yeah because electing Presidents who claim to have all the answers like both Bush’s and Clinton/Obama, instead of admitting they don’t have all the answers like Cain has worked SO well for us./s
Yes, Obama was had so much more expertise in foriegn policy when he was running for president.
Sheez. . . .
A lot of folks don’t like his 9,9,9 plan. Every other candidate has shown nothing but a 0,0,0 plan.
The man at least looks for real solutiions instead of just spewing more garbage.
How is getting us involved in 5 endless wars, the way the current Political class has done, proven their “smarts” on Foreign policy?
He is probably right in thinking that. This is going to be a straight up economy election like we have never had before. Foreign Policy will be pretty far down on the list this go round.
I’ll take proudly ignorant over ignorantly proud any day!!!!!
Yeah, like Carter, Clinton, and the Cretin-in-Chief are geniuses in this area.
Face it political types, your trade is just about entirely populated by folks who are not exactly the sharpest knives in the drawer.
Else, they’d be doing some useful for society.
And, of course, Cain has done many useful things already.
Jealous, perhaps?
The Republican establishment is outraged that Cain doesn't read the stuff that they read, and doesn't subscribe to their pet publishing project.
I’m not saying I’m willing to jump on the Cain bandwagon, but I like the idea of a candidate more interested in domestic policy than in foreign policy. He’s running as president of the U.S. and not president of Israel or president of Europe or president of the Middle East, and I’d like him to concentrate on our problems before the problems in other countries.
Herm will see how the UN works :-)
Asked what he thinks about the country’s relationship with the United Nations, Cain said: “I want to give the UN a chance to work. But it does not work in the way it ought to be working right now.”
Should United States withdraw from the organization? “No, because I want to take a look at the situation,” he said. “I want to take a look at how it is structured. I know how it is structured generally speaking, but no, I’m not ready to just throw the baby out with the bath water yet.”
Poor Little Commentary got their feelings hurt? What a shame.
Best definition of a “neo-conservative” I ever heard was: “a Liberal who just got mugged.”
They are generally former Democrats — predominately Jewish — who are mediocre, at best, on social issues, but oh-so-quick to interject US forces around the world in wars they deem appropriate. They love Romney.
Only thing is: They usually choose the places they want us to intervene (Iraq, Afghanistan), while ignoring others (e.g., Cote d’Ivoire, Congo, etc) that would be equally worthy of our intervention, if the goal is to save lives and prevent the metastatic spread (via arms) of Islam across the African continent.
Of course, Ron Paul would say: Let’s stay out of all these places. Sometimes I wonder if he is not correct.
Jug-ears Knows All and Does no Wrong
If the neocons hate him, then I am madly in love with Herman Cain.
If this is any indication of his lack of foreign policy experience, I can’t wait until he feels he has a better grasp on it. He is practically the only candidate even discussing these things:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/cain-rips-obamas-dumb-foreign-policy_595953.html?nopager=1
“I think that the way he handled the surge [in Afghanistan] was not the right way to do it,” Cain said during a phone interview with THE WEEKLY STANDARD. “First of all, it took him too long to give the order to do the surge in Afghanistan. When they finally did the surge, and the commanders on the ground were able to start making some progress with these additional resources, then he goes back about a year later and desurged the surge. First of all, I would have asked the commanders on the ground, ‘When do you think we need to do this?’ Because if he did, he didn’t listen because both Admiral Mullen and General Petraeus were surprised when he went public with his decision. That says that he didn’t listen to his commanders.”
“I would not have told the enemy what we were going to do,” Cain continued. “That is ill-conceived. That does not make good common sense.”
Cain said Obama is “doing the same thing in Iraq.”
“We’ve got 43,000 people still left over there,” he said. “The Iraqis are making good progress with the help of those 43,000. So what does he do? He goes off and says we’re going to by the end of the year pull out 40,000 troops. I’m sorry if this is not politically correct, but that is a dumb thing to do.”
“Iran has already told its terrorists over there stop fighting the American soldiers, just wait until the end of the year,” Cain continued. “This makes no sense to telegraph what it is that you’re doing. They are sitting back, waiting for the 40,000 troops to leave and then they’re going to overrun their country and try to take it back in a sectarian manner. You don’t need foreign policy experience to know that doesn’t make good common sense.”
To paraphrase Nasty, “We have to elect him to find out what’s in him.”
It’s criminal how these twerps can twist what someone says.
He didn’t fall for Gregory’s neo-conservative because he didn’t want to be labeled something that has different meanings to different people.
He said that he would not project a solution for Iraq or Afganistan because he doesn’t have all the facts from the generals on the ground, and his decision would be based on facts and their recommendations.
Tobin is a tool!
Herman Cain is the only candidate who doesn’t fake it. He courageously admits his shortcomings on foreign policy, but how many presidents go into office with full knowledge of foreign policy? Mr. Cain is right to refuse to state an opinion on a matter of which he has not been briefed. What do you know?! An honest GOP candidate!
Herman Cain can stand proudly on his record of success in the real world. No funny business with Herman Cain!