Cain blows his job interview
Herman Cain’s campaign is collapsing. A very awkward job interview appears to be ending.
At The King’s College we are interviewing people for faculty positions. We are looking at technical competence in their fields as well as character and compatibility with the mission of the college. If we were to flummox a second round candidate with a softball question that any sophomore could hit with ease (“Federalist Paper No. 51? Now, let me see. Which one was that?”), the interviewee would get an immediate thank you and good-bye.
We should hold presidential candidates to less a standard … and it’s not a high standard. Political primaries and campaigns are a kind of job interview. Questions range from stock and easy to surprising and tough. The nation was stunned this week to see serious contenders for the GOP presidential nomination fail the simplest, qualifying round questions.
Rick Perry had his “oops” moment in a nationally televised debate. It was stunning. He is proposing that we address our national budget crisis in part by cutting three entire departments. That is an awesome—and I think admirable—step. But he could not remember all three: “It’s three agencies of government when I get there that are gone. Commerce, education, and the uh … uh … what’s the third one there?” He never came up with it. Interview over. Not ready for this level of performance. Have a nice day. It’s an easy call. Don’t make excuses for him. You jeopardize the country and everyone in it. This is a high-stakes hire.
Cain has had a few such disqualifying moments, such as when he revealed he was unaware that China has nuclear weapons, which they have had since 1964. He tried to finesse that one with “what I meant was” clarifications. But his utter confusion this week over what President Obama did in Libya to bring down Muammar Qaddafi should be the end of the interview. He had to ask the reporter whether or not Obama supported the uprising. He didn’t know. He was going to give several ways that the president mishandled the crisis. Then he stopped. “Nope, that’s a different one. Um. [Long pause, shifting in seat, searching memory.] I’ve got to go back and see. Uh. [Another long silence.] I’ve got all this stuff twirling around in my head.”
Whereas Perry’s campaign excused their candidate, saying that he had a headache, Cain’s people complained that that their man was sleep-deprived. Perhaps. But a president must be able to function under all circumstances. A campaign is difficult, but not as difficult as actually serving as president. Also, when interviewing for a high-level job that entails responsibility for lives and fortunes, there are things you need to know better than your own name and that you can recite even through the haze of semi-delirium.
The Republican Party has to show the country at this point that it has a politically mature understanding of what they expect of a serious contender for the office of president. It’s time to call the interview “over” for these two applicants. According to a new CNN poll that shows a sharp 11-point drop for Cain, it seems that primary voters are finally drawing up that short letter that begins, “Thank you for your interest in the nomination. …”
Read a review of D.C. Innes’ new book, Left, Right & Christ, in the current issue of WORLD.

















Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top62 Comments to “Cain blows his job interview”
The Dem Party and the State Run Media are trying to focus the Repulbican Party to pick Rommey.. That is why they are going after anyone who may challenge Rommey.
Report comment to moderator
Going after? You mean the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel asking Cain if he thinks Obama made the right call in Libya is nothing but a plot of the liberal media? Good grief. What sort of questions don’t qualify as “going after,” then? Anything harder than “what is your favorite color”?
Another NotRomney goes down in flames. Put your finger in the wind, and I think you’ll see that Newt is the next Conservative Messiah. He has the policy knowledge (unlike Bachman, Perry, Cain), but he is such an odious man personally that I just don’t see the base coming out to support him, much less do I see independents swinging his way. As soon as he takes the spotlight, his serial faithlessness and his rank hypocrisy during the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal will take the spotlight.
Of course that, too, will be another plot of the liberal media.
Report comment to moderator
Yet another reason why my husband and I are supporting Rick Santorum, who’s got the experience in D.C., the integrity of values he lives, and smart strategies in everything from the economy to education to foreign policy. We’ve been watching him for twenty years now, and he has a solid conservative record. Much as I like Cain, and admire his successes in life, I just can’t see him as Presidential material. Rick, out of all the candidates, has the moral strength combined with the balanced wisdom and tempered experience that are needed to lead this nation. In the end, I’d rather vote for a dead squirrel than Obama, so I’ll take whoever eventually emerges from the pack. But until then, our money is backing Dark Horse Rick.
Report comment to moderator
Yet another reason why my husband and I are supporting DR. RON PAUL!! He is the *only* candidate with a thorough knowledge of foreign policy, and who will return this country to its roots as defined by the Constitution. He is the *only* candidate with conviction & consistency.
Report comment to moderator
Let see the State Run Media pay no attention to the Fact Mr. Obama in a speech declare Hawaii as not be part of this nation. but is part of Asia.
Or the fact Mr. Obama White Hosue gave their buddy $500,000.00 loan.
yeah the State Run Media are going after anyone who may challenge who they want to go agaist Mr. OBama
Report comment to moderator
Violamom – the state run media will go after Rick Santorum the same way..
Report comment to moderator
In 2008, the Democrat candidate was held to no standard whatsoever except being historic (i.e. black) and inexperienced. He was asked almost no questions whatsoever that were tough and yet he still made plenty of gaffs and blunders. They were covered up and ignored. He was worshipped by the cheerleaders in the media and by foolish and naive academia.
The media can make or break whomever they want. The people should ignore the media pundits and the expters and think for themselves for a change.
Report comment to moderator
VIOLAMOM,
AMEN to your comments at #3.
Report comment to moderator
I do not agree with D.C. INNES that Perry’s “oops” moment means much of anything. We all have them. No swet. However, I do think that Rick Perry tended to come across a bit arrogant overall at first (his first month or two of campaigning). I also think he has been humbled and that he is taking that humility more to heart (finally). I am warming back up to Rick Perry (though I still agree with #3 that Santorum is the best candidate).
Report comment to moderator
I disagree that this primary campaign is like regular job interviews. The people do the hiring and NOT the bosses or the experts. And I, for one, believe in second and even third chances. We have let the experts and pundits and bosses play too strong a hand in past “hirings” (especially in their power to pressure good people out of a race or smear them mercilessly). I fear that we will continue to do the same, but I don’t have to be for it or add to the foolishness.
Frankly, they are free to run and stay in the race and we all are free to support them or not. I still say the best results come out of freedom, even in campaigns. Let the people decide. Would I like a smaller circle of candidates now, sure! But freedom has to cope with some messiness.
Report comment to moderator
Nein nein nein!
Report comment to moderator
Joel Mark – the Democrat candidate are held to a lower standard by the Media… But are promote also by the media as having thier views being main stream.
Report comment to moderator
I even think Ron Paul should stay in the primaries as long as he wants to and has the support to do so, even though I think his views on foreign policy are sometimes indistinguishable from those of Noam Chompski.
Report comment to moderator
Let see the State Run Media pay no attention to the Fact Mr. Obama in a speech declare Hawaii as not be part of this nation. but is part of Asia
Pastor Roy: We all get carried away from time to time when typing fast, and I’m as guilty as anybody, but lately it seems your grammar has run amok.
Report comment to moderator
Pastor Roy said: “Violamom – the state run media will go after Rick Santorum the same way..” Of course they will. No big deal to Rick–he’s been dealing with the SRM for twenty years. Bring it on.
<
Report comment to moderator
Let see the State Run Media pay no attention to the Fact Mr. Obama in a speech declare Hawaii as not being part of this nation. but is part of Asia… Also the fact that Mr. Obama does not know how many States are in the United States of America…
but you left Cain pause before answering about Mr. Obama’s war of Libya, the State Run Media is trying to make a big deal out of it.
Report comment to moderator
I see Rick Santorum as being a good VP.
Report comment to moderator
should read
but you let Cain pause before answering A QUESTION about Mr. Obama’s war of Libya, the State Run Media is trying to make a big deal out of it
Report comment to moderator
D.C. Innes reveals his politcal bias with his criticism of the Republican candidates’ gaffs in this article. This is proven by the following questions: How many articles did he write about then candidate Obama declaring he visited “all 57 states”? Where were his criticisms of Obama when he referred to them as Navy “Corpsemen”? Did he write about Obama when he referred to the mascot of Penn State as the “Nittily Lions”? Did he respond when Obama said he saw “many fallen heroes” present in the audience? How many articles did he write criticizing VP Joe Biden when he said it’s all about a three letter word – “j-o-b-s”! And, that’s one of many, many gaffs he has to choose from concerning Biden!
No, it’s usually only Republicans that are held to a standard of perfection in the national press. It is sad that his clearly biased opinion was given the space on World’s website page. World is usually much more professional than that!
Report comment to moderator
See, this is why we can’t have nice things.
I have never in my life seen such a collection of whiners and crybabies. Even D. C. Innes has a liberal bias because he criticizes Cain’s flub?
I get the feeling that most of you would define “liberal bias” as anything short of playing the happy lapdog for your favorite candidate. You’re looking for another Brett Baier interview of G. W. Bush. “Mr. President, is it hard to be as awesome as you are?”
Please.
Report comment to moderator
Cain needs better prep. Even if he didnt realize the ChiComms have nukes I’m sure he knows how many states are in the federal union.
I think what we need in candidates is the same type of honesty I have in the past witnessed with young NCOs at promotion boards: “Sir at this time I do not have the answer but I’ll research it and get back to you” Obviously Cain is not a full-time career politician. He has expertise in areas no current life-long politician can boast about.
I recall someone questioned then candidate George W Bush to identify the President of Pakistan. He didnt know or spoke incorrectly.
Really, these silly gotcha questions need to end.
Report comment to moderator
Cain needs better prep
Sorry, wrong answer. The Presidency is not the place for on the job training. These are not gotcha questions. They are international relations 101 questions, and if you can’t pass that course without “more prep”, you will NEVER pass the highest level honors seminar in the world, which is what the President has to excel at.
R’s, and to a lesser extent D’s all have some kind of “everyman” complex which is a yearning for some kind of person who just has the common sense to deal with every situation. S/he’s not out there.
Political leaders need seasoning and years of practice of their art before they should even think of running for that office.
Being “a businesman” qualifies one for nothing except just that. In that job, one’s constituency is either a)oneself or b)a few board members. A President’s constituency is all 300 million of us and, to a considerable extent, the entire world. It is not a job for amateur everymen.
Report comment to moderator
Yeah, I got a chuckle out of the characterization of Innes and World Magazine as arms of the many-tentacled “liberal mainstream media”.
In other news, I still can’t figure out how to spend my Republican-primary vote given it’s only one I get that will matter with respect to the presidency. Do I:
1. Vote for Obama in the Democratic Primary as a symbolic gesture of my disapproval of the Republican field?
2. Vote for Romney to minimize the odds of one of the crazies winning and pulling a fluke upset of Obama?
3. Do I vote for one of the crazies in the hopes they win the nomination and increase the odds of an Obama general election victory?
4. Do I vote for whomever I find least offensive from among the existing Republican field? If so, who would that be? (Probably Huntsman or Johnson.)
5. Do I write in one of the candidates I wish would have sought the nomination but decided not to? (Probably Mitch Daniels?)
Hard to say.
Report comment to moderator
The Presidency is not the place for on the job training.
–
Funny that is what Mr. Obama has been doing for the past 3 years.
Report comment to moderator
I agree, but I don’t think asking Cain whether he approved of Obama’s action in Libya was a “gotcha” question. (On the other hand, asking Palin whether she approved of “the Bush doctrine” was a gotcha question).
Speaking of “gotcha” moments, I’d really like to see conservatives put to rest the “Obama thinks there are 57 states” attack. It makes you look dishonest, like you’re willing to take any advantage, even an obviously unfair one. Go watch the video. It was a verbal flub: “I’ve visited fifty… seven? states? one left to go, because I can’t visit Alaska and Hawaii.” Clearly he does not think there are 60 states in the union, minus Alaska and Hawaii = 58 he intends to visit.
Report comment to moderator
A worthwhile reminder, but (just to be clear) I don’t think anyone disagrees. Innes is arguing that we should not support these candidates, which he is (of course) free to argue.
I thought this at first. It was embarrassing, perhaps even disastrous, given the role appearances play in politics. But does it make him not fit to lead? I complain often about the vapidity of soundbyte politics, so it would not be fair to dimiss a candidate on style instead of substance.
But I’ve come around to Innes’s way of thinking, and (I think) for some of the same reasons.
I’m teaching Beowulf right now. I think about the things I might lose in an absent moment while teaching — say, the poem’s approximate date of composition. I forget it precisely because it is, in my own mind, a fact disconnected. But someone who has spent significant time researching the dating of the manuscript would not forget, because that fact connects to entire theories and to other historical events.
If, on the other hand, I were to forget that the third monster Beowulf faces is a dragon, it would not simply be an absent moment. It would be evidence that I have no knowledge of the poem at all — that I’ve just “memorized the cliff notes,” so to speak (1. Grendel, 2. Grendel’s mother, 3. dragon), and I’m trying to bloviate my way through a lecture with those.
The fact that Perry couldn’t recall the third agency is more severe than just a “brain flub.” It means that he couldn’t remember that third thing on some list he memorized, like a anxious schoolboy taking an exam. It means he could recall none of his good reasons for the elimination of that particular agency: none of the statistics about its waste or the arguments about how it hampers business or is unconstitutional. Nothing. The body of knowledge wasn’t there, because it never was. That third agency was just a name, a fact disconnected.
A man who will eliminate federal agencies without being conversant with his own reasons why is not someone who ought to be president.
Report comment to moderator
I am sick and tired of the credence we give to political talk and rhetoric. Republicans are falling for this just as much as the Dems in this media dominated campaign. I value performance and principles as applied in that performcne.
I have always preferred Rick Santorum, but Rick Perry fell from my admiration for a while. He is recovering. Now, I once again think the two Ricks are the best in the race.
Report comment to moderator
Rick Perry forgot a govt. dept. and Innes can’t get beyond that? Really? I’m with Joel Mark on that one. And it does make Innes sound like a liberal. It’s shallow. Just shallow.
Report comment to moderator
Arcadia – “Political leaders need seasoning and years of practice of their art before they should even think of running for that office.” Are you referring to Obama’s 120 days as a member of the federal government before running for President? Before that he was prepping to organize a socialist revolution in Chicago politics; hardly a “Presidential” resume by your standards!
JJF – “Speaking of “gotcha” moments, I’d really like to see conservatives put to rest the “Obama thinks there are 57 states” attack.” What about all of the other inexperienced gaffs he has made? Are they all also “taken out of context”? How about the many “Bidenisms” from the man “just a heartbeat away from the Presidency”; where is the reporting about good Ol’ Joe?
All I want to see from World is balance. Innes has had plenty of fodder from the current occupants of the Executive Branch. Where are those articles?
Report comment to moderator
I value performance and principles as applied in that performcne.
What aspects of Perry’s performance of governor speak well of him? What principles?
Report comment to moderator
Performance *as* governor.
Report comment to moderator
The first “disqualifying moment” cited by D.C. is that Mr. Cain “revealed he was unaware that China has nuclear weapons, which they have had since 1964″–with the quoted phrase helpfully containing a YouTube hyperlink.
Listening to the linked video of Mr. Cain, it is not evident to me that he is necessarily revealing any ignorance. It sounds more like he is thinking of China developing nuclear ships or subs. Or perhaps “further developing bombs” is what he meant, but failed to include the “further” qualifier. This is more reminiscent of a “gotcha” where someone flubs out of a spelling bee for failing to repeat the word again after spelling it correctly.
Just reading the claim makes the ignorance sound plausible, but after listening directly to “the horse’s mouth” it seems instead that those hopping onto the “proof of ignorance” claim are perhaps revealing they have an axe to grind (or other undisclosed motives).
This also reminds me of an earlier claim regarding some banter about putting a fence on the border–when you listened to the actual recorded incident, it sounded like the naysayers either entirely misunderstood the tone of it, or were just trying to get other people to take it that way!
Report comment to moderator
BUDDYGLASS,
Are you seriously not even aware of Rick Perry’s accomplishments? Wow!
I read his book about 5 years ago, “On My Honor” which was an excellent outline of the principles he values that were first instilled by the Boy Scouts of America. It was one of the best books I read in the decade.
Plus, his job creation record in Texas is undeniably exemplary, so much so that partisan Democrats work hard to trash it. He balances fiscal and social conservatism rather nicely. He has served as governor of Texs well and longer than any other governor. He respects the private sector and the principles of liberty.
He is a proven leader of the first order. But as I noted before, he did show some arrogance at first in this campaign. ButI do see a humbling effect on him now as he is dealing with issues more seriously now and being more light-hearted in his criticisms of himself and less heavy-handed in his criticisms of others.
Report comment to moderator
JJF wants balance? When did he eliminate Obama because he said there were 57 states? When?????
Report comment to moderator
The difference is, Obama doesn’t actually think we have 57 states. He was interviewed at the end of a long day and said he had visited 57 states with three left to go … he obviously meant 47, and acknowledged the error with good humor later.
Perry, on the other hand, was not an exhausted candidate responded to an impromptu question at the end of a long day of travel and campaigning. He was speaking in a planned debate for which he had ample time to prepare and rest. And the error he made was not a simple mis-speaking on a simple fact that everybody knows, it was totally forgetting an agency involved in one of the key initiatives he plans to take.
You cannot seriously equate the two.
What it suggests to me is that Perry is somebody’s puppet. He isn’t developing his policies, he’s been hired or co-opted by someone (probably the Koch Brothers) to implement policies that will further add to the wealth disparity of the country. Because his policy ideas are not his own, he has to learn what they are, and he forgot one. He would not have forgotten it if it was something he was really passionate about, especially not in a setting where he has ample opportunity to prepare.
Report comment to moderator
Are you seriously not even aware of Rick Perry’s accomplishments? Wow!
I wouldn’t say “unaware”; more “skeptical of”.
Perry took office in December 2000.
* In 2000 Texas was 15th in the country in GDP per capita. In 2010 it was 17th. Overall, relative to the other states, Texans have gotten poorer over Perry’s tenure.
* For the year 2010, 12.6% of Texas’s work force earned at or below federal minimum wage. That’s the highest percentage of any state.
* For the years 2009-2010, 25% of Texans had no health insurance coverage. That’s the highest total of any state.
* Many of the jobs created in Texas went to immigrants, many of whom were illegal. States here. To highlight one of them: “From the middle of 2007, shortly before the recession began, until the middle of this year [2011], Texas added 279,000 jobs. Of those, 225,00 or 81 percent, went to immigrants who arrived in the United States in 2007 or later.”
* Texas’s current unemployment rate (Sep 2011) of 8.5% is good for 23rd among the 50 states. That’s above average, but only barely.
But what about conservative principles?
* Perry created a VC fund under his sole control (Emerging Technology Fund) from which he subsidizes various Texas companies. Allegedly the fund benefits firms in a way that suggests crony capitalism.
* Perry (allegedly due to the influence of Merck) tried to designate the HPV as required for all Texas school children.
* Perry was prepared to seize a pretty big swath of private land across Texas (via eminent domain) to pave the way for the Trans-Texas corridor.
* Perry defends in-state tuition at Texas universities for illegal immigrants who graduate from Texas schools.
* Perry opposes a border fence for the purpose of stemming illegal immigration.
* Perry supported Gore and even worked on his campaign in 1988. Romney’s flip-flops are well documented, but this seems like a colossal one for Perry.
Report comment to moderator
The difference is, Obama doesn’t actually think we have 57 states. He was interviewed at the end of a long day and said he had visited 57 states with three left to go … he obviously meant 47, and acknowledged the error with good humor later.
–
Yeah sure, this is the man that just stated Hawaii was part of Asia not the United States…
Report comment to moderator
I’ll say it again because it bears repeating:
=== (# 25) ===
Speaking of “gotcha” moments, I’d really like to see conservatives put to rest the “Obama thinks there are 57 states” attack. It makes you look dishonest, like you’re willing to take any advantage, even an obviously unfair one. Go watch the video. It was a verbal flub: “I’ve visited fifty… seven? states? one left to go, because I can’t visit Alaska and Hawaii.” Clearly he does not think there are 60 states in the union, minus Alaska and Hawaii = 58 he intends to visit.
Report comment to moderator
JJF – You reveal your true nature – a left-wing “troll.” You’ve had Time and Newsweek as your propaganda machine for decades now. Finally, World comes along and generally tells the story straight and you complain about it being “right-wing.”
My criticsm of this article by Innes isn’t the fact that he pointed out Republican candidates’ gaffs. My criticism is that he hasn’t also used the same passion to point out the many, many, many serious gaffs of the current administration. That’s being balanced. Innes obviously isn’t. Neither are you.
Report comment to moderator
I agree with JJF that the failures (note: plural) of both Cain and Perry are not the same as Obama’s “57 states” failure. Both have demonstrated a pattern of ignorance/inexperience/unPresidentialness. Obama has various gaffes and they are funny, but they are just verbal slips. The failures of Perry and Cain show me that they’re not qualified to be President when compared to Romney, Santorum, Huntsman, Gingrich, or even Bachmann. (Bachmann has her own gaffe problems but she has definitely more policy knowledge than Cain and is a quicker study as well, and is at least equal to Perry in this area. Not only that, she is more trustworthy and has better conservative principles than Perry, who has problems with corruption and crony capitalism). I’d support either of them over Obama though, who is terrible on domestic and social policy, just ok on foreign policy, and a crony capitalist to boot.
I agree with Buddyglass’s critique of Perry on conservative principles.
Report comment to moderator
I agree with Buddyglass’s critique of Perry on conservative principles.
To be clear: I actually agree with some of the “non-conservative” policies of Perry’s that I listed. I point them out because I’m fairly sure most conservative-minded World Magazine readers would count them as a strike against him.
Re: Bachmann suppport: How do you square your support with her claim that under President Bachmann we’d have $2 gasoline?
Report comment to moderator
I disagree with Buddyglass’s critique of Perry on conservative principles, BG’s selective cherry-picking. Statistics do not always reflect observable reality.
I have actually read his book (about 5 years ago) and his conservative principles come throughclearly.
Texas has had more obsticles and barriers to economic growth than most states that are not on a border and struggling with population changes and culture challenges. yet, they are still doing a better job than most states in resisting many of the pathologies we find rising in other bluer states.
Report comment to moderator
MATT Y wrote; “I agree with JJF that the failures (note: plural) of both Cain and Perry are not the same as Obama’s ‘57 states’ failure.”
MATT y, you miss the point entirely, in my view.
As a candidate, Obama’s gaffs were as bad as any candidate’s gaffs in recent history. You seem to support the gross double standard in the media that makes Republicans pay dearly for gaff that are not as bad as those made by Democrats.
But why let the media define which so-called “gaff” we should pick ofr our own discussion? What disqualified Obama (and what was far worse than anything Perry or Cain or Gingrich have said or done) are not verbal gaffs the media overlooked but his 20-year close association with a racist hate-filled bigot like Rev. Jeremiah Wright as his “mentor”, which the media also overlooked. Obama kicked off his political career in the home of a virulent unrepentant domestic terrorists who hates America and everything good about it.
Report comment to moderator
MATT Y wrote; “Both [Cain and Perry] have demonstrated a pattern of ignorance/inexperience/unPresidentialness.”
I disagree.
How so? On what fairminded basis do you say this?
With the exception of Gingrich, Rick Perry is the most experienced of all the candidates. And he has shown excellence and competence in his ten years executive experience as a Governor in Texas.
And nothing at all has been proven with regard to the salacious smears agaisnt Cain. And a mere pause in answering a question does not in any way warrent your harsh judgments or constitute a pattern. Cain has stengths and weaknesses, like all the candidates, but you do not give good reason to write him off.
MATT Y, you and I may be on the same page with the candidates we prefer most, but I am not buying into the media driven smears and the cynics who want to trash human candidates who are far more excellent and qualified than Obama.
Report comment to moderator
Statistics do not always reflect observable reality.
Quite so. Which is why I posted those stats in response to Perry’s characterization of his economic record. Many jobs have been created in Texas. That’s indisputable. The question is why and what kind. Evidence suggest they’re disproportionately low-paying jobs and that the lion’s share of them went to immigrants. Perry’s Texas did not gain any ground, with respect to per capita income, vs. the rest of the states in the Union.
I have actually read his book (about 5 years ago) and his conservative principles come through clearly.
I’m sure they do, given the point of the book is bolster his conservative cred. Essentially what you’re saying, “I trust what I read in Perry’s book regardless of what he’s actually done while in office.”
Texas has had more obsticles and barriers to economic growth than most states that are not on a border and struggling with population changes and culture challenges.
I ran the GDP per capita numbers for other border states as well. California moved up one spot. If I recall, New Mexico moved up two and Arizona moved down three. As noted earlier, Texas was down two spots. Hardly the economic miracle Perry describes.
Report comment to moderator
No, they weren’t, and that is precisely the point.
What are the gaffes that reveal Obama’s deep ignorance of major facets of the presidency? What is Obama’s “I can’t remember the third one” moment, or his “Um, I’ve just got all this stuff swirling around in my head” moment? Where is the moment when either Obama OR John McCain said something so dumb, was so completely flummoxed, that it was clear the man had no knowledge of what he was speaking about?
There are plenty of places that candidate Obama deserves criticism. A very few of them we likely agree on (vague campaign rhetoric that encouraged people to view him as a political messiah). A great many we likely disagree on (you often criticize him for the church he attended). But a deep ignorance of the sort Cain and Perry display is not one of those places that candidate Obama deserves criticism.
Report comment to moderator
I’ve been here a long time, and I certainly hope the record of my posts makes it clear that I’m not just “trolling”. I say what I genuinely mean, and I try to be deliberative in my responses (though I will admit to sometimes losing my temper).
I do not complain about WORLD being a right-wing publication. I merely pointed it out. It shouldn’t need pointing out. It is obvious. I don’t think anyone would dispute it. (Except you. Again, do you read WORLD?)
Click D. C. Innes’s name. Read his other posts. He is manifestly not left-wing. He has not one left-leaning bone in his body. He might not even have a left arm. He has two right arms, and the one attached to his left shoulder is backwards so his thumbs point the right way.
Innes just recently had a post removed in which he called Jim Wallis a Marxist. I commented in it, then the post was just gone. I don’t know if it was removed because he or the editors thought better of it, or for some technical reason, but it clearly was not the essay of a left-wing operative out to destroy conservative heroes.
Report comment to moderator
I can’t speak for either Cain’s or Perry’s knowledge on the topics on which they faltered, but I can say, based on my own experience, that one can go completely blank under pressure on topics about which one is very well educated and informed. For one who’s prone to this, it doesn’t make for an impressive sounding speaker, but it also doesn’t correctly reflect the depth and breadth of the speaker’s knowledge.
Report comment to moderator
Saw this quote today. Made me chuckle, considering the source.
Ann Coulter, November 16th
I guess Coulter’s part of the lamestream liberal media for suggesting the non-Romney Republicans have no chance.
Report comment to moderator
Joel Mark: I don’t disqualify candidates for a few gaffes, verbal slips, etc. That said, Cain is just ignorant on foreign policy. He had to ask someone what Obama’s position was on Libya’s uprising (did he support the uprising or not?) He didn’t know China has nukes. He is just unprepared in general.
To quote Michelle Malkin:
It has nothing to do with anything Gloria Allred has her hands in.
It’s his continued lack of preparedness on, and familiarity with, basic domestic and foreign policy issues. Sorry, Cain fans. Tried to give him the benefit of the doubt. But like Rick Perry, Herman Cain is just not ready for prime time. The real Cain scandal: He can barely form a coherent thought on Libya when put on the spot and garbles collective bargaining 101 facts.
It’s not because of the liberal media, in these cases. Yes, Cain has been the subject of unsubstantiated attacks (the “salacious smears” that you referred to). But Cain and Perry have done themselves in all on their own. A lot of people are coming to this conclusion based not on the liberal media, but on watching interviews and debates with our own eyes.
Report comment to moderator
In the first paragraph above, I should’ve said: “I don’t disqualify candidates for a few gaffes, verbal slips, etc. I like Sarah Palin and would choose her as President before anyone in this field except Rick Santorum. Palin has committed gaffes. So has Bachmann, and I like her as well, though not as much as Palin. That said…”
Report comment to moderator
On Gingrich, while he’s intelligent, experienced and qualified, he’s as low on my list as Cain and Perry. Here’s why:
Even a brief summary of Gingrich’s baggage would require a great deal of space, but here are a few bullet points:
•Support for a government health care individual mandate that is comparable to the Massachusetts legislation that is the millstone around Romney’s neck.
•Consulting work done for the Freddie Mac government mortgage giant that helped sink the economy in 2008 and which is part of the mantra of GOP complaints about Democrats.
•Support for global warming initiatives including shooting an advocacy spot on the issue with Nancy Pelosi?.
•His made-for-Iowa ethanol love affair.
•His bizarre flip-flops on foreign policy issues such as Libya.
•His tasteless personal attacks on the president such as claiming Obama was the product of a “Kenyan anti-colonial mentality.”
•His personal life and public hypocrisy.
In short, Gingrich can easily be portrayed as being as much, if not more of a RINO than Romney, which makes the case for his role as the new conservative “non-Romney” untenable.
As for the last item, many Republicans have taken to viewing any discussion of a candidate’s personal life as beyond the bounds of decency. Americans are basically forgiving of celebrity flaws so long as people are honest about them. Divorce hasn’t been a disqualifying factor in political life for several decades. But it would be dishonest to pretend Gingrich’s circumstances are not unique. Many Americans may not care that much about whether he cheated on his first two wives, but the fact that he was committing adultery with wife number three while married to number two at the same time that he was leading a moral and legal crusade against Bill Clinton? for his peccadilloes remains one of the most loathsome examples of public hypocrisy by a major political figure in our nation’s history.
Report comment to moderator
His tasteless personal attacks on the president such as claiming Obama was the product of a “Kenyan anti-colonial mentality.”
Blame Dinesh D’Souza. Who happens to be President of King’s College N.Y. where Anthony Bradley and D.C. Innes are on faculty and where Marvin Olasky was formerly Provost.
Report comment to moderator
Another excellent thing about Rick Perry’s record and his conservativism is his commitment and experience getting across tort reform. That makes him a rare conservative.
Report comment to moderator
As a candidate, Obama’s gaffs were as bad as any candidate’s gaffs in recent history.
Especially egregious were his saying the words “corps” and “corpsmen” with the ‘p’ sound, three times!!! He did not learn after one or two mistakes. Some clueless Commander-in-Chief.
Report comment to moderator
#51 – 53, fair enough, MATT Y. But why are you spending such effort and so many words trashing Republicans? All of them are far far far far better than Obama.
I respect anyone on the right these days who gets into the race, considering what is in store for him or her.
Report comment to moderator
I have not heard Newt Gingrich make tasteless personal attacks on the president such as claiming Obama was the product of a “Kenyan anti-colonial mentality.” In fact, I do not consider such claims as tasteless, except perhaps to use the word “Kenyan” to describe it. I think it is generally true.
1. This “mentality” is rampant in academia, especially in IVY league schools. I doubt that the President would even object much to being accused of having an “anti-colonial mentality.”
2. From what I have head and read, this mentality is clearly perceived in Obama’s writings. Of course, we don’t have much or any of his academic records or papers on such matters do we?
The history of colonialism is a mixed bag. The abuses are famous and undeniable but the blessings it brought are grossly under-reported and under-appreciated by most historians today. I think Obama is a typical academic in that he can rail against the abuses (rightly, I might add) and completely ingore the blessings (which is unintellectual and unfairminded on his part). This is just my perception.
Report comment to moderator
I think that the gafs that Obama made were physical not so much speaking. Maybe that’s why some say he is such a good speaker. I never could figure that out.
I don’t remember the exact details, but am thinking when he gave a very improper gift to another country’s official. (I think it was some egocentric offering.)
Also the other diplomatic blunders. Did someone criticize Cain because he would be practicing as president?
Report comment to moderator
Joel Mark: As a candidate, Obama’s gaffs were as bad as any candidate’s gaffs in recent history.
Especially egregious were his saying the words “corps” and “corpsmen” with the ‘p’ sound, three times!!! He did not learn after one or two mistakes. Some clueless Commander-in-Chief.
You think that mispronouncing a word and forgetting major parts of your platform are equivalent mistakes?
And you wonder why almost nobody takes you seriously.
Report comment to moderator
I take JOEL MARK seriously. I guess my new handle must be ALMOST NOBODY. Thank goodness it’s just almost. ;–)
Report comment to moderator
I am very sad to see Cain go but I have to start to agree – he has to go. I am glad that we still have a choice like Rick Santorum!
Check this history lesson out about Newt:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWPz1Qdq1uI
You will be educated.
No Bama – Please dear God – but I do see your mercy in giving him one term. Ultimately you know best
No Romney
No Newt
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDmag.com's Community section to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!