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 ...
For three years, what we have witnessed is an arrogance and lack of humility unbecoming the most ordinary citizen, but far more obnoxious in one who could pretend to leadership of a free people.
Perhaps Cain draws upon ancient advice and example of a style of leadership which acknowledges it does not solely rely on itself, but draws on the accumulated knowledge of others, including the enduring principles expressed in America's Declaration of Independence and Constitution.
Or, perhaps he reaches into an even more distant piece of advice:
"Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding." (Prov. 4:7)
Quick, ready sound bites on matters which involve the lives, liberty, and futures of generations yet unborn are foolish indicators of arrogant, shallow men and women.
Acknowledgement of the need for study, contemplation and prayerful consideration on such matters may reflect a mind which has faced his own mortality and has come away with a sense of humility that has prepared him for leadership.
One could be wrong about that, but shouldn't we consider that as a possibility?
As many posters have pointed out already (maybe even at least once in this thread, which I haven’t yet read), a presidential CANDIDATE who is not a current Senator or Congressman has no access to classified material and is thus at a great disadvantage in talking about the DETAILS of foreign policy, which he can only develop after he becomes president.
So Cain is absolutely correct in what he is saying here.
I don't disagree, that's what he needs to do, and not worry about who the leader of Borneo is.
I watched that video and I don’t see a problem with anything Cain said in that video.
Actually, he's not. He's pointing out that the job of the executive is not to be the expert on every matter, but to have the ability to find the right experts, listen to them, and make decisions.
It sounds easy, but it's not. Most of the people I work with every day are incapable of making decisions, at least the big ones. They hedge and delay when put in that position, or seek validation from others. It's not that they're lazy or stupid -- it;s that they simply don't have the temperament, confidence, and experience to "make the call".
In many respects, focus on policy in a Presidential race is misplaced. It has some bearing -- at the very least it shows a candidate's priorities and approach to solving an issue -- but what is far more important (and 9/11 should have driven this point home) is the idea of "do I trust this person to make the 'big decision' when it needs to be made?"
Is that supposed to convince us that Herman Cain should be president?
The goal of a candidate campaigning for Republican presidential nomination should be to convince the American people (who are not already flatlined) that he will guide the nation to ride the waves well above the hull-crushing depths of Traitorobama's (or Slick Willie's) incompetence.
It should not simply be that he is not as much over his head as Barack.
If you don’t know anything about the subject, how do you know if the one’s giving you advice, are even close to being right? What happens if they give you advice, but it just doesn’t feel right? Follow them blindly?? May as well elect the one’s giving the advice.
I think there are two completely different ways to read this line:
“I’m not supposed to know anything about foreign policy. Just thought I’d throw that out,” he said, a dig at his critics.
Number one is
“The President isn’t supposed to know anything about foreign policy.” (Comments here suggest that this is the take on the line).
Number two is
“My critics CLAIM that I don’t know anything about foreign policy”....this interpretation of the line is indicated because it says that this was a DIG at his critics...as in SUPPOSEDLY I don’t know anything, or according to my critics I am an idiot.
Depending on how one understands the line, the meaning is certainly very different. I think that Cain often speaks sarcastically or jokingly and it gets misunderstood. This could even be how he got in trouble with the accusers as well. If you are being “jokey” and the other person is being “literal” it might not end up working.
Another blatant display of diarrhea of the mouth from Cain.
Now it Perry had said anything of the kind here, we would have at least a week of threads ranting and raving at how stupid and unworthy he is. Double standards are like that though.
If only we had someone with Gingrichs grasp of the issues, Perrys governing experience, and Cains combination of core principles and likeability.So come up to the lab and see what's on the slab. I see you shiver with anticipation.
Normally, candidates don’t worry about these things until the Primaries are in full swing....how long do we have before Iowa and New Hampshire???
I am amazed at how quickly people on FR will believe what Politico prints.
I watched the video from Java4Jay and he said nothing of the sort!
Politics is perception...
Another blatant example of false narrative building by the Romney McPerry-bots.
I have to admit, your #69 does have a point.
Didn’t come out right.
Should have been “I don’t need to be the expert on foreign policy. My Secretary of State and my National Security Advisor need to be experts on foreign policy.”
We have someone in the WH winging it now. Clearly, on the job training for President doesn't work.
Herman Cain has no access to secret breifings. He is not a Washington insider who sits in on government briefings & does not pretend to act like he has inside information.
He is being honest & truthful. I don't see anything damning about that!
Cain’s position during 2008 presidential election;
In 2008, Cain initially praised Democratic candidate Barack Obama, saying of Obama that “His gift is the gift of oratory. That’s not just the ability to speak, but the ability to connect with people.” He also said that he would consider supporting Obama “under the right circumstances” but only if he made a serious attempt to “reach across the aisle”. Eventually, Cain instead endorsed Mitt Romney in the Republican primary. [
Cain on Bank bailouts, and “too big to fail”;
Cain supported the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) bank bailouts as a way to revive the economy, viewing it as an investment opportunity for the taxpayers. In a 2008 editorial, Cain wrote, “Owning a part of the major banks in America is not a bad thing. We could make a profit while solving a problem.”
In May 2011, regarding his TARP support, Cain said, “I dont have any regrets . . . I studied the situation. I didnt have trouble with the idea; I had trouble with its implementation, picking winners and losers.”
In October 2011, Cain said he does not believe in the concept of “too big to fail” and has stated that he did not agree with the bailouts of “JP Morgan and the big banks on Wall Street”.
Cain on Affirmative action;
Cain supports ensuring that minorities receive the same opportunities as non-minorities. He does not agree with a “quota” style affirmative action system, which he believes gives an advantage to minorities simply because they are a minority
Right, “false narrative building” that happens to be on the record........(Nice try though, your rhetoric has not changed one bit.)
Geez. Isn’t that special? Bless his little ole’ heart.