nt

to want to win on both sides of the issue.

I am against abortion, but if a family wants to make that choice, that is up to them.

I am against negotiating with terrorists, but I think that negotiating with terrorists is fine.

9-9-9 treats everybody the same, except for people in poverty and “opportunity zones.”

Good to hear he is pro-choice, he is still a disastrous candidate.

You have my respect and admiration for doing something that all of us have a hard time doing;, admitting we are wrong. I think this also demonstrates that Cain supports who questioned your motives in writing the original posts were 100% wrong themselves.

Conservatives have the guts to say when they are wrong.
The left, not so much.
You have impressed me more than I was before Leon.

The Brazillion reference:
Obama was told by his military advisor that two Brazillion solders were killed in Afghanastan.
Clearly shaken, he fell into his chair and seemed most troubled.
After several minutes with his face in his hands,
he finally looked up, a worried look on his face and asked,
“How much is a brazillion”.

Not as to whether he is pro life and lives his belief, but whether he is trying to have it both way and what that says about his integrity….

don’t believe me?

Check out what he said yesterday to defend his comments about what is and is not a families choice

My position on abortion has been the same — on pro-life — has been the same throughout this campaign. And that is, I am pro-life from conception and I don’t believe in abortion. When he then tried to pigeon-hole me on my granddaughter being there as a victim of rape, then what would I do?”

“The only point I was trying to make: A lot of families will be in that position and they are not going to be thinking, “Well, what does the government want me to do?” My position is no abortion. My position is no abortion. But all I was trying to point out was take the typical family in this country and you don’t know what they might do in the heat of the moment,” Cain explained.

Fox’s anchor Martha MacCallum responded: “Here’s the issue pro-life people are going to have with that. You’re presenting it as a choice, a decision that is to be made by the family, not something that is considered murder by the laws of this country.” The anchor continued telling Cain that some politicians say they are pro-life but say they don’t want government involved in protecting the lives of unborn children.

“Let me just state again, I am pro-life from conception, no exceptions,” Cain responded. “I will not fund any abortions by the government, I will sign any legislation to de-fund and all of the other variations of this whole pro-life issue.”

MacCallum then asked, “The question is, do you want abortion to be legal in this country for families who want to make that decision?”

Cain replied, “No. No, I do not believe abortion should be legal in this country if that’s the question. I’m consistent with that.”

“Look, abortion should not be legal,” Cain said a moment later. “That is clear,” he said, adding that anyone who wanted to get an abortion would be breaking the law by doing so: “But if that family made a decision to break the law, that’s that family’s decision.”

The quote in bold is troublesome at best….I mean…really? That’s his explanation as to why he’s been all over the map on this starting with John Stossel and going on all week?

I was starting to give Cain a good hard look and was leaning toward going over into his camp since Perry has flamed out….but his groping around to explain his inconsistent earlier remarks are only making the problem worse.

First rule of holes Herman…when you find yourself in a hole, stop digging…..only he’s not using the shovel to dig…right now he is beating himself about the head with the business end of it.

If his is how he is running for POTUS…do we really want to have to deal with this when he is the Republican nominee for POTUS

Might as well vote for Romney because we’d be making the same lame excuses for the flip flops whether it was Herman or Mitt flopping around trying to be on both sides of every issue

The “Big Tent” analogy isn’t the correct one…the correct one is a MAGNET…we need to be a MAGNET that draws these independents in who are sick and tired of what’s going on in Washington—Fred Thompson

…because, today, speaking to Martha McCallum on FNC, he said that the rape victim who freely “chooses”an abortion would–in his world–necessarily be seeking an “illegal” one.

.

that Cain put in $1 million his own money. It says that the PAC planned to spend $1 million and that Cain is a backer/contributor to the PAC. It doesn’t specify how much he contributed and what other pro-life funding sources that PAC may have.

I thought two posts, same topic, front page, same day bordered on overkill. But then, I see people are still arguing the matter. So nice to see their tunnel vision is not effected. You did good, tonight.

As my computer’s been down all day, figured I missed out on new things happening. But judging by the remarks that are still being thrown out about this one topic, nothing else apparently occured in the world of poltics.

I see the “beat cain down” crew is still hard at it. I mean Cain is the only thing keeping Perry from hopping over Romney right? If it weren’t for the Cain Train, everybody would be riding the Perry Ferry?

Don’t bet on it.

*not taunting

Though Leon is great in trying to get this straighten out but it only shows and confirms that – Cain is not up to the job. He can’t seem to explain himself or what he stands for and at this rate nobody believes.

What I find odd and perhaps someone can shed light on this is: Cain can’t seem to get his message out an on message and is filled with gaffes – so those that left Perry because he was poor at debating and you didn’t think he could beat Obama how can you explain to me that Cain is any better?

n/t

Very classy, Leon. Makes us Redstaters proud.

did Herman Cain make this whole big brouhaha for himself with a series of completely incoherent contradictory statements about his position on abortion? If he’s devoutly pro-life, what he has been saying in interview after interview makes absolutely no sense. ???

The guy clearly believes Roe should be overturned and abortion should be generally illegal. He is pro-life. Yes, he’s really flubbed this up this week and he’s taken some criticism for that. And no, I really don’t think he should be first choice for president right now based on that and other things. But let’s be real. He’s not pro-choice.

Perry is 5th

But from what I read, at the very least he is pro-life for all but the exceptions of rape/insest. At the most he is pro-life for all. But don’t all the other candidates agree with those exceptions? So it should be a non-starter. If you like him for his tax plan go with him (assuming I am right and there is not difference with the other candidates).

I never doubted that Herman Cain was pro-life, personally. But it should take a week, and a dozen responses to make himself clear. His response should have been simple: “Yes, I am pro-life, and no, I don’t agree with Roe V. Wade, but it IS the law and until it is changed by the SCOTUS, a President has no say in the matter. Presidents don’t make law and they don’t overturn SCOTUS decisions.”

Now, how difficult is that?

I also disagree with the tax free zones he seems to now be proposing. How is a merchant in those areas supposed to be able to know if a customer makes enough to pay the taxes or not? Or do even the wealth, or middle income, get a tax break because of where they live?

Cain seems to be winging it and making it up as he goes along. I don’t need that, and neither does America

Very few would have the moral courage to post the retraction you just gave. Good job!

I still have my doubts about Cain, but being pro-life is no longer one of them.

Having read a lot about Cain’s personal life and having heard him speak, I never had any doubt about his pro life creds.

You have proven yourself to be a gentlemen deserving of our respect. As you so rightly point out, blogging allows one to comment instantly. In the case of redstate, our comments, once posted, are out there – good or bad. Perhaps we could all learn a lesson from this situation that sometimes it’s better to think before we speak, even on the net. Or maybe especially on the net.

I hope the rest of you that made the same error will man up.

–

I’ve stared at this diary for a quite few minutes now, deciding whether or not I wanted to respond. I do respect that you are trying to set the record straight, and I wanted you to know that. Thank you for that much, Leon.

It’s that he had so much trouble articulating his point in the first place. Then he went out and kicked two more interviews on Fox. The one with Stossel was just painful to watch because Stossel was trying to lead him to the fact that he was coming off as essentially pro-abortion.

Cain has a nasty habit of saying the exact opposite of what he means to. Not just on abortion, but look at his negotiating with terrorists stuff over the debate, or the Muslim controversy, or a half dozen other things. We all like his loose and cool “I’m not a politician” manner of speaking and all during the debates and stuff, but you just can’t do this while running for president. Heck, you can’t do this while running for mayor and expect to be taken seriously.

Because I deeply respect the RedState bloggers, I’m going to sketch-out my viewpoint…which hasn’t changed since the 1970′s…that I have characterized as multiple-choice: I am personally pro-life but publicly pro-choice. This reflects the American split, and the ultimate American intent to tolerate [if not enhance the expression of] philosophical differences.

It is predicated on Exodus 21:22-25, which clearly differentiates the potential-life in the womb with the realized-life [elaborated upon in the Talmud] after the fetus crowns.

I argue the GOP-perspective simply by noting the D’s are 100% pro-choice [Planned Parenthood, 3rd Trimester, Parental Consent/Notification, etc.].

I also recognize stare-decisis in this and other realms [e.g., Social Security] and greatly appreciate Perry’s adherence to the 10th Amendment.

This is why, perhaps, I have a greater affinity for Perry than for Romney, despite a recent survey that revealed that I overlap with the former over the latter [policy-wise] in-reverse [60% vs. 90%].

This, on a grander scale, is what endears me with the GOP; we are more focused on philosophical adherence to the Constitution than to whether a controversy may erupt regarding how to apply these principles in specific realms.

BTW, I would repeal Roe if possible AND/OR promote debate the issue as to whether the Constitution creates [in its penumbras] a right-to-privacy.

This is the libertarian-streak that animates my overall approach….

COMMENT?

I”n 1998, Cain said in an interview, “I am pro-life with exceptions, and people want you to be all or nothing.” He added: “I am not a social issue crusader. I am a free-enterprise crusader.” It’s not clear what the exceptions were in 1998; in 2004, he supported only one: when the life of the mother is at stake.”
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/herman-cains-muddled-abortion-remarks_598356.html

I”n 1998, Cain said in an interview, “I am pro-life with exceptions, and people want you to be all or nothing.” He added: “I am not a social issue crusader. I am a free-enterprise crusader.” It’s not clear what the exceptions were in 1998; in 2004, he supported only one: when the life of the mother is at stake.”
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/herman-cains-muddled-abortion-remarks_598356.html

Regardless of what any of us might think about Cain’s policy positions, when it comes down to the fact that he is directly challenging the left’s strongholds (or “sacred cows” as LUR expressed it in his diary last night), the kind of lead he is providing in this context is the right one. We need more of this from Conservatives. A lot more. We need to challenge the premises on which Liberalism has been established and then present our case to the American people as to why Conservatism is our best hope.

Facepalm.

I hope we can now start having reasonable discussions about the conservative we support to lead us – be it Cain, Perry or other candidate.

Cain simply doesn’t have the judgment for the job. The idea of promoting a plan that introduces a national sales tax on top of a national income tax, regardless of what he thinks he can enforce for rates, is not only horrifically bad policy. It also betrays a basic lack of understanding of human nature and how it will express itself when extra power is given to those who rule. If he makes other judgments out of that kind of template, we can expect other miscalulations down the road. He really doesn’t seem to get it. And he does not appear to have the ability to recognize he’s got to recalculate. And he doesn’t appear to be ‘teachable’.

was not 100% pro life.

His problem is that until now he has not been required to think about the issue and express himself as someone who could have a direct role in promoting the pro-life view via legislation, sanctions, etc.

This is the problem with a non politician.

We have candidates who have been (Santorum,, Gingrich) or are (Bachmann, Paul) in the legislature. They vote for and against bills. They sponsor legislation. We know their positions. Governors (Romney, Perry, Huntsman, Johnson) have sponsored legislation, supported or vetoed bills, etc in their states. we know where they stand and how they would perform as Presidents.

This is the most pro-life field for Republicans ever. I am really pleased and don’t hold Herb’s lack of political record against him.

However.

His approach is that of someone who feels strongly but whose views are not performative — that is, they don’t matter. Until now, that has been the case.

Herb needs to think through the issue — what does it mean, in legislative, performative terms, that he is pro life? Is it an example, is it coercive, is it punitive? What is the role of the pro life politician (as opposed to the preacher, talk show host, writer or speaker?)

This is something Herb has not thought through.

either forgotten Reagan in 1979 or are just too young to have known all of the grief he endured in his quest for the Presidency…….in 1979, without twitter and the blogs he was hounded beyond belief – i am not sure that he would be considered ‘electable’ today…….

Reagan was ridiculed for his economic policy (voodoo economics), misunderstanding of key issues (detente with USSR), desire to coddle the rich (tax rate cuts), and finally, for being out of touch with the common man. What people failed to understand was that while Reagan did not know all of the answers personally, he had the ability to inspire people to work with him to accomplish his goals. Reagan had a set of unwavering PRINCIPLES that he used to determine his response to questions, critiques, or situations.

Cain is not Reagan, however, his personality/optimism/vision reminds me of Reagan. I live in Atlanta, and have heard enough over the years from Cain to know that he is a true conservative in whom we can trust.

You could have just conveniently “forgotten” your post on Cain, moved on, and just tried to let it slip down the memory hole. It might have.

Kudos for stepping up.

#1

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/herman-cains-muddled-abortion-remarks_598356.html

In another interview when he ran for US Senate in Georgia in 2004:

Are there circumstances under which he thinks abortion should be legal?

There’s a four-second pause. “Ahhh,” [Cain] sighs, going silent for 16
seconds.

“You’re asking, are there circumstances in which it should be legal?” Yes.

“Let me get back to you on that. I need to mull this over because that question can be a trap either way you go. I don’t want to be inconsistent with what I have said in the past.”

You have to mull it over? You have to make sure it matches what you said
before? WOW, wouldn’t need to if you had a true core belief. It would come
with no pandering nor hesitation.

#2. If he’ll do it to run for a Governorship, he’d do it to run for President. He spent about the same when thinking of running for Governor and started all the right kinds of organizations, etc to help himself out.

I have no doubts he would spend a million dollars to gain the Presidency or start organizations, etc to set himself up for it. He aleady did it when the GOP wanted him to run for Lt. Governor in 2006 and he turned it down as he had higher aspirations,

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/insider/0105/010605.html

So has Cain given up politics — and a shot at the Governor’s Mansion in 2010? Heavens, no. He’s simply determined that the lieutenant governorship is an inadequate vehicle. Cain figures he can hang on more tightly to his core supporters by privatizing his ambitions, on a national-level. To wit:

He’s created a non-partisan, not-for-profit foundation called “A New Voice”

An accompanying political action committee will be able to offer campaign contributions that will enhance its clout.

Cain launches a weekly, two-hour radio talk show that he hopes to syndicate nationally.

Wrote a book to promote himself

In avoiding the lieutenant governor’s race, he’s keeping his network of followers — and his own identity — somewhat separate from Georgia’s GOP machine. It’s a move that smacks of maneuverability, and one man’s intention to remain a player.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/herman-cains-muddled-abortion-remarks_598356.html

In another interview:

Are there circumstances under which he thinks abortion should be legal?

There’s a four-second pause. “Ahhh,” [Cain] sighs, going silent for 16
seconds.

“You’re asking, are there circumstances in which it should be legal?” Yes.

“Let me get back to you on that. I need to mull this over because that question can be a trap either way you go. I don’t want to be inconsistent with what I have said in the past.”

He answered Yes that there are circumstances in which it should be legal. This is not a misunderstanding either as he repeated the question himself before answering it.

And..You have to mull it over? You have to make sure it matches what you said before? WOW, wouldn’t need to if you had a true core belief. It would come with no pandering nor hesitation.

My problem is that I don’t believe him. Especially when he just recently came out and said he’s ALWAYS been prolife w/no exceptions. That’s just not true. That’s a lie.

Now if he’d have said he used to be pro-life w/exceptions but had a come to Jesus moment, then I’d believe. But he lied. There’s no getting around that.

Not to mention, although he may say he’s 100% pro-life now, he doesn’t plan on doing anything about it either. Especially with the Presidency, he’d have great opportunity. That’s a problem for me. A big problem.

Well thank you so much for your mea culpa! Not many will do that these days, EXCEPT herman cain! And yes homework MUST be thorough before lambasting one to wit is the recent hatchet attack on Rubio by a less than credible author with ties to Castro.

Where you do not feel Herman is presidential, I feel 200% otherwise that he is! Remember how they attacked Reagan for being a B-movie actor. And he proved to be one of our best and patriotic presidents. Herman Cain fits that mold and I believe God has shown a bit of light on the the good ole USA by giving us a NON-politician problem solver, intelligent, humorous,and honest man from functional parentage that formed this man of character. Nothing dysfunctional about his background.

Here is an article written in 2006 discussing Cain’s Pro-Life advertising campaign he launched in several states.

http://www.lifenews.com/2006/09/13/nat-2583/

The problem is that you come across as having a serious agenda here . . . talk about massively and hugely blowing something out of proportion. I DON’T think the federal government should have a direct say in it. And you woudl probably see a much larger portion of the country abortion free if it hadn’t ever had a say in it.

You come off as, to be blunt, a condescending jerk here. And being a condescending jerk isn’t likely to win a single person over to your little jihad.

(I want to thank Davidpw for being the first to catch this info)
Cain has some explaining to do and the media once again isn’t doing their job vetting him:

Herman Cain on the Issues – Pro Life or Pro Choice Abortion, or Pro Gay:
http://christiancitizens.org/herman_cain_for_president.html

A few examples:
Affirmative action problem:
“Herman Cain favors Federal Government intervention in the work place on the behalf of blacks and minorities.”

Fed Audit Problem:
“Herman Cain, former Chairman and Member of the Board of Directors for the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, flippantly denies the need to Audit the Federal Reserve”

TARP Problem:
“He backed the Wall Street bailout, or according to Cain, the “recovery plan,” as he called it on his radio show. Cain wrote that nationalizing banks “is not a bad thing.”

School Voucher problem:
“Cain opposes school vouchers for private schools and backs efforts only to revisit, not eliminate, affirmative action.”

http://christiancitizens.org/herman_cain_republican_quotes.html
“Herman Cain has made the cause of civil rights a major issue. Cain, who has been endorsed by Rainbow/PUSH’s Southeastern operations director Joe Beasley, stated he would vote for reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act. Herman Cain favors Federal Government intervention in the work place on the behalf of blacks and minorities”

Herman Cain & Hillary Clinton: More In Common Than You Think
http://politicalvine.com/news/newsview17514.html

Then we have the Cain Gaffe Machine who can’t keep his foot out of his mouth.
Cain was for an electric fence or not
Cain is for exchanging GITMO prisoners or not
Cain is not for auditing the fed or not
Cain and racial baiting
Cain fellow blacks are brain washed
Cain was considered to be a moderate in his Senate race.

http://news.yahoo.com/cains-stumbles-fuel-doubts-electability-091436260.html

http://christiancitizens.org/herman_cain_republican_quotes.html

“Herman Cain favors Federal Government intervention in the work place on the behalf of blacks and minorities”

“He backed the Wall Street bailout, or according to Cain, the “recovery plan,” as he called it on his radio show. Cain wrote that nationalizing banks “is not a bad thing.”

Most of the anti-Herman people on here stick with their mantra, regardless of facts. But that’s mostly because they are pro-Perry people. But regardless, it’s appreciated when you update your previous posts that are factually inaccurate.

I don’t think any sane person is doubting Cain’s personal opposition to abortion. What did Herman Cain mean when he said “The government has no business determining morality”? It’s like a wealthy person against poverty donates $1 million to charity but says that the govt has no business re-distributing wealth! It’s very much understandable to act that way and I think this is applicable to Cain’s position on the issue.

“However, it is also sometimes one of the bad things about blogging, in that it allows you sometimes to shoot before the facts are all in.”

No, Leon. Blogs ALWAYS allow you to shoot before you’ve done your homework. Whether or not you shoot recklessly is a function of your character, temperament, and judgement.

By the way, is Herman Cain a militarist? Is he sympathetic to some Americans’ habitual aggression and mania for homicidal foreign adventures? Is he a warmonger? If so, then he’s not pro-life.