Herman Cain went from the high to the low with me in just two days. His answer on abortion on Meet the Press was great.
But then he gives this horrendous interview with Wolf Blitzer, saying he would exchange prisoners with al Qaeda.
The Weekly Standard reports:
BLITZER: Could you imagine if you were president … and there were one American soldier who had been held for years and the demand was al Qaeda or some other terrorist group, “You got to free everyone at Guantanamo Bay” — several hundred prisoners at Guantanamo. Could you see yourself as president authorizing that kind of transfer?
CAIN: I could see myself authorizing that kind of transfer, but what I would do is I would make sure that I got all of the information. I got all of the input, considered all of the options. And then, the president has to be the president and make a judgment call. I can make that call if I had to.
What? Seriously. What? So the day Cain becomes President guess what the first thing that’s going to happen in the Middle East.
This was a horrific answer. And it feeds into everyone’s fear of Herman Cain. He just doesn’t have the experience. He doesn’t seem to have thought these issues through and that’s kind of a big deal when you’re running for President.
Believe me, if it’s Cain or Obama I’m going with Cain but this answer worries the heck out of me. I could absolutely see Obama running this as an ad so he can run to the right on Cain on this issue.
Something tells me that Perry’s campaign is pumping their fists in joy right now.
October 19, 2011 at 2:41 am
He kind of walked it back during the debate, but he did it poorly. This is reflective of Cain's larger problem: speaking before thoroughly thinking through the issue.
October 19, 2011 at 2:43 am
He just clarified, however, and said that he would have a standard policy of not negotiating with terrorists, and then he would look at it on a case-by-case basis.
I think that's a good policy. To totally rule out EVER negotiating with anyone is a dangerous policy to have, because it locks you in. I know that if my spouse, or maybe my mother, were kidnapped, I would want at least the possibility that the government would try to free my family member.
October 19, 2011 at 3:39 am
I dont know why so many politicians today dont understand the difference between managing a message and being "wishy washy." I think so many candidates are concerned with being "political" that they would rather be gun slingers and shoot first and ask questions later.
There is nothing wrong with taking a question and answering it in a way that doesnt get you in trouble later. Sidestepping an unfair or troublesome question isnt a sign of weakness, it is a sign of intelligence and strength.
October 19, 2011 at 2:09 pm
I like Mr. Cain, but am beginning to like Gingrich more.
KM
October 19, 2011 at 3:30 pm
This was a mistake.
On the other hand, Cain is the only person up there with the humility to say that he would get sound advice from many expert sources, evaluate them carefully, then make a decision. This is how a leader SHOULD make decisions.
This question was devoid of that process. Sure it's great if you have a Gingrich type who can process a million little elements to all kinds of esoteric policy options. But then again, he decides immediately and winds up saying things like, If a boat loaded with drugs is coming into this country, I would sink it.
Then you have other know-it-alls like Paul, who is completely sure of every answer and also completely wrong.
Cain was a Mathematician. I have listened to him carefully to try to understand his "hidden taxes in a loaf of bread" argument and after reflecting on the numbers I was surprised to see that he is right! If you have a sales tax of 6% in your state, even though your sales tax increases from 6% to 15% in total, you still pay LESS! You pay less of the "hidden tax" which makes up a HUGE portion of the price of an item. This is because of the gigantic corporate tax CUT. So, the COST of what you are paying for every item would drop like a rock. Combine this with a huge income tax reduction, and you end up with much mor emoney to spend anyway. Interesting when you really crunch the numbers. I initially thought it was regressive and so on. I was wrong. It's a very sound plan.
BTW – was Santorum a complete a– last night or what?! What the heck has happened to that guy? Ugh. "No No – YOU'RE out of time! You're out of time!" I half expected him to say, "Nyah-nyah, nyah-nyah nyah!" Such a bummer he can't be pro-life and also a NICE person on stage.
October 19, 2011 at 3:41 pm
Wait. Are you that wishy washy that Cain mentions something and all-of-the-sudden you're "not" for Cain or leaning towards it? Well maybe he doesn't need your support. Talk about jumping the gun. Here's a rule. Wait a few days for an explanation by Cain or whomever before freaking out about a certain candidate. Cain said he misspoke, because unlike other politicians, he's humble, a quality btw that defeated the Devil twice (with St. Michael and Jesus).
October 19, 2011 at 3:43 pm
As for Gingrich; he's brilliant but has a lot of baggage. Cain/Gingrich for 2012!
October 19, 2011 at 4:45 pm
I wish that we could create a composite candidate with certain attributes taken from each. Herman Cain's life story, and his cheerful, confident manner… Newt Gringrich's intellect and debating skills… Rick Santorum's faith, values and principles. Obama wouldn't have a chance.
But trying to choose in the real world, it is becoming a really tough call. I wish to goodness that Tim Pawlenty hadn't dropped out. He is looking pretty good right now.
October 19, 2011 at 5:48 pm
Missed the debate so not sure about the lead in to the question , but it brings to my mind the Israeli's recent exchange of over 1000 palestinian prisoners for 1 Israeli soldier who had been held for 5 years by Hamas:Gilad Shalit is the Israeli soldier. Difficult decision, but one foreseeable when dealing with terrorist groups. Have I missed something here?
October 19, 2011 at 5:54 pm
The 'wrong answer'?
(There has been a clarification.)
Now, then. If ISRAEL considers it in their interest to negotiate with Hamas terrorists, is it just…..possible…….that the US might come to the same conclusion?
Anony (above) came to the same question. Perhaps the mantra was wrong–or perhaps the mantra could be adjusted?
If all you want is more Washington "thinking", then Obama, or Gingrich, or Romney, is your candidate.
October 20, 2011 at 1:05 am
Meet the Press?? Isn't that where he said abortion should be a womans choice (twice) in the case of rape/incest and then said no choice after hearing the audience reaction?
Real integrity there, he'll make a great pol, learning fast. Tell the sheep what they want to hear, not the truth. Now all he needs is more of that fawning MSM coverage and the sheep will know who to vote for. Slaves "voting" for pre-vetted CFR/bankster stooges to be their masters: Brilliant! It's the American way. Our choice is to be war, war, and more war, debt and slavery, never ending lies and do Israels bidding while everything implodes….and I'll come back and read "Whut happened?" here.
Meanwhile Ron Paul just keeps telling the truth and the sheep don't want to hear it.
October 20, 2011 at 6:13 am
Huh. Speaking of truths people don't want to hear, did you know David Duke, the Neo-Nazi group Stormfront, and the Communist Party of the USA have all endorsed Ron Paul?
Yeah, with enemies like him, they won't need friends.
October 20, 2011 at 3:10 pm
Thank you, Sophia, for your reply to obvious anti-Semitic Paulbot.
As for Cain on abortion. He is against it. Nuff said.
October 20, 2011 at 3:19 pm
P.S. When someone writes, "It's the American way" it is but one sure sign that they are not American.
October 20, 2011 at 4:10 pm
As for Cain on abortion. He is against it. Nuff said.
Umm, you might want to read this and the accompanying transcript. In essence, he adopts the Rudy Giuliani/John Kerry stance on abortion.
Now that might signify the end of the Cain campaign.
October 21, 2011 at 2:34 am
This comment has been removed by the author.
October 21, 2011 at 2:36 am
@Paul Zummo,
I don't think that's really what Cain thinks, I think "authentic conservatism" has become so synonymous with "always puke out the states' right position whenever possible" that Cain had to say it, just like an ancient Roman had to reflexively denounce the idea of kings while being loyal to the Emperor.
Everything else Cain has said or done indicates he actually is pro-life, and if candidats were disqualified by the occasional incoherent remark born of ideological conditioning, we couldn't run an American.