican - North Carolina; 1889-1893
John Mercer Langston (1829-1897); Republican – Virginia; 1890-1891
Thomas E. Miller(1849-193); Republican - South Carolina; 1890-1891
George W. Murray (1853-1926); Republican - South Carolina; 1893-1895, 1896-1897
George Henry White (1852-1918); Republican - North Carolina; 1897-1901
The Democrats did not elect their first black American to the U.S. House until 1935, and he was from the North. The Southern Democrats waited until 1973. The first Black Senator was not elected until 1993.
what is interesting to me is that if the Republicans nominate Cain it will be because he was the best person for the job and not some sort of affirmative action crap.
At this point, I’ll vote for Cain because I trust him and that’s good enough.
He’s just the kind of guy I think I could spend an afternoon with, sitting in the shade shooting the breeze.
Where os the Marva Collins when we need her? Now there was a good teacher!
By the way, where's the mockery of Deroy because of the oddity of his name - standard fare here among some.
I back Herman Cain because I see him as the most conservative candidate running, nothing at all to do with his skin tone.
That race has even been brought up on your post is offensive to me. Maybe I’d better find another forum to log onto.
I'd rather you wouldn't but that's a personal decision, only you can make. The knives are coming out against Cain and he needs defenders against slander, on this forum as well as others.
I am looking for the next President of the United States. I felt betrayed when Powell endorsed Obama because I thought he was principled. The Obama candidacy opened my eyes to the color trumps ideology.
I have heard Cain speak about his blackness and I personally researched his church by simply going to it's website. Herman Cain preaches there too so it is important to check these things out. Anyone can tell you what you want to hear.
Do I think Cain is generally conservative? Yes. Do I think he thinks in terms of color? Absolutely and I got that by listening to him when he's not stumping to Tea Party crowds.
When you say you like Empowerment Zones because they are in predominately black areas, it tells me you have a bias and I believe it will carry to the Whitehouse. Understand something too Empowerment Zones, which Cain has now switched to Opportunity Zones, because Empowerment sounds too liberal (his words), are not broad based but targeted regions designed to transfer work and wealth from one are to another. One zip code pays the bills, the zip code next door doesn't.
Go to his church website. Antiocnorth.org and click on his pastor and read his pastors own words about justice and we need to quit expecting blacks to do something but ask what government needs to do because Jesus said "the first will be last and the last will be first". You go and read it yourself, don't take my word for it.
Cain not only preaches there but is very close friend with the pastor. I find all that to be bothersome to me. If it doesn't trouble you ,no problem, that is your prerogative.
Ronald Reagan was a successful two-term Governor of California and a highly successful two-term President. Reagan had a record of achievement and accomplishment unmatched in recent times. Reagan was able to advance conservatism under extreme conditions and fight off the forces of the liberal establishment. We knew all about Reagan, the good, the bad and the ugly. Reagan was in the public spotlight for 45 years when he finally was elected President.
Herman Cain has some good conservative qualities. Problem is, we know nothing about how Cain would govern or legislate. Why? Cain has no record with which to judge him on. Period! All we have to go by is what Cain says he would do in his public statements. And the more statements Cain makes, the more scrutiny he will receive and the more questions people will have of him.
Hummm..Now let me get this straight. You are disturbed because I am offended that race is the subject of this thread? Maybe you should read my post again. I simply do not think in terms of race. I don’t think anyone else should either.
“Cain Nomination Would End GOP Race Issue Forever”
No, it wouldn’t. Professional race baiters will all have to die (natural deaths) and then probably the next generation too before that poison is leached out of the black community.
Memories sure get short when it comes to a favorite candidate, eh? Here’s a blast from the past!
Posted on Sun Jan 14 2007 22:22:51 GMT-0600 (Central Standard Time) by Extremely Extreme Extremist
Deroy Murdock: Giuliani’s social liberalism overstated
I m not aware of Herman Cain committing slander. He rarely speaks about anything but what he, Herman Cain would do as president, or how he would repair any problems America faces today. He admits his mistakes and learns by them. I think he has done very well for a “civilian”, don’t you?
I thought electing Obama was going to end the race issue forever?
Nothing will end the race issue so long as the racemongers and poverty pimps can use it for money and power.
Hummm, you'll have to cite me where I said that. I'm not disturbed that you are considering leaving this thread at all. I simply said, I'd rather you didn't.
It's not good to argue with one who is agreeing with you, even complementing you by telling you that you and your input would be missed. What I did say was, "that's a personal decision".
I also said this, which is also in agreement with what you said: "I back Herman Cain because I see him as the most conservative candidate running, nothing at all to do with his skin tone".
Hey, when Cain gets elected, they fear this gambit will be turned on them.
Every time they complain about his conservative policies, we will tell the Slave Party members that we know that they are really only up to their old tricks: They insisting that the black man follow their orders.
I agree.
I sorta like Herman Cain's merits.
;-)
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.