Clown?

Post #349,447 by SpiceWare 10/20/11 3:39:19 PM Reply	Clown? CAIN: ... I can have an opinion on an issue without it being a directive on the nation. I wish more politicians felt this way.
Post #349,449 by Another Scott 10/20/11 4:25:03 PM Reply	He's playing games. Like a clown. ;-) Transcript - http://transcripts.c...10/19/pmt.01.html Ok, Morgan asked him his personal feelings about various hot-button issues. That's a ridiculous way to phrase questions to a presidential candidate ("I like turtles"), but there you are. Sensible people know that personal views often guide what policies that a candidate will try to put in place. What's important is what he thinks the federal government should do about abortion laws and policies, not whether he likes turtles.... But even giving him points on offering his "personal view", he can't even keep a consistent view for the few minutes of this interview: MORGAN: Abortion. What's your view of abortion? CAIN: I believe that life begins at conception. And abortion under no circumstances. And here's why -- MORGAN: No circumstances? CAIN: No circumstances. MORGAN: Because many of your fellow candidates -- some of them qualify that. CAIN: They qualify but -- MORGAN: Rape and incest. CAIN: Rape and incest. MORGAN: Are you honestly saying -- again, it's a tricky question, I know. CAIN: Ask the tricky question. MORGAN: But you've had children, grandchildren. If one of your female children, grand children was raped, you would honestly want her to bring up that baby as her own? CAIN: You're mixing two things here, Piers? MORGAN: Why? CAIN: You're mixing -- MORGAN: That's what it comes down to. CAIN: No, it comes down to it's not the government's role or anybody else's role to make that decision. Secondly, if you look at the statistical incidents, you're not talking about that big a number. So what I'm saying is it ultimately gets down to a choice that that family or that mother has to make. Not me as president, not some politician, not a bureaucrat. It gets down to that family. And whatever they decide, they decide. I shouldn't have to tell them what decision to make for such a sensitive issue. MORGAN: By expressing the view that you expressed, you are effectively -- you might be president. You can't hide behind now the mask, if you don't mind me saying, of being the pizza guy. You might be the president of United States of America. So your views on these things become exponentially massively more important. They become a directive to the nation. CAIN: No they don't. I can have an opinion on an issue without it being a directive on the nation. The government shouldn't be trying to tell people everything to do, especially when it comes to social decisions that they need to make. MORGAN: That's a very interesting departure -- CAIN: Yes. MORGAN: -- from the normal politics. CAIN: Exactly. Oooh. He's such a Maverick. 1) He was asked about his personal view. When it was pointed out there may be complications in applying his personal view to a real-world example, he changes the subject to government's role. He didn't answer the question about whether his family member should bring to term a pregnancy resulting from a rape. Herman Cain isn't going to be, personally, having an abortion. :-/ 2) I wasn't aware that it was OK to violate the fundamental rights to privacy and self-determination of reproduction of "not that big a number" of people. :-/ 3) He's trying to have it both ways: 'My feelings are so strong about being "pro-life" that I'm personally absolutely, positively opposed to abortion in all circumstances! But if someone decides they want to have an abortion, it's none of my business. That's just a personal decision.' Letting others make up their own mind is what's known as being "pro-choice" in the real world. He doesn't get to redefine the meaning of words. He either cannot express his views coherently, or he doesn't have coherent views. Or both. ;-) 4) He needs to tell the "base of the Republican party", the folks he's pandering to by posting his "I'm 100% pro-life. End of story." tweet, that. My $0.02. Cheers, Scott.
Post #349,451 by beepster 10/20/11 5:19:46 PM 10/20/11 5:22:53 PM Reply	Now you are incorrect, too. His belief is his. If asked for counsel, he would recommend no abortion. So if you want to limit to the binary, he is both pro-life and pro-choice. (which shows the glaring inequities of those items to define ones position on the matter) He recognizes that this is his opinion, and others have their opinion, and in a free country, that means sometimes people get to do things that you, yourself don't like or believe in. In short, he appears to believe it is NOT the governments role to legislate morality. (at least this particular one) And on this one issue, he gets plus marks from me. HOWEVER, his 3 9s plan is so half baked that the number of minus marks can never be overcome. (post edit) -- the plus marks are for recognizing there are things that the government has no business in and that this is one of those things...not on his beliefs on abortion. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are. Edited by beepster Oct. 20, 2011, 05:22:53 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #349,452 by Another Scott 10/20/11 5:21:46 PM Reply	Interesting that you can read his mind. ;-)
Post #349,453 by beepster 10/20/11 5:26:12 PM Reply	Not a mind reader. He said as much in his answer. You call it gamesmanship. However, there are many people that feel as he does, that they personally would not but also feel that it isn't the governments role to legislate that behavior. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #349,469 by mmoffitt 10/21/11 8:55:58 AM Reply	Nice try. He explicitly stated a "Pro-Choice" position. No, it comes down to it's not the government's role or anybody else's role to make that decision. Pro-Lifers want to ban it, make it illegal. Most moderate that view to include exceptions for rape and/or incest. But the whole discussion is idiotic. I find myself agreeing with Cain here. It is a private matter, just as any other decision concerning healthcare is. You can argue about whether or not you want to live in a society (as we apparently wish to do) in which only those fortunate enough to have the cash to pay for healthcare get it. But that is a different question. His position as stated here is unambiguously Pro-Choice.
Post #349,470 by beepster 10/21/11 9:18:58 AM Reply	Doesn't really matter he isn't going to get to Pres for us to have to worry about it. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #349,471 by mmoffitt 10/21/11 9:27:20 AM Reply	Careful. I said the same thing about Dubya. ;0)
Post #349,484 by crazy 10/21/11 10:12:09 AM Reply	No, that's a submarine statement His policy actions will be driven by this. He explicitly said he will only appoint judges that will allow prosecution of abortion doctors and cut any funding possible in any way. He's clear on this. And Bush (no matter how stupid) made it in. There is NO pass on these statements. So no matter what he said about his daughter, he will make sure it is as difficult as possible. Which in some states means traveling 6 hours to the only clinic in the state, getting a horror story read, and then delaying 24 hours before having the abortion. Which means they rent a room or travel back and forth. The cost skyrockets, and people in that situation are already on the edge. So to have to spend a few hundred over baseline for no reason other than political pandering (a state by state issue) is the issue. Either it's legal or not, and if legal, any non-medical based impediments are not acceptable. Which means these laws get challenged and end up at the supreme court. Which means any candidate who's position is in the direction of these impediments fails. That's MY litmus test on this issue. Do you have one? As to my political policy view on abortion, I am 100% pro-life. End of story. I will appoint judges who understand the original intent of the Constitution. Judges who are committed to the rule of law know that the Constitution contains no right to take the life of unborn children. I will oppose government funding of abortion. I will veto any legislation that contains funds for Planned Parenthood. I will do everything that a President can do, consistent with his constitutional role, to advance the culture of life."
Post #349,487 by beepster 10/21/11 11:51:34 AM Reply	That was a revision to the earlier statements and, quite frankly, a very large change in the meaning of those statements. Until he is actually a candidate, not a "potential" candidate. I'm not going to waste my time on it. The earlier "plus" points he got from the initial statement have been rescinded, because he clearly (now) didn't mean what he said (then). And I'm not going to engage with you one way or the other on this issue. If you'd like, you can invent a position for me and debate it, you've done this before. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #349,513 by crazy 10/22/11 7:01:56 AM Reply	No assumptions here As you said, he not a candidate yet. But I just wanted to state my position and why. No hassles to you.
Post #349,517 by crazy 10/22/11 7:32:07 AM Reply	On the other hand, his star is rising http://www.washingto...a-gop-straw-poll/
Post #349,524 by boxley 10/22/11 10:31:37 AM Reply	the board rooms like him and he isnt mormon his tax plan pleases the tea partiers so if he can fundraise he has a shot on the ballot Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #349,518 by crazy 10/22/11 7:32:09 AM 10/22/11 9:50:44 AM Reply	Dupe http://www.washingto...a-gop-straw-poll/ Edited by crazy Oct. 22, 2011, 09:50:44 AM EDT Expand All History
Post #349,472 by hnick 10/21/11 9:32:17 AM Reply	Two points. First and foremost: It is a private medical decision and the only principal involved is the woman. She may CHOOSE to be informed by her partner, family, doctor, clergy, or pet cat. She is the only principal in the decision. If he ever said that, I would deem him correct. It is my impression he replaced conciseness with a lot of weasel words, but I'm being hugely fallible these days. Second: I don't think the point is that he actually has made a clear stand. I think he is trying to stand firmly on both sides of the fence without straddling. It's a difficult trick and I don't think he does it very well. In my opinion, he's just another hack who would piss on a spark plug for more power or prestige read *MONEY*
Post #349,475 by mmoffitt 10/21/11 9:37:53 AM 10/21/11 9:39:07 AM Reply	Addendum. And I have a point for you. I should have said that I agree with the quoted statement as written. I'll buy your argument that "the only principal involved is the woman" if and only if you buy the proposition that the biological father to an out of wedlock pregnant teen is held harmless by any decision the "woman" makes. An out of wedlock teen pregnancy is a mistake. Once pregnant, a decision needs to be made. Whatever decision is made, if the sperm contributing partner has no say in the next decision, he shouldn't be held accountable for the consequences of that decision. But that's not the way the law currently works, is it? Better to leave it out of the law entirely. Edited by mmoffitt Oct. 21, 2011, 09:39:07 AM EDT Expand All History
Post #349,486 by hnick 10/21/11 11:46:20 AM Reply	Different subject, but the law should be rewritten. Given agreement on the basics, an appropriate law could be written. Before they get to the basics, however, they have to solve something involving waltzing angels and pins. I'm not hopeful.
Post #349,488 by Another Scott 10/21/11 12:35:42 PM Reply	Well, there is that... ;-)
Post #349,490 by boxley 10/21/11 12:41:13 PM Reply	144 well known fact used to be 150 but six got pulled off due to the burgeoning virgin supply crisis Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #349,456 by boxley 10/20/11 8:19:14 PM Reply	hardly, your visceral dislike of black conservatives is showing. He has spoken many times on that issue on his radio show. Transcripts are available. Personally he doesn't believe in it. Legislatively states rights prevail. Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #349,457 by Another Scott 10/20/11 8:52:03 PM Reply	Heh. Nice try. His race has nothing to do with it - you know me better than that. Herman Cain "clarified" his position today. http://blogs.cbn.com...-the-culture.aspx Herman Cain Statement: ÂYesterday in an interview with Piers Morgan on CNN, I was asked questions about abortion policy and the role of the President. I understood the thrust of the question to ask whether that I, as president, would simply ÂorderÂ people to not seek an abortion. My answer was focused on the role of the President. The President has no constitutional authority to order any such action by anyone. That was the point I was trying to convey. As to my political policy view on abortion, I am 100% pro-life. End of story. I will appoint judges who understand the original intent of the Constitution. Judges who are committed to the rule of law know that the Constitution contains no right to take the life of unborn children. I will oppose government funding of abortion. I will veto any legislation that contains funds for Planned Parenthood. I will do everything that a President can do, consistent with his constitutional role, to advance the culture of life." Yeah. He's a personal-liberty-people-make-their-own-decision and states-rights guy when it comes to this issue. Or something. Sure. :-/ (Note that "order" doesn't appear in the CNN transcript of the abortion discussion.) What really happened is he got schooled on Republican orthodoxy by the Republican base, and Santorum and Bachmann, today. He put his Maverick cape away and got back in the group. FWIW. Cheers, Scott.
Post #349,458 by Another Scott 10/20/11 9:24:02 PM Reply	More. http://www.washingto...Azgsw0L_blog.html ÂThe government shouldnÂt be trying to tell people everything to do, especially when it comes to a social decision that they need to make,Â Cain said. Just last week, though, Cain appeared to take the opposite position on abortion, telling Fox Business NetworkÂs John Stossel that Âabortion should not be legalÂ Â although even in that interview, he confused the hosts about just what his position was. Also, in 2003, he said he supported a Constitutional amendment outlawing abortion. The confusing set of statements from the new GOP frontrunner represents just the latest instance in which Cain appears to be trying to take positions on both sides of an issue. And itÂs opening him up to charges of being a flip-flopper. (via http://www.esquire.c...zai-video-6520690 ) FWIW. Cheers, Scott.
Post #349,474 by boxley 10/21/11 9:36:46 AM Reply	about as usefull as an Obama Lawn Jockey everyone knows that its fake because a jockey is a private sector job. Kick the guy to the curb because you dislike his policies, that's fine. Trying to make shit up to match your agenda is a very republican thing to do. You should know better Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #349,478 by Another Scott 10/21/11 9:48:42 AM Reply	? I quoted him....
Post #349,481 by boxley 10/21/11 9:55:35 AM Reply	referencing people who make shit up is republican as well Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #349,482 by Another Scott 10/21/11 9:59:36 AM Reply	Heh.
Post #349,496 by lincoln 10/21/11 1:05:46 PM Reply	translation: "When I'm president, I won't have the authority to order people to not have abortions. However, I will appoint to every judgeship that I can judges who will guarantee that they will prevent pro-abortion laws from being enforced and strike them down in any way possible. Thus, I'll outlaw abortion in this country by circumventing the Legislature." "Chicago to my mind was the only place to be. ... I above all liked the city because it was filled with people all a-bustle, and the clatter of hooves and carriages, and with delivery wagons and drays and peddlers and the boom and clank of freight trains. And when those black clouds came sailing in from the west, pouring thunderstorms upon us so that you couldn't hear the cries or curses of humankind, I liked that best of all. Chicago could stand up to the worst God had to offer. I understood why it was built--a place for trade, of course, with railroads and ships and so on, but mostly to give all of us a magnitude of defiance that is not provided by one house on the plains. And the plains is where those storms come from." -- E.L. Doctorow

Welcome to IWETHEY!