Posted on 10/20/2011 6:40:19 PM PDT by wmfights
Its a nice try but this doesnt jibe with the exchange between him and Piers Morgan.
Yesterday in an interview with Piers Morgan on CNN, I was asked questions about abortion policy and the role of the President.
I understood the thrust of the question to ask whether that I, as president, would simply order people to not seek an abortion.
My answer was focused on the role of the President. The President has no constitutional authority to order any such action by anyone. That was the point I was trying to convey.
As to my political policy view on abortion, I am 100% pro-life. End of story.
I will appoint judges who understand the original intent of the Constitution. Judges who are committed to the rule of law know that the Constitution contains no right to take the life of unborn children.
I will oppose government funding of abortion. I will veto any legislation that contains funds for Planned Parenthood. I will do everything that a President can do, consistent with his constitutional role, to advance the culture of life.
No one on either side is arguing that the president has a constitutional power to issue executive orders barring women from having abortions. Ive never heard even a diehard pro-lifer suggest that, so in essence, he wants you to believe here that he was responding with a point that no one disputes to a question that no one ever asks. Which means either hes lying about what he understood Morgans question to mean or hes so unacquainted with the most basic terms of the abortion debate that he genuinely felt obliged to reassure Americans that he wont be sending the FBI to pregnant womens homes to make sure they carry to term. Bad, bad news either way.
Beyond that, though, its simply not true that his response to Morgan was couched in terms of the limits of presidential power. Go back and watch the clip again. Morgan asks him what hed want his daughter or granddaughter to do and Cain quickly arrives at this answer:
No, it comes down to is, its not the governments role or anybody elses role to make that decision. Secondly, if you look at the statistical incidents, youre not talking about that big a number. So what Im saying is, it ultimately gets down to a choice that that family or that mother has to make. Not me as president. Not some politician. Not a bureaucrat. It gets down to that family. And whatever they decide, they decide. I shouldnt try to tell them what decision to make for such a sensitive decision.
Hes talking about the entire government, not just the presidency, and of course its a core argument for pro-lifers that Congress should act to make this decision on behalf of women if/when Roe v. Wade is overturned. A moment later he told Morgan that his opinion as president shouldnt necessarily operate as a directive on the nation, but then he was back to broad language about government again: The government shouldnt be trying to tell people everything to do, especially when it comes to a social decision that they need to make. No pro-choicer could say it any better. How did we get from that to I am 100% pro-life, end of story in the span of 24 hours?
Question, then: Does this hurt him at all, and if it does, has the damage been done to his social conservative credibility or to his overall credibility, i.e. the basic belief that presidential candidates are fully engaged on complex but essential issues? For now, the rest of the field is attacking him on the former point. Santorum questioned his pro-life cred earlier this morning and then Perry, who desperately needs Cain to fade in social-con bastions like Iowa and South Carolina, issued this statement:
The campaign of Texas Gov. Rick Perry has responded to Cains comments, with Perry communications director Ray Sullivan saying, A number of the Republicans candidates have flip flopped or been tripped up on the abortion issue. Governor Perry has been proudly pro-life for his entire career, successfully working to pass a parental consent law, a pre-abortion sonogram law, and defund Planned Parenthood in the state budget.
Thats awfully timid. Lets see what happens at the next debate. Until then, read HuffPos report on the reaction of Iowa social conservatives to what Cain told Morgan. Exit quotation from talk-radio host Steve Deace: Cain is good at regurgitating talking points, but when he is forced to explain what he believes the devil is usually found in the details. Based on the testimony of his own words, Cain is neither ready, willing, nor able to honor the oath of office required of a President of the United States.
I hope you understand that part because your discussion of who said what about which suggests you have not quite got down how it happens that you were conceived, developed, were born then grew up.
The process is quite elemental with mammals!
Understand now, thanks.
normy, quote the flippin’ words. As many as it takes to make your case. Give us all a link so we can quote more if you’re excerptin’ a little too much.
Cain’s last line is not pro-life...it’s pro-choice...
I'm all about analytics so let's take a look-
Keyword search "Rick Perry"
On the first page (as of when I searched) out of the results, there are:
38 Overtly positive Perry articles
16 are overtly negative Perry articles
The rest are either neutral such as polling numbers, or not directly about him.
This has to be the lamest attempt yet by Perrywinkles in their futile attempt to revive Perry's poll numbers into double digits.
I continue to LOL reading Perrywinkle propaganda while their fatally flawed candidate can't utter a complete thought coherently.
Cain’s last line wasn’t responding to ‘abortion’ it was responding to raising the child (versus giving it up for adoption). He had already said in no uncertain terms abortion should not be legal under any circumstance.
Look at the specific quote Cain was responding to.
YES! Pro-choice as to whether to RAISE the child, not as to whether to ABORT the child. Read the whole exchange, please.
This is why the whole Democrat party recently made a big switch to pushing for federal funding for killing babies. That'd died down for over a decade, but there they were back again with their ObamaKKKare.
That we have to do semantical gymnastics to figure out where he really stands on this issue should trouble everyone, What we need to hear is something like this:
Cain: “I will appoint pro-life justices to the Supreme Court. We’ve lost our moral compass with regard to human life, and I will use the power of my presidency to set us on the right course.”
That’s all he needs to say. Plain and simple.
But you can nullify executive orders that were issued to do things like provide abortions on military bases and things.
Agree. Perry's trajectory is a downward campaign death spiral.
While not yet fatal, when considered in the context cited above and warned about in that vanity, these gaffes increasingly betray a weakness in the candidacy of Herman Cain which could be fatal if he carries it into the general election campaign as the nominee.
Cain answered it and to say “no one” thinks the President has such authority says to me you haven’t looked at the present President and the things the lamestream media says IS within his power! They absolutely think the President has the power to control this as long as it is a lib occupying the White House.
Ravenstar
We don't have to, just ignore the static and look at what he actually said and his entire history of statements and actions. There is no gymnastics needed. He has always been an outspoken and praised pro-life champion. This was never questioned at all until he took the lead and threatened other candidates.. The only gymnastics going on is twisting that lifetime record to make him look pro-abortion.
Examples:
African American Businessman Spends 1M to Urge Blacks to Vote Pro-Life (Herman Cain 2006)
Herman Cain: Defund Racist Planned Parenthood Abortion Biz
Herman Cain...statement after the Senate voted to ban Partial-Birth Abortion:
Herman Cain blasts Roe v. Wade (from 2004)
The only other person I've ever seen make such strong statements about abortion is Alan Keyes- but Cain doesn't play the Keyes antics games..
Cain has been more consistently, money-where-his-mouth-is, principled, pro-life than any other candidate. (Santorum isn't a candidate - it's a way of life.)
From some of the comments on this thread, an observer might surmise that social conservatives are a) illiterate - or at least incapable of parsing a simple verbal response; b) rabidly partisan followers of other candidates - to the extent that they're willing to perjure themselves; or c) racists.
I honestly can't think of any other explanations.
Just damn.
close enough?
Herman Cain Statement:
Yesterday in an interview with Piers Morgan on CNN, I was asked questions about abortion policy and the role of the President.
I understood the thrust of the question to ask whether that I, as president, would simply order people to not seek an abortion.
My answer was focused on the role of the President. The President has no constitutional authority to order any such action by anyone. That was the point I was trying to convey.
As to my political policy view on abortion, I am 100% pro-life. End of story.
I will appoint judges who understand the original intent of the Constitution. Judges who are committed to the rule of law know that the Constitution contains no right to take the life of unborn children.
I will oppose government funding of abortion. I will veto any legislation that contains funds for Planned Parenthood. I will do everything that a President can do, consistent with his constitutional role, to advance the culture of life.”
Snip....
My choice would be Rick Perry. From my view, he clearly won the debate Tuesday and is coming out with a solid plan to rescue the economy (e.g., a flat tax and drill-baby-drill). Romney lost it as did Cain. Gingrich continues to do well. But neither he or Cain, or Bachmann, or Paul, or Santorum have the necessary combo of money and organization to carry on for a long haul. Once again, the race will be between Perry and Romney.
“This was never questioned at all until he took the lead and threatened other candidates..”
No it was questioned after the interview last night on Piers. I never heard it mentioned at all before.
I have no doubt that he is as pro life as any candidate out there but he'll say something stupid and then go have to dig himself out of it.
He's done that several times.
Perry is not the most articulate guy out there but you are never confused as to where he stands.
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.