Posted on 11/16/2011 8:34:37 AM PST by Sub-Driver
Herman Cain: 'I'm not supposed to know anything about foreign policy'
By: Maggie Haberman November 16, 2011 10:06 AM EST
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, whose editorial board interview with Herman Cain produced one of the most memorable videos of 2012, spent a day on his campaign bus with some nice highlights.
Among them:
He defended his view that presidents and presidential candidates don't need to be immersed in the fine print of world affairs - they simply need to be leaders who can surround themselves with the right people and sift through their advice.
"I'm not supposed to know anything about foreign policy. Just thought I'd throw that out," he said, a dig at his critics.
"I want to talk to commanders on the ground. Because you run for president (people say) you need to have the answer. No, you don't! No, you don't! That's not good decision-making," said Cain.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
I’ll take Cain, warts and all.
At least I know what I’m getting.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Isn’t it evident to everyone that the left is trying to destroy Cain?? Why would they do that?? Because they are scared to death of him. Bet you they never try to tear down Romney or Newt because both are a part of the establishment.
If you look upthread you’ll see the video posted and my response to the video, in which I said I see nothing wrong with anything Cain said in that video (regarding Libya).
I just think it’s amusing that SOME people (not saying you) who spent 24/7 trashing Perry on every Perry thread that popped up on FR (even on one that was merely one of some family photos of Perry) are then so hyper-sensitive to criticism of THEIR candidate.
Look, I like Cain. I really do. He is my second choice (close second) behind Newt.
But I see his weaknesses, just as I see Newt’s.
And I’m sorry, after the way the Perry-bashers behaved for a couple of months here on FR, I’m not going to cry any tears over critics of Cain showing up on Cain threads.
I’m just not going to do it.
FR is a place where there are a lot of heated discussions.
If you can’t take it (not saying you, just using the general “you”), especially after you’ve been dishing it out for a couple of months, then you really should go home to mommy (not saying you, just using the general “you”)... if you know what I mean.
Cain comes from the phony-baloney corporate set that thinks everything is a widget, and all he has to do is hire some talent, sit back and grace the company with his decision-making prowess, and all will be well.
Conservatives should not be seeking ANYONE to be potus who doesn't have the political experience and elective success needed to mount a serious campaign for potus. If you want to run for potus you have to have a clear understanding of the challenge. Cain never figured to get this far and the further he advances, the more apparent it becomes. Cain is in over his head.
Ignore TBBT. He/she/it is not FOR any candidate; He/she;it is only vitriolically AGAINST Cain.
And that’s all.
>> “I will have good people, I will give them the credit for successes, and I will take responsibility for any failures.” >>
That would be a helluva talking point.
I think it's legitimate criticism and, again, I like Cain.
I would believe that as a senior member of the House Intelligence Committee, Miche;e Bachmann has access to all sorts of classified info re Libya. And she is still a candidate.
Ridiculous. Reagan knew his stuff. He had a grand vision, but he demonstrated an appropriate level of detailed knowledge that Herman Cain will never attain:
From “To Restore America”, Ronald Reagan, March 31, 1976:
But there is one problem which must be solved or everything else is meaningless. I am speaking of the problem of our national security. Our nation is in danger, and the danger grows greater with each passing day. Like an echo from the past, the voice of Winston Churchill’s grandson was heard recently in Britain’s House of Commons warning that the spread of totalitarianism threatens the world once again and the democracies are wandering without aim.”
“Wandering without aim” describes the United States’ foreign policy. Angola is a case in point. We gave just enough support to one side to encourage it to fight and die, but too little to give them a chance of winning. And while we’re disliked by the winner, distrusted by the loser, and viewed by the world as weak and unsure. If detente were the two-way street it’s supposed to be, we could have told the Soviet Union to stop its trouble-making and leave Angola to the Angolans. But it didn’t work out that way.
Now, we are told Washington is dropping the word “detente, “ but keeping the policy. But whatever it’s called, the policy is what’s at fault. What is our policy? Mr. Ford’s new Ambassador to the United Nations attacks our longtime ally, Israel. In Asia, our new relationship with mainland China can have practical benefits for both sides. But that doesn’t mean it should include yielding to demands by them, as the administration has, to reduce our military presence on Taiwan where we have a longtime friend and ally, the Republic of China.
And, it’s also revealed now that we seek to establish friendly relations with Hanoi. To make it more palatable, we’re told that this might help us learn the fate of the men still listed as Missing in Action. Well, there’s no doubt our government has an obligation to end the agony of parents, wives and children who’ve lived so long with uncertainty. But, this should have been one of our first demands of Hanoi’s patron saint, the Soviet Union, if detente had any meaning at all. To present it now as a reason for friendship with those who have already violated their promise to provide such information is hypocrisy.
In the last few days, Mr. Ford and Dr. Kissinger have taken us from hinting at invasion of Cuba, to laughing it off as a ridiculous idea. Except, that it was their ridiculous idea. No one else suggested it. Once again what is their policy? During this last year, they carried on a campaign to befriend Castro. They persuaded the Organization of American States to lift its trade embargo, lifted some of the U.S. trade restrictions. They engaged in cultural exchanges. And then, on the eve of the Florida primary election, Mr. Ford went to Florida, called Castro an outlaw and said he’d never recognize him. But he hasn’t asked our Latin American neighbors to reimpose a single sanction, nor has he taken any action himself. Meanwhile, Castro continues to export revolution to Puerto Rico, to Angola, and who knows where else?
As I talk to you tonight, negotiations with another dictator go forward, negotiations aimed at giving up our ownership of the Panama Canal Zone. Apparently, everyone knows about this except the rightful owners of the Canal Zone, you, the people of the United States. General Omar Torrijos, the dictator of Panama, seized power eight years ago by ousting the duly-elected government. There have been no elections since. No civil liberties. The press is censored. Torrijos is a friend and ally of Castro and, like him, is pro-Communist. He threatens sabotage and guerrilla attacks on our installations if we don’t yield to his demands. His foreign minister openly claims that we have already agreed in principle to giving up the Canal Zone.
Well, the Canal Zone is not a colonial possession. It is not a long-term lease. It is sovereign United States Territory every bit the same as Alaska and all the states that were carved from the Louisiana Purchase. We should end those negotiations and tell the General: We bought it, we paid for it, we built it, and we intend to keep it.
Mr. Ford says detente will be replaced by “peace through strength.” Well now, that slogan has a a nice ring to it, but neither Mr. Ford nor his new Secretary of Defense will say that our strength is superior to all others. In one of the dark hours of the Great Depression, Franklin Delano Roosevelt said, “It is time to speak the truth frankly and boldly.” Well, I believe former Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger was trying to speak the truth frankly and boldly to his fellow citizens. And that’s why he is no longer Secretary of Defense.
The Soviet Army outnumbers ours more than two-to-one and in reserves four-to-one. They out-spend us on weapons by 50 percent. Their Navy outnumbers ours in surface ships and submarines two-to-one. We’re outgunned in artillery three-to-one and their tanks outnumber ours four-to-one. Their strategic nuclear missiles are larger, more powerful and more numerous than ours. The evidence mounts that we are Number Two in a world where it’s dangerous, if not fatal, to be second best. Is this why Mr. Ford refused to invite Alexander Solzhenitsyn to the White House? Or, why Mr. Ford traveled halfway ‘round the world to sign the Helsinki Pact, putting our stamp of approval on Russia’s enslavement of the captive nations? We gave away the freedom of millions of people freedom that was not ours to give.
Now we must ask if someone is giving away our own freedom. Dr. Kissinger is quoted as saying that he thinks of the United States as Athens and the Soviet Union as Sparta. “The day of the U.S. is past and today is the day of the Soviet Union.” And he added, “My job as Secretary of State is to negotiate the most acceptable second-best position available.” Well, I believe in the peace of which Mr. Ford spoke as much as any man. But peace does not come from weakness or from retreat. It comes from the restoration of American military superiority.
Ask the people of Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Hungary all the others: East Germany, Bulgaria, Romania ask them what it’s like to live in a world where the Soviet Union is number one. I don’t want to live in that kind of world; and I don’t think you do either. Now we learn that another high official of the State Department, Helmut Sonnenfeldt, whom Dr. Kissinger refers to as his “Kissinger,” has expressed the belief that, in effect, the captive nations should give up any claim of national sovereignty and simply become a part of the Soviet Union. He says, “their desire to break out of the Soviet straightjacket” threatens us with World War III. In other words, slaves should accept their fate.
The Cain supporters are going to need to get together and decide what their response is.
Some are saying this is a great quote, and exactly right. They are the really deluded ones.
Some are saying it’s not a great quote, but they will give him a pass, because after all he’s not as bad as Obama.
And some are saying Politico probably messed up the quote. I sure hope this is the case.
Has anybody said he was just joking yet? That’s usually a good excuse for Cain.
But it will be not be funny for all those who defended the quote, if it turns out it’s not accurate. Not that they will care, they will have no trouble taking the opposite view tomorrow if that’s what their Candidate tells them to do.
He toast.. over... there is no way I would vote for him now. too bad, because I really thought he might have made a great candidate in the general.
we absolutely have to have someone who may have flaws, but can win...
down to Newt and Romney, IMO.
We have a platitude president now. Hope and change can mean anything you want it to mean, just elect me and find out later.
I want specifics
Great you-tube on Herman. The man knows what to do. I think he is our best shot at undoing the harm to our country that Obama has created
This man is not fit for the office.
Period.
How about context on this ‘quote’. Herman may have been saying that since he has not been mired in government for deacdes, he is not expected to be that current on foreign policy, but in his own words he is getting updated by expert analysts and will be caught up.
I was not one of those who trashed Perry, but I have spent countless hours posting proof against the lies his supporters posted about Cain.
POlitico is quoting from an interview Cain had on his campaign bus, NOT the interview you reference. Or they are SAYING they are quoting from the campaign bus; I don’t want to suggest the quotes are accurate.
“Cain never figured to get this far and the further he advances, the more apparent it becomes. Cain is in over his head.”
Is that the VETTING you are talking about? A straw man argument?
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.