Skip to comments.Herman Cain: 'I'm not supposed to know anything about foreign policy'
Posted on 11/16/2011 8:34:37 AM PST by Sub-Driver
Herman Cain: 'I'm not supposed to know anything about foreign policy'
By: Maggie Haberman November 16, 2011 10:06 AM EST
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, whose editorial board interview with Herman Cain produced one of the most memorable videos of 2012, spent a day on his campaign bus with some nice highlights.
He defended his view that presidents and presidential candidates don't need to be immersed in the fine print of world affairs - they simply need to be leaders who can surround themselves with the right people and sift through their advice.
"I'm not supposed to know anything about foreign policy. Just thought I'd throw that out," he said, a dig at his critics.
"I want to talk to commanders on the ground. Because you run for president (people say) you need to have the answer. No, you don't! No, you don't! That's not good decision-making," said Cain.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Ill take Cain, warts and all.
At least I know what Im getting.
Isn’t it evident to everyone that the left is trying to destroy Cain?? Why would they do that?? Because they are scared to death of him. Bet you they never try to tear down Romney or Newt because both are a part of the establishment.
If you look upthread you’ll see the video posted and my response to the video, in which I said I see nothing wrong with anything Cain said in that video (regarding Libya).
I just think it’s amusing that SOME people (not saying you) who spent 24/7 trashing Perry on every Perry thread that popped up on FR (even on one that was merely one of some family photos of Perry) are then so hyper-sensitive to criticism of THEIR candidate.
Look, I like Cain. I really do. He is my second choice (close second) behind Newt.
But I see his weaknesses, just as I see Newt’s.
And I’m sorry, after the way the Perry-bashers behaved for a couple of months here on FR, I’m not going to cry any tears over critics of Cain showing up on Cain threads.
I’m just not going to do it.
FR is a place where there are a lot of heated discussions.
If you can’t take it (not saying you, just using the general “you”), especially after you’ve been dishing it out for a couple of months, then you really should go home to mommy (not saying you, just using the general “you”)... if you know what I mean.
Cain comes from the phony-baloney corporate set that thinks everything is a widget, and all he has to do is hire some talent, sit back and grace the company with his decision-making prowess, and all will be well.
Conservatives should not be seeking ANYONE to be potus who doesn't have the political experience and elective success needed to mount a serious campaign for potus. If you want to run for potus you have to have a clear understanding of the challenge. Cain never figured to get this far and the further he advances, the more apparent it becomes. Cain is in over his head.
Ignore TBBT. He/she/it is not FOR any candidate; He/she;it is only vitriolically AGAINST Cain.
And that’s all.
>> I will have good people, I will give them the credit for successes, and I will take responsibility for any failures. >>
That would be a helluva talking point.
I think it's legitimate criticism and, again, I like Cain.
I would believe that as a senior member of the House Intelligence Committee, Miche;e Bachmann has access to all sorts of classified info re Libya. And she is still a candidate.
Ridiculous. Reagan knew his stuff. He had a grand vision, but he demonstrated an appropriate level of detailed knowledge that Herman Cain will never attain:
From “To Restore America”, Ronald Reagan, March 31, 1976:
But there is one problem which must be solved or everything else is meaningless. I am speaking of the problem of our national security. Our nation is in danger, and the danger grows greater with each passing day. Like an echo from the past, the voice of Winston Churchill’s grandson was heard recently in Britain’s House of Commons warning that the spread of totalitarianism threatens the world once again and the democracies are wandering without aim.”
“Wandering without aim” describes the United States’ foreign policy. Angola is a case in point. We gave just enough support to one side to encourage it to fight and die, but too little to give them a chance of winning. And while we’re disliked by the winner, distrusted by the loser, and viewed by the world as weak and unsure. If detente were the two-way street it’s supposed to be, we could have told the Soviet Union to stop its trouble-making and leave Angola to the Angolans. But it didn’t work out that way.
Now, we are told Washington is dropping the word “detente, “ but keeping the policy. But whatever it’s called, the policy is what’s at fault. What is our policy? Mr. Ford’s new Ambassador to the United Nations attacks our longtime ally, Israel. In Asia, our new relationship with mainland China can have practical benefits for both sides. But that doesn’t mean it should include yielding to demands by them, as the administration has, to reduce our military presence on Taiwan where we have a longtime friend and ally, the Republic of China.
And, it’s also revealed now that we seek to establish friendly relations with Hanoi. To make it more palatable, we’re told that this might help us learn the fate of the men still listed as Missing in Action. Well, there’s no doubt our government has an obligation to end the agony of parents, wives and children who’ve lived so long with uncertainty. But, this should have been one of our first demands of Hanoi’s patron saint, the Soviet Union, if detente had any meaning at all. To present it now as a reason for friendship with those who have already violated their promise to provide such information is hypocrisy.
In the last few days, Mr. Ford and Dr. Kissinger have taken us from hinting at invasion of Cuba, to laughing it off as a ridiculous idea. Except, that it was their ridiculous idea. No one else suggested it. Once again what is their policy? During this last year, they carried on a campaign to befriend Castro. They persuaded the Organization of American States to lift its trade embargo, lifted some of the U.S. trade restrictions. They engaged in cultural exchanges. And then, on the eve of the Florida primary election, Mr. Ford went to Florida, called Castro an outlaw and said he’d never recognize him. But he hasn’t asked our Latin American neighbors to reimpose a single sanction, nor has he taken any action himself. Meanwhile, Castro continues to export revolution to Puerto Rico, to Angola, and who knows where else?
As I talk to you tonight, negotiations with another dictator go forward, negotiations aimed at giving up our ownership of the Panama Canal Zone. Apparently, everyone knows about this except the rightful owners of the Canal Zone, you, the people of the United States. General Omar Torrijos, the dictator of Panama, seized power eight years ago by ousting the duly-elected government. There have been no elections since. No civil liberties. The press is censored. Torrijos is a friend and ally of Castro and, like him, is pro-Communist. He threatens sabotage and guerrilla attacks on our installations if we don’t yield to his demands. His foreign minister openly claims that we have already agreed in principle to giving up the Canal Zone.
Well, the Canal Zone is not a colonial possession. It is not a long-term lease. It is sovereign United States Territory every bit the same as Alaska and all the states that were carved from the Louisiana Purchase. We should end those negotiations and tell the General: We bought it, we paid for it, we built it, and we intend to keep it.
Mr. Ford says detente will be replaced by “peace through strength.” Well now, that slogan has a a nice ring to it, but neither Mr. Ford nor his new Secretary of Defense will say that our strength is superior to all others. In one of the dark hours of the Great Depression, Franklin Delano Roosevelt said, “It is time to speak the truth frankly and boldly.” Well, I believe former Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger was trying to speak the truth frankly and boldly to his fellow citizens. And that’s why he is no longer Secretary of Defense.
The Soviet Army outnumbers ours more than two-to-one and in reserves four-to-one. They out-spend us on weapons by 50 percent. Their Navy outnumbers ours in surface ships and submarines two-to-one. We’re outgunned in artillery three-to-one and their tanks outnumber ours four-to-one. Their strategic nuclear missiles are larger, more powerful and more numerous than ours. The evidence mounts that we are Number Two in a world where it’s dangerous, if not fatal, to be second best. Is this why Mr. Ford refused to invite Alexander Solzhenitsyn to the White House? Or, why Mr. Ford traveled halfway ‘round the world to sign the Helsinki Pact, putting our stamp of approval on Russia’s enslavement of the captive nations? We gave away the freedom of millions of people freedom that was not ours to give.
Now we must ask if someone is giving away our own freedom. Dr. Kissinger is quoted as saying that he thinks of the United States as Athens and the Soviet Union as Sparta. “The day of the U.S. is past and today is the day of the Soviet Union.” And he added, “My job as Secretary of State is to negotiate the most acceptable second-best position available.” Well, I believe in the peace of which Mr. Ford spoke as much as any man. But peace does not come from weakness or from retreat. It comes from the restoration of American military superiority.
Ask the people of Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Hungary all the others: East Germany, Bulgaria, Romania ask them what it’s like to live in a world where the Soviet Union is number one. I don’t want to live in that kind of world; and I don’t think you do either. Now we learn that another high official of the State Department, Helmut Sonnenfeldt, whom Dr. Kissinger refers to as his “Kissinger,” has expressed the belief that, in effect, the captive nations should give up any claim of national sovereignty and simply become a part of the Soviet Union. He says, “their desire to break out of the Soviet straightjacket” threatens us with World War III. In other words, slaves should accept their fate.
The Cain supporters are going to need to get together and decide what their response is.
Some are saying this is a great quote, and exactly right. They are the really deluded ones.
Some are saying it’s not a great quote, but they will give him a pass, because after all he’s not as bad as Obama.
And some are saying Politico probably messed up the quote. I sure hope this is the case.
Has anybody said he was just joking yet? That’s usually a good excuse for Cain.
But it will be not be funny for all those who defended the quote, if it turns out it’s not accurate. Not that they will care, they will have no trouble taking the opposite view tomorrow if that’s what their Candidate tells them to do.
He toast.. over... there is no way I would vote for him now. too bad, because I really thought he might have made a great candidate in the general.
we absolutely have to have someone who may have flaws, but can win...
down to Newt and Romney, IMO.
We have a platitude president now. Hope and change can mean anything you want it to mean, just elect me and find out later.
I want specifics
Great you-tube on Herman. The man knows what to do. I think he is our best shot at undoing the harm to our country that Obama has created
This man is not fit for the office.
How about context on this ‘quote’. Herman may have been saying that since he has not been mired in government for deacdes, he is not expected to be that current on foreign policy, but in his own words he is getting updated by expert analysts and will be caught up.
I was not one of those who trashed Perry, but I have spent countless hours posting proof against the lies his supporters posted about Cain.
POlitico is quoting from an interview Cain had on his campaign bus, NOT the interview you reference. Or they are SAYING they are quoting from the campaign bus; I don’t want to suggest the quotes are accurate.
“Cain never figured to get this far and the further he advances, the more apparent it becomes. Cain is in over his head.”
Is that the VETTING you are talking about? A straw man argument?
Presidential primary season is a special time in a young (or old) FReepers life. It's when normally snippy, sarcastic and grumpy FReepers turn into a frenzied troop of rabid howler monkeys screaming and throwing poo at each other. I get choked up just thinking about it.
This story originates from an interview taken on the bus, after the video interview.
[SNIP] By that time, the Cain bus had embarked from a fundraiser at the Milwaukee Athletic Club toward Lambeau Field about 120 miles away.
Aboard were Cain, a handful of staff members, four Wisconsin supporters - Cain called them “EBCs” for “Early Believers in Cain” - and a reporter.
It was almost as if the soon-to-be-famous Libya moment had never occurred. Cain was at ease and holding court.
“We have a lot of fun on the bus,” he said of the vehicle whose exterior bears a giant portrait of his grinning face.
“We need somebody who shoots from the hip and is not politically correct all the time,” said Cindy Cunningham, a Neenah businesswoman who rode the bus Monday. “You can feel his honesty.”
Cain brought up the GOP debate on foreign policy two days earlier.
“That’s a tough subject. You don’t want to get your facts mixed up,” he said.
He defended his view that presidents and presidential candidates don’t need to be immersed in the fine print of world affairs - they simply need to be leaders who can surround themselves with the right people and sift through their advice.
“I’m not supposed to know anything about foreign policy. Just thought I’d throw that out,” he said, a dig at his critics.
“I want to talk to commanders on the ground. Because you run for president (people say) you need to have the answer. No, you don’t! No, you don’t! That’s not good decision-making,” said Cain.
My view is Mr. Cain said “everything” NOT ‘anything’ in his statement to the reporter. It will be interesting to see how this washes out.
That was pretty quick — you watched a 34 minute video in 7 minutes?
Or you meant you had seen the entire 34-minutes before. That’s probably it.
I do worry that Cain is in over his head. I watch him very closely in the debates and I have that worry.
Let me ask you this: Why is he getting such strong support from conservatives, both here in FR, in the various Tea Parties and other places?
Because we all KNOW he’s a conservative?
Based on what?
Based on what he’s TELLING us?
I happen to believe him. But just think about it. He’s 65 years old, he has NO political experience, no track record on which to judge either his actual political principles or his ability to put them into action, and yet many conservatives accept a) that he IS a conservative and b) that he is a QUALIFIED conservative and they accept that based on what?
I’m asking myself that, too. Not just you.
I watched the video yesterday. It wasn’t posted for the first time today.
Because we’re sick of career politicians....this is the trade-off, a little less polish, I’ll take it.
I just watched Sportscenter, and Cain didn’t say anything like that on Sportscenter either.
My point being that the video has nothing to do with the quotes, which were allegedly from an interview on the BUS, apparently regarding the video you are watching now.
Thanks, I finally found the source of the story, see post #122
Ok. That’s fair. I understand that.
You post is an excellent argument to reject Herman Cain. He is inexperienced, an amateur with no record at all in either legislative or executive government positions.
And as you say, No Republican will ever have those two gifts in any election against a rat, those “gifts” being what allowed the inexperienced Obama to be elected.
Yes, it is AN argument.
But there are other arguments.
And you can read them right here in this and other threads.
And many of them are valid.
I suggest you read with an open mind.
I tend to think you are correct, that he was either joking or being sarcastic. Wouldn’t know without a full transcript, or a video though.
You might want to direct some of your ire against the pro-Cain folks who are defending the idea of a President having no idea at all about foreign policy. Several have argued this is 100% correct.
Politico has lost all credibility when it comes to reporting on anything regarding conservatives. First with Palin, then with Cain.
I will believe them when I see an actual video of Cain saying these words.
For all we know he could have said I don’t have to know “everything” about foreign policy.
You are discounting the fact that Herman Cain has worked on the OTHER side of the fence. He has experience the ineptness of the bills that Gingrich, Bachman, and the rest have put upon the American people. That is why he decided to run for office.... to clean it up.
That is the reason why I am voting for HERMAN CAIN. He is the can do candidate.
Heck, half the time when CAIN says something stupid, they crucify Perry.
That would explain how he ran Godfather’s pizza. Just on cruise control, never growing, slowly losing market share, flat revenues. Went from 5th best pizza company to 11th-best. Did return to profitability by cutting stores that didn’t make money. Which works if you don’t want to grow your business.
He just keeps making it harder and harder on us.
1) Set very big goals w/ tight deadlines
2) Delegate like crazy
3) Don't let any experts in the room
Newt will be done soon. His pro-mandate stance will kill him once people remember it, and you can be sure the newt opposition will make sure everybody remembers it.
But don’t fret, we can always circle around again through the candidates. Or we could give Santorum a whirl. Assuming anybody can forgive him for supporting Spector over Toomey.
And hey, with Toomey pushing tax increases, maybe the Spector thing can be forgotten.
You’re not allowed to use the R word here, unless it’s purely derogatory.
Sorry, but Cain isn’t ready for prime time, not even close. What Pluses does he have? Seriously, think about it. He’s never won an election to anything in spite of trying, yes he’s had success in business but NO ONE EVER has gotten to the oval office without military and/or prior political service.
The republican candidate isn’t going to get a Pass like the press gave Fauxbama in 08, they aren’t going to cover up their goofs or toss them softballs. If the guy can’t handle what were relatively easy questions, which he clearly couldn’t, he has ZERO chance of winning a general election.
“Tea Party” folks need to stop trying to project Reaganesque qualities on folks who just aren’t there. Cain’s a nice enough fellow, and who knows someday he may have a bright future in politics, but if this guy winds up the nominee, the chances of Republicans winning the White House in 2012 are over before the confetti hits the floor at the RNC Convention.
We cannot send a neophite up, Democrats can. The press will carry water for them, that won’t be the case for a republican, and frankly after the disaster the current neophite has created the last thing the world needs is another one in the White House, even if he does have an R beside his name.
Like it or not, the Republican Primary short of something earth shattering to occur is boiling down to Romney V Newt at this point... Ideal choice? Nope, but there isn’t a Reagan out there folks, not even close and the “tea party” bloc’s continuing to project those qualities onto what are clearly not ready for prime time players is not helping anything. The 2012 class is a rather sad lot, but what is sadder is that folks are hitching their wagons to folks like Bachmann and Perry and yes even Cain, who do not stand one ounce of winning a general election.
Believe me I’d love to see a Reaganesque candidate, but there just isn’t one, and likely won’t be another one in my lifetime. Great Presidents are few and far between, and NONE of them came out of nowhere.
I would agree if the press had asked Cain, hey, who’s the prime minister of myramar.. that’s a nonsense question, but to not be able to answer “Do you agree with Obama’s actions in Libya?” without looking like a deer in the headlights? Come on... remember how the left flailed GWB as he processed what was going on on 9/11 after the fact? Farenheight 911 etc? Remember?? You think they won’t evicerate the republican candidate if we send up a second or worse a third teir schlub like Obama?
If the Tea Party Bloc wishes to really influence this election they need to stop trying to make second and third teir candidates into paragons by trying to project on them qualities that just aren’t there, and find a candidate who is competent, articulate, can show they can handle the press, and the process, think of their feet, understand the media, and at the very least the basics of Politics.
Under those criteria you have really 2 choices left, Romney and Newt... some might argue Santorum, but I think he fails a few of those tests. That’s it, no one else in this lot has a chance. 2012 should be a cake walk for the republican candidate as long as they are competent and capable. Cain, Perry, Bacmann etc, these guys as the nominee are the sure fired way to steal defeat from the jaws of victory IMHO.
He had a talk show, and was conservative on that show. Although I don’t see a lot of quotes from the talk show, I presume some people have gone through the tapes and are convinced.
He also has written articles that appear in WND, and they seem conservative.
He ran for office in 2004, and his platform was a conservative platform.
Thanks. I didn’t mind your link btw, I hadn’t seen the entire interview, and now I’ve got it in my favorites to watch when I have a chance.
“Isn’t it evident to everyone that the left is trying to destroy Cain??”
Herman is doing it all on his own.
Because he LIVES conservative values. He has written and argued political issues from the conservative standpoint for the past decade years - in writings and 5 days a week, 2 hours a night on his radio show. He wasn’t doing this because he was running for president. There was no “future political gain” in any that.
He started speaking at tea parties in 2009. He wasn’t running for office then. He spent 2010 stumping for conservative candidates. He wasn’t running for office then, either.
Do you believe Mark Levin is a conservative?
Fact is - all we have are words and promises - that is true of all the candidates, not just Cain. Romney and Gingrich talk a big gain, but they didn’t walk the talk, did they?
Heck, half the time when CAIN says something stupid, they crucify Perry.
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.