Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Herman Cain: Gun Control A “States Issue.” Huh? [June 2011]
Outside The Beltway ^ | 6-8-2011 | Doug Mataconis

Posted on 11/11/2011 9:49:00 PM PST by TitansAFC

When I saw Herman Cain’s interview with Wolf Blitzer yesterday afternoon, this immediately jumped out at me:

.........

(Excerpt) Read more at outsidethebeltway.com ...


TOPICS: Politics
KEYWORDS: cain; newt; perry; secondamendment
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 241-249 next last
To: Renata Maree

He didn’t differentiate, so it was an unsophisticated answer. If he had cited SCOTUS and either agreed or disagreed with the decision, that would have shown some familiarity with the subject, but he swung right into his libertarian kneejerk without the background knowledge or skill to give a sound answer.


181 posted on 11/12/2011 3:34:07 AM PST by firebrand (It's almost too late.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: PieterCasparzen
IMHO, if Herman tells CNN that he’s anti 2nd Amendment, I’d be willing to bet he’s really not.

LOL. And this is supposed to be a defense of Cain? What pray tell are we supposed to go by? What we wish Cain were? If we can even figure out where he stands we are lucky.

182 posted on 11/12/2011 3:44:08 AM PST by firebrand (It's almost too late.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Java4Jay

Concealed carry ‘enabled’ by legislation (regardless of the process or requirements) is but another restriction on the Second Amendment.
One of the most uncomfortable elements of the Second Amendment, for left leaning quasi-conservatives, is the logical extension of its fundamental tenet that precludes even their ‘common sense’ restrictions.
To apply registration requirements of any sort simply does not pass logical muster, given the language of the Amendment. Likewise, the notion of limiting ‘types’ of firearms is on the same logical quicksand.


183 posted on 11/12/2011 3:56:40 AM PST by PubliusMM (RKBA; a matter of fact, not opinion. 01-20-2013: Change we can look forward to.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

“What forethinking candidate for POTUS jokes about sexual harassment?”

Which candidate joked about sexual harassment. Cain joked about Anita Hill voting for him, so it wasn’t Cain. Maybe Perry?

“It’ll be certain death in the general election. Dems will paint him as the most anti-woman candidate to walk the earth and enough will buy their message to even sweep Pelosi back into the Speaker’s chair.”

That’s why Perry needs to be careful.

“It might sell with some Republicans but it’ll be poison if he’s the nominee.”

Same as above, Perry better watch it.

“Having handed them a nuclear weapon to use against Republicans in the fall of 2012, nominating Cain would be a gift to the Democrats.”

Now you go off-topic. What does Cain have to do with a mistake that Perry made?


184 posted on 11/12/2011 4:01:02 AM PST by BobL (Send Rove a Message, VOTE CAIN, no matter what)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

“That is helpful for people who are apparently incapable of reading the “date” field. You know there is a date field, where you are supposed to put the date of the article. It’s where most of us look to find what date the article was posted.”

We don’t like people that ABUSE their privileges on this site. Eventually they will, and do, get zotted. We’ve already disposed of half a dozen Perrybots, some dating back over a decade.


185 posted on 11/12/2011 4:02:53 AM PST by BobL (Send Rove a Message, VOTE CAIN, no matter what)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

“Not only off-topic, but do you actually think the person who posted this article is a Perry supporter? Or is that just the recommended response from the Cain Supporter Handbook?”

Obviously./


186 posted on 11/12/2011 4:03:28 AM PST by BobL (Send Rove a Message, VOTE CAIN, no matter what)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

“And it’s funny how just a few days ago the Cain people were CHEERING about how there were “TWO ADULTS” in the room, and talking about how great Gingrich was to have a great debate with Cain. But that was before some polls suggested Gingrich might actually be in the race, so I guess now you’ve got to destroy him to. Too bad Cain didn’t know that last week when he had him one-on-one in a debate.”

Newt has more than enough history to destroy himself. If Newt wants to side with Anita Hill, after siding with Pelosi on global warming, that is his right, and we do have the responsibility to point that out.

And yes, Newt did treat Cain MUCH BETTER than Bachman or Sanatorium, who both piled on Cain right from the start. But Newt shifted gears and took a VERY CHEAP shot at Cain, by both comparing Cain’s joke about Hill to children being RAPED at Penn State, and by taking Hill’s side. That is EXACTLY the concern most conservatives have about Newt - you NEVER know when he’ll flake-out. I expressed my concerns about Newt and held back going after him for the Pelosi crap....but Newt simply cannot help it and he cannot handle the exposure. He’s too damn arrogant.


187 posted on 11/12/2011 4:11:20 AM PST by BobL (Send Rove a Message, VOTE CAIN, no matter what)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: TitansAFC
Who should determine where you may not carry a weapon (Grade School, bar)? What should the rules be for convicted felons and their rights to own or carry? What should be the age requirements to buy and carry? Should crimes committed using a gun be treated more harshly than the same crime committed without a gun? These and many more questions are Gun Control Issues and all should be determined by each STATE and NOT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
188 posted on 11/12/2011 4:30:01 AM PST by Kartographer (".. we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TitansAFC

The entire Republican field really is looking like “The Gang That Couldn’t Shoot Straight”. God help us.


189 posted on 11/12/2011 4:50:42 AM PST by Lockbar (March toward the sound of the guns.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TitansAFC
Herman isn't going to support any federal legislation and most of the states are on the right track.

Herman is walking a tightrope, give him some room.

Remember, Bush 43 said he would sign an AWB if it crossed his desk, I don't believe Herman would.

190 posted on 11/12/2011 4:54:16 AM PST by SWAMPSNIPER (The Second Amendment, a Matter of Fact, Not a Matter of Opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

191 posted on 11/12/2011 5:05:06 AM PST by Timber Rattler (Don't Tread on Me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT; All

Name one serious candidate who has a better position on the 2nd Amendment than Cain


192 posted on 11/12/2011 5:06:02 AM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Spktyr
It says "Congress shall not......" as well. The 2nd in the federal constitution applies to the states only through construction provided by the 14th amendment.

All but 2 states have their own constitutional standards regarding self-protection.

A strict constructionist/original intent sort of guy would instantly argue that firearms are subject only to state control ~ and then argue that out within the context of the state constitutions.

To apply the Bill of Rights except for the 9th and 10th amendments directly to the states you have to turn into a mind-numbed, robot-like, knee-jerk Leftwingtard who cr*ps on the Founders intentions.

I think you may have been missing the point of this debate ~

193 posted on 11/12/2011 5:12:24 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PubliusMM
It's actually about the right of self-defense. That is precisely what the ideomatic expression "right to keep and bear arms" meant for centuries ~ maybe millenia.

Firearms are a current technique. Used to be swords, knives, chained dogs, cobras on the grounds, trebochet, mangle, ...... a large wall (and so many people think those 12 to 16 ft chain link fences are unsightly and should be banned from residential areas yet they are your first line of defense against armed briggands).

This "right" is not just about firearms.

194 posted on 11/12/2011 5:18:06 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: Darkwolf377
The Conservative vote can be split in two and the Mittbots lose.

There's plenty of room for Gingrich AND Cain on the ticket.

195 posted on 11/12/2011 5:21:00 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
Cain sounding more like a conservative of convenience, again.

Here we go again. Trashed Perry into oblivion and now working on Cain. I guess Newt is next and Romney is the shoo-in....

196 posted on 11/12/2011 5:21:50 AM PST by trebb ("If a man will not work, he should not eat" From 2 Thes 3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

Why would I need a more recent one, seems digging up months old stuff works for his detractors...

But you have already been schooled by others anyways...


197 posted on 11/12/2011 5:23:45 AM PST by ejonesie22 (8/30/10, the day Truth won.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

Well I hope you learned in 2008 and have dumped Mitt.


198 posted on 11/12/2011 5:27:21 AM PST by ejonesie22 (8/30/10, the day Truth won.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

The problem is that ONE of them has to defeat Romney. If the Cain and Gingrich fans are both voting for their guy in a primary, Romney has the RINO vote all to himself.


199 posted on 11/12/2011 5:27:55 AM PST by Darkwolf377 (Obama: The stupid person`s idea of a smart person.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
You make my point. More “qualified” people on paper have proven abysmal in actual office. Same with Clinton etc.

So calling Cain “unqualified” is not really a solid argument, especially given his resume.

Perhaps “unqualified” is not a bad thing

200 posted on 11/12/2011 5:32:41 AM PST by ejonesie22 (8/30/10, the day Truth won.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 241-249 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson