The Inadequate Political Magick of Herman Cain, Rick Perry, and Mitt Romney
The science and art of causing change in conformity with will.– British occultist Aleister Crowley’s definition of magick
We sit here today with a high unemployment rate (and in our bones we know it even higher than the figures suggest) and the national disappointment, President Barack Obama, for one key reason: the magickal incompetence of the Republican Party during the 2008 election. Say what one will about the President’s shortcomings, as a campaigner and a political magician he is first in his class — and without the aid of affirmative action. Doubt me? Name a more talented political liar. Who else could spend an entire career arms locked with vulgar radicals like Jeremiah Wright and Billy Ayers yet somehow mesmerize the country into believing he was Grown Up Centrist Liberalism Incarnate?
Obama won in 2008 not just because of the fortunes of history — first black nominee, two orphan candidates, Bush fatigue, the economic crisis — but because he waged the more effective campaign. McCain/Palin did not know what hit them.
How he’ll top the potency of these — two of modern presidential history’s most effective magickal sigils — is anyone’s guess.
The magickal energy of these images still reverberates doesn’t it? Stare into them and you can still feel the illusion he wanted you to feel — just as when you always ask a Democrat about their political positions they’ll tell you how they’re driven by how they “feel” like one public policy is better than another.
And so it is that reluctant bedfellows of Republicans and Tea Partiers unite with a shared sense of clarity about the importance of a candidate’s skills in the art of political warfare.
My position is comparable to many: Obama’s defeat in office is the primary priority. Among the three front-runners of Herman Cain, Rick Perry, and Mitt Romney I have my shifting preferences but would be more than comfortable with any as nominee and President. So the question that remains is which will have the best shot in a head to head match up with the Alinskyite Cult’s Goblin King.
The answer is whoever wins the primary.
Voters have not yet fully cemented their support behind a candidate because a combination of three magickal spells has yet to be cast effectively by any of the front runners:
- Political Authenticity
- Political Literacy
- Political Competence
Authenticity — The candidate’s political efforts flow from a profound sincerity. The candidate believes in what he says and is not just “playing politics” or “just saying something to get elected.” His actions are the extension of a serious grounding in conservative political philosophy. We can trust the politician to try and do what he says. Above all he is authentically American in his values and in his understanding of the role of the federal government and his limited responsibilities as head of the Executive branch.
Literacy — The candidate knows the strange rituals and baroque customs of post-World War II American political culture. He can navigate the treacherous terrain and gaseous fever swamps of our corrupt mainstream media. He will not make easy media mistakes and lousy, embarrassing gaffes. He knows how to play defense.
Competence — The candidate can effectively unleash political magick spells to disrupt his enemies’ efforts, inspire his supporters, and ultimately capture victory. He knows how to play offense.
Each of the candidates is still trying to cast all three of these spells. On the next three pages we’ll consider each one’s Achilles’ Heel.
First: It’s just a flesh wound…
Mitt Romney, Shining Knight of the East Coast GOP Establishment
- Political Authenticity
- Political Literacy
- Political Competence
Mitt Romney is the sophisticated patrician of the race — our Knight groomed from boyhood to know how to wear his polished, expensive armor. With his usually calm and collected manner he’s had the mores and rules of the last 40 years of our political culture fused into this essence. No one doubts his Political Literacy.
Romney’s lifetime of navigating through the elite corridors of power have taught him caution. To succeed at Harvard Business and Harvard Law, to live up to his father’s hopes and expectations, to profit within the corporate world — all require a careful, political temperament that knows when to shift and how to hedge bets. One does not rise up in these channels by challenging corruption, bucking convention, or reevaluating a broken system’s root flaws.
And so we now see that these two apparent blessings — knowledge of the political game and the discipline to play it properly — manifest as a curse when it comes to the third spell of Political Authenticity. One cannot have the record of a Massachusetts Rockefeller Republican and any hope of dominating a national political primary in which the Tea Party sets the agenda.
It’s too bad for Romney that he’s running in 2012 instead of a repeat of 2008. The political culture has shifted too deeply against him and all that he symbolizes. While his Political Literacy and Political Competence may be enough to secure him the nomination, however if that happens it will be because of the failures of Romney’s opponents.
Yet in spite of all the very reasonable objections that the anti-Romney, Tea Party brigade lay out, the reality is that he’d probably be able to defeat Obama and certainly be an extraordinarily competent president. Will he rule as a so-called “RINO” as Tea Partiers eager to shrink government fear? It’s certainly possible, but more likely in my view is that finally Romney’s finger-in-the-wind, pragmatic approach to politics may lead him in a direction most Tea Partiers would approve.
Tea Party conservatives should not forget that the wind is now blowing in our direction. As the national debt grows higher and economic chaos continues with Europe’s PIGS crisis more and more Americans will continue to naturally be driven toward Tea Party politics.
Next: That the Conan the Barbarian remake flopped at the box office is not a good omen.
Rick Perry, Barbarian Warlord of the Booming Texas Desert
- Political Authenticity
- Political Literacy
- Political Competence
Rick Perry’s Political Authenticity is not in doubt. When he says,
I’ll work every day to make Washington, D.C. as inconsequential in your life as I can.
Then I believe him. His credibility as the inspirational Texas leader — whose policies protected his state while the global economy collapsed under socialism’s weight — is still just as golden as when he inspired so many when he first emerged in the race.
His Political Literacy is also on full display. Perry is not the longest-serving governor of Texas because he got lucky. The man’s a skilled politician who can connect with voters and hit the right political notes.
But being able to charm the voter and project a genuine spirit when communicating on his own terms is not enough to win a political war. It’s one thing to have the strength to deliver a devastating blow. It’s another to have the intelligence to land it.
What earns Perry his Barbarian archetype is the sloppiness and incompetence of his political attacks. Just take a look at this pathetic display. This “you hired illegals!” is a clumsy cudgel that splinters in Perry’s hand:
We are supposed to believe that this man will triumph in the upcoming political war with Team Soros-Obama-Podesta-Van Jones-Huffington-Brock? This is what they’re doing over at Media Matters and the Center for American Progress as they see Perry’s punchdrunk bumbling:
Perry might make for a fine President and he may be a decent man, but can his campaign overcome skilled challengers?
I’m not opposed to this style of campaign. If Perry is rough and sloppy and undisciplined then those might be acceptable trade-offs if he is sufficiently aggressive and willing to hit hard. In a battle with Obama it’s alright for Perry to miss a few hits as long as he’s throwing enough out there. With a Perry candidacy we don’t have to worry about having a wimp, unwilling to engage in brutal political combat. That remains a potential liability with Romney.
Finally: The big question mark: the effectiveness of Free Market magick channeled into the Permanent Political War.
Herman Cain — Mysterious Wizard from the Land of Capitali$m
- Political Authenticity
- Political Literacy
- Political Competence
For several weeks now (shortly after his Florida win and once it was clear that the Barbarian Warlord’s political competence was in doubt) I’ve been “on the Cain train,” meaning that a Hermain Cain candidacy seemed most desirable via my own alchemical calculations of the Buckley Rule. The 9-9-9 plan (endorsed by Arthur Laffer, Dick Morris, and Paul Ryan) was straightforward enough and seemed like something that my Obama-leaning friends would have a hard time refuting when I laid it out to them. “Yes goods will be cheaper! Did you know that a loaf of bread costs more because of all the taxes? You realize that taxing ‘evil corporations’ means they just have to raise prices on consumers to stay alive, right?” The idea of a non-politician emerging to redefine the Presidency back to how it was originally intended was very attractive.
I liked that Cain had been married for 43 years. His feelings “partially driven by how passionately [he] felt about this country,” had never provoked him to destroy a marriage. What a man does when he thinks no one is looking says everything about his character and his competence as a human being. If a man cannot handle his responsibilities as a husband then he has no business taking the most stressful occupation on the planet. Cain’s seemingly bulletproof character, Christian ethics, and sunny disposition have been at the core of his brand, fueling the effectiveness of his Political Authenticity and Political Competence spells.
But after last week’s inept handling of the sexual harassment pile-on I find myself drifting back into the “lean Cain” category and provoked to reexamine the positives of Romney and Perry if the Wizard of Godfather’s Pizza cannot recover. I don’t think that Cain did anything objectionable to any of these women. The cash pay outs are way too low. But where there’s smoke there’s often fire. And because of the Cain campaign’s poor handling of this — a really out of character attempt to blame Rick Perry without adequate evidence? — doubts have been planted in my mind and certainly some voters as well whether or not it’s reflected in his poll numbers yet.
This question of whether or not Cain messed around in any way with his subordinates needs to be more thoroughly settled. It probably will be one way or the other within the next few weeks — because too much is at stake to risk going with a Republican Bill Clinton who could have a “bimbo eruption” at any moment during the general election. I don’t have any worries that Mitt Romney the Good Mormon would make any “indiscretions” during the campaign…
Even before Cain’s lack of preparation to address an obvious issue in his background, we were seeing his failures to cast the Political Literacy spell. His answers to questions about the Israeli government’s prisoner exchange and his pro-life convictions demonstrated that Cain’s attempts at politeness and decency were impairing his ability to use the media effectively. (The root cause of both missteps was Cain’s attempt not to disrespect Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or the women out there who had made the decision to have abortions.)
Initially I surmised that Cain’s shortcoming here (as well has his limited foreign policy knowledge) were the most correctable of the three frontrunners’ shortcomings. Political Literacy should not be an issue — it does not take long to familiarize oneself with the “rules” of politics and to hire professionals who can keep a campaign on message. This is a more open question now, though.
And when the questions are open I turn to PJM’s commenting community: what will it take for one of these candidates to finally get their act together and seal the deal? What would each of them need to do to prove to you that they are the most skilled political warrior who will emerge at the end of the campaign with our country retaken?
Update: Just a heads up that an analysis of the second tier candidates and vanity candidates is coming soon…
*******
Knight and Barbarian Illustrations: Algol / Shutterstock
Our Deceitful Marxist President’s Cruel War on Sick Medicinal Marijuana Patients
When Boomer Culture Finishes Its Suicide, What Will Rise Next?
*******
What the writer really wants ,is Obama. He had the magic. How’s that workin out for ya
The article cons and swindles, doesn’t inform, it’s another pied piper entertainment issue. Loser. Americans, if the writer understood us at all, get real angry at writers and reports of any kind eliminating American candidates for our elective offices. HOW DARE YOU. If this writer likes to do that, he’d have less suspicion had he – shoulda coulda started with writing some import on his pal O. Go write somewhere else, this trickery dog won’t hunt in the USA anymore. Either give your commentary on ALL of our candidates or don’t do any.
“We sit here today with a high unemployment rate (and in our bones we know it even higher than the figures suggest)”
I believe it was the Clinton administration that changed the formula to hide rising unemployment.
What about the other candidates?
At this time in the last presidential primary, McCain would not have been in your top three.
Your critique of the three seems spot on but I say let the process work. It isn’t over for the others, except Huntsman.
Let it play out and then the people will speak. I don’t like being put in a box that excludes all info and choices.
Unless the GOP nominee repeals/defunds every O’bwana E.O., rule, and law, we will end up worse off than if the Dems retain the WH. Like the Bob Dole era, when the GOP was “the debt-collector for the welfare state,” voting for GOP candidates who will only stop initiating new programs, while funding the latest crop and allowing the Dems to consolidate their latest gains, is a waste of time & effort. The attitude of the GOP nominee, to be worth voting for, has to be like the quote from a USN admiral after Pearl Harbor — “When this war is over, the only place the Japanese language will be spoken is in hell.” That’s minimal motivation, IMHO.
So, you support Mitt. OK with me.
I do not support, Mitt. Of the three front runners he’s my last choice.
Mitt. That’s an American baseball term. Stiff, cold, arrogant, self protective liar. Hides the basic beliefs of his religion that does not accept Jesus Christ. This is a Christian country, and has enabled others to worship however they want, but never said they could rule us. Why would a follower of a religion that does not accept Christianity even want to be in this government knowing our Christian foundation, a government that enabled them to live in this country in the religion they prefer. Fact.
Way to Troll
Mormons DO believe in and worship Christ. (Don’t believe me? the name of the church is “The Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter Day Saints”). Do your research before you open your mouth.
Though I wonder if this widespread ignorance is something that Mitt will have to address if he gets the nomination?
Mitt isn’t my last choice, he is my NO choice. I will write in a candidate if Mitt is the nominee. I distrust him the same way as I distrusted McCain. To tell the truth, I believe the Republican party is finished. It hasn’t held to Republican ideals in decades. Since I am old it isn’t going to affect me that much. Moreover I lecture my grandchildren about the importance of useful lifeskills because opportunities for a good life will be fewer than heretofore. It is a sad reality but that is how I see it.
would be interesting to see your analysis extended to Gingrich and perhaps Bachmann or Paul.
I had hoped to include that in this initial piece but didn’t have time for it. It’s on the to-do list for this week, though.
Gingrich is like the tortoise in Aesop’s fable. He might eventually emerge as the frontrunner, but it’ll take a while. He came from way behind, debated impressively, and quipped his way to the top four or so. Whatever one feels about his past, there’s no denying his intellectual merits.
If the geopolitical situation deteriorates precipitously, a Gingrich/Bolton ticket might enter the realm of possibility.
If Newt’s top of the ticket he doesn’t need Bolton as VP. Bolton would make a far better Sec of State and of course as Ambassador to the UN Carlos Mencia.
True, Bolton would be effective as Secretary of State. I was just envisioning a reassuringly hawkish-sounding ticket, should the world become even more unstable and dangerous.
Gingrich/Cain or Gingrich/West sound good to me too.
When you do your follow-up on 2d tier candidates, please Mr. Swindle, don’t be like the Republican Establishment and ignore TWO THINGS:
1. Stop ignoring Buddy Roemer. He’s kept off the debates and Florida Republican Party (the only state able to do this) has summarily dropped him from the Republican ballot altogether. But he’s NOT going away!
He (if you will but take the time to look him up, consider the history of so-called “free” trade, and do the kind of analysis you did for Romney, Cain and Perry) is the ONLY REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE with a populist issue that crosses all of the political spectrum from left to right–Fair Trade instead of “free” trade and the jobs it could create. That’s how Ross Perot got that 20% vote in 1992 and Clinton was the beneficiary–his votes came from union members, Democrats whose jobs had moved off shore, middle of the roaders like me who are OFFENDED by the sheer insanity of our trade agreements, and Pat Buchanan Republicans, that small business wing who never wanted NAFTA in the first place and still don’t He’s the only Republican who just might beat Obama.
Either LET HIM INTO THE REPUBLIC AN DIALOG BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE or risk his running (as his supporters like me) will urge, independently.
2. America Elects. You are just tilting with windmills if you don’t familiarize yourself with AE (as Fox and I like to call it these days) before you presume to comment further on politics. This website has never run an article on America Elects according to a search I just did. Yet AE has the potential to make all your analysis and comments–and mine–totally irrelevant by May or June of this year. Do you not KNOW what’s ahead with AE? It will be the greatest transformation of how we choose presidential candidates since TV ended those conventions where attendees got drunk and wore crazy outfits. Changed conventions forever after and launched the primary system we now have. Get ready for the age when TV is replaced by the Virtual Convention.
By 2012 AE will be major factor and depending upon who it nominates and its platform either win or crown Obama(my opinion NOW). By 2016 both parties will have been so scared “straight” they may just reform themselves!!
Too long to go into here, but PLEASE Mr. Swindle, Google America Elects and then start by reading recent citations from commentators you respect–from Fox News to Politico to Ballot Access News–whatever. Then check out the website.
I think too much damage has already been done to each candidate — mainly by himself in all three cases, which is remarkable in itself — for conservatives to see all three virtues in any one of them. If one of these three does gain the nomination, it will be at least in part by the default of the other contenders.
At this time, the one whose sins are venial rather than mortal or near-mortal is Governor Perry. Yes, he debates ineptly…if the strange formats we’ve seen to date deserve the appellation of “debate.” He might recover if he mounts a strong individual campaign, and refrains from saying another word about any of the other contenders. Whether that’s in the cards is to be seen.
Cain is on the verge of elimination, despite the polls that continue to show him as the front-runner. Because of his inept handling of the unsubstantiated allegations against him, they’ve “stuck” more tenaciously than they should have. Worse, the adhesions will intensify as the Legacy Media pursues them, even without substantiation, because Cain has done too much “revision.” That puts the smell of blood in the air.
At this point, I’d say Romney is out of the running. His willingness to say whatever he thinks will win him his current audience’s support is too well known. Too many conservatives refuse to trust him, and without the conservative base, he won’t win the nomination if any other credible conservative is in it. Of course, I said something similar about John McCain four years ago, so I could be wrong.
The dark horse is Gingrich. I’d originally dismissed him as yesterday’s news, but his tenacity has been impressive, and his public speeches equally so. If there’s a candidate who could leapfrog the three currently at the front of the pack, Gingrich is it.
We shall see.
Agree.
Also, this reminds me about that candidate that never was, who was politically competent, literate and authentic, and receiving damage only from other people mudslinging and not by herself, that legendary girl from the north…
Too much damage? What malarkey. We are a long way from deciding this thing and being an echo chamber for every failing serves no one well. I will watch to see if Cain can regain his mojo and sense of humor. Cain/Gingrich seems like the best option in my view. I like Perry and respect Romney, but Cain seems to have real fire in his belly.
I’d like to see it the other way around. Gingrich/Cain. That would give Cain 4 years to experience the top level of federal government and we could see how he handles it. Gingrich has a much better plan and his new contract and promise to repeal President Zero’s imperial edicts make me like him a lot. He’s learned from his mistakes and has seemed to move ever more conservative. Look at this and see if you don’t like his plan.
http://www.newt.org/21st-century-contract-america
It’s not just my opinion. Cain appears to be taking on water, according to one poll, anyway. The worst part of the situation, for Cain and his supporters, is that the factual aspects of the matter can only be resolved if the National Restaurant Association opens its books, which it appears resolved not to do.
Rumors and innuendi can hurt a campaign as badly as adverse facts.
Gingrich is looking better and better as the other three stumble over what should be a “piece of cake.” Cain mishandled the allegations which are so obviously a “high tech lynching;” Perry a really quality candidate couldn’t get his act together in the debates’ and Romney is by far the darling of the establishment and is the Republican version of Obama.
I’m looking at Gingrich more and more and I’m liking what I see. Now, Gingrich MUST get better at stating what he would do in specifics, and stop with the professorial lectures and get down to earth.
I repeat myself, but, Romney is the same man we didn’t want in 08. How has he changed? Gingrich may be slow in the polls but he is strong on knowledge and is a great speaker. Newt would mop the floor with Obama in a debate. I really want to see someone mop the floor with Obama.
Cain’s 4th woman came forward with lawyer Gloria Allred, now, I am suspicious!
The authors analysis is pretty good as far as it goes. It falls short by not including Newt Gingrich who has the largest share of all the criteria. If you watched the Cain/Gingrich discussion last night it was clearly apparent that Cain, while likeable, lacks depth of understanding in all areas of Political authenticity, literacy ,and compentency. Perry is not likeable nor is he fast on his feet. Gingrich would certainly be best going toe to toe in a debate with Obama. Cain, Romney,and Perry would get steam rolled by Obama simply at the level of charisma, B–Sh– and nose elevation which the media loves. Newt would reveal Obama’s shallow, phony empty suit. In fact Obama would least like to debate Newt and would perhaps refuse such debate. Would not like to have any of the Republican candidates ruled out at this point as the contrasts are ultimately helpful in arriving at the strongest choice.
Let’s not let the dems pick the gop guy again.
They’re good at control.
Stop using dems to mediate the debates.
I agree with your take on Gingrich, although I don’t care for him that much. In a debate he would make mincemeat of Obama, however the media, the Soros organizations, ACORN, SEIU et al will totally destroy him. Unlike you I find Perry likeable, but he probably wouldn’t do well sparring with Obama. Overall I lost all faith in the American voter to see through the political quagmire. I know too many people, sadly, who check their local newspaper a couple of days before an election for guidance on how to vote for anybody or anything. Newsmedia should be prohibited from making endorsements of politicians and issues. Here in California we have such a crooked mess with an almost one party government, illegal voters, ballot boxes dropped in SF bay, recounts during which democrat vs. Republican votes are always found to increase.
I have to agree with your assessment of all three candidates and add one other factor the voter enthusiasm. There are very few voters that would be enthusiastic about voting for Romney and his nomination would likely suppress the conservative vote. They might feel that anyone but Romney might be reason enough to sit home and let the Joker win. This is not how I feel, but I have heard rumblings. Perry can and has created enthusiasm and if he can up his game could win the nomination. Cain can and has created enthusiasm, but he is stumbling around even worse than Perry.
The deciding factor between the two will be who recaptures the enthusiasm of the voters first. With so much riding on the next four months and with so much happening in January there isn’t much time left for Perry to shoot back to the top. Cain’s fall may end up being meteoric like his rise or he could hold on to his gains and give Romney a run for his money. It is a coin flip at this time, but the only truth is the Romney does not generate enthusiasm which leaves him vulnerable to both Perry and Cain, but kills him in the general election.
Any so-called conservative who stays at home to protest a Republican candidate that they don’t like will be contributing to a national suicide. I hope they realize that and help get out the vote regardless of who the nominee is.
Absolutely. While I will NEVER vote for Romney in the primary, I will certainly vote for him if he is the republican candidate. If for no other reason than to prevent Obama from having 4 more years of appointing activist judges.
Frankly, national suicide might be called for. I will not stay home but I will not vote for Romney. I will, as I have in prior elections, do a write in candidate. People tell me I am throwing my vote away, so be it.
“Among the three front-runners of Herman Cain, Rick Perry, and Mitt Romney . . .”
Perry?
Great article. My perfect candidate would be a mixture of:
- The entrepreneurial and CEO experience of Herman Cain
- The quick-thinking mastery of the facts and debating ability of Newt Gingrich
- THe Ability to move people of Sarah Palin
Obviously, I can’t have that. Of the three traits, lack of Political Literacy is the easiest to overcome. Every good CEO knows to surround himself with the right people and I have no doubt that Cain will do the same.
As for the sexual harassment hit-piece, I give Cain the benefit of the doubt. Everyone thinks that the Cain campaign had 10 days to prepare but put yourself inside the campaign: He’s running a very lean shoestring operation. They probably get hundreds of requests a day, all competing for their attention. You can bet that when Politico approached the Cain campaign they did so in a very circumlocutionary and disingenuous manner designed to conceal their true intent.
In fact, the incident makes me like Herman Cain even more: It was very clear that he was not engaged in the normal beltway political spin-talk. He was dealing with the situation as any normal person would. Frankly, it added to his authenticity.
I have liked Cain from the start. I must say when he came out with his 999 plan I atarted to waver. I am ok with a national sales tax. I do not want a income tax for most added to the formula. Everyone should pay some tax. The poor use more government services and they need to have a dog in the fight about controling spending. A better formula would be a 10% sales tax on new products. This is a round number most could add up in their head. No income tax on earned and unearned income up to somewhere around $300,000. A 20% tax on capital gains up to $500,000 and 25% above $500,000. A 20% tax on income between $300,000 and $500,000. A 25% tax on incomes over $500,000. Index these figures to inflation. Corporate taxes could be somewhere aroud 15% and get rid of the many loopholes. Let business deduct costs as they occur. If you don’t like the high CEO wage packages, limit the deduction of their wages to the first $500,000. Most would not even have to file a tax return and old Warren Buffet would have his wish to pay more than his employees. If you want to avoid some of the sales tax grow a garden, buy a used car or buy used clothing. No one gets any rebates. The middle class would pay a lower tax and could gain wealth over time.
Last Sunday my son asked me about the phrase “fair tax.” I said it was a so called conservative idea that sounds like the kind of naming of a plan that liberals/progressives do. In the last presidential election Mike Huckabee championed the idea. The welthiest people I know have read Huckabee’s book and love the idea.
A caller to Larry Kudlow’s radio program two weeks ago asked what I believe is the pertinent question. “What about the effect on someone who has withdrawn all of their money from an IRA, already paid all federal taxes they thought they would ever pay, and now would be penalized for it?” The “fair” tax is the most regressive of all taxes. It burdens people on Social Security, unemployment, etc., etc.
The tax that most conservative economists and analysts worry about is a national sales tax. It will grow. As Santorum said in a previous debate (speaking to Cain with his mic turned down) “You will not always be President.” A flat tax is fair. Period. The only tax that is. Also, Cain’s 9-9-9 was written by a small Ohio town financial adviser for Wells Fargo. Perry’s flat tax was designed by Steve Forbes. Gingrich’s flat tax is based on the very successful Hong Kong model. This is not Ted Mack’s Original Hour. Let’s get serious.
You’d have to be an idiot to want to give congress another method of taxing us by keeping the income tax and giving them an additional tax (9%). Do you really believe you have some way of stopping the government from increasing all three taxes at will? They write the law and you can’t see what’s in it until they pass it.
Yep, you’d have to be an idiot (or in congress) to do it.
Due to Gingrich’s slow but steady rise in the polls, he deserved coverage in your article as well. Too bad you left him out.
You’re right that the piece would have been better with him included. But I’ll have some things to say about him and the other vanity candidacies in my follow-up.
“Vanity candidate.” Are you serious? If you have not yet watched his “Lincoln/Douglas” debate with Hermain Cain, I strongly urge you to do so. There was a substantial list of detailed approaches to help solve the well-known dilemmas we face with regard to Medicare & SS.
There can be no doubt that Gingrich’s behind-the-beltway experiences & intelligence are quite formidable. There is little doubt in my mind that he would do quite well in the role as POTUS. Yes, he comes with baggage but who doesn’t? What we need to ask ourselves is how significant is said baggage in its capacity to undermine how well a given candidate would be as POTUS.
A man who blames his great passion for America for provoking him to destroy his marriage has told me everything about how qualified he is to be president. Between Clinton and Obama we’ve had enough Bipolar Narcissists in Chief.
I’ll have a follow-up piece laying out my arguments in greater depth for why the Gingrich candidacy should be taken with as much seriousness as the Paul, Huntsman, Santorum, and The Rent’s Too Damn High! Guy’s candidacy.
The MSM would love Newt. They could hide all of Obama’s BS again and just NAIL the hell out of Newt.
Newt can’t beat Obama. The MSM won’t let him.
Exactly, you said it better than I did. I recall greeting cards in Union Station, Washington, DC that had a caricature of Newt and said “neuter Newt”. It was during the 90ties when his contract with America was making waves. While I stood there the cards sold out.
Are you saying Newt is a vanity candidate?
Aren’t they ALL vanity candidates then. Only egoists run for president, almost by definition.
I would say a vanity candidate is one who has no experience or no chance to win. You could make one of those arguments for all of them except Romney, Perry and Gingrich. And at this stage, you could almost make the argument for Perry.
Ron Paul and Ralph Nader are the iconic vanity candidates of our political era. They use presidential elections just as a way to get attention for themselves and their ideas. They know quite well that they’re not going to be president. But being president isn’t really the goal — inspiring their movement and increasing their magickal potency is. That Ron Paul runs for president every four years is just about the only thing keeping paleo-libertarian radicalism alive. So too with other vanity candidates, Newt included.
There is a measurable chance that Newt will be the next president; not so for Ron Paul, Nadar, and probably Huntsman. At this point, Bachman’s and and Santorum’s only chances appear to be shockingly good results in Iowa.
Cain was certainly more of a vanity candidate than Newt at the beginning. He must be the most surprised man on earth to be leading in some polls.
I can see your point about Newt, but as a former speaker, with a wide audience via Fox News, and his numerous politial think tankish activities, he is more qualified than most, so it’s hard to claim that he has only run for ego purposes. I’ll have to fall back to the previous point and repeat that they all have huge egos, and other than Ron Paul, probably all convinced themselves that they could win in the early stages. I agree, however, that Newt has more to gain than the others if he loses. It builds his brand.
Proreason is right to believe that Cain was the most surprised vanity candidate. He ran to sell books and up his speaking fees. His chief political adviser is a total amateur. The author of 9-9-9 is a small town Well Fargo economic adviser. My personal experience with Wells Fargo financial advisers is that when I took each ones advice I got less of a return on my investment than I was getting on my checking account! On the other hand Rick Perry’s flat tax was designed primarily by Steve Forbes. Newt Gingrich’s flat tax plan is based on the tried and proven Hong Kong model. Ladies and Gentlemen this is not Ted Mack’s Original Amateur Hour.
Even Ralph (I hate Corvairs) Nader would have been a better president than Obama.
I understand why you reported first on the 3 frontrunners as you make your way through the multitudinous list of wannabees. But I’m looking forward to your assessment of Gingrich. So far (save for a glitch or two, here and there) he’s the man who can answer the call. Detractors? Yes, of course, but he’s got what it takes and more. Oh boy, I hope I’m right.
It does not matter who is the better politician, or which politician gets
elected, because there is no political solution to our economic problems.
The cascading failure of the world economic system is already underway,
the effects will soon be felt in the US, and the people of the US will then
shift their support from politicians who can only make promises to leaders
in the private economic sector who can provide them with the necessities of life.
Everything these leaders do will be in defiance of government regulation,
and that will not matter, because when people are cold, hungry, and afraid,
they will not allow the EPA to shut down power plants, the FDA to ban genetically modified foods, or the BATF to restrict their right to defend themselves.
Men must be governed, they can no more escape that necessity than they can
escape bondage to their bowels, but the current political system will be
replaced by a functional government, possibly before the coming presidential
election, and certainly before the end of the new President’s 1st term.
Those currently in office can ride the wave of change or be swept away by it.
What you seem to be saying ISMW is that if things get bad enough, some sort of coup will take place. Is my assumption here correct?
‘Coup’ is a word laden with emotionally negative connotations,
better suited to describing attacks which have happened, and
may happen again, in countries with more centralized authority
and more domesticated, ah, _civilised_ citizens; Europe, perhaps,
Russia or China probably, and the 3rd world, certainly;
In the US, there are no concentrations of power adequate to control
an aroused population; What we will get, worst case, is a devolution
of power to the States, and a degree of authoritarian administration
that the people are willing to put up with during hard times.
This is not news to anyone except the current D&R Tax&Spend politicians
who are understandably in denial, as their whole power structure is
going to be replaced with something which can address our problems,
rather than pretending they do not exist.
Interesting…During the seventies while our children were playing outside,some of us mothers and housewives would sit in each others’ kitchens and discuss the then politics. We would reflect on how the hippies would one day represent us in government. It was pretty scary. We concluded that the US was destroying itself from within and that eventually it would have to be ruled by a benevolent dictator, in order to restore a functioning society. Are we there yet?
Ask the voters/citizens/taxpayers of Connecticut, who have been without
electrical power for a week because their government did not have the money
to keep the tree branches clear of the power lines.
We are not there yet, but you can see it from where we are; A few more fails
like the above, or one really large, messy one with fatalities, and the
citizenry will say ‘Throw the bums out and start over.’
In the 2008 campaign the only one on the Republican ticket that was trying to win was Palin. McCain spent more time campaigning for Obama then he did for himself. Add to that, that Obama ran to the right of McCain and McCain continued to play the fool it was a shoe in for Obama. After three years of Obama we all know now that he is a charlatan and a liar and the magic is gone. The 2012 election is going to take that rare commodity called “common sense” and what we can pray for is that enough people still have it.
Amen!
I’m pretty sure this is the first time that Crowley has been quoted approvingly in a Republican context. I’m impressed.
Thanks. There will be more of it — though more approval of specific ideas and metaphors, certainly not a lot of his personal behavior.
I did love the story about slinking through his club: “That’s just Crowley, being invisible again.”
“. . . punch back twice as hard” “. . . punish our enemies” President Barack H. Obama
The above quotes are not from candidate Obama but rather President Obama, and now Obama and his leftist supporters have unleashed Occupy, which closed the fifth largest US shipping port, Oakland and attempted to intimidate and shut down a conservative sponsored summit, “Defending the American Dream” in DC, an article in RCP dated 11/4/11 “2012 Race likely to be Close, Tough and Maybe Brutal” I think pretty much says it all but I would change Maybe to WILL.
Obama is counting on two things to ge re-elected one of course energize his base but second and more importantly, frighten, intimidate independent voters. Tea Party and the conservative wing of the Republican Party are more than ready for the struggle to take back this country to free market capitalism and liberty of the individual from government interference in the form of excessive taxation and regulation.
But independent voters and RINO’s not so much, they still wish to placate the left in all its thuggery, by “go along to get along” and thus put that big bad, ugly Occupy genie back in the bottle, but always at the ready for the left to uncork when the Right gets uppity. This is why I think Rick Perry is the candidate. I think the author and I both agree Romney is the RINO candidate and will not if necessary lock into a death struggle with the Left if it is required.
Cain while I agree is a conservative candidate he just doesn’t have the experience to put together and lead a Presidential campaign that is battle hardened, last week makes that all the more obvious.
Now Perry not only nows how to put together and lead a campaign, he knows how to as the President says . . . “PUNCH BACK TWICE AS HARD”
In closing I would like to offer to independents and RINO’s who find conflict uncomfortable a thought “Be not afraid” Pope John Paul II.
Ahh, the need for our SHAZAM moment has been finally outlined and defined…quite well, actually.
Well done, David.
So, how do we choose the carrier of our burden?
Do we have the choices in place for a Solomon, Hercules, Atlas, Zeus, Achilles and Mercury?
“Cain, Romney And Perry” certainly give us a different anagram, we who seek to overthrow the overthrow.
I, for one…had hoped we would focus much more on GDP. (Gingrich, Daniels and Paul). Alas, we have abandoned the wisdom of Solomon.
One of the qualities most ascribed to Solomon is his wisdom. Solomon prays:
“Give Thy servant an understanding heart to judge Thy people and to know good and evil.”
“So God said to him, ‘Since you have asked for this and not for long life or wealth for yourself, nor have asked for the death of your enemies but for discernment in administering justice, I will do what you have asked…’” “The whole world sought audience with Solomon to hear the wisdom God had put in his heart.”
None of the three CRAP contestants contain the ability to bring the people to them through sage wisdom. Romney dissembles, Perry fractures and Cain avoids.
So, do we have a Hercules in our midst? First, we must identify the twelve labors.
1)To slay the “gender studies” demon. Often taking on the appearance of a woman, the first labor is to overcome the leftist use of “gender” assaults on non-leftists. The fur is made impenetrable by any slings and arrows. Leftists are protected from rape, misogyny, adultery, sexual harassment…only non-leftists are attacked by this beast.
2)Slay the Occupydra, a many-headed beast, with an air so foul and disgusting, to breathe it in is to risk asphyxiation. It moves in many directions at once and has no aim or focus…only to destroy.
3)To capture the Reagan Democrats, these elusive creatures that run like the wind from extremism, dislike white collar chicanery and romp through the swing states with frustrating speed.
4)To trap the runaway European PIIGS. The only way to complete the overthrow of the overthrow is to recognize that it is a global movement of runaway, rampant, leftism.
5)Clean the Soros Stables. Our hero must confront the mountain of daily dung heaped upon the landscape by an owned, controlled and propagandized mass communication stables. Our information stream is buried beneath it. We cannot get at the truth, because we are being smothered in lies, slander, and bs.
6) To slay the brotherhood of toxic birds set loose by the pack of wolves in the Arab Spring. We have lost all grasp on our ability to discern what is real and what is dangerous here. Picking off one or two birds and declaring victory is foolhardy and dangerous.
7)Capture the Cretin Bulls on Wall Street and separate them from the good, honest and hard-working engines of the free market. Making the “bankers” the fall guys for what the leftists set in motion is an easy trick for the leftists to pull off. We should not add to the effect of this shell game. It was leftism that caused the collapse, it was the leftist Congress that sealed it. We should know the root causes and not be fooled again.
8) Capture the four levels of our education system. Our youth are being indoctrinated, they are chained to a system that teaches them to loathe the country, a false history, a slanderous oral leftist boot camp. K-8, middle school, high school and colleges need to have leftism eradicated. Youth are wild and tempestuous by nature. They need to be fed truth to calm them.
9)Capture the entitlement girdle. We now have an unsustainable amount of fat growing to Amazonian proportions…it is important to capture the hippo-like girdle and expose the bloated body, so that we can begin to put it on a proper regimen of diet and exercise.
10)Slay the Monsters of Fraud. Hollywood, entertainment, pop culture have seized this messaging arm of leftism and have painted our military, our corporate leaders and all non-leftists as evil, corrupt, greedy, …a smear campaign that is barely hidden and openly hostile.
11)Unleash the gold, oil, natural resources and powers of the beautiful and bountiful land of ours. In order to “put us in our place” the leftists have locked, chained and shackled our natural golden apple orchard. It is time to fetch them and begin to restore ourselves to fiscal health.
12)Capture the three houses of the hellhounds. The Senate, the White House and Congress and eliminate the damage done by Pelosi, Frank and Reid. Uncover the hidden “czars” and all the leftists planted at the DOJ and elsewhere.
Which of these candidates is most likely to accomplish the Twelve Labors?
If not these three…then we must draft our hero.
I’ll settle for the one who looks most likely to win.
Your post is entertaining, as always, but it won’t be necessary to have an Homeric leader as president this time. The Tea Party Congress is willing and able to provide the leadership, as per the constitutional design. We need a president who will follow THEIR lead. I believe that all of the candidates will do so, and actually worry more about the ones who seem the most determined to impose their personal will on the country.
From that perspective, the candidate should be the one best able to defeat the Hydra.
Whenever I see that “Hope” poster, and that flag-colored zero, I certainly do feel something, only I wouldn’t call it “magick”.
Rick Perry was my first choice, but I’m disappointed in how he has handled the media-driven attacks against him (I didn’t bother with the debates, because the only one that counts is the one where the nominee debates the incumbent). If he can’t outwit our leftist media, what hope is there that he could win an election?
I also like Herman Cain a lot, and what’s more, I trust him not to indulge in politics as usual (although, as a CEO, he would certainly know how to do that). Like Perry, Cain knows and loves his country, and would do his utmost best for it.
Mitt Romney is a poor choice, in my opinion, simply because he is a RINO (read, opportunist). But if it came to that, he would still have my vote, because I’m prepared to vote for Anybody But Obama.
IMHBLO, we have to get past this belief or hope that politicians can “fix” anything. They can’t. And they won’t. A guy like Regan, or any other political great, is a historical anomaly.
They provide the opportunity, the people have to provide the way. And right now, Americans have no “way”. We are bamboozled. Stymied. Perplexed.
A POTUS needs a cooperative and sympathetic congress to do anything. When was the last time we had that? Before last election, you say? You are correct. America is heading toward socialism because we are being led there.
This is one of the best analyses I’ve seen. Mr. Swindle should contribute more regularly.
The only thing I disagree with is that there is now a fourth top tier candidate, Newt. Gingrich also has strengths and weaknesses. Using Mr. Swindle’s framework, Gingrich is easily the best at Political Literacy, strong on Political Authenticity, and good to strong on Political Competance.
It’s interesting that the conservative base is currently discounting Political Literacy, since Cain is in the lead. And they have also discounted Political Competance, since whatever Herman does or says is automatically declared as being brilliant. Somehow, other than the most slavish admirers, I can’t quite see that continuing.
The race is going to come down to the guy with the money and organization (Romney) vs the guy with the brains and background (Newt)…or a wild card in the slim chance that nobody has a majority of delegates by convention time.
Thank you. My PJ Counterculture column will appear every Sunday.
I’m planning on doing a similar analysis of the second tier and vanity candidates. I still regard Gingrich as the latter. He certainly has the Political Literacy but that’s all he’s really got. His “personal baggage” of blaming his patriotism for his affair indicates that he’s still the same old untrustworthy, amoral Newt.
You are reaching back a long time to knock Newt for something that isn’t uncommon among politians or the general public. I’m not lifting him up for it, but making long-ago personal morality a disqualifier sure does thin any field.
It’s funny, one of the things I like about Romney is that he appears to be moral to a fault (understanding that you never really know), yet he appears to get zero credit for that.
But for me, the overwhelming criteria is the ability to defeat obama. I’m more than willing to forgive Newt’s (or any other candidates) indescretions and ego, as long as they don’t get in the way of the ability to win. Usually that is challenged on the grounds of ideological purity, not morality, but it doesn’t really matter to me. The marxist in chief will destroy the country, and there are only a handful of candidates left to choose from. The main reason I am not totally on Newt’s bandwagon is I’m waiting to hear what will come out of the woodworks as he rises in the polls. I see now that the impact of your objection might be more major than I had thought it would be.
I’m not going back far at all. His comments blaming his patriotism for distracting him from his marriage were quite recent. I’m willing to forgive candidates who have made mistakes and are genuinely trying to become better people. But it’s pretty obvious that Newt hasn’t learned anything. I’m not thinning the field or disqualifying him for his infidelities, that’s just one piece of the bigger character issue.
And of the candidates I don’t have confidence that Newt would be able to defeat Obama.
It’s a lousy excuse, but it beats parsing the definition of “is”. His problem with explaining it was that he couldn’t just say “I f*d up” without offending his current wife. The problem of explaining his behavior has some things in common with Romneycare…like doing something that makes you have to hire a lawyer, once the deed is done, there usually aren’t any good solutions, only a series of bad and worse choices.
As I look at the list with my criteria, despite the shameful behavior and awful excuse, Newt is still the first or second best in the field.
Mr. Swindle, thanks for the good writing. . . . interesting to quote Crowley, but he definitely was a real piece of fecal matter. . . . kinda like using Lenin’s ” what are we, then, to do?”
Newt definitely has major character issues. . . . he also lost me when he endorsed the AGW crap. . . . he is a politician, first and foremost.
I’m beginning to think a dead-locked convention and a new look at other candidates, Bolton, Palin, Jeb Bush, etc., might be the best hope. It’d sure make a mess of the demo’s candidate attack research, and would generate a lot of interest, perhaps even enthusiasm.
I thought the 3 magic words were “end all immigration,” the most destructive physical event in America in the last half century; shanty towns are right around the corner and the way shown and paved by OWS – the authorities will do nothing but give in to their demands for sewers and electricity and then give them welfare for cable TV. Read between the lines of Victor Hanson’s reports and realize shanties are the next step.
If you don’t think this has happened in Latin America I got news for you, there are over 700 such illegal shanties in Rio de Janeiro alone.
Alongside that is the worst ideology to afflict America in the same time period, political correctness; all the worse since it is an informal and truly grass roots phenomena that will be difficult to root out.
Have our candidates become so stupid that we now ask of them to just not make gaffes? A true Presidential candidate should be smarter than any frickin’ reporter and welcome their ambushes rather than fear them. A confident man (or woman) will welcome the opportunity to be on the channels that hate them the most to light them up for fools and expose their nonsense.
Take your lumps in the beginning if you must but bring on the Courics and others and sharpen your debating skills and the tone and debate YOU wish to present.
Unfortunately, there is no one like that on either side and there are now so many illegals in the country that to run counter to immigration is to be unelectable – a true Catch-22 that will only worsen.
Welcome to the Third World 2.0.
Michele Bachman is rated better than any other candidate on the illegal imigration issue by numbersUSA (a nonpartisan orginization). She gets a B-. The next best are 2 candidates that get a C-. (I personally discount both of those for reasons I have stated before on this website.) The rest get D’s, D-’s, or F’s. Of course, Obama gets an F-.
Contribute to Michele if you are serious. And, sign up at numbersUSA.com for any changes. I’ve been a member for years and regularly send faxes to my congressman and Senators.
I have only heard one “conservative” talk radio person mention the information I just gave you and he is a local San Diego radio host (not national). No wonder none of the people on any of the “conservative” websites ever mention the single issue that could put millions of Americans back to work immediately.
“McCain/Palin did not know what hit them.”
Wrongo Du Maxami!
Palin knew exactly what she was up against, the McCain Handlers and McCain himself PROHIBITED her from responding in kind.
Palin was terrible on illegal immigration. NumbersUSA gave her a D- until she decided not to run. Now, they have removed her from the list.
In what way was she terrible on immigration?
The website at numbersUSA has removed her from the list but these are the catagories on which she was rated and I will give you Huntsman’s scores because he is equally bad:
Oppose Amnesty/Legalization; Bad
Mandate E-Verify; First Steps
Reduce Overall Immigration; Bad
End Chain Migration; Unhelpful
End Visa Lottery; Unhelpful
Limit Unfair Worker Competition; Bad
Secure Borders; Good (Michele Bachman by comparison gets an excellent.)
Implement Entry/Exit; Unhelpful
Support Local Enforcement; Good (Michele Bachman by comparison gets an excellent.)
Punish Business Violators; First Steps
Tackle Refugee Fraud; Unhelpful
End Birthright Citizenship; Unhelpful
To the best of my recollections the scores of Palin and Huntsman were almost identical. (Ron Paul is the worst of the Republicans, but better than Obama.)
this still does NOT answer the question!
You said the opinion of NumberUsa is that , but WHY is given that opinion? This is the question. Why Palin is said to be bad in Immigration?
Go to numbersUSA and look up how they know these things. They rate Obama F-. Is that incorrect? Think before you tell someone who took as much time as I did to answer your question that the answer was not an answer. Your response is Clintonian. It depends on what the meaning of is is.
In the case I concede your “answer” was an answer, it is still a very stupid answer.
To prove it, I’ll start reminding you of -wait for it, the question!
davod said: In what way was she terrible on immigration?
(November 6, 2011 – 11:44 am )
And this is what it has not been answered. Would you like to elaborate and, for instance, remind us all the readers about any instance taken by Sarah Palin on Immigration, and why hers way of thinking is terrible?
To say “hey! I read she was terrible!” is not an answer, it’s just a void statement that happens to follow a question but without answering.
It’s a senseless argument because the horse is already out of the barn and the people that made this country great with their technological and societal and artistic innovations are being demographically shoved out the door and marginalized as endemic racists.
It’s a painfully slow march to the Age of Copper from here on in. Bow your heads and have a last hurrah.
And this relates to the point of the article and what I had to say HOW?
Palin is not as conservative as you think. No doubt the McCain people kept her from responding as well as she might have. But, that is a big might have. She like Cain has never been vetted. On the other hand Bachman who is conservative on all the issues has been attacked by even El Fatbo. If anyone has been maligned by the media it is Michele. Yet she has not played the misogynist card like Cain played the race card. Larry Elder pointed out on Friday that even Clarence Thomas was out of bounds calling his treatment a high tech lynching. He was referring of course to the much, much worse treatment of Robert Bork.
You still have not addressed the point that when in a back alley dealing with a street fighter armed with Chains and Knives you do not stand up to him adhering to the The Marquess of Queensberry rules and expect to survive because you will look better to the witnesses to your flogging.
Yet that was the specific McCain Strategy, and why the McCain Handlers pulled Palin out of the public when she began to respond in kind and numbers were going up as a result.
Weather or not Paline IS or IS NOT Conservative enough is Non Sequitur with regards to tactics or recognition thereof.
If she is bad on conservative issues it would have shown up in interviews if the McCain people had not held her back. That would have turned off more conservative voters and even I might not have held my nose and voted for McCain. That is not a non sequitor. Facts are pesky things.
I will vote for any of these candidates in the general. In the primaries however, I will support whomever is in second place. I do this in the faint hope that no one will end up with a majority of delegates, and a brokered convention will nominate Daniels, Ryan, Jeb, or Christie.
A boy can hope.
How are Christie or Bush better than Romney? Why not Scott Walker or someone conservative?
A bit less conservative for a bunch more competence or spine is a trade off I’d consider.
A bit more conservative in exchange for a bunch less competence or spine is a bad deal.
…plus, any of the four I named would have coat tails a mile long. I’d like to run the table in the Senate and Scott Walker doesn’t get us there.
Christie is a Rino. Period. Bush is a Rino. Period. We elected about 60 new Republican Congressman in 2010. Only 22 Congressmen voted against raising the debt ceiling and one of those was Crazy Ron. At that percentage of change in the Senate and Congress the coountry will be bankrupt totalitarian before we can even realize sufficient change to matter. See you in the rice paddies.
If you look two keys to the right of the letter “M” on your keyboard, you should see a key with a dot on it. If you press it, it will make a period show up on the screen. I know it must get tiring having to spell out all your punctuation.
No, don’t thank me. I’m just glad I could help.
Unfortunately Scott Walker was already destroyed by the media, unions and other collective goons. I still ask why not Jan Brewer governor of AZ?
PRIMO! BRAVO! Well done.
Comments, too. Especially cfbleachers.
Truly American. Independent, excellent, insightful, thoughtful, caring, cautious, direct, to the point, no bs, and most of all worrysome for We The People’s exceptionally tough choices “to get it right” once and for all, in 2012.
Yes, 2008 exposed a vulnerability, but it alerted a whole mass of true American citizenry who love and believe in Reagan’s “light on the Hill.” Or, better yet, true American Exceptionalism. God Bless America.
The task before We The People is truly daunting. Make a small error in a key nomination and an ineffectual repeat of 2008 will befall us all.
Of the three criteria: Political, 1)autheticity, 2)literacy and 3) competence one candidate seems to have all three in spades: Newt. A quirky figure personally…but masterful at “defense-parry-attack” chess game played in We The Elite Washington DC halls of power brokering.
Mr. Cain is knowledgeable in business politics. Totally different in way
, shape and form than Washington politics. Business politics is a “closer-to-the-vest” type, secretive political game. Washington is more a “Texas Hold’Em” style poker game. Lots of talk, hot air, bs, bluff and subterfuge.
Newt knows Washington DC political mores, Cain knows business politics. Which is what best serves We The People’s ultimate 1) mission, 2)vision, 3)goals and 4) objectives?
Vote massively because massive fraud has already befallen Our Beloved USA. God Bless our USA.
Thank you.
But in my follow up you’ll see I disagree with your assessment of Newt the candidate. Newt the thinker/policy wonk/activist is fine by me — but he has no business being a politician anymore given his character problems. They make it impossible for him to cast the Political Authenticity spell.
Really good article. As we have all known all along, all the candidates are tremendously flawed. The good ones wouldn’t run. We are in decline. (sigh)
Cain is still my guy, and I think the only guy americans will trust. Politicians will not trust him because they know he has the best chance of making major changes with the people behind him.
He is also the guy who can remove the curtain and expose the OZ of government. The job of the Prez is not really that hard in a smart/dumb sense. It is mostly political skill that has made leaders effective in domestic policy, but we are WAY past that point now. Our country needs an organizational and financial re-organizing pronto. I think Cain has the will, and the credibility, and the people will follow. If we give him our support the other politicians will have no choice.
Elsewhere on pjmedia, I’m reading “40 best man quotes” while my daughter was watching CNN. And looky what I found, one of my favorite!
“It is not the critic that counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or the doer of deeds could have them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the Arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but he who does actually strive to do the deed; who knows the great devotion; who spends himself in a worthy cause, who at the best, knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails while daring greatly, knows that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls, who know neither victory nor defeat. — Teddy Roosevelt”
Herman Cain rocks.
That place with the cold timid souls who never know victory nor defeat? CNN
Teddy Roosevelt was a fascist. He believed in eugenics. He ran for President on the Progressive Party (nicknamed Bullmoosed Party) Ticket. Read Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldberg. You desperately need some history lessons, but I’m tired of trying to educate all the Tea Pary people who think that because some “conservative” talk show host said something that makes it a fact. Read a book.
More power to you, keep up the effort. Every time someone praises T. Roosevelt I cringe, but then I wasn’t educated in the USA. Sorry had to throw that in.
My sentiments were similar to yours before the debacle with the sexual harassment claims. Let’s hope he can really show us how competent he is over the next few weeks.
BAH this RPG party is not complete! Who are the priest, thief and bard?
I hope to have a follow up about the second tier and vanity candidates next. Any suggestions on who should be which? I have my ideas but will give credit to commenters who have good suggestions.
Cain and Gingrich are the two main vanity candidates. Both had books coming out that they wanted to sell. Maybe you should contact radio talk show host Larry Elder about who are the vanity candidates. He always mentions Cain and Romney as such and in that order.
Governor Perry’s glaring inability to handle the game show, gotcha national (media) campaign stage and stay focused on why his ideas have worked is the most disappointing development so far for me. Especially with european socialism providing, on a silver platter at the candidates’ feet, the evidence proving a Take philosophy rather than a Make strategy cannot produce prosperity. As likeable as Herman Cain is, he seems over his head outside his area of experience.
“Stare into them and you can still feel the illusion he wanted you to feel….”
No. Actually, that is not what I feel at all. I never felt what HE wanted me to feel. I felt a creepy-crawly anticipation as I observed how many were being deceived by him. These visuals make me slightly ill as they always have.
to demolish Obama in the debates, you have to expose him face to face for the corrupt liar and criminal that he is, and keep goading him with it to such a point that he loses his wits entirely and goes ballistic, for all America and the whole world to see, reducing the nasty snot nose that he is at last to the laughing stock of the country.
And here you are, dissing the wizard’s sex magick! What has the world come to?
See you at the drum circle, dude!
I cannot support Herman Cain. He strikes me as totally unqualified for a number of reasons. I could reluctantly support Romney and even Perry, but both bother me for different reasons.
As much as I like Bachmann, she has sunk her candidacy and most people have abandoned her.
I like Gary Johnson, but he is even less popular than Bachmann. Not viable. And he supports the “fair” tax which I hate (also a strike against Cain).
So I am left with Gingrich, despite his embarrassing marital history. If I ignore that, I recognize that he is incredibly informed and a good debater. He has played in the big leagues before. He can handle it. And he supports a flat tax. He probably would be the most effective President at moving legislation since Nixon or LBJ (Reagan was darn good, too, but LBJ was a master — we can despise The Great Society, but you have to admire the feat of getting it passed). So since we need a lot of important legislation passed (e.g. entitlement and tax reform) we need a President who can get things done in Congress. There’s your argument for Gingrich.
BTW, one of Obama’s chief deficits is his inability to get legislation passed. The way Obamacare was passed was a corruption and the law so terrible that he won’t be running on it. Also, like the Porkulus and Dodd-Frank, it is not so much a product of the Obama administration as it was Democrats in Congress. Presidents should craft proposed legislation and good Presidents actually get some of their proposals passed. Obama has no clue how to get his legislation passed now that the Republicans control the House. If he thinks that bashing them will help, he is truly ignorant. Why did I write “if”?
I’ve listened to Herman Cain as objectively as possible, and (call me naive) have believed every explanation he’s given regarding any perceived “gaffe.”
a) It’s patently false that he doesn’t know that China is a nuclear power. He discusses China having nuclear weapons in his book. It’s clear that he was talking about their fleet.
b) He explained that when he gave a pro-choice statement he was responding in the context of what a President can do in regards to abortion. Specifically, he can’t overturn Roe v. Wade, and was speaking to the Constitutional limits of the executive office. He’s made very clear from the beginning that he would nominate conservative justices and defund any abortion supporter or provider.
c)His statement on releasing the Gitmo prisoners for American hostage was simply a misguided attempt to support Netanyahu from criticism involving Gilad Shalit. Definitely a gaffe, but no objective person would think that Ca in would do that – he was answering from Netanyahu’s point of view and did not understand that the question posed involved a terrorist group rather than a sovereign nation.
d) He didn’t know what the phrase “right of return” or a particular Medicare term was, and rather than deny that acknowledge it.
All in all, much ado about nothing.
There are self-styled political wonks out there on the internet who will never be satisfied, and will somehow support someone with questionable intelligence but public-sector experience rather than simply trust a man that seems moderately intelligent but may not be as refined on policy as say a Gingrich. No one will – the guy’s a professor and everyone knows it.
I’m not saying that Cain doesn’t have a lot to learn, but I feel that often his problem is delivery and interpretation of delivery rather than a lack of intellect or intelligence. There are many on the right who support other candidates that will parse his words to no end in the hopes of mocking and ridicule.
Thank heaven the country isn’t run by self-styled political wonks on the innerwebs. We’d have disintegrated a long time ago.
I have to disagree with one thing:
“Tea Party conservatives should not forget that the wind is now blowing in our direction. As the national debt grows higher and economic chaos continues with Europe’s PIGS crisis more and more Americans will continue to naturally be driven toward Tea Party politics.”
It is NOT blowing in our direction. It is more like a crosswind, blowing in several directions at once. Example – The Dems and their unions are going to win a big one in Ohio tomorrow, when the Tea Party governor’s reforms are going to be repealed.
The only consistent wind is an ill wind called economic collapse. Since the global economy is energy constrained, and peak oil is past, our debts are catching up with us all very fast. There are no political solution for this. Only socialist demagoguery and dog eat dog fighting for the scraps of an ever shrinking pie. We are just in the early stages of collapse. Wait till the oil supply suddenly drops by 20-30%.
Rent the movie Dr. Zhivago, that is where I believe we’ll end up within a few years, maybe 4-6.
I don’t want a silver- tongued devil. I want the guy who works, and who knows to stay out of my way while I work. I want the guy who looks okay in a hardhat, touring a refinery. Perry doesn’t need to debate well. He just has to keep repeating Texas’ jobs numbers.
Perry has already tangled with the over- privileged sumbitches called establishment democrats- bill hobby’s memoir is all about democrats in high places trying to school him. Mr White, the democrat, tried to whine his way into the governorship, after having sunk Houston. Perry cleaned his clock. Perry’s ads were awful- but they got the point across.
Seriously, you don’t know what a treat you’re missing. Perry is the real deal. You’ll love him, by the end of it all.
ari,
Watching from California, as governor Perry and his colleagues attracted and created a private sector that New York, Illinois and my state were driving away, I was sold. But I’m the easy sell up in the choir loft. Independents, who might consider voting for the current Washington disaster, need to appreciate the hows and whys that led to the results in Texas—as well as the blue state exodus that Krugman and others spin or ignore. Call it Layman’s Economics 101; Makers,Takers and Incentives.
And all of these candidates need to get up to speed on foreign affairs; they’re vying to be a nation’s chief foreign policy architect, not just chief domestic executive.
It is possible that I’m embracing a pipe dream! The main thing in this upcoming election is picking truly conservative candidates to topple the progressive ideology of the current administration and the likes of Reid and Palosi. The charm and charisma standard for election is the least accurate!
Only the readers familiar with the Bible will understand this. I believe Herman Cain was played like Naboth.(1Kings 21)Obama will hire, just as Jezebel did,to do the dirty work. I was sickened at Christian talk radio at how often they ‘picked up the stones’ to hurl at Mr. Cain. The establishment is worried about Herman Cain, or Henry Kissinger would not have wasted his time with Mr. Cain. Gingrich has rubbed shoulders with Pelosi and Hillary. Romney and Gingrich would appear hypocrites to oppose Obama on some issues. I am afraid Mr. Cain was probably told,”We’ve shown you what we can do with the media. We can ruin your life. We can fabricate birth certificates and scrub internet links(http://www.examiner.com/civil-rights-in-portland/justiagate) and we can have dead people vote. If that isn’t enough and you are able through some miracle to win the election, remember JFK.” Given that imaginary scenario, what do you think Mr. Cain would do?
J’accuse Herman Cain and “Mr. Stone”!
She needed a job and he offered one. When they were alone, he fondled her, forcibly french-kissed her, groped her, and guided her hand to his genitals.
No, those aren’t the opening lines from a steamy novel or the words of Herman Cain’s latest accuser, Sharon Bialek, the first of four of his alleged sexual harassment victims to come forward. Ms. Bialek claims she was shocked, I say shocked, when Cain put his hand up her skirt, “grabbed [her] head and brought it towards his crotch.”
Since Gloria Allred is in Ms. Bialek’s corner, can there be any doubt in her veracity?
However, the man who did the frenching, groping, and guiding was former Vice President Al Gore. His victim, massage therapist Molly Hagerty, described her encounter to Portland, Oregon police soon after tipsy Gore, acting like a giggling, “crazed sex poodle,” tried to seduce her in his Hotel Lucia room in 2006.
After Politico.com broke the unsubstantiated Herman Cain story, every member of Obama’s MSM in the country descended on the allegations as if it were manna from the gods of liberalism because Cain isn’t a Democrat liberal.
Just as with the initial revelations about Democrat Bill Clinton’s Monica Lewinsky affair and Democrat John Edwards’ productive hanky panky with Rielle Hunter, the Portland Tribune was well aware of Molly Hagerty’s claims concerning Democrat Gore but chose not to publicize them despite the fact an official police report was filed and made public by TheSmokingGun.com.
In that report, when Gore ordered a late night massage at the Lucia, he was alleged to have used an alias, “Mr. Stone,” though he is described in the report as “Al Gore, former vice president of the United States of America” and charged with “alleged Sexual Assault.”
It’s not as if Portland was Gore’s first known instance of forcing tonsil hockey on an unwilling partner. While still VP, drunk at a New Year’s Eve party, Gore . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5924.)
Herman Cain, guilty or innocent, is already a threat at the highest level to Democrats’ dependency agenda, to use George Will’s phrase: an unapologetic conservative who “left the farm years ago”.
Actually his word was “plantation.”
Do what thou wilt.
Nice to see another AC fan about.