“He made Wallace define it, by not attempting to answer and repeating the phrase with a ? after it twice. Wallace then defined it, then Herman answered it. I think it was clear to anyone of common sense that the catchwords were not in his mind, but the concept was. So what?”
Oh, for heaven sakes. Cain blew it bigtime. He had no clue what Matthews was asking him about. Even after Matthews gave him a big hint. Stop trying to cover for him. Cain doesn’t know foreign policy, and we already have one guy as Prez who doesn’t know it either. Why would we want another foreign policy illiterate, even if both Cain and Obama are smooth talkers. That’s not good enough, being a smooth talker. Cain’s off my list because he doesn’t have even a smidgen of foreign policy experience or knowledge, in an incredibly dangerous world.
Yep.
Sky is falling.
All you chicken littles say so.
BTW, don’t order me to do this or stop that. Who do you think you are to order any free American around like that?
I’m amused by your superior attitude, seeing as how the interviewer was Chris Wallace on Fox, not “Matthews” as you repeat and repeat ad nauseum
The difference is that one dude loves America and the other one hates it. One is destroying it while the other one wants to save it. I'm pretty sure Mr Cain could learn about foreign policy very quickly and won't need a teleprompter to talk about it. I'm also very sure that he will appoint intelligent people to his cabinet.
I don't blame him for not knowing what the question meant.
Yeah, you’re right....what we need is someone who is a foreign policy WONK, who lives and breathes this crap...someone like Jimmy Carter or John Kerry...oh, wait...
;-)
I think we need someone who has basic, accurate and conservative convictions about the world who will find out facts on the ground and apply his worldview to those circumstances.
Did you see the SC debate? Herman’s first question was about Afghanistan. He didn’t make a big policy statement—he said he frankly didn’t know EVERYTHING he needed to know about the situation. He would get good people around him, learn the facts, and decide then.
Cain didn’t become a success by stating particular tactics BEFORE he knew the facts.
just mho. :)
I couldn't have said it better myself.... However I did give it a try and was roundly flamed on this earlier thread....
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2723566/posts
My comments start at post 24 and you can see how fast I was sicced upon by some who don't know how to have a good debate. Like I'm some kind of liberal plant because I don't think Herman Cain made a good showing in the interview. Like I'm lame for knowing about the so called right of return that has been argued about for 40 years or so. The ME conflict is the most important in the world to most informed Christians and of course Jews, you would think that most Conservatives would know the Pali Israel issues inside and out but many here are defending an embarrassing lack of knowledge by pointing to their own ignorance of the subject. Sheesh!
Big difference is, we're not running for the leader of the free world and we've known about a right of return argument for decades. I think Cain made himself look really a lot worse by trying to pretend that he actually understood the issue when he obviously didn't.
Michele Bachmann Haley Barbour
John Bolton
Herman CainMitch Daniels
Newt Gingrich
Rudy GiulianiMike Huckabee
Jon Huntsman, Jr.
Gary Johnson
Thad McCotter
Roy Moore
Sarah Palin
Ron Paul
Tim Pawlenty
Rick Perry
Buddy Roemer
Willard Romney
Rick SantorumDonald Trump
I'm guessing you're a Bolton or Huntsman supporter then? No one else on the list has a smidgen of foreign policy experience.
So who then?
The only one whose name is floated that really knows foreign policy is Bolton.
A good VP for a guy like Cain.
Dubya didn’t have much foreign policy knowledge either - remember how he flubbed about the new leader of Pakistan?