Posted on 10/11/2011 12:12:41 PM PDT by Cato in PA
In a radio interview just now, Herman Cain previewed his Tuesday night debate plan: “I’m going after Romney.”
"I’m not going after Perry. I don’t need to go after Perry," Cain said, per POLITICO's Juana Summers.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Thank you
NO...it is the former Palin supporters now Cain supporters that have posted some of the most childish comments. Most Perry supporters at least act their age...adults...now telling me to get lost is the way a teenager talks and acts.
She already called Cain “flavor of the week,” didn’t she?
I wish some of these newbies to politics would stop shooting from the lip, learn the issues and learn how to truly debate... hoping for some good foreign policy questions tonight...
That comment would definitely put Cain in a bad light - saying if Mitt changed his views! IOW, if Mitt is a flip flop, I’d be his VP!
When he started attacking Perry over him being soft on the border...which is a lie...I lost respect for him. Then when he had that interview and without a thought slammed one of our very important allies in the eastern block...I thought this man has as much business being president as Donald Duck. He is rather stupid, IMO.
And yet somehow able to put words and sentences together far more coherently than your diatribe.
Talk is cheap. Let’s look at his record. Oppss he has no record so he isn’t much different than obama. Just give him a chance, oh he’ll work out yet we have no record oh just trust him.
Cain added that Uzbekistan was “insignificant” to U.S. national security interests:
Knowing who is the head of some of these small insignificant states around the world — I don’t think that is something that is critical to focusing on national security and getting this economy going. When I get ready to go visit that country, I’ll know who it is. But until then, I want to focus on the big issues that we need to solve.
With U.S.-Pakistan tensions on the rise, the Obama administration is in discussions with Uzbekistan about increasing military supply routes to the U.S.-led Afghanistan war through the former-Soviet republic, whose authoritarian president — Islam Karimov — has some human rights issues.
Cain’s mocking and ignorance of Uzbekistan come at the tail end of a tough week for the former pizza chain CEO on foreign policy, even as his star slid up a notch in the Republican nomination contest.
Lately, Cain’s been assailed by conservatives and liberals alike. On Wednesday, neoconservative Washington Post blogger Jennifer Rubin decried Cain’s “lack of rudimentary knowledge about foreign policy.” And an earlier Cain gaffe about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict led off a Saturday front page New York Times article about the GOP race’s inattention to global affairs (despite the nomination frontrunner Mitt Romney’s largely substance-free fear-mongering and general hawkishness).
Aside form his being a political neophyte, Cain's 999 tax plan and his Chilean plan to reform SocSec are nothing but political ploys and gimmicks to draw in naive voters. I'm not a conspiracy type, but Romney has shown a willingness to hoodwink conservatives into following him. Cain seems to be taking a cue straight out of Willard's playbook.
Okay, no problem. Degree in mathematics, minor in chemistry, ballistics expert for the Navy, track record of saving businesses in financial straits, successful author and radio personality.
Oppss he has no record
Research is your friend.
so he isn’t much different than obama.
Oh, geez. I'm so embarrassed. I must have posted to the wrong place. I didn't realize this was the Most Brainless Statement of the Day thread.
I posted a link earlier that has the whole interview.
are you nuts?
compared to Perry and Obomney Cain is a genius at business
They are political wonks
I was talking about Cain being a political neophyte in the true spirit of Ross Perot.
Nuts? NO! To grasp that concept makes me politically savvy.
I have a feeling that tonight will make or break Perry. If he continues to look lost and bumble his way through questions, stick a fork in him, he’s done. Deep pockets won’t make up for loose lips.
He definitely isn’t my first choice - Rick Santorum holds that distinction for his comments on abortion in the event of rape - but I could hold my nose and vote for him if he won the nomination. Unfortunately, I don’t think he’ll make it that far. “Heartless” has become a sticking point for him that he hasn’t been able to shake off like Mitt has with Romneycare.
“Mitt: Herman Cain and I both have a record of great and successful business experience. But I also have a record of experience in elective office”
Only because Mitt McCain has lost every ran he ever ran but one. Ted Kennedy made mince meat out of him a few years ago. There’s a youtube video floating around the internet of Romney and Kennedy debating. Romney was trying his hardest to convince the libs in Mass that he was more liberal than Ted. He proudly boasted, “I am proud to stand with pro-choice women, and will continue to do so”. Later on he tells all he’s done for the gay community in Mass and says he will never abandone them. The guy is nauseating. The two parties have effectively merged if
Willard Headroom is elected president.
“Talk is cheap. Let’s look at his record”
Cain support Tarp.
Cain supported the bailouts.
Cain was head of the Kansas City Fed and said the Fed does not need auditing.
Cain supported the RINO Romney in 2008.
Cain is NOT A CONSERVATIVE.
I totally agree with you. He is more conservative than Mittens but not by much. So is he a con man?
Besides, Once people make up their minds the $$ will flow, This election is too important!
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.