“The guy had total brain-lock—far worse than Perry on a far more important topic.” from the lips of Sudetenland
-thumb-560xauto-23565.gif)
Posted on 11/14/2011 2:59:28 PM PST by Bigtigermike
You won’t believe me until you click play but this is much worse than Perry’s brain lock at the debate last week. Perry lost his train of thought; Cain doesn’t have a train at all here, to the point where he needs confirmation from the interviewer of what Obama’s position on Libya actually was.
Eventually he produces some boilerplate about not supporting the opposition until you’re sure who’s in it and of course not making a decision as president until he has all the information, which is a standard Cain fallback talking point whenever he gets in trouble on a question, but the first two minutes or so are pure agony. The board actually took pity on him, I think, by not following up.
And that still only barely qualifies as the worst answer he gave today. Here’s what he told them when asked, predictably enough, about Scott Walker’s righteous crusade against public employee unions:
"On the issue of collective bargaining, Cain said he supported the right of public employees to bargain collectively." But not collective hijacking. What I mean by that, if they have gotten so much for so many years and it’s going to bankrupt the state, I don’t think that’s good. It appears that in some instances, they really don’t care.”…
Cain also appeared to be unclear on the issue of collective bargaining as it involves federal employees. Asked if he thought federal employees should have the ability to bargain collectively, Cain said: “They already have it, don’t they?”
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
“The guy had total brain-lock—far worse than Perry on a far more important topic.” from the lips of Sudetenland
After all, what worked so well for the LSM, democrats and GOP elitists in destroying Pain, why should they change their tactics against another.
“Unlike all the other state, county and municipal workers in the country who have collective bargaining rights, federal workers have their pay and benefits set by Congress,” Brofenbrenner said. “But federal workers can bargain over terms and conditions of employment besides pay and benefits
Bargainig over terms and conditions of employment besides pay and benefits is in essence like having no rights at all. The reason why 10’s of thousands of people marched on the Capital in Madison, Wi WHERE I listened to Herman Cain speak while they SURROUNDED our TeaParty rally and taunted us, was BECAUSE Gov. Walker took away the unions right to bargain on pay and benefits. For Herman Cain to come and speak to the rally and not inform himself on the issue at hand is inexcusable.
I supported Cain at first, thinking he was the best conservative option, but his inability articulate himself effectively in his most recent interviews, especially the one here in Wisconsin yesterday has caused me to reconsider.
His answer yesterday on Libya after a 30 second pause was mind numbingly nonsensical. There is really no defending some of Herman’s recent ‘lapses’
“By law, the President of the United States appoints the members of the FSC, which include three experts in labor relations and pay policy and six representatives of Federal labor unions and other employee organizations representing large numbers of GS employees.” (Per Wikipedia: http://wiki.ask.com/Federal_salary_council?qsrc=3044)
So, the Federal employee unions are involved as part of the collective bargaining process that is used to establish pay rates for Federal General Schedule (GS) employees.
(Hope that helps clarify what is, admittedly, a somewhat arcane area of Federal employment.)
For my own curiosity, if you don't mind, who are you supporting now?
FReegards, Geoff
Well then something is wrong with him- he seemed to have blanked out- maybe he was tired?
They will be viciously attacked, but I don’t think the tactic is as effective as many believe it is. There are too many Conservatives who start to believe their lies, and feel that the Conservative candidate has been destroyed, and is unelectable when it’s not the case. I think Herman Cain is showing some resilience despite the constant attacks that would have destroyed him immediately before Conservative talk radio, and the Internet.
As soon as Cain surged in the polls they tried to ignore him, while hoping he would just go away. Then they started talking about him being the flavor of the week who would fall in the polls without any doubt, and they based that on nothing whatsoever. They have said that about him everyday since the beginning of his surge, and are still saying it, but what they want to believe(and make us believe), doesn’t make it a reality.
They have never acted like Cain was any kind of threat, and said he would just drop in the polls, without ever giving a substantial reason for why they believed that. It’s a tactic used to slowly influence the way we think. They are trying to demoralize Conservatives, and hurt Cain’s support, but I’m not falling for it.
I’m supporting Herman Cain because I think he’s the best Conservative, and his tough stance on illegal immigration makes him stand out among most of the other candidates. After just reading an article about illegal immigrants openly protesting in Alabama where illegals admitted they were here illegally, and taunted us, and said they will not obey our laws or the will of U.S. citizens. Everyone of those people should have been arrested. Instead they are free to tell everyone they are illegals, and disrespect our country while knowing they will not face any consequences.
With Herman Cain being the first candidate polling good, who’s history and statements show he’s very serious about stopping the problem of illegal immigration makes me see him as a possible once in a lifetime candidate. I mean when was the last President, or even real Presidential candidate to take a serious stance on illegal immigration? I know that’s pathetic, but it’s the truth.
I like that Cain’s a Conservative outsider who’s on the right side of all the most important issues we face that must be taken on seriously because they are nation killers. I would think more people would support Cain based on his immigration stance. I’m supporting him until the end because I want something new. We need something new, and I’m not going to support the same old career politicians. I’ll take a risk with the unknown, before accepting the same old politicians we have had for decades now, which have only shown our nation declining at different speeds.
I’m just fed up with the indifference by most politicians, in total contrast to your average U.S. citizen, of the damage illegal immigration is having on our country. It’s an issue just as serious for the survival of our nation as our economy. You need to be right on a few issues, or it kind of makes your other stances irrelevant. You can’t take one of the problems serious while ignoring the others when they are things everyone knows will lead to the destruction of our nation if they stay the same as now. We need to stop the massive influx of illegal immigrants just as bad as we need get our economy back on track, start creating jobs, and cutting out of control spending, but they aren’t talked about in the same importance and danger as they are in reality. I don’t think anyone could legitimately argue that our nation will not be destroyed, broken up and weakened, and unrecognizable as what we were if illegal immigration is allowed to to continue as it is now.
How can we not even talk about this issue seriously, when it’s pretty much known to most what the consequences of our inaction will be if nothing changes. The facts have been assessed of what’s happening now, and then looked at to see the probable effects if the problem stays the same as now in the coming years. When you get excited about the tough stance a Presidential front runner takes on the issue like Herman Cain has, it shows just how bad the situation is. We don’t even get tough talk from any Presidential candidates in real contention, and literally haven’t in decades. I don’t know who the last person with the power to do something about the problem took a serious action to solve it was.
I am going to support Herman Cain because I know from his past, long before running for President, that he takes illegal immigration serious unlike any President I remember, and I hope he’s willing to back up his beliefs with real action that’s significant, and aimed to actually secure the border once and for all. I know his stance on this issue, it’s just a matter of seeing if he’s willing to do what’s necessary to solve the problem once in office. I believe he will, and I believe that his stance on this issue is where a lot of his support is coming from, not to mention he’s on the right side of the other most important issues we face.
http://www.hermancain.com/issues
http://www.hermancain.com/issue/immigration
Click this link to make a contribution to the Cain campaign - https://supporthermancain.com/
“...that he takes illegal immigration serious unlike any President I remember,...”
I remember President Eisenhower when he carried out operation “Wetback” and it worked.
Herman Cain has a history of having a tough stance on illegal immigration. He doesn't only support a border fence, and that's not the only thing he's said regarding illegal immigration. He supports the Arizona and Alabama immigration laws, and said he would give them a medal instead of suing them. He's also said he would consider using the military on the border, and actually allow them to be armed and able to defend themselves against drug cartels if needed. He supports a wall on the border, and he's against the DREAM act. He supports enforcing the laws we have on the books. Sheriff Joe Arpaio said he believed Cain was serious about doing something something at the border to stop illegal immigration. Herman Cain has a Conservative TEA party ideology when it comes to illegal immigration in every way. He was also endorsed by Tom Tancredo who is known for his extremely tough stance against illegal immigration.
There is absolutely nothing that makes Perry even comparable on the issue of illegal immigration. Perry is probably the absolute worst Republican candidate you have when it comes to illegal immigration, while Herman Cain is the best. Herman Cain is actually against illegal immigration unlike Perry, which gives people a little more confidence in who would make a better President who could solve our nations problems. Herman Cain is the only candidate we have had to take illegal immigration serious, who is also in contention for the nomination, in my lifetime and we shouldn't let this opportunity to nominate him as our Conservative Republican outsider candidate pass by, and get him in the White House because we might not see a candidate taking it serious again. Herman Cain is the Conservative Republican to support if you see illegal immigration as the extremely serious problem that it is.
Well, it’s obvious from your comments that you have actually never investigated the dubious claims you make about Perry. Many people post misinformation and others read it and believe it to be the truth without verifying.
It tickles me that you believe Cain to be so informed on running a state with a population of 25,145,561 million people and a foreign border of over 1200 miles of river, desert and canyons. But - he’s a good talker.
He’s in D.C. and you’re in Colorado and y’all know all the facts.
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.