Why is Cain being taken seriously?

Posted: October 16, 2011 by socklessjoe in Conservatism, FAIL, Fun With Media, GOP FAIL, Islam - a religion of tolerance and peace, News, Op/Sped

Why is it that the media -including conservative media- are taking Herman Cain so seriously?

Yes, his poll numbers are impressive for a candidate who was written off just weeks ago.  But Cain’s rise would not have happened had the media been doing their jobs.  There are two categorical failures in the media’s coverage of Cain, coverage concerning his 9-9-9 plan, and everything else. First, the tax plan:

A lot of conservative wonks are not on board with 9-9-9 for various wonky reasons. Sadly, the media has largely avoided those reasons, and has chosen to focus on made-up bullshit instead. Virtually every media report on Cain’s plan portrays a nightmare scenario for middle and lower income households who would suddenly be hit with massive sales tax increases.  The media conveniently omits the fact that Federal payroll taxes (-who is this “FICA” person, and why does he get so much of my paycheck?) would be eliminated under Cain’s plan.

When critics leave out this crucial detail, they only invite the Cainiacs to (correctly) cry foul.  All this spurious criticism then blinds Cain supporters to the legitimate problems with the Cain candidacy.

But with all the fuss about 9-9-9, we’ve been distracted from the biggest reason Cain shouldn’t be President: He doesn’t understand the Constitution.

I’m not exactly the biggest fan of the Religion of Peace ™, but I have enough respect for the First Amendment to know that localities can’t prohibit the construction of mosques based on majority vote.  Freedom of religion doesn’t work like that.  That sort of fundamental misunderstanding of the Constitution is a complete deal-breaker.

And we shouldn’t forget Cain’s shaky remarks about the Second Amendent, which, even in the most generous view of Cain’s comments, seems to misunderstand the incorporation doctrine.

So there we have it. A guy who is dead wrong about the First Amendment, possibly the Second, and shows a general misunderstanding of Constitutional principles.  Even his 9-9-9 plan shows a wrongness about the ability of Congress to bind future Congresses to a two-thirds supermajority to raise taxes.  The supermajority requirement itself could be repealed by a simple majority.

How can anybody, particularly pro-Constitution conservatives, possibly be taking Herman Cain seriously?

  1. Gundo says:

    Compared to whom, exactly? I’m not a Cain supporter, mostly for the reasons you touched on, but he’s no more wrong and/or ill-informed than most of the other candidates, and less so than a couple others, none of whose seriousness [as candidates] you’ve questioned. That I noticed, anyway.

  2. veeshir says:

    Why is he being taken seriously?
    Because he’s not Romney.

  3. socklessjoe says:

    Well, I could have mentioned his lack of any foreign policy experience (-as evidenced in part by his lack of understanding on the Palestinian “right of return”, not that I’d question Cain on any actual decision involving Israel he might be faced with). Or I could have mentioned his recent praise of Alan Greenspan. (And no, you don’t have to be a Ronulan to recognize, at least in retrospect, that Greenspan was wrong and Bernanke is just Greenspan^2.)

    Or I could have mentioned his “one exception” abortion policy (–life of the mother), which ain’t gonna go over well when you tell swing voters their daughters can’t get abortions if they are raped.

    But to flake out on the First, Second, and Fourteenth Amendments? Yowza. No, I don’t think any “serious” candidate is so wrong on the Constitution.

  4. doubleplusundead says:

    Amnesty destroyed Bush, and it’s in the process of destroying Perry. Cain is the only one in the top tier that shows any kind of charisma, focus and energy (without having the Paul/Bachmann crazyeyes) and hasn’t talked down to conservatives like a liberal twat. Perry had this primary in the fucking bag until he started in lecturing conservatives for opposing amnesty just like a liberal shitbag.

    Bottom line, the conservative base is fucking sick of being talked down to by the GOP leadership, more than anything else. They have no problem washing their hands of it all, letting Rome burn if the GOP wants to be an accomplice to the left’s push toward socialism. Like Ali said the other day on Twitter, this is bigger than one person, bigger than one election.

  5. doubleplusundead says:

    And no, I’m not crazy about Cain for a lot of the reasons you state, but Amnesty, AWBs and Romneycare are absolute non-starters for me. I really hoped Perry wasn’t gonna be a fucking retard on Amnesty,

    • socklessjoe says:

      “Shamnesty” killed amnesty. I’m sure you’ll probably disagree, but I could hold my nose and accept amnesty with some abso-frakkin-lutely-no-BS border security and mandatory e-verify for employment. Shamnesty was so very obviously not serious about border security that it really poisoned the well for a compromise solution. Bush and McCain really slit their own throats on that one.

      Perry really stepped in it with this malarkey about people not having a heart.

  6. jp says:

    I can say, for myself, that none of the things which you mention are nonstarters. I don’t expect the 9-9-9 plan to pass, or if it does it will be done under much scrutiny and modification. I don’t expect there to be a sudden constitutional crisis over the 1st amendment, and I don’t expect him to go on a crusade against the 2nd amendment.

    I don’t think anyone is looking for the ideal conservative candidate at this point. Conservatives are looking for the most conservative and most viable, with the courage to fight back, and the ability and willingness to learn from mistakes. Cain seems to fit these requirements.

    • socklessjoe says:

      I would have called McCain-Feingold a 1st amendment crisis. It was a major factor in me opposing McCain as the nominee in 2008. So while that’s a different aspect of the 1st amdt, showing a lack of basic Constitutional understanding has its downside. These things will turn up from time to time.

      It’s not just one thing about Cain that I find troubling, it’s the totality. He doesn’t get the Constitution. Game over.

      For all my disagreements with Romney, I think Romney has a firmer grip on the Constitution than Cain does.

      I am still carrying a torch for Perry, but that torch is burning ever-fainter.

      • jp says:

        Cain is no McCain. I have no doubt that Cain would never consider silencing free speech on the level of McCain-Feingold.

        Cain has no problem with going on the Mark Levin Show, and I’m sure he would consider Levin’s wisdom on the Constitution seriously. Something McCain would never do.

        I’m just not worried. I just cannot envision Cain shredding the Constitution, even if he may be ignorant on some Constitutional issues.

  7. AJ says:

    Seems like they comments are right on. Cain is an infinitely better candidate than Romney, who has been on every side of every big issue. How will he govern? How can his associations with Obama advisors not scare the living crap out of you?

    Cain may not be the perfectly polished candidate but i trust him a heck of a lot more when it comes to making an important decision than Romney, who seems to be best buds with a few too many famous liberal policy wonks.

    In a choice between Romney and a conservative….its not even a choice.

    • chad98036 says:

      In a choice between Romney and a conservative….its not even a choice.

      Well if that’s the case I am sure Basil Marceux (.com) would be happy to accept your vote for President.

      I am not a Romney supporter, his position on abortion convinced me he is an opportunist who will say or do anything to get elected, and that was on an issue I don’t even care about. None of his other positions have given me any more reason to vote for him, but that doesn’t mean I will vote for any dumbass just because he is a conservative and isn’t Mitt Romney. I will not vote for Michelle Bachman because she is frankly both an idiot and energetic. Ron Paul is out for me both because he is dishonest in his positions and because, despite his excuses, he is a racist and an anti-semite. The others have other issues but the least objectionable at this point remains Rick Perry.

  8. Goober says:

    I’m actually okay with a President who learns these things as he goes along and is willing to admit that he has much to learn. What i’m NOT okay with is a President that goes into all of these things completely clueless about them but with strong pre-copnceptions on how they work that he is unwilling to let go of. Cain is the former. Obama is the latter.

    i guess what I’m trying to say is that Cain’s lack of knowledgte about politics is proof that he is removed from being part of the political elite and that is what is actually endearing to me about him.

    That being said, he does have a bit to learn about Amendments 1 and 2. We can teach him very quickly once he’s elected.

    • chad98036 says:

      I am ok with them learning on the job up to a point. The one thing that Cain has going for him as far as I am concerned is that he has a record of success, whereas Obama has a record of failure outside of his ability to talk his way into the right schools. That said Perry also has a record of success as does Huntsman, and even Paul, Bachman and Romney, giving the devils their due.

  9. Dave says:

    I love watching Libs try to explain how nominating Cain is an example of racism

  10. socklessjoe says:

    Just as a general statement, I will gladly vote for Cain over Obama, should it come to that. I will also vote for Romney or Perry over Obama. I’d probably vote for some of the other yahoos too, but don’t care to get down and dirty about which ones they might be.

    As far as Ali’s comment about this being bigger than one election… I don’t know what sort of shape the country might be in after another four years of Zero — and Cthulhu forbid he get a Dem majority Congress again.

  11. rjschwarz says:

    The 1st Amendment specifically says Congress shall enact no law establishing a religion, it doesn’t say squat about the States. You might find such in case-law (or in the modern living interpretations of the Constitution) but not in the actual Constitution so holding Cain to task in that regard doesn’t really hold water, in my humble opinion.

  12. […] Why is Cain being taken seriously? (doubleplusundead.com) Like this:LikeBe the first to like this post.  10/19/2011  napman57 Categories: "My Noise", 999 crazy bullshit talk, a far right wingnut, a lie is a lie is a lie, and stop wrapping your ass around the flag, another cheap tight-ass Republican, another new low the GOP takes, bat shit crazy, dumb as dirt, following blindly like fools, head up his ass, raising taxes, Republican clowns, telling lies and spreading fear, the pizza man, working poor […]

  13. […] Obama. I think Perry or Cain could arguably beat Obama, but either could just as easily flame out. (And besides, I am not a Cain fan.) I don’t think either Bachmann or Santorum would stand a chance against Obama. Jon Huntsman […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s