Posted on 10/06/2011 10:35:23 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
HOUSTON -- Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain said Thursday that he would definitely consider an invitation to run as the eventual nominee’s vice president, except if the nominee turns out to be Texas Gov. Rick Perry.
Cain, who rocketed to the top tier of the GOP field in several recent polls, was asked by reporters on the campaign trail for his thoughts on a hypothetical invitation to run as the eventual nominee’s No. 2. After offering the obligatory comment that he intends to be the nominee, Cain said, “Quite frankly, based upon Gov. Perry’s position on some issues, I would not be comfortable being his vice presidential nominee.”
Those issues include Perry’s moderate stances on immigration. As governor, Perry supported legislation offering in-state college tuition for the children of illegal immigrants, which has become a flash point in his campaign. Cain said, “Issues relative to being soft on the border, issues relative to the whole, you know, tuition for children of illegal aliens. And I haven’t totally gone through all of his positions, but a lot of positions I have questions with.”
Cain, who is black, was critical of Perry after the Washington Post reported Sunday that his family owned a Texas hunting camp once known as “Niggerhead,” a word that was also painted on a rock near the camp’s entrance. Perry has maintained that his father painted over the word as soon as he bought the property in the 1980s. And Cain subsequently said he believed Perry’s explanation.
Of a vice presidential slot in general, Cain said, “I would not say no to being vice president of the United States. But it would depend upon who got the nomination. I will support who gets the nomination. I know I have said that there are some people right now who I cannot support, but I wouldn’t say no to it. I could say yes. But it has to be someone who I believe I can complement them in their job by being able to bring my skills to the table.”
Where did I express any outrage? I said that Herman Cain is troubled by me — that’s an interpretation of his own words about how he is troubled by people like Perry and me who don’t see the overpainted rock as a real issue.
A poster asks some questions in Post #180. I take some time to make a long, thoughtful informed reply and then I get their reply in Post #121 (this poster always posts to #1 so no one can follow the tread to see what they’re responding to or how they’re harassing a poster).
They just want to make negative posts to make it appear you are not cooperating or that you are attacking someone when you are not — anything but have a meaningful discussion about this election and the candidates. Where do they learn these tactics?
Sorry but that sort of mindless bot response by you indicates that what I contended in my 1st post is correct.
You are merely posting pre programed Campaign bot attacks lines and have never been the least interested in honestly discussing the candidates merits.
My reply to that poster was in Post #202.
What’s Cain’s plan for the illegals that he seals in the USA with his super-duper fence?
Deport them all? Have them live here illegally? I ask because I don’t see where he has been asked that question. Punting deportation issues to the border states isn’t an answer, either, because it’s US citizenship I’m concerned about, not state residency status. Also, by allowing states to decide on illegals, isn’t Cain giving de facto support to the Texas DREAM act for tuition?
14:35 your questions in post #180.
15:10 my reply in post # 202.
I spent a half an hour working on my reply — not under one minute.
You really are something. Your habit of posting always to #1 your way to hide and deceive and confuse.
So is “Cult of Personality” the new catchphrase against Perry supporters?
MNJohnnie is a Johnny-One-Note...
The response of this poster is continually:
“I did a great job in Texas so make me President” is not an agenda...
OR
It is all “I’m a great guy, look at the great things I have done”.
OR
Sorry a Cult of Personality candidate is no more attractive when you slap a Conservative label on him.
OR
“I’m a great guy, look at the great things I have done”. Sorry a Cult of Personality candidate is no more attractive when you slap a Conservative label on him.”
Over and over and over.
My answer to him was that I’d rather see someone with a history to point to than someone that relies solely on campaign promises.
Thanks. I’ll know better next time.
Charles, you're in very good company on this issue.
To: pogo101
Yes, “don’t have a heart” was very politically tone-deaf.
Of course, some of that depends on which side of an issue you are on. If you were someome who supported Texas giving in-state tuition for their own children of illegals, then Romney saying you weren’t conservative was also a “personal attack”.
I do so detest the politics of faux outrage over being called something. Given that it is a daily feature here to call other freepers names when they disagree with you, it’s hard to see how anybody has such thin skin that they’d be “hurt” by it.
The statement you make about Mr Cain below is not even remotely factual. If you bother to read what Mr Cain said, you would know this. So either you did not bother to get the facts OR you are knowingly lying.
On the other hand, a Black man calling you a racist — that has real repercussions. Apparently, because I didn’t see the big deal about some stupid rock painted over with the word N*ggerhead showing faintly through, I’m “insensitive to blacks”, and I trouble Herman Cain, who I actually like as a good conservative, except when he is insulting me with charges of latent racism.
But I’ve noticed that poeple didn’t take that personally. I know I don’t, but I didn’t take “heartless” personally either. Like I said, faux outrage doesn’t interest me.
37 posted on Thursday, October 06, 2011 1:57:03 PM by CharlesWayneCT [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
So if you don't like being pointed out as a hypocrite, quit being one.
If Perry had said something so unintelligible he would have been roasted over the coals.
Herman Cain: "“[There is not] a more vile negative word than the N-word and for him to leave it there as long as he did, before I hear that they finally painted it over is just plain insensitive to a lot of black people in this country.”
There is no other interpretation for what Cain said. Forget that he had his facts wrong -- he is saying that any person who wouldn't think to immediately remove the rock is insensitive to black people.
And I can tell you for a fact that in 1981, I doubt I would have painted over a rock on land my father was leasing, just because it had the name "N*ggerHead" on it. I wouldn't have used the word (as I was finally an adult and didn't use childish namecalling) but I wouldn't have thought too much about whether a then-common name, found in the woods somewhere, would be so offensive that I had to destroy the rock.
Would I do something today? Sure -- but 2011 is NOT 1981. It was a different time, a less politically correct time.
What did Cain mean? What does it mean to be "insensitive to blacks", as opposed to "insensitive". Note he didn't say it was "insensitive", which would apply to all races, he specifically said it was 'insensitive' to "black people".
If I am being told that I am singling out black people for my insensitivity, to me I am being called a latent racist. I am being told that my insensitivity is targeted at a race, which is what racism is.
But I don't care that Cain might think I'm "insensitive" to blacks; the problem is his, and I just think it is too bad that he is troubled by my insensitivity.
But really, he has apologized, although now he's insisting that Perry is the only unacceptable candidate, so that's another problematic issue for him in my book.
On a more POSITIVE note though, I see he is tempering his attacks on the muslim faith:
Herman Cain's meeting last week with Imam Magid at the All-Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS) Center was a positive development in the national conversation about Islam. Cain's positive personal interaction with the Muslim leaders seems to have tempered his enthusiasm for unfounded conspiracy theories about Muslim Americans.As I told people who attacked Perry for having a good working relationship with a moderate muslim Iman, you won't find a serious presidential candidate who agrees. Cain was the only one that looked like he might, but now we see he doesn't.
That is how our left-wing adversaries are using his statements.
Still, he apologized, and admitted he didn't know what he was talking about, so I guess I should drop it.
Actually, I tipped over with “dirtboy”’s post to you in #110.
I’d been thinking of developing some answer to “build the fence” for the last few days and when I saw that post, I went to work.
The first post I developed was pulled for too much content. So he may not have seen it.
So now that I’m thinking about it, I’m gonna ping him to the two posts re the border topography.
You’re doing a helluva job, CW. Thanks and keep it up. I’ll do what I can to help.
DIRTBOY...pinging you to post #191 and #197 in this thread re “building the fence”. I see that you’re from Pennsylvania and you’ve probably got lots of time down here on the border.
This is just to bring back memories of the times you’ve spent down here.
I thought I made it pretty clear to you yesterday. I guess we have to teach it to you again since you seem incapable of remembering anything day to day.
Your blind loyalty to Perry based on nothing but the state he is from and the school he went to is childish.
It is utterly impossible to take your posting seriously when you have nothing to offer but your emotional based feelings.
Glad you have feelings. That you like Perry does not magically qualify Perry to be President.
Sure you can, you just have to live in Texas for 3 years.
Rick Perry/Scott Walker is your ticket.
Your statements about Cain were completely fraudulent and you know it. Glad you have strong feelings for Perry. That does not justify lying about the other candidates.
I would vote for the more evidency type of evidence vs. wild extrapolation. The man doesn’t like Perry that does seem fairly plain but why is another matter.
1) He’s secretly working for Romney despite no actual evidence to that fact (sure it’s possible but Cain also does not strike me as a 2nd fiddle type)
2) He just doesn’t like Perry (sometimes people do not click)
3) He realizes that he’s not competing with Mitt who has 25% and probably always will have 25% support but with Perry, Bachmann, Gingrich, and other conservatives for the bigger slice of the pie (this is my favorite as it jives with my understanding of Cain as a man who understands numbers and markets)
And there could be other reasons. I like Cain and Perry has and remains my backup choice. I will say that reading threads in the past few weeks has led me to the conclusion that Perry is the distant 2nd but closing in the race for most annoying and paranoid supporters with Ron Paul looking over his shoulder.
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.