[Vanity] I want to like Herman Cain, really.

Vanity ^ | 5-20-11 | Libertarianinexile

[LibertarianInExile]

I have seen a couple of posts on here regarding Herman Cain, and heard him on Neal Boortz' show lots of times. Boortz really seems to love the guy. And I am inclined to like anyone who is pro-Fair-Tax more than someone who is for continuing the current income tax mess, which costs America far more productivity than any sales tax that replaced it ever could.

But I haven't heard Cain talk about some controversial areas where I may well have concerns about his views on the Constitution. And where I have heard him talk on the issues, he's sometimes said troubling things.

First, while he's talked about race, he has not once stated outright that he would end affirmative action policies where he could. He's danced like a Romney on this where I have seen him speak or write about it, like he did here: http://www.boortz.com/Player/100950001/ http://chronicle.augusta.com/stories/2004/04/28/op_413767.shtml

A candidate's position on affirmative action must be unequivocable, "I'm against it." No "we need to be fair" or "considering race might be okay" or any of that crap. It's unconstitutional, racist, sexist and wrong. Why hasn't Cain said this?

Second, I don't know why Cain's dancing on foreign policy. If he doesn't have a plan for Afghanistan, fine. Who really is sure what to do about Afghanistan? But what would his overarching sense of the United States' military role be? That we must patrol the Red Sea and Persian Gulf, militarily stop Iran from getting the bomb, intervene preemptively--or not? That we should be stationing troops in Yugoslavia and Korea and Diego Garcia--or not? During the debate he wanted to "set up a committee" or study stuff, but that is not how to run your military or state department. I didn't agree with W on everything, but after the China spy plane mess, W got it together and had a plan when it came to foreign intervention: "Have a strong military and use it, or make it clear you can and will." Clear policy from the White House, unlike the constant finger in the wind of President Pollbama's administration, is crucial for our businesses and citizens because it makes clear to us and our opponents as to what we will do to protect our countrymen and interests abroad. Pick a course now, because it makes a difference to some of us, Herman.

Third, Cain was pro-TARP back in the day. What made TARP Constitutional? Why was he against auditing the Fed and then for it? Amd where does he come up with this stuff about TARP being a net payoff for taxpayers? See here:

http://004eeb5.netsolhost.com/hc133.htm

He comes across as a real bankster. I don't like that.

Fourth, what's Cain really think we should do about illegal immigration? I get the impression he wants to leave deporting these illegals to the states, and this is one area where the federal government SHOULD be involved. Building a border fence and deporting illegals are two things states shouldn't have to do.

Fifth, is he a federalist and constitutionalist, or really just a unitary goverment social conservative? Where does he stand on Gonzales v. Reich? What about the Commerce Clause and where it stops?

Sixth, how does any conservative support income redistributionism? He's come right out and said he's for the food stamp program. How does that jive with being a conservative?

Finally, and this is what perplexes me the most, no one has asked him why he supported a labor lawyer Democrat over a Republican for mayor of Omaha way back when he lived in Nebraska. Now, I don't know the whole story. Maybe Hal Daub (the GOP candidate) was a real RINO back then. But I doubt it from his record, and I don't know anyone conservative who would vote for a Democrat even over the worst Republican. Even the folks like me who couldn't stomach a vote for McCain didn't do something as stupid as voting for Obama.

[merryberry]

Without a doubt. And the best part about it he will do it in PLAIN speak and right to the point. I’ve not seen him fudge yet and if he can be on his toes like he was in the debate he could be unstoppable..

[This Just In]

You’re asking relevant questions, LibertarianInExile. I’m interesting in what Cain has to say. He has my attention. I would like to hear his platform concerning the Constitution, abortion, embryonic stem sell research, states rights, US sovereignty, Israel, religious rights, free trade, flat tax, marriage, SCOTUS, labor unions, public education, our military, border security, foreign policy, just to name a few.

[maine-iac7]

I think Cain will be valuable in the campaign trail. He's a showman and a salesman and says a lot of things most couldn't get away with - not would dare try. He will drive the libs and media apoplectic - they can’t effectively use the race card.

That said, he does not have the experience we need to bring this country back from the brink. He has no foreign affairs experience or contacts, for one,and that is going to be crucial with the ME aflame and Israel in the cross hairs.

And there's little chance he'd win against obamama

However, this man below has the knowledge, on all fronts, and the backbone. No one intimidates him. He knows who our enemies are, foreign and domestic, he knows the Constitution, the Bible - and is much admired by the Israelis. (They feel about him over there as many of here about Netanyahu.)

I'm praying that, by fall, this man will be convinced to run.
Latest of Lt. Col West's statements - he says it up straight and backs down to no one.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGIZtD4ufFo

“I am sick and tired of this class warfare, this Marxist, demagogic rhetoric that is coming from the President of the United States of America....Third world dictator arrogance...” Lt Col Allen WEst, Congressman

on Israel and Islam

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mY8tVkaDqYw&feature=related

at CPAC “NOW is the TIME

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mf33LIEt-g

on illegal immigration

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkGQmCZjJ0k

He doesn't speak “PC”

“Don’t blow sunshine up my butt and tell me it’s warm and fuzzy...put down the mike and go home!” (PC be damned!)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MZx38i6iYs

Revolution

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP2p91dvm6M

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7RKIpufStQ

Just look at all the different clips of him - and picture obumbles trying to debate him. Col. WEst would shred him - on every subject. We’d probably see a narcissistic meltdown.

[merryberry]

Notfor nothing but I just went to your profile and ,my virus blocker went nuts

[LibertarianInExile]

“Right on. Too many conservatives will vote against an otherwise solid conservative candidate because they disagree on one issue. It’s arrogant and not too smart.”

Just curious: how many issues must a conservative disagree with a candidate on before voting against that candidate becomes not arrogant and smart?

I won’t vote for anyone who hasn’t enunciated opinions on the issues of the day, especially re: Gonzales and Kelo. During my lifetime, candidates seem to get a free pass on addressing what they think about the role of the federal government. When they don’t have to answer, they inevitably do come out for big government when the issue arises. To some of us, it’s not good enough any more to have elections about flag burning and “change” and who looks surprised at a %$#@%@ supermarket scanner.

[LibertarianInExile]

“That said, he does not have the experience we need to bring this country back from the brink. He has no foreign affairs experience or contacts, for one,and that is going to be crucial with the ME aflame and Israel in the cross hairs.”

I don’t know that you need foreign affairs experience to lead this country. You do need a vision of where America fits in the world. I don’t think you get that by committee. I haven’t said I can’t vote for the guy—I just want him to address the questions and issues, as I would ask of any candidate. What bugs the crap out of me is that these are issues and yet there are plenty of folks here that assume it’s maligning the guy to ask him to address them before the primaries get rolling. It’s fair to ask a candidate where he stands and why.

[maine-iac7]

you want “a candidate who is a constitutionalist conservative?”

Here ya go

Revolution

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP2p91dvm6M

While you’re in YouTube - take a peak at any and all his other clips

We need BACKBONE AND EXPERIENCE.

Cain’s a good showman but we need more. We’re heading over a cliff

[Minus_The_Bear]

I wanted to like Herman Cain until I heard he supported TARP & the bailouts.

If he is such a financial genius why did he support that theft?

All I have heard to answer that question so far from his "supporters" are attacks that I am a "Ron Paul supporter".

Anybody who lies about this is probably lying about everything else.

[LibertarianInExile]

“from Wikipedia...He is a former deputy chairman (1992–94) and chairman (1995–96) of the civilian board of directors to the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City...That explains his reluctance to audit the Fed. If he were to come out and renounce his ties to them, I’d be ok with him.”

Yeah, he’s got Fed ties in a big way. That doesn’t sour me on him as much as his willingness to let them skate from public audits does. What’s up with that attitude? It’s not like they are some standalone wholly private entity—they set our nation’s monetary policy, for pete’s sake!

[LibertarianInExile]

“Notfor nothing but I just went to your profile and ,my virus blocker went nuts”

Probably because it had to work hard looking at all the content on there. I just checked my profile with McAfee’s site advisor—it didn’t find anything bad. And if there were something virus-y about my profile, the problem would be with FR.

[Aria]

You eat your car?

[noinfringers2]

I am a Cain supporter along with a few others. Your questions do need an answer/response from Cain and as well from all other would be POTUSA candidates.

[Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears]

Yeah, I’m serious. It’s amazing that you bring up “affirmative action” as a priority at all. Look around you. The country is dying, and that’s a priority with you. Astounding.

[LibertarianInExile]

People are so used to flat out attacks on their candidates and into the attack-back-quick mindset that quite a few instantly post back insults, on seeing any post that is at all questioning of their candidate. It’s not hard to get into that mode after you’ve been slammed a few times. But I’m sorry that you’ve dealt with it.

I thought pretty hard about TARP myself, but ultimately came down against it for the same reason I was against “Cash for Clunkers” and the new housing grants. It’s other people’s money. Cain evidently didn’t have that view from the getgo. That made me want to ask questions about his bedrock principles.

[Rebelbase]

“Because there are people who actually need food stamps at one time or another.”

I’d like to see a breakdown of the numbers of people who only use food stamps as a temporary fix and move on to being able to provide for themselves vs. those who are lifetime abusers.

[LibertarianInExile]

“You eat your car?”

Oh, I’m sorry I confused you. /sarc

But to address your ‘funny’ comment, I need a car to GET to food. So it’s as important as food. So why are car stamps not provided to me on your dime?

Or did you want to see if you could sidestep the question again, and avoid the issue, which is that it’s still redistribution? It is still taking people’s money away at the point of a gun, in order to give that money to other people the government thinks are more deserving.

[Fee]

Ditto. With real unemployment at 17 percent food stamps have prevented Americans from hitting the streets and rioting. Call it a necessary stability program. So far crime has not hit the ceiling despite the high unemployment. I think food stamps played a role in it. But if the gov runs out of money, blood will be running in the streets.

[LibertarianInExile]

A question about affirmative action, a question that actually does much to highlight the candidate’s missing views regarding the plain language of the Constitution, is somehow lacking in gravitas to you. The issues we face as a country that is “dying” arise because of our government’s failure to adhere to clear constitutional limitations, be that in providing equal opportunity under law to all citizens, or in taxing Americans preferentially to grow leviathan. If you can’t see that the broader issue of interpretation of the plain language of the Constitution is a priority, I guess we have no reason to trade posts, and you should just go back to the talking points for Cain.

Maybe you should tell me he’s an entrepreneur and a great speaker a few more times until I get with the program. Or you could stick with the “your priorities are out of whack” posts. That’s certainly been an effective way to distract from your candidate’s inability to clearly address the issue of affirmative action in a way that states his adherence to the plain language of the Constitution. /sarc

[LibertarianInExile]

“I’d like to see a breakdown of the numbers of people who only use food stamps as a temporary fix and move on to being able to provide for themselves vs. those who are lifetime abusers.”

I’d like to see a breakdown of the numbers of dollars spent on the food stamp program and the number of dollars actually reaching people who need food. But I’d also like to see where in the Constitution it says the federal government can forcibly take money away from Peter to feed Paul.

[DrinkDeep]

I think West would be an awesome Secy of Defense - it takes a lot of people to run an Administration (not as many as the present one, but...), and I’m interested in hearing about some of the cabinet picks these candidates would like to nominate. Cart before the horse, perhaps...but I’d like to hear about their Dream Team