I am officially OFF the Cain bandwagon. Alright, I was never really on it, but I did spend a lot of time in the showroom, kicking the tires, rubbing my hands on the upholstery, and ooggling the console, still in the consideration stage and wanting to be impressed. But major design flaws have just been revealed making any further support on my part just too risky.
I mentioned before in the earlier Cain post that although seemingly confident and intelligent, his colloquial (i.e. limited and rudimentary) knowledge of world affairs and world problems could be his undoing, and that with any luck nothing disastrous would occur until he had a chance to bone up and educate himself, at least to the point of not sounding
dangerousstupid, too late:
This is worse then ,”I can see Russia from my house”, or stalling on questions like ,”what newspapers do you read?”, this shows not only a glaring lack of common sense, but his balls to walls approach at not tempering any answer with any reflection or circumspection, all in an attempt to show strength and not hedge, on anything.
In my earlier post on the prisoner exchange, I made it clear that although I thought this was not a good bargain, the Jews more then anyone know about living under the specter of terrorism, so if the spport was there, with the people, the military and the government, to make this deal, good on them, despite my misgivings. But I also believe that Americans would not support such a deal with the devil, so for me, this was an easy call.
To think for one second that releasing 245 (or so) of the most hardened, blood thirsty murders and terrorists on the planet (including KLM and band of cohorts) from Gitmo, all for the release of one incarcerated American, I don’t see this as a particularly tough call at all and think that his affection for everything Israeli, including the PM, clouded his judgement and caused a knee jerk default that was not well thought out.
To be fair, he did couch some of his answer with a need to “seek the council of others”, that is a great answer when involved in the nuances of diplomacy or foreign protocols, but this is a common sense answer that should not require special tools, special advice, or special training.
Cain has a history of gakking foreign policy questions, so far they have been mostly scratches, but this to me is serious. This incident, coupled with the electrified fence debacle, not a good week, but par for the course:
GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain’s campaign has been so beset by foreign policy gaffes that he’s constantly forced to defend his record. First, it was his assertion that he believed in the Palestinian right of return — which he subsequently walked back under pressure. Then he unilaterally recognized Taiwan. Then last week he displayed deep ignorance about Uzbekistan, an increasingly important ally in the Afghanistan war that Cain called “Ubeki-beki-beki-stan-stan.” Cain again had to defend himself, and merely blamed liberal, African-American commentators for not “want(ing) black people to think for themselves.”
As I mentioned before, I found him way to zealous in perpetuating the Perry/racist rock scandal, and now his 9-9-9 plan is also coming under more scrutiny. The usually non partisan very thorough Tax Policy Center panned it as lowering taxes for the wealthy but raising them for everyone else (even Cain admitted as much but felt the ledger would balance out with the other aspects of his plan). The Americans for Tax Reform had a similar opinion.
UPDATE: Oh boy, just found out that he is now walking this whole mess back, check out the clip.
Obviously Herman, you misspoke, and when is this all too consistent pattern of you misspeaking going to end?