Posted on 09/25/2011 6:34:42 AM PDT by no dems
Exactly!
Look, my first pick (although she hasn’t announced yet) is Palin. That being said, I would have NO problem voting for Cain. I could give a rats arse if he doesn’t understand every last forein relations problem around the world. As you say, as an executive who has had to delegate, he’d hire a terrific staff to help him manage these issues.
This elitiest, conventional wisdom mentality is part of the reason we’re in the mess we are today. As an aside, maybe this will begin to merit him more questions in the debates. I’m beyond sick of almost all of the moderators questions going to Mittens and Perry. Good grief, Perry is a snoozer!
True, but don’t forget he was Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Kansas City Fed. The Fed isn’t a govt entity, but I think it’s safe to say in these times that it’s a quasi-govt due to the heavy intertwining of fiscal/monetary policy in the U.S.
I think that’s given him a far better understanding of govt than most people realize, because the Fed has to take into account current govt fiscal policy and it’s effect on the economy in making their decisions.
It has gotten us the fiasco of the Obama Presidency when that "conventional wisdom" was ignored.
The American voters were reckless enough to ignore that "conventional wisdom" once but the American voters, especially in these very troubling times and after the Obama's first term, are not about to be that reckless two Presidential elections in a row. At least Obama will now be able to claim four years of experience instead of ZERO experience.
If Cain is on the ticket, he would have to be in the VP slot so that, at least, it could be claimed that, if elected, he would getting OJT as the second string quaterback in the first elected office he has ever won in his life.
The commentary I heard was that Cain’s win was more of a “none of the above” vote. I like Herman, but America has had enough of Presidents without the right experience. Though Cain has “executive” experience, he has no practical experience in politics (he has never won an election, nor had to draft, support or vote on legislation), and that alone makes him a non-starter.
It’s going to take a lot more to convince the punt-on-second-down crowd.
Make no mistake, Herman Cain’s leadership at The National Restaurant Association (the largest industry assn in the US employing millions) is the business equivalent of Congress. You do not get to “call the shots” in that setting and you work to ensure your “constituents” are satisfied.
Read this and tell me Herman Cain can’t handle foreign policy! I haven’t heard anyone running have this kind of insight:
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/09/20/herman-cain-if-mess-with-israel-youre-messing-with-usa/
Col. Michael Steele (USA-Ret) Endorses Herman Cain for President last week.
From his website:
Herman Cain’s stance on National Security (Foreign Policy)
The primary duty of the President of the United States is to protect our people. In fact, it is the principal duty of a limited federal government. They must ensure that our military and all of our security agencies are strong and capable.
Unfortunately, national security has become far too politicized with our elected officials using the issue as a means to polarize our country as the “war hawks” and the “peace doves.” In response, the safety and morale of our brave men and women in uniform are often at risk for political gain. The judgment of our military experts on the ground is often underutilized in exchange for political purposes. National security isn’t about politics. It’s about defending America.
While diplomacy is a critical tool in solving the complex security issues we face, it must never compromise military might. Because we are such a free and prosperous people, we are the envy of the world. Many regimes seek to destroy us because they are threatened by our ideals, and they resent our prosperity. We must acknowledge the real and present danger that terrorist nations and organizations pose to our country’s future.
Further, we must stand by our friends and we must not be fooled by our enemies. We should never be deceived by terrorists. They only have one objective, namely, to kill all of us. We must always remain vigilant in dealing with adversaries.
We must support our military with the best training, equipment, technology and infrastructure necessary to keep them in a position to win. We must also provide our men and women in uniform, our veterans and their families with the benefits they deserve for their tremendous sacrifice. These heroes have served us. We must never forget to serve them.
Eisenhower had no combat experience during World War I and had no combat experience during World War II.
As the Supreme Allied Commander of a multi-national military alliance, Eisenhower did not do "Combat". Eisenhower did "Politics".
His entire military carreer was "Politics".
>>> Though Cain has “executive” experience, he has no practical experience in politics (he has never won an election, nor had to draft, support or vote on legislation), and that alone makes him a non-starter. >>>
I respectfully think you have it backwards. Political experience - every minute of it - takes you one minute further away from the reality of the entirety of the rest of America. We need as many politicians with zero political experience as we can get.
Having politicians with political experience is like having referee’s play the actual football game. Or something like that....
THEN, you lay out an idea for a 15% flat tax....
Well, just imagine the fun the Dems would have with that!
And Cain’s experience with the National Restaurant Association was also a training ground for small p politics - not to mention working inside the corporate culture of several major corporations like Coca Cola and Pillsbury Corp.
>>> It has gotten us the fiasco of the Obama Presidency when that “conventional wisdom” was ignored. >>>
Now c’mon — it’s not Obama’s lack of political experience that is the problem, it’s his wealth of socialist views that is the problem. His lack of experience has zip, zero, nada to do with the problems we face.
In fact, his legislative successes are what is killing us. If he had more experience and had been “more successful” then America would be even worse off than we are now.
False analogy.
Touche’
Nice try, but it's also kept establishment types like Boehner, McConnell, and Cantor in positions of power allowing Obama to pass laws without a fight! Seems you forgot the bill that the Boehner led House sent to the president (with the assistance of Mitch McConnell in the Senate) that effectively lowered our credit rating from AAA to AA+, giving the president over 1 trillion dollars, with NO reduction in spending. Its this conventional wisdom that the GOP establishment adheres to that says; "compromise at any cost..." that has us in the sorry arse state we are today as a nation and a party. Sorry, if you were correct in your assertions, the Tea Party would've never been born.
Lets also not forget, Obama is a socialist and had a known past of hanging out with domestic terrorists and radicals. Cain is a hard working American who has contributed in great ways to this country.
Sorry, but you make one lame, weak-a$$ argument.
The voters understand the basic concept that the Presidency is not an entry-level job.
>>> The voters understand the basic concept that the Presidency is not an entry-level job. >>>
Real Americans understand that Cain’s many experiences make him anything but “entry level” -
>>> Like Herman Cain/John Bolton? I could go for a ticket like that! >>>
And you know who dreads that ticket the most?
Joe Biden ( can you imagine that gaffe machine debating Bolton on foreign policy?)
What public office has he held? Until you can point to one, he’s nothing more than another loud-mouthed Alan Keyes or Pat Buchanan (or even Steve Forbes). Sorry. President is not the place to get your first public office. Damn me all to heck if you must, I don’t care. One completely inexperienced tool in that office is enough for me.
What fascinates me is the number of people who jump ship each time something happens one way or another in the hopes of being known as supporting the winner.
What if Cain says something unpopular? Will there be a sudden rush to whoever is saying what the people want to hear?
And that is really what is going on, the candidate that tells the GOPers what they want to hear, not necessarily what needs to be said, will lead the way.
Bachman had some great ideas but jumped the shark and revealed severe character flaws by spreading gossip and rumors.
Romney is afraid to be controversial, seeking populist sound bytes.
Perry come across clumsy but proves wrong those who claim he lacks sincerity and only says things for momentary popularity. His persistence in unpopular ideas has cost him but seems to me that he has the ability to stand by convictions even when easier not to.
I love Newt’s intellect and understanding of history. I still have trouble visualizing his as President.
Well said.
How important are 960 votes anyway?
There is really only one poll that counts.
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.