I find no cogent blueprint in his foreign policy statements (in fact his lack of depth makes me cringe).
I keep saying "stop and think" because I am so afraid that in our near frenzied hope to find a replacement for Obama we are falling for platitudes and terrific soundbites.
There's so much anger and raw emotion surrounding his candidacy that I will say it again--please, pull back and hear what he says about policy and process, not what you want to believe he means.
Thanks.
Again, I HAVE thought it through. NO ONE is an expert in every area a president has to deal with, period. But his success in the corporate world is proof he knows how to be a leader. And considering his constantly evolving success it’s obvious to me he is a very quick study. You aren’t more qualified than I am analyzing the current field. Our criteria is different. That doesn’t mean I haven’t “stepped back” and analyzed the current field.
Either the intent of the founders means something or it doesn’t. Did the founders add qualifiers? NO! And that’s for a reason, don’t you think? In my opinion, through generations of losing sight of original intent, we’ve lost sight of WHY the founders didn’t add other qualifiers. My first consideration is whether the constitutional requirement has been met. Look where the “right” education (elite Ivy League) and career path has gotten us. We’ve gone from very capable private citizens taking the helm to 0bama who was “on the right career path” but no resume that anyone can find and whose Constitutional requirements are unknown at this point.
However, even though Cain IS more qualified than 0bama (and there’s nothing wrong with stating that), I simply look for qualifications beyond a government or military career. Once the Constitutional requirements have been met the next thing I do is evaluate qualifications based on criteria I deem important. The most important of those is leadership ability. Cain has proved he has that. I also look for someone who can learn very quickly on the job. Considering how quickly he’s turned around failing companies, it’s obvious he quite capable in that area too.
So please don’t tell me (or anyone else here) they haven’t taken a step back and considered things thoughtfully and logically according to our criteria. You’ve come to different conclusions based on what you deem important in a president. I would never presume to tell you to “take a step back” because you have different considerations than I do. Now, tell me where I am wrong and you are right? Is your way the ONLY way of assessing the field? Does stepping back mean ONLY your conclusions are valid?
Cindie