Image 01 Image 03



I did not watch Herman Cain on the various news shows, but Memeorandum is relatively quiet, so I assume there were no major gotchas.

Definitely get the sense the Occupy protests are getting uglier, not better.  The cream is not rising to the top, it’s the people we see riot at every G20 or other international gathering who are moving up.

The Israel prisoner swap is depressing, and will be even more so when Hamas holds its victory rally.  I’m happy for the Shalit family, but their happiness will be at the cost of the sadness of terror victim families watching the killers go free, to kill again.  There must be something else going on here, perhaps that is not public, otherwise it’s hard to understand Netanyahu agreeing to this.  Perhaps it was a strategic calculation to weaken the Palesinian Authority at a time it is seeking U.N. recognition back to the pre-1967 borders; or maybe there are events Netanyahu swill take place soon which will make the release of the prisoners seem like small change but make getting Shalit back impossible (e.g., collapse of Assad regime, war with Iran, etc.).

AxelPlouffe is going after Romney as a flip flopper.  Hey, that’s our gig! Axelrod says voters are unsure about Romney’s “core principles“.  No problem there for Obama, we know exactly what his core principles are.

What else?


Israel Matzav, IDF soldiers told to blow themselves up or kill their comrades rather than allow another Gilad Shalit.  What trading hundreds for one results in.

Israel Today, Israelis worried by anti-Semitic flavor of ‘Occupy Wall St.’ protests.  The same people who board ships for Gaza, call Israel an “Apartheid state,” and are part of the Boycott Divest Sanction movement.

Washington Times, Obama: King would have backed ‘Occupy Wall Street’.  He also spent much of the speech blaming “the last 10 years” before he took office for all our problems.  Never missing an opportunity to poke others in the eyes.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


well there’s this story in the New York Post

October 16, 2011
Con Ed threatens to evict Ground Zero Mosque
Rick Moran

The Ground Zero Mosque is in danger of being evicted because it owes the electric company $1.7 million in back rent.

The Park 51 group building the Islamic community center has sued Con Ed.

New York Post:

Ann Althouse, no Herman Cain fan, had this to say:

“Herman Cain nailed “Meet the Press.”
“In my opinion, and I was quite critical of Cain after the last debate.”
Ann Althouse

I thought he was very good in an openly hostile interview where every soundbite and reference had a purposely negative spin.

He seems to have the ability to gently, but very firmly, bulldoze over any objections.

I knew I shouldn’t have taken a peek at LI today. It’s addictive!

I have a ton of studying to do today, but now I’m feeling aggravated (Shakina Nayfack) and depressed (prisoner swap).

Guess I’ll watch Lulu to feel good again before hitting the books.

LukeHandCool (who really needs to give up ice cream and Legal Insurrection)

Well, Cain did admit “Some people will pay more” under his 9-9-9 plan and he had no idea what David Gregory was talking about when the NBC host asked him if he was a “neo-conservative.”

Otherwise it was a pretty tame interview.

Brian O’Connor

Video of the Cain interview:

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | October 16, 2011 at 6:07 pm

Herman Cain was great on Meet the Press. The one gotcha question was when he told Gregory that he’s a fan of Reagan’s “peace through strength” doctrine related to foreign policy. That prompted Gregory to say something like, “so you’re a neo-conservative then?”. Can replied, “I don’t know about neoconservative, but I’m a conservative.” I was a little surprised that Gregory let him off the hook with that answer and didn’t press him on it. Gregory had him in a spot where he could have really embarrassed him and done some damage but he chose not to.

It’s clear to me if Cain wants to be Top Tier, he needs to take a crash course on foreign policy. Eventually, he’s going to run into an interviewer who won’t be as gracious as Gregory was this morning. Maybe he can hire John Bolton to ride around in the bus and tutor him.

What I’ve seen of Elizabeth Warren’s recent videos is far better than her demagogic one from the fundraiser. Her Web site is effective too. She is doing a decent job of sounding like a regular-Jane middle class striver.

Warren is favored in the illiquid Intrade market on the race. I wish I could disagree, but I can’t. I’ll vote for Brown, but it will be a listless vote.

It’s not the Kennedy seat, it’s the people’s seat. Well, it may not be the Brown seat for much longer either. And Brown has given me precious little reason to get agitated about that.

Not having too much problem analyzing Romney’s “core principles”. Already thoroughly comprehend Teh Wan’s, so it’s pretty easy to make the switch.

Speaking of Romney, are voters in Iowa and New Hampshire aware of the fact that they’re paying for RomneyCare?

Perhaps Israel has calculated that releasing all those prisoners will cause more trouble within the various Arab camps than they will for Israel. Think of 1000 terrorist leaders and killers returning and saying they want back their old jobs. And revenge on whoever they think helped get them caught. Think of what Chicago would have gone through had Al Capone gotten out of prison early, and been healthy. Lotsa old scores to settle.

Or perhaps they want to see where they go and who they see – lots of intelligence can be gathered that way.

    BannedbytheGuardian in reply to radiofreeca. | October 17, 2011 at 1:12 am

    Agree. After the ‘celebrations’ – this s going to upset the (bad ) apple cart. They can’t be bombers again yet they can’t be in any position of authority . Palestinians are wanting /negotiating statehood they cannot put forward convicted terrorists.

    Yet they will see themselves as heroes.

Henry Hawkins | October 16, 2011 at 9:06 pm

Romney’s problem is that people don’t know his core principles. Obama’s problem is that people do know his core principles.

    Oh, I disagree. The problem is that most people DO know Romney’s core values. Depending on what day it is. And the fact that one of his “global warming” advisors is now working for Obama.

Re: “Israelis worried by anti-Semitic flavor of ‘Occupy Wall Street’ protests.”

Maybe copies of the fascinating first-hand account of Wall Street life, “Liar’s Poker” should be handed out to the anti-Semitic protesters.

When they read about the antics of Ranieri and the whole Italian-American contingent of traders at Salomon Brothers, (many of whom didn’t even have college educations … hey, how did they get in there? … I thought you had to be Jewish?!) they’ll be forced to change their signs to “Jews and Italians control Wall Street.”

“Jews and Italians control Wall Street” won’t have the same catchy singularity of blame, will it?

I put all the blame on President Obama for not saying, “Knock this off, right now!”

Talk about teachable moments.

He’s pretending not to know about what’s going on … just like when he feigned not knowing of tea-party protests he could’ve seen by looking out the window.

Absolutely pathetic and dangerous.

I never wanted to act or sound like a lefty and say, “He’s not my president.”

But this is going well beyond being devisive for political gain. This is sowing extremely dangerous seeds.

By pretending he doesn’t know about the ugly undercurrent (if an undercurrent can still be an undercurrent when it’s plainly on the surface … but conveniently ignored by the MSM) he is fanning the fire. This has to stop now.

President Obama can call these anti-Semites out. If he doesn’t very soon, he is not my President.

LukeHandCool (who wonders if the President has ever pondered what America would now be like if, like the OWS L.A. anti-Semite hopes, the Jews were run out of America. Think of all that the Jews have done for America, Mr. President. All the accomplishments from which we’ve all benefitted. Think long and hard, Mr. President … while I can still, just barely, call you my President. I like to extend a generous benefit of the doubt to people … and, I might be a little bit dumb … but I’m not totally stupid. The world is watching you, Mr. President, to see what you do. Do the right thing and call them out and shame them now).

Cain still came across as unknowledgeable on foreign policy and had to admit that some people would pay more under the 9-9-9 plan.

There was a variety of takes on Cains “Meet The Press” appearance at:
for example:
“When pressed for answers today on Iran, Afghanistan and Iraq, the best Cain could do was to repeat his mantra that he would consult experts and then figure it out.”

Cain is starting to get attacked strongly by the Left and his lack of foreign policy knowledge is going to hurt him, as is the meme the MSM are pushing that seniors will have to pay more tax. It may not be fair or necessarily true, but most people will not read enough about 9-9-9 to find out if it is true for them. They will just see a tax hike and vote for Obummer.
Obama wants to run against Romney, he can then negate the Obamacare charge with Romney’s people helped me model Obamacare on Romneycare, and Romney is a big Wall St guy. Why do you think Obama’s minions are protesting Wall Street.

If not Cain, then give Perry a second shot, he has come up with drill baby drill a la Sarah Palin, and this first part of his economics plan actually brings jobs, baby, jobs.

    retire05 in reply to damocles. | October 16, 2011 at 10:00 pm

    Americans need jobs. American want the goverment made smaller and starting with the EPA is a damn good start. Americans are not looking for a Comedian In Chief who makes stupid statements and then has to call them “jokes” to try to back off of them.

    WarEagle82 in reply to damocles. | October 16, 2011 at 10:40 pm

    Most presidential candidates have little to no foreign policy experience when they are elected.

    Obama had ZERO foreign policy experience when he entered office. Plus, he had a decidedly anti-American philosophy. And after 3 years he has learned NOTHING. His current foreign policy is worse and more destructive NOW than it was 3 years ago.

    It is virtually inconceivable that Cain could do any worse in foreign policy that Obama is doing right now. At least his guiding philosophy won’t be anti-American.

And let’s not forget that Cain is now trying to walk back his absolutely absurd remarks about an electric fence that could kill people trying to enter the nation illegally. He is, once again, relying on the “it was only a joke” meme and said “America needs to get a sense of humor”, the same thing he said when he shot his mouth off about Muslims and had to wind up meeting with American Muslims and kissing a lot of butt.

I think a lot of Sarah’s supporters jumped to the Cain Train when she decided not to run, but come on, folks, do you really think Sarah Palin would have made such a stupid statement about a border fence designed to kill people?

The IDF is telling their soldiers to kill themselves or their comrades if capture appears imminent? This is supposed to inspire the kind of aggressive military spirit that has allowed Israel to defeat their numerically superior foes in the past? This is insanity…

Popping in with a shameless promotion – my latest blog post, “A Tale of Two Occupations” is up:

It’s about the difference between the OWS protesters and those who love this country. If you like it, please pass it along –

As a palate cleanser for the post about the 99%-er Critical Dance Studies doctorate, here is the 53% graphic essay site.

Check it out. The photos and artwork are amazing.

    Anchovy in reply to Mutnodjmet. | October 16, 2011 at 11:20 pm

    Yeah, but if these people had a PhD in Critical Dance they could have skipped the written notes and just put on tights and danced their message and saved a tree.

    Besides, didn’t Kurt Vonnegut Jr. have a character in one of his novels that communicated by tap dancing and farting?

With regard to the OWS, we should remember that when the cream doesn’t rise to the top, the scum usually does.

So, Obama advisers are telling him to go all in, siding with the 99%’ers on his upcoming *bus* tour. Oh please, oh please, oh please, do it.

BannedbytheGuardian | October 17, 2011 at 1:23 am

The dynamics of this OWS/ Obama’s incitations is morphing into a class warfare.

The more I think about the possible direction in a tense atmosphere the more i fear for 2012.

The more I see Sarah Palin going low key -the smarter I think she is. I 100% believe hers & her family’s lives would be in danger. As to the other GOP candidates -no one really cars about them . They are more likely to be ignored than assassinated.

See there are pluses in being boring & stand for not much types.

I hear Cain said the following in an exchnage today about the 9% sales tax

“MR. CAIN: First, they’re missing one very critical point about the sales tax. It wasn’t even mentioned in that analysis that you read. On the price of goods, there are invisible taxes that are built into everything we buy. We’ll simply–those invisible taxes are going to go away. And we’re replacing them with a 9 percent visible tax. For example, take a loaf of bread. The farmer pays taxes on his profits. The company that makes the flour, the baker, the delivery man. By the time that loaf of bread gets to the grocery store, there are a series of invisible taxes, which are also called embedded taxes. So, in reality, those taxes go away and so the price of goods don’t go up.

MR. GREGORY: You’re saying they actually go down?

MR. CAIN: Yes, they actually go down.

MR. GREGORY: Based on what?

MR. CAIN: Based upon competition. Competition drives prices down. For example, suppose one breadmaker says, “I’m going to charge $2.20 for a loaf of bread,” and the other one says he’s going to charge $2.40 for a loaf of bread. Well, guess which one is going to win out based upon the quality being essentially the same?”

Does anyone actually believe that IF (and that’s a huge IF) his plan lowers or eliminates these “hidden taxes” he talking about, that companies will actually lower their prices by 9% or more make up for the extra tax you and I are paying?

This is a serious question: Does anyone think that?

Cain to my knowledge has not given any historical examples to show that this has happened. I can give one historical counter-example: unleaded gas. Unleaded gas is cheaper to produce than leaded gas, but when it was introduced, it was more expensive.

As leaded gas was phased out, there is no evidence that the savings were passed on to the customer. People were used to paying more for unleaded gas so the price stayed the same and sales margins improved.

I suppose you could argue that few people knew that unleaded gas was actually cheaper to produce, so they were ore accepting of the price increase, assuming it was linked to cost. Cain 9% sales tax — which is a big tax compared to most state’s sales tax — will be overt, but I think people will still see it decoupled from the cost of goods.

So do you think that Cain’s 999 plan saving companies money — if it does — will lead to them lower their prices, or will they do other things with that savings?

And do you really believe that the saving for business under his plan will amount to 9% of gross sales, the amount that would be necessary for overall prices to remain the same?

Personally I think Cain is confused or being disingenuous here. I doubt he’d run his pizza biz this way.

Share your thoughts.

Another question about Cain’s 999 plan: I read elsewhere that his plan does not allow salaries (and thus presumably contractor payments) as deductions for business? However some capital equipment costs can be deducted? Can this be possible?

If so, what the logic? I can write off a piece of machinery but not the person who operates it? Is this welfare for robots or something (since I can deduct the price of the robot but not the wage of a worker, so I should never employ any workers?)

For service businesses, the cost of labor is the main cost. Perhaps he thinks that removing the payroll taxes balances the 9% he intends to levy on business, but in fact it doesn’t, especially if your biz uses a mix of employees and contractors (think builders).

Right now, if you lose money, you don’t pay taxes. Under Cains plan, it sounds very much like many small businesses — like mine — could lose money and still pay a hefty 9% tax on what amounts gross sales, not on my profit. Since many businesses lose money for the first few years, Cain’s plan sound like a really bad idea as if will hamper the start of new small business.

BTW: My point here is not to shred Cain’s 999 plan in detail since it is not — and probably never will be — policy.

My intent is to shine a light on how he thinks — does he understand reality on a broad level? Does he understand unintended consequences? Can he think critically about complex topics?

The answers appear to be: No, No, and NO!

Cain maybe be a charismatic guy, but he’s beginning the scare me.

PS: His bit about not charging national sales tax on “used” items — which I also heard — is sheer lunacy. What’s the rationale for that? Consumption is not “consumption” if an item is “used”? How used? A year? A week? 5 minutes? What?

Do I need to get a specially approved Fed used stamp? Will they audit me to determine my shirts were really bought at Goodwill? Will Sears set up a “used tools” aisle? Has he no idea how distorting that would be? Scary stuff…

(If the blogosphere is getting these details wrong, please correct them. I’d like to think better of the guy…)

    retire05 in reply to Owen J. | October 17, 2011 at 12:22 pm

    One of the problems with Cain’s 9-9-9 is that it does impose a 9% sales tax on new goods, but not used goods. This will accomplish two things: first, it will increase the cost of new goods (i.e. a new car at $40K will have an increased cost of $3,600.00 in taxes. That money will be financed, costing the buyer even more in the long run, increase the cost of the monthy payment and reduce the buying power of the consumer) and it will also increase the cost of used goods due to demand.

    Example: the Cash For Clunkers program seemed great on the surface, but the unintended consequence came from the demolition of all those used vehicle turned in for the program. The value of used vehicles has now increased based in availability. The fewer used vehicles, the higher the cost of used vehicles go.

    Cain’s plan will reduce the demand for new goods, drive the cost of used goods higher, and the unintended consequence will be fewer jobs required to produce new goods.

    Also, it basically turns Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid into pure welfare programs as workers will no longer pay anything into the system. It will be totally unfunded by worker contributions. At least now, it sees some revenue for workers. All that will end.

    And what about people who don’t file income tax returns because they are in a position to live off their Social Security checks. Ideally, seniors live in homes that are paid off, have no mortgage interest deductions to claim, no children as tax deductions, so their income requirements are lessened. They will pay the 9% sales tax on the two biggest items in their budgets, food and medication. Many states don’t charge sales tax on those two items, so with a 9% sales tax, the seniors buying power will be reduced by 9%.

    Cain talks about a “prebate”. How does that work. Will seniors see an increase in their Social Security check to cover the 9%? How will that be determined? Will they have to submit their total annual spending (in the form of sales receipts) to the IRS to determine the “prebate?” Will they get a card, much like a Social Security card, that shows they are exempt from the sales tax? What if they are eligible one year, but the next year take some money from their IRAs to do some traveling? Will they be back billed for the 9% sale tax by the IRS? Doesn’t this create a whole new department for an already oppressive IRS?

    9-9-9 sounds good on the surface. But there is an old adage that if you really knew how the sausage was made, you would never eat sausage again.

      Owen J in reply to retire05. | October 17, 2011 at 5:49 pm

      yes, there’s lot of problesm I’m seeing right now with his plan.

      But the to me isn’t to nitpick the plan as much as to figure out how the guy thinks. Sure, it just a starting point, but it’s a radical starting point compared to current practice, so what I want to know is: Did he bother to try to think this through or not?

      The evidenc so far e is that he did not. It sounds to me that he just thought it was catchy and cool sounding and made for good sound bites.

      I don’t like that in a leader.

Cain was masterful on Meet the Press on Sunday. Far more poised and prepared than Romney, Perry and any of the other GOP want-to-bees. He answered all questions without hesitation, aw(s), buts or long pauses.

Regarding 9-9-9, anyone with two neurons to rub together should realize that it’s a starting point. I doubt that a national sales tax would survive in any event but the income tax surely needs to be drastically revamped on the side of simplification.

And those that favor Perry, well if you want the the K Street lobby gang to thrive, he’s your guy. Take it from me, a Texas resident that has continually witnessed the shafting of the working stiff under his watch. “No new taxes” might be his slogan but watch out for them thar’ new fees! And don’t even get me started on his soft approach regarding illegal immigration!

Be careful for what you wish for…

    spartan in reply to GrumpyOne. | October 17, 2011 at 7:27 am

    Of course he was masterful ….. he’s your guy.
    Your guy is clueless when it comes to foreign policy. Would you like to know what is the primary job of the POTUS (as contained in the Constitution)?
    Yep, National Defense. But of course, he will have advisors help him with such issues. How much do you want to bet Cain will be looking to K Street for guidance? He may even seek advice on “Right of Return” from J Street (just for balance).

    As for Perry and illegal immigration:
    By many measures, Perry’s approach to immigration ought to please the party faithful. In his decade-long term as governor, he cracked down on so-called sanctuary cities, imposed tough restrictions on drivers’ licenses for immigrants, and sent armed Texas Rangers to the border while demanding more federal boots on the ground. He opposes a federal DREAM Act and a swift path to legalization for illegal immigrants.

    “Of all the Republican candidates he’s the one who stands out the most on wanting to deal with this issue and put it to bed and resolve the problems,” said Jim Gilchrist, co-founder of the Minutemen Project, a Tea Party-aligned activist group that monitors activity along the U.S.-Mexico border.

    If you are a resident of TX, you should know this. As a resident of GA, I can say with certainty Herman Cain is a phony. He is more libertarian than conservative (he got his start in radio from another libertarian Neil Boortz). Ask yourself why Cain (and Romney) refused to sign the Susan B Anthony Pro-Life pledge. Please don’t respond with Cain’s rhetoric/excuses. If one will not defend the unborn, how does one guarantee he will defend the living?

    As for 9-9-9, the VAT was introduced in England in the early 1970’s, with the guarantee it would never go over 10%. Would you like to guess where that rate is today?
    By all means, be careful what you wish for ……

    retire05 in reply to GrumpyOne. | October 17, 2011 at 12:02 pm

    And just what new “fees” would those be, GrumpyOne? Be specific. Name them.

    And your claim of “soft approach on illegal immigration” is just another Romney/Cain talking point. Outside of in-state tuition given to the children of illegals (of which 77% were born on U.S. soil in Texas and at least 12 other states have done) what other objections do you have concerning Perry’s border policies?

    Do you object to the 150 Texas Rangers Recon Squad personnel being put on the border? Or Perry’s refusal to accept a phone call from the DoJ and the Mexican counsel when Humberto Leal was executed? Do you object to the number of drones, owned by the State of Texas, and not the federal government, that fly the border and report to the Border Patrol directly? How about Perry spending money from the Governor’s account that gave more money to border county sheriff departments so they could hire more man power and have a greater presence on their borders with Mexico?

    I want to know just exactly what it is you seem to think Perry is weak on when it comes to the border. And then, I also want you to provide a comparison between what other border state governors have done to protect THEIR common border with Mexico to what Rick Perry has done.

    Owen J in reply to GrumpyOne. | October 17, 2011 at 5:57 pm

    Of course the 999 tax plan is a starting point — the question is, what does it say about Cain’s approach? As you say, the sales tax probably is a no-go and without it, his whole plan falls apart.

    So is Cain serious here or is he just bloviating to sound “radical” and “cool”? I want real solutions, and evidense that a leader can think through viable solutions to complex problems — not campaign cuteness. 999 sounds like the latter to me and I do not want that in a leader.

    BTW: If you want to make substantive points about Perry, do so. Repeating cheap ignorant talking points about him (or any other candidate) simply reduces your credibility to 0.

Some people think Cain didn’t know the flavors of conservative, this from a guy who was a talk radio host, has been hanging around conservative conferences for many, many years, has had conversations with thousands of people on the right side of politics over decades. One thing I noticed about Cain is people seem to automatically think they know something but Cain is ignorant (see 9-9-9). You can see it in the interviews, David Gregory being a good example. Watch the video, read the transcript, then decide who is the ignorant party. I would caution people, be careful, Cain is a lot deeper and better prepared than his cheerful optimistic exterior might lead you to believe.

    spartan in reply to Viator. | October 17, 2011 at 7:40 am

    As stated above-Cain is predominately libertarian. I don’t have a problem per se with that but Cain is not a conservative in classical (Burke) or modern sense (Kirk). I do think Gregory was either dishonest or disingenuous asking Cain if he was a Neo-conservative. A neo-conservative is someone who is unapologetically liberal on social issues but is a foreign policy hawk. Other than his libertarian bent, there is not much to suggest a liberal streak in Cain.
    I do not think Cain is ready for prime-time and we will respectfully disagree on that issue.

A nice interactive way to scare the willies out of you.

Red = The Keynesian house of cards.

@ Owen J: I don’t know about your unleaded gas example, but I would think that, in most cases, the lowering of production costs for a given product would indeed lower the price of that product for the consumer. Your theory that prices won’t come down, because people get “used to” paying “x” dollars for something and therefore manufacturers will simply pocket the savings generated by reduced production costs seems to assume price-fixing as an inherent feature of markets. Perhaps manufacturers collude on keeping prices high in certain instances (unleaded gas?), but if we’re talking about bread bakeries, for example, I seriously doubt that the savings would not be passed onto consumers, all else being equal.

    Owen J in reply to Conrad. | October 17, 2011 at 6:27 pm

    Conrad: Price-fixing may not be an inherent feature of markets, but maximizing profits is. Outside of Moore’s Law industries (where the savings are huge), I am not aware of industries that generally lower prices when costs decline, especially by modest amounts.

    Think of organic food — it is in many cases cheaper to produce, but it always costs more because people have been sold on the idea that it should; organic food actually carries a sort of “guilt tax.” And of course, it is not that much cheaper to produce, so the margin is small, and dropping the price by the margin the producers must feel would only dilute profits without increasing market share.

    So the question is really the price point and how much does the price point have to change to generate competive advantage. I submit that for most markets a 9% marginal cost difference will not it.

    For empirical data on this, look at discounts: a 10% discount does not increase sales in most industries or confer a competitive advantage: 15% might and 20-25% usually does.

    So I doubt very much that producers would get any advantage to reducing their prices by a less than 9% decrease in costs. And of course, there is nothing that says that the 999 plan will actually result in lower tax overall — I keep finding scenarios where they actually go up.

    I also do not like the argumnet in principle. What Cain is saying is that he wants to hit me with a new significant mandated cost but it is OK, because their will be some savings in there, Maybe there will but the savings is not mandated. He’s saying the market will react to his proposal is such a way to generate some savings but what does he know? Does he have any hard evidence?

    Of course not. He’s just hand-waving — saying “trust me.”

    The other problem is that producers are not going to adjust prices in response to a moving target and a national Sales tax could be such a target: who says it’s going to stay at 9%? Govt’s love to monkey with sales tax — look at Calif. Whenever they want more money, they raise the sales tax — a “temporary” tax — and then it stays there as the new baseline.

    Sales tax is easy to raise because it becomes buried in the cost of living — no one really knows at the end of the year what they spent on it. But income tax is right there on your tax return. Cain is being sneaky in calling this “transparent” — literally true but misleading.

    But again, the issue is: What does this tell us about Cain’s approach to governing? Based on what I’ve seen, it tells us nothing good.

There is no secret about Netanyahu’s deal. This was absolutely predictable; he talks a wonderful game, but whenever push comes to shove he’s the squish to beat all squishes. Remember that he’s the one who gave away Chevron, and then reneged on his promise that if the Arabs would shoot from the hills IDF tanks would immediately take them back. Netanyahu does what is electorally advantageous for him, and in this case he caved to an intense campaign that would portray him as a heartless beast if he declined the deal. Bringing Gil’ad home gets him public approval, and damn the dozens or hundreds whose lives have been sacrificed in advance; we don’t know their names, so they and their families don’t count.

VetHusbandFather | October 17, 2011 at 10:04 am

Anyone watch the full MLK Jr Dedication speech? Anyone else feel like Obama was talking about himself the whole time and not MLK Jr. Particularly at the part were he started ‘After winning the Nobel peace prize he was called a…”

Cain may have a second amendment problem. On local Conservative radio this am, Mark Davis played a Cain interview,( May 2011) with Wolf Blitzer. Cain stated that the second amendment is a states issue. He started by saying that he fully supports the 2nd amendment, but then when pressed,Cain said laws on gun control are a states right issue.
Cain needs to stop with the states rights on gun control. If he stated his position correctly, that would mean if a states could limit the possession of arms overriding the Constitution. If he did not mean this or misspoke, Cain needs to fix this statement ASAP.

Just to update. In defense of Herman Cain I did some more research on Cains later campaign speeches on the second amendment and he seems to have walked back the comment he made on Blitzers show. It may have been a “gotcha” moment where he wasn’t well prepared, or simply did not explain his position fully.
I am willing to take his position as stated in later speeches, although these speeches were not the ones that were highlighted on the Conservative radio show that brought up the Blitzer answer. The host really likes Cain,
but was worried about the comment made on Blitzers show.