Reactions to Herman Cain’s Withdrawal

Saturday, Herman Cain officially announced that he was ending his campaign for the 2012 Republican Presidential nomination, amid many alleged scandals.  Some in Republicans and conservatives are glad to see him out (the former group consists mainly of establishment types who want to cram Mitt Romney down our throats and the latter consists of people who are backing some other candidate).  Cain’s withdrawal was not unexpected to anyone paying attention, ever since he rose to the top of the Republican polls he’s been under attack.  The Leftwing attack machine, supported by their willing accomplices in the Drive-By Media, has had their sights on Cain and they’ve finally succeeded. 

I’m on the record as saying that I believe Cain when he denies these allegations.  For starters, the way these accusations kept coming out one at a time as the previous didn’t work.  They were all unprovable, with the best available accuser being a woman had a history of claiming sexual harassment every time she didn’t get her way at work.  I believe Cain because I’ve looked in his eyes.  I can’t explain it any further, save for saying that as a Christian, I’ve learned how to discern the spirit of a man.  I believe Cain.  He has admitted to giving money to this woman who is now accusing him.  As a Pentecostal Christian, I can tell you I’ve seen that before.  It’s called caring for the needy amongst you. 

Cain is gone now.  The Media hit job has worked.  They’ve gotten Cain out of the way.  I for one do not believe this was entirely a consequence of the Media attacks.  Cain lost a lot of conservative support from people like myself who were inclined to support him because of his poor performances recently on foreign policy.  Whenever Cain got off the subject of 9-9-9, it seemed to hurt his support.  My concern now is that this may hurt the chances of Mr. Cain to serve in a cabinet post or, in the role I believe he is wonderfully suited for, the Republican Vice Presidential Nominee.  Regardless of his political future, however, I believe Mr. Cain is destined to be a player in the political arena for a long time to come.  If he does not seek some sort of elected office he will be a major power broker in the Tea Party and the larger conservative wing of the Republican Party, similar to Sarah Palin. 

Now to those of you who back other candidates and therefore jumped on the bandwagon in attacking Mr. Cain, I have a message.  I absolutely guarantee that your candidate will be next if he becomes the nominee.  If it’s Mitt Romney, don’t be assuaged by his squeaky-clean background, because truth does not matter to the Left Wing attack machine.  If it’s not “Mormonism is weird,” they will invent something.  Trust me.  If Rick Perry rebounds to the top of the race, it’ll be more of the same baloney about daring to purchase a name that had a racist name on a rock long before the Perry family bought it and that the Perry family painted over and turned to hide said slur.  If Michelle Bachmann were to rise back up, it’ll be more attempts to paint her as a fire-breathing dragon.  If pigs fly and Hell freezes over and Ron Paul becomes the nominee, his foreign policy alone will see him torn down by the Right and the Left will go after him as the single most uncaring person in the world for his reasonable desire to spend only the money we receive in taxes. 

The same type of attacks have already begun on Newt Gingrich, whether it’s rehashing the same false story about Newt supposedly divorcing his ex-wife on her deathbed back in the 80s (by the way, the same woman is still alive today, so the deathbed claim is already patently false) or misrepresenting his role with Freddie Mac, the attack machine is already started on Gingrich.  I think Newt will deal with these claims in a completely different manner.  To quote Herb Brooks, he’s not going to defend against the Drive-By Media, he is going to attack them.  Quite frankly I think it’s going to be fun to watch. 

 I wish Mr. Cain the best in his future endeavors.  As his brother in the Lord Jesus Christ, I pray for Herman Cain, and for Gloria Cain.  I close with this, and I know I will take heat from some for it:  I believe Mr. Cain when he says the accusations are false.  If one is innocent, there is nothing more you can do but proclaim your innocence.  The same gut that told me Bill Clinton was lying in the 90s tells me that Cain is telling the truth.  I close with this:  if you piled on to Cain because you support someone else, your candidate will be next if he or she rises to the top of the heap.  I guarantee it.

Reactions to the CNN – Heritage Foundation Debate

Last night the Republican candidates met for a debate on National Security in our nation's capital. First and foremost, I'm going to give props to a network that I usually lambast: CNN did a good job of moderating a very fair and balanced debate. They did a nice job of spreading out the questions to all candidates and they didn't play "gotcha." As many questions came from members of the Heritage Foundation and other conservative groups were asked as questions from Wolf Blitzer. Also, although Blitzer tends to lean left, that's better than falling directly to their left side like most in the Drive-By Media. Also, Blitzer reminds me a combination of my favorite college professor, the late Dr. Billy Reed (a teacher who I remember very fondly) and Mr. Feeney from Boy Meets World. Oh, and also he reminds me of the guy in the Men's Warehouse commercials (you're going to like the way you look…I guarantee it.)

So let's play a round of everyone's favorite post-debate analysis game: Buy, Hold, Sell, or Sell All.

Michelle Bachmann – Sell (Sell):


Bachmann had a great debate. She said some great things. For example, "President Obama is letting the ACLU to run the CIA." That being said, it's going to take an awful lot for Congresswoman Bachmann to get back into this race at this point.

Again, Congresswoman Bachmann had some great moments. She had a great exchange with Governor Rick Perry on the subject of Pakistan. Her debate performances keep going up…but her poll numbers don't. I think Congresswoman Bachmann might be a good Vice Presidential nominee, I also think if, as expected, Speaker of the House John Boehner faces a Tea Party primary challenge, and if he loses, Bachmann would make a fine Speaker of the House. But right now I do not see her rebounding.

Herman Cain – Hold (Buy):

Herman Cain is still hanging in there. He's winning most national polls still and, despite the Drive-By Media's best efforts, this sexual harassment scandal is not forcing Cain out of the race, even given the stories that the Drive-Bys are ignoring (more on that later this week). This debate was out of Cain's wheelhouse, at least on paper. His strength is in the area of jobs and the economy. Yet he came off as more knowledgeable than I expected. Clearly Cain has done his homework and has good people advising him on the subject, because it's not as important to be knowledgeable on your own but rather to surround yourself with knowledgeable people. Cain did get tripped up some on the "torture" question. However, I do trust him to surround himself with the right people, and ultimately, that's what matters. As my good friend and fellow blogger the JC Freak said to me after the debate, Cain's strategy is to "not be Hitler and assume that he is a military genius who micromanage everything, but instead listen to his generals."

Foreign Policy is not Cain's strong suit. He spent a whole lot of time obfuscating in this debate. He gave a lot of safe answers that didn't have a lot of substance. He's also dropped to 3^rd place in many polls.

Now to give you a shocker: I don't think it has a whole lot to do with the Drive-By Media hit job with the unfounded claims of sexual harassment. I think why Cain is dropping is due to the very issue last night's debate handled: National Security. Conservatives, including yours truly, is becoming concerned about Cain's ability to be Commander-in-Chief and his lack of knowledge on National Security. He had one great line, "Enforce the laws we already have…we don't need new laws!" I couldn't agree more. The laws we have are enough, now enforce them! Great moments aside, though, I have serious doubts that Mr. Cain is ready to be the Commander in Chief.

Now I can tell you what a great job to learn those issues would be for Mr. Cain: Vice President of the United States. Seriously….as the #2 man behind Newt Gingrich or (sigh) Mitt Romney, Cain would get the experience he needs and have the opportunity to step up to the proverbial big chair in eight years.

Newt Gingrich – Buy (Sell):

Newt has now pulled into a 2^nd place tie with Mitt Romney and within the margin of error of frontrunner Herman Cain. He's for real in this race. I said for a long time that if Gingrich showed me he could win, I'd love to back him. Well here we are…and I'm leaning toward backing him.
What I love about Gingrich most of all is the looks that he gives the moderators when they ask really stupid questions…a look that says "are you REALLY that stupid?" before he answers it. He nailed it agreeing with Rick Perry about starting at $0 in foreign aid and then requiring them to prove why we should support them with foreign aid.

 Newt had so many great lines, however my favorites included:

 "There are a number of ways to be smart about Iran and there are relatively few ways to be dumb, and the (Obama) Administration skipped all the ways to be smart."

 And when asked if he wanted to comment on his statement that Mitt Romney was a "competent manager" but not able to make real changes in Washington, Newt simply said "No," then proceeded to reiterate that ANY of the people on this stage would be better than Barrack Obama, which is so very true.

 Gingrich again showed that he is, in my opinion, the single most knowledgeable candidate on pretty much every issue in these debates. He understands reality and understands how to solve problems. (Yes, I'm becoming a Newt man, if you didn't pick that up.) He understands that developing our domestic energy supplies, namely oil, will solve a whole lot of problems in our national security by removing our dependence on many foreign nations for those supplies. And yes, Newt is right, if we are serious, we can change the face of the oil market by drilling for our own oil in a serious manner.

Newt did a good job, although I do think he was hurt by CNN spreading out the questions evenly because, by other debates have given the frontrunner more questions, and that frontrunner, friends, is Newt Gingrich.

 Jon Huntsman – Not In Attendance (Sold):

 Rather than wasting time talking about Jon Huntsman and his magenta tie, I've decided to provide a link to a video of Abbott and Costello doing their classic routine "Who's On First."

Well, a pig flew by tonight because I agreed with Huntsman on one statement: We do need term limits for Congress. Then he proceeded to drive me so crazy through the debate that I felt I couldn't just make a fun joke about Governor Huntsman. I've seen pieces of wet one-ply toilet paper with more tensile strength than John Huntsman's spine. He's a wimp, and we've already got a wimp in the White House.

Ron Paul - Sold (Sold):

You know that 15% of policies where I completely disagree with Ron Paul? This debate highlighted those differences. (For example, I still do not believe that Saddam Hussein didn't have weapons of mass destruction based on simple logic, specifically that dictators don't give up easily. I do agree that President's shouldn't go to war without a declaration of war from Congress.)

Ron Paul's issue on foreign policy is that he lives with his Magic Imagination Hat on where every ideal can be realized. I, on the other hand, live in the Real World.

When Paul talked about our spending problems, I stood up and cheered. Yes, I agree that our spending problem is one of our biggest national security issues. That being said, in a few places, Paul also showed a whole lot of the reasons why I can't support him…on the subject of National Security, Congressman Paul sleeps with his Happy Imagination Hat on. I, on the other hand, live in the Real World. Honestly, I do not believe that we can just play the isolationist game in this modern world…we just can't. I'm sorry, but that's the reality. To paraphrase a favorite television show, there's a time and a place for everything, including idealism and it's called college. It's not called the White House.

Overall, however, Paul focused on the 85% of issues I agree with, and stayed away from a lot of the issues where I do agree with Cain, starting with really dealing with our real problem, which again is not revenue, it's spending.

Congressman Paul really fascinates me, because he has a condo up the street from me in the Real World that he lives in 11 months a year, but then decides to take out his Happy Imagination Hat and live at his time share in Happy Imagination Land when it comes to foreign policy. I just don't get it. How can one man be so realistic when it comes to the economy and so unrealistic when it comes to foreign policy?

Rick Perry – Hold (Hold):     

Perry got better this time. Again, he has gotten stronger in the debates. He's learning to communicate his message more effectively. I think perhaps he's doing debate prep and practicing. I say it all the time, real conservatism wins whenever it's effectively communicated. Perry's issue is not being a real conservative, thus far it's been effectively communicating it. I think it was very wise for Perry to join the joke and laugh at his own gaffe in the last debate. Self-deprecating humor was one of the things that made his former boss and our former President, George W. Bush, so approachable and why Bush won two elections against people who were, on paper, stronger debaters.

 My favorite Perry quote was "The foreign budget for any nation in my administration will start at $0," and then we would consider increasing it if a nation proves they are supporting us.

Perry is giving me hope that he might rebound. As I've said, on paper, he's the candidate that best represents my values. I think Perry could be someone who ends up being a frontrunner someday, but not this election. I think being a 2^nd time Presidential candidate in eight years could be a big difference for Perry, much like Mitt Romney is much improved since 2008.

Perry maintained his gains from the last debate. He's begun to pick up a few points in the polls. I really like his plans, I like his Flat Tax, I like his Balanced Budget Amendment, I especially like the idea of making Congress part-time. That being said, I don't really think he's going to rebound THIS ELECTION. I do think you could see Perry be a very strong candidate in eight years as a second time Presidential candidate. So many candidates are better the second time around. Look at Mitt Romney. Also, look at Ronald Reagan. I'm not writing Perry off yet, because his numbers are climbing, but I don't know if there's enough time to climb back to the top.

I also want to give a quick reality check to Governor Perry: Just because you were able to work with Democrats in Texas, doesn't mean you can work together in the same manner with Democrats in the United States Congress. The man Governor Perry served under as Lieutenant Governor of Texas, former President George W. Bush had the same expectation and it didn't pan out…and that's because a Democrat in Texas is often more conservative by a fair margin than a Republican in say, Connecticut or New York.
I think Perry did well tonight, just based on debate performance. I think he stood strong and did pretty well.

Mitt Romney – Buy (Buy):

 Foreign policy is a good topic for Mitt. I have my issues with him on domestic policy because I question whether or not he's conservative ENOUGH on taxes, on the economy, etc. But like I said for eight years under George W. Bush, I do trust him to keep us safe.

 I thought Mitt came out strong at several times, including his clear statement against Barrack Obama for believing that his personal charisma would make the difference in a world filled with evil people (I'm paraphrasing here) and that the President thinks of this country as just another nation. I agree with Mitt, America is not just another nation. America is the great, shining city on a hill.
 Tonight's debate gave me reasons that, if Romney is our nominee, I could get behind Mitt and support him. I still hope for better, but I will get behind him if I need to in the general election.

 "What you have is a President who has a priority of spending us into bankruptcy, but he's not just spending us into bankruptcy, he's spending the money foolishly." Amen, Mitt, amen. Once again, foreign policy is a good place for Mitt. I genuinely would trust him to keep ups safe if he became President, just like I trusted George W. Bush to keep us safe. That's the big reason why I could live with Mitt as President. I still want better, though.

Rick Santorum - Sold (Sold):

 Santorum bumbled a lot on Saturday. When he said "Pakistan MUST be our friend" to me was a stupid statement. Yes, Pakistan is a nuclear power. So is North Korea. The idea that because someone is a bully that it's better to befriend the bully out of fear that the bully might attack us next, even though we KNOW we would clean said bully's clock in a fight. The better thing to do is to let the bully know that we will take the bully out if they try to pick on any of the other kids.

 Honestly, I'm getting annoyed with Santorum. He's so busy showing he can play the same lame compromise game (I promise I wasn't trying to do a Dr. Seuss impression) that has caused the problems we have in Washington. Democrats want Republicans to compromise when the GOP is in power, and then tells us "elections have consequences, and we won" when Democrats are in power. We do not need to compromise with Democrats. We need to defeat them. Santorum wants to play the same Washington insider game, and we don't have time for that game.


Debate Winner(s): Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul

Please note: My debate winners have zero to do with chances to win the Republican Nomination.

As it sits now, the race for my personal vote looks like this:

1. Newt Gingrich
2. Rick Perry
3. Herman Cain

How about you? Let me know in the comment section, on Twitter (@UpstateMetFan) or on the Biblical Conservatism Fan Page on Facebook!

Cain Drops in Polls, Harassment Stories Disappear?

Obviously, friends, that question mark in the title is dripping with sarcasm. I told you when the story first broke that this was nothing more than a media hit job.  Now that Herman Cain has dropped out of the top two candidates in most polls, all of a sudden, the News Media couldn't care less about Herman Cain or allegations of sexual harassment.

I told you when this story broke that it was nothing but a high-tech lynching of Herman Cain. Now that the Drive-By Media thinks they've succeeded, they've moved on. If it was really about a search for the truth, do you think it would've stopped?  Of course not.  They'd continue to hammer this story until justice was done.  Yet this story has been pushed aside in favor of going after the newest conservative on the rise, Newt Gingrich.

The Herman Cain sexual harassment allegations, which by the way would never have stood up in court, are now old news.  Don't be fooled, my friends, if Herman Cain starts rising int he polls again they will come back out.  And if that happens, I want you to remember today, when it's a nonstory again (as it always should have been).

The truth stands:  The Drive-By Media doesn't want a conservative as the Republican nominee because that will give a real choice between Barack Obama and the GOP nominee.  They definitely don't want a black conservative, because that eliminates the vote with your guilt types who voted for Obama to prove they weren't racist.  That was always what the allegations directed at Herman Cain were about.  The fact that those allegations went away as soon as Cain dropped in the polls proves it.

Finally, to you who prefer someone other than Cain and thus jumped on this bandwagon, once again I guarantee you that your guy will get the same treatment if he or she becomes the top candidate.  If your favorite is Mitt Romney, be certain it will not happen in the primaries, but if and when he's nominated, but rest assured it will happen.

Media bias is proven once again.  Who's shocked?

What the Media ISN'T Telling You in the Cain Scandal

It's now been two weeks since the Herman Cain sexual harassment claims first surfaced.  A lot of "news" has come out about the story, but what is more telling is what the Drive-By Media ISN'T saying.  There are pockets of details that are being ignored by the Media that make this a completely different story.  So today, I'll be doing my impression of Weasel Zippers or the Drudge Report and bring you two stories the Media ISN'T reporting.

Using high tech lie-detector software, Private Investigator TJ Ward has concluded that Herman Cain was not lying in his press conference.  Shown on video (below) you can see that Cain was not lying at any point during his press conference last week but that Sharon Bialek's story was highly questionable.  For those clamoring for Cain to take a polygraph test...this test is as accurate if not more accurate than a polygraph.



Pat Dollard - Report: Cain Accuser Sharon Bialek Fired From NRA For False Accusations Of Sexual Assault

Summary:  Accuser Sharon Bialek, who has accused Herman Cain of sexual harassment, apparently has a history of making false accusations of...sexual harassment.  Yep, Sharon Bialek has a history of making such claims, and was even fired from the National Restaurant Association for making false claims.  From the report: 

I remember (Bialek) as a time-waster, and rabble-rouser. If she didn’t get her way she cried about sexual harassment”. A former co-worker, a female no less, emailed me. “She was trouble with a capital “T”.

Kind of puts a shadow on this claim of sexual harassment, no? 

Combine these two stories, and all of a sudden claims of a "high tech lynching" of Cain that have come from everyone from national conservative talk hosts like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity to lowly Internet bloggers like yours truly start to hold water.  According to Dollard in the above article:

The fact that (Bialek) waited 13 years and never said a word not even during Cain’s earlier forays into politics. She only now magically appears because Cain is leading in some polls and proving a threat to Barack Obama?

Same can be said about anonymous claims and other claims that weren't even sexual harassment but just Cain asking a woman to join him for dinner at a networking event because "I know what he was thinking."  Uhuh. 

The Drive-By Media won't let this go away.  But it's still an unfounded, libelous claim.

Reactions to the CBS-National Journal Debate

Saturday night, the Republican Presidential Candidates met in South Carolina for a debate, televised on CBS. The moderators weren't as bad as the CNBC crowd last week, but they really annoyed me by once again trying to participate. What I find hilarious is that these moderators kept trying to debate with Newt Gingrich, which consistently ends up being just as useful as attempting to take down a brick wall using only your head.

Today, and moving forward, I'm adding two new features to my debate reactions: My current Top 3 Contenders for my vote in the New York State Republican primary and the person or people I felt won the debate. So let's play a round of our favorite post debate stock market analogy: Buy, Hold, Sell or Sell All:

Michelle Bachmann – Sell (Sell):

Bachmann had good moments, but her place in the polls has tanked. I like what she said about everyone paying taxes, even if it's $10 a year. I agree. When the Left talks about someone "not paying their fair share," but they ignore that 47% of Americans pay zero taxes and then consumes more than half of the government welfare. So 47% of people pay no taxes and use all the tax money.

At one point Congresswoman Bachmann was my top choice. Right now I don't feel she's got a chance, and I'm not wasting my vote on idealism. Maybe she can be Vice President, but not President.

Bachmann had a great debate. She said some great things. For example, "President Obama is letting the ACLU to run the CIA." That being said, it's going to take an awful lot for Congresswoman Bachmann to get back into this race at this point.

Herman Cain – Buy (Buy):

Cain has had a rough couple of weeks. Early on, the moderators tried to play gotcha with Cain. It didn't work. He came off as genuine in his response. I will say this over and over, when Cain denies these charges, deep down in places I don't talk about at parties, I believe him. Cain is an honest man. The best phrase to describe him is "what you see is what you get." He really answered well.
Then he got back on message. He talked about 9-9-9. He talked about making taxes fairer and transparent. He really got back on topic today. I believe if Cain can stay on message he'll get past this propped up, made up scandal and continue to succeed.

Herman Cain is still hanging in there. He's winning most national polls still and, despite the Drive-By Media's best efforts, this sexual harassment scandal is not forcing Cain out of the race, even given the stories that the Drive-Bys are ignoring (more on that later this week).

This debate was out of Cain's wheelhouse, at least on paper. His strength is in the area of jobs and the economy. Yet he came off as more knowledgeable than I expected. Clearly Cain has done his homework and has good people advising him on the subject, because it's not as important to be knowledgeable on your own but rather to surround yourself with knowledgeable people. Cain did get tripped up some on the "torture" question. However, I do trust him to surround himself with the right people, and ultimately, that's what matters. As my good friend and fellow blogger the JC Freak said to me after the debate, Cain's strategy is to "not be Hitler and assume that he is a military genius who micromanage everything, but instead listen to his generals."

Newt Gingrich – Buy (Sell):

In debates, Newt is the man. He tells it like it is and does it in a way that people can digest. I loved when he said that there were two points in our history of rapid economic growth, the Reagan Years and the Contract with America (bad news, Clinton fans, it wasn't Clinton who caused the 90s Boom, it was the Contract with America). Both of those eras had one huge similarity: Lower taxes and let people keep their own money, because private citizens do better with their money than government ever can. Newt is on the rise, and I think he has a chance. I'm seriously considering voting for him now. He was Tea Party before there was a Tea Party. I'm glad to see his rise.

Newt has now pulled into a 2^nd place tie with Mitt Romney and within the margin of error of frontrunner Herman Cain. He's for real in this race. I said for a long time that if Gingrich showed me he could win, I'd love to back him. Well here we are…and I'm leaning toward backing him.
What I love about Gingrich most of all is the looks that he gives the moderators when they ask really stupid questions…a look that says "are you REALLY that stupid?" before he answers it. He nailed it agreeing with Rick Perry about starting at $0 in foreign aid and then requiring them to prove why we should support them with foreign aid.

Newt had so many great lines, however my favorites included:

"There are a number of ways to be smart about Iran and there are relatively few ways to be dumb, and the (Obama) Administration skipped all the ways to be smart."

And when asked if he wanted to comment on his statement that Mitt Romney was a "competent manager" but not able to make real changes in Washington, Newt simply said "No," then proceeded to reiterate that ANY of the people on this stage would be better than Barrack Obama, which is so very true.

Jon Huntsman – Sold (Sold):

I'm kind of glad Huntsman is in these debates. It gives me a chance to use the bathroom or make a sandwich.

Rather than wasting time talking about Jon Huntsman and his magenta tie, I've decided to provide a link to a video of Abbott and Costello doing their classic routine "Who's On First."

Gary Johnson – Not in Attendance (Sold):

Johnson showed up at what, one debate? Is he still running? Does anybody care?
I'm going to start leaving Johnson off these things. He isn't even showing at debates.

Ron Paul - Sold (Sold):

I like some of Paul's plans, namely cutting $1 Trillion from the budget in year one. Unfortunately there's still that 15% where I can't agree with him.

You know that 15% of policies where I completely disagree with Ron Paul? This debate highlighted those differences. (For example, I still do not believe that Saddam Hussein didn't have weapons of mass destruction based on simple logic, specifically that dictators don't give up easily. I do agree that President's shouldn't go to war without a declaration of war from Congress.)

Ron Paul's issue on foreign policy is that he lives with his Magic Imagination Hat on where every ideal can be realized. I, on the other hand, live in the Real World. This is why Paul can't win the GOP nomination, most of the party doesn't vote with their Magic Imagination Hats on.

Rick Perry – Hold (Hold):  

Perry got better in this debate before he got worse. At first he was figuring out how to properly present conservatism. As I've said recently, I like his Flat Tax. I like his plan to remove all regulations added by the Obama administration based on one critera, "if it costs jobs, get rid of it." My other favorite Perry statement tonight was "If you're too big to fail, you're too big." And then the gaffes happened. 

 At one point I thought that Perry was back on the rise, and I was glad, because I think he's one of the conservative powerhouses in this race and if he can prove he can win I'd love to back him. Then he couldn't complete answering a question and looked like a bumbling fool. Once again I continue to stay that real conservatism wins every single time it's effectively communicated. The problem is I still doubt if Perry can effectively communicate it.

Perry got better this time. Again, he has gotten stronger in the debates. He's learning to communicate his message more effectively. I think perhaps he's doing debate prep and practicing. I say it all the time, real conservatism wins whenever it's effectively communicated. Perry's issue isn't not being a real conservative, thus far it's been effectively communicating it. I think it was very wise for Perry to join the joke and laugh at his own gaffe in the last debate. Self-deprecating humor was one of the things that made his former boss and our former President, George W. Bush, so approachable and why Bush won two elections against people who were, on paper, stronger debaters.

My favorite Perry quote was "The foreign budget for any nation in my administration will start at $0," and then we would consider increasing it if a nation proves they are supporting us.

Perry is giving me hope that he might rebound. As I've said, on paper, he's the candidate that best represents my values. I think Perry could be someone who ends up being a frontrunner someday, but not this election. I think being a 2^nd time Presidential candidate in eight years could be a big difference for Perry, much like Mitt Romney is much improved since 2008.

Mitt Romney – Buy (Buy):

Mitt had good moments and bad. One of his best moments was explaining the definition of profits. He got out of his robotic mode and got excited and showed emotion about capitalism. He had a rough moment early on when he was being questioned about his flip flops. What it really comes down to is that Romney would be okay, but we can do better. We've got, by my count, five dyed in the wool conservatives on that stage, and I want better than Mitt.

Foreign policy is a good topic for Mitt. I have my issues with him on domestic policy because I question whether or not he's conservative ENOUGH on taxes, on the economy, etc. But like I said for eight years under George W. Bush, I do trust him to keep us safe.

I thought Mitt came out strong at several times, including his clear statement against Barrack Obama for believing that his personal charisma would make the difference in a world filled with evil people (I'm paraphrasing here) and that the President thinks of this country as just another nation. I agree with Mitt, America is not just another nation. America is the great, shining city on a hill.

Tonight's debate gave me reasons that, if Romney is our nominee, I could get behind Mitt and support him. I still hope for better, but I will get behind him if I need to in the general election.

Rick Santorum - Sold (Sold):

Santorum had a great debate. He really was on the ball. I just don’t see him getting revved up. Maybe I’m wrong. But for now, he’s getting 2-3% in polls. He’s got no chance.

Santorum bumbled a lot on Saturday. When he said "Pakistan MUST be our friend" to me was a stupid statement. Yes, Pakistan is a nuclear power. So is North Korea. The idea that because someone is a bully that it's better to befriend the bully out of fear that the bully might attack us next, even though we KNOW we would clean said bully's clock in a fight. The better thing to do is to let the bully know that we will take the bully out if they try to pick on any of the other kids.


Another debate, kind of a short one considering how many candidates we have in the race, but entertaining.

Debate Winner(s): Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney

Honorable Mention: Rick Perry (For delivering better than expected.)

As it sits now, the race for my personal vote looks like this:

1. Newt Gingrich
2. Herman Cain
3. Rick Perry

How about you? Let me know in the comment section, on Twitter (@UpstateMetFan) or on the Biblical Conservatism Fan Page on Facebook!

Reactions to the CNBC “Your Money, Your Vote” Debate

Last night, the Republican Presidential Candidates met for a debate in Rochester, MI. CNBC hosted the debate, and on many fronts I wanted to smack the moderators. It was pretty bad actually. I darn near threw my remote through the television when the moderators tried to play gotcha with Herman Cain. Then I remembered it’s not the TV’s fault. I continue to wonder why the heck we as Republicans keep putting ourselves through these debates? CNBC’s moderators kept trying to join into the debate and that is not what they are supposed to do. Too much gotcha was played. Jim Cramer reminded me a lot of Matt Foley the Motivational Speaker last night.


Aside from that, let’s play everybody’s favorite post debate game, buy, hold, sell, sell all or sold:

Michelle Bachmann – Hold (Sell):

Congresswoman Bachmann came out swinging tonight (look for that statement a lot tonight). She really had some great moments. I honestly do not know if this response will build any support for her. She had some great moments. My favorite was when she brought up that Barrack Obama’s relatives are still in this country illegally. Honestly I don’t know if she’s going to pick up any support, but I thought her debate performance was solid.

Bachmann had good moments, but her place in the polls has tanked. I like what she said about everyone paying taxes, even if it’s $10 a year. I agree. When the Left talks about someone “not paying their fair share,” but they ignore that 47% of Americans pay zero taxes and then consumes more than half of the government welfare. So 47% of people pay no taxes and use all the tax money.

At one point Congresswoman Bachmann was my top choice. Right now I don’t feel she’s got a chance, and I’m not wasting my vote on idealism. Maybe she can be Vice President, but not President.

Herman Cain – Buy (Buy):

He took it hard on the 9% sales tax in the debate from the other candidates. I think he did a good job of responding and explaining that the plan is replacing the current pipeline, not giving a new tax pipeline.


In the last month I’ve done a 180 on Herman Cain. He’s become a viable candidate and is the current contender to Mitt Romney at the top of the race. I thought he did a very good job of explaining his 9-9-9 Plan and continuing to invite people to go to his website and view the plan in full. He did a great job to explain that his plan is replacing significant taxes that go into the price of every product we buy. He’s going to have to do a lot of explaining to get that fact into people’s heads. Yes, there would need to be significant and potentially Constitutional safeguards for a plan like 9-9-9 to work. But he did a good job I think of shaking off the attacks and staying firm on his plan.

Cain has had a rough couple of weeks. Early on, the moderators tried to play gotcha with Cain. It didn’t work. He came off as genuine in his response. I will say this over and over, when Cain denies these charges, deep down in places I don’t talk about at parties, I believe him. Cain is an honest man. The best phrase to describe him is “what you see is what you get.” He really answered well.

Then he got back on message. He talked about 9-9-9. He talked about making taxes fairer and transparent. He really got back on topic today. I believe if Cain can stay on message he’ll get past this propped up, made up scandal and continue to succeed.

Newt Gingrich – Buy (Sell):

Newt joins Herman Cain in the category of making me look bad, and I’m glad of it. I really like Newt. If he can show himself to be a viable option and not a throw away vote in my state’s primary, I’d strongly consider voting for him. He’s got great ideas and he would absolutely cream Obama in a debate. He had great moments in the debate. I’d like to see Newt really take the next step. Let’s see what happens.

In debates, Newt is the man. He tells it like it is and does it in a way that people can digest. I loved when he said that there were two points in our history of rapid economic growth, the Reagan Years and the Contract with America (bad news, Clinton fans, it wasn’t Clinton who caused the 90s Boom, it was the Contract with America). Both of those eras had one huge similarity: Lower taxes and let people keep their own money, because private citizens do better with their money than government ever can. Newt is on the rise, and I think he has a chance. I’m seriously considering voting for him now. He was Tea Party before there was a Tea Party. I’m glad to see his rise.

Jon Huntsman – Sold (Sold):

I’m glad Huntsman wasn’t here. I’ve run out of funny statements for him. I’ll work on it before the next debate. Any suggestions, send me a tweet @UpstateMetFan.

I’m kind of glad Huntsman is in these debates. It gives me a chance to use the bathroom or make a sandwich.

Gary Johnson – Not in Attendance (Sold):

See Jon Huntsman note.

Johnson showed up at what, one debate? Is he still running? Does anybody care?

Ron Paul - Sold (Sold):

Ron Paul forgot to sound crazy tonight. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, I agree with him on 85% of his policies. Unfortunately the other 15%, which didn’t come up tonight, scare me about him, like his isolationist policies that do not make sense in our modern world. I stay where I stay, he won’t be the President. But I’m glad he’s in my party. Also, I’d like to give kudos to Paul on one statement, “We have rights, and they come from God.”

I like some of Paul’s plans, namely cutting $1 Trillion from the budget in year one. Unfortunately there’s still that 15% where I can’t agree with him.

Rick Perry – Hold (Hold):

I felt Perry rebounded pretty well. His plans to use the energy resources we have to power this country makes far too much sense to ignore. I can’t tell you what a boon to my budget it would be to see my energy costs go down. I’m fortunate enough to live in a town with local, municipal electricity, but even so, if gas prices were cut in half and energy prices were cut in half due to increased supply, that’d be a 10% increase in my monthly available budget, and that would be absolutely huge to me. For the rest of American that would be so as well. I felt he did a decent job on immigration as well.


Most importantly, I felt Perry did a good job of taking it to Mitt Romney. In fairness, Perry really should have let Mitt finish his sentences, but the reality of the situation was that I think Mitt sounded like a he was whining while Perry seemed like an attack dog. While Perry’s statement about Romney hiring illegal immigrants may not have only been true in name only (and I’ll look for a fact check on that), if Romney’s response was indeed true, it still did bloody Romney a bit. Perry may have started to rebound last night.

Perry got better in this debate before he got worse. At first he was figuring out how to properly present conservatism. As I’ve said recently, I like his Flat Tax. I like his plan to remove all regulations added by the Obama administration based on one critera, “if it costs jobs, get rid of it.” My other favorite Perry statement tonight was “If you’re too big to fail, you’re too big.” And then the gaffes happened.

At one point I thought that Perry was back on the rise, and I was glad, because I think he’s one of the conservative powerhouses in this race and if he can prove he can win I’d love to back him. Then he couldn’t complete answering a question and looked like a bumbling fool. Once again I continue to stay that real conservatism wins every single time it’s effectively communicated. The problem is I still doubt if Perry can effectively communicate it.

Mitt Romney – Buy (Buy):

Mitt stood his ground last night and did as well as he’s continued to do. I want to see a fact check on his claim that his “illegal immigrant hiring” was actually him contracting for landscaping with a company who hired illegals, which is, in fairness, not something I can legitimately blame Mitt for. However, where I think he looked bad was when he was defending himself against the interruptions by Perry. I know, it doesn’t sound right, and in most cases I would think that Perry sounded like a jerk and Mitt like a victim. Yet, in that particular instance, Mitt came off to me as condescending and Perry as someone who was legitimately looking for answers.


That exchange (and the subsequent Twitter reactions during it) showed Mitt’s biggest problem. The conservative Republican base really doesn’t want him. That’s why there’s been a perpetual battle of Mitt vs. Not Mitt. (The role of Not Mitt has been played recently by Donald Trump, Michelle Bachmann, Rick Perry, and now Herman Cain.) Republicans are desperately seeking somebody else, and that will hurt Mitt.

Mitt had good moments and bad. One of his best moments was explaining the definition of profits. He got out of his robotic mode and got excited and showed emotion about capitalism. He had a rough moment early on when he was being questioned about his flip flops. What it really comes down to is that Romney would be okay, but we can do better. We’ve got, by my count, five dyed in the wool conservatives on that stage, and I want better than Mitt.

Rick Santorum - Sold (Sold):

Santorum was swinging away again tonight, and I still don’t think he gained any traction. I like him, but his highest possible realistic goal is Vice President.

Santorum had a great debate. He really was on the ball. I just don’t see him getting revved up. Maybe I’m wrong. But for now, he’s getting 2-3% in polls. He’s got no chance.


My personal decision is getting closer…at least I’m down to three candidates I’m seriously considering: Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, and Rick Perry. I’m sick of listening to Leftwing Moderators playing gotcha and knowing they will give softballs to Obama when the general election debates occur. Still, The field is winnowing in my mind. We’ll see how that continues. Next debate is Saturday night. We’ll see what happens!

Reactions to the Cain-Gingrinch "Lincoln-Douglas" Debate

Saturday night, Presidential candidates Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain met for an unorthodox but highly entertaining debate in the style of Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas from their 1858 campaign for the United States Senate. It was a fascinating concept. What I liked about this debate was I got to see real discussion between two candidates that went heavily into the issues instead of just providing for quick, sound-bite answers.


From an entertainment standpoint, this debate was beyond compare. Both Cain and Gingrich are legitimate conservative candidates that I am seriously considering voting for come New York’s primary next year. Both present two great conservative solutions: the 9-9-9 Plan and the New Contract with America. Seeing the two of them square off head to head told me one thing above all else: I’d love to get behind either one of these men in 2012 against Obama.

For the record, I’m buying both of their stocks, so I won’t bother playing Buy, Hold, Sell All or Sold. This was just too different a debate to use the standard format. So instead, I’d like to discuss what I thought was each candidate’s best overall moment, best response to a question, best point made against their opponent and what position makes me, as a conservative, the most excited.


Herman Cain:

Best Overall Moment: “Since Medicare/Medicaid got started in 1965 what it has done trying to control it out of Washington, DC it has gotten states hooked on it like people getting hooked on crack. We have to break the crack habit! Block granting is definitely the approach to end the dependence of states on Washington DC bureaucrats making those decisions.”

Best Response to a Question: We have the best healthcare in the world…we have a Healthcare cost problem. “Don’t let the liberals use their typical scare tactic of throwing grandma off a cliff.” Treat Medicare money like IT’S YOUR MONEY not part of a pool. Ownership of money will cause people to spend it better.

Honorable Mention Moment: Cain’s statement on requiring a photo ID to vote. I had some friends over (including fellow blogger the JC_Freak) to watch the debate and we actually took a moment to discuss what type of individual would actually be able to survive in this country without some sort of legal photo ID. We concluded it would be an individual who had inherited their home on a generational basis going back so far that that Squater’s Rights took over and a photo ID was not required to receive the house in a will, is a completely self-sufficient subsistence farmer who grows his own food and does not sell it, or if he does sell it accepts only cash and then keeps his money under his mattress does not drive, and never purchases any age limited product (ie alcohol, tobacco, lottery tickets, and NyQuil). That’s the person who would be able to survive without a photo ID, because you must provide it to buy a home, to rent a home, to drive a car and to have a job. So to say that it’s disenfranchising people by requiring a photo ID is just plain silly.

Position that Excites me Most as a Conservative: Cain’s “teach a man to fish” story excited me. Cain gets the problem with the entitlement society…we’re just giving people a fish constantly and now they’re standing with their hands out waiting for their next fish. The truth is that we should create a system where we are not making people comfortable in poverty but where we provide their immediate needs until such time as they can pull THEMSELVES out of poverty.

Newt Gingrich:

Best Overall Moment: “The left has this model in which everybody is weak, helpless and stupid but government will take care of them…which always leads me to wonder who do they think government hires?”

Best Response to a Question: "All of us have a hand in making medical costs a mess. Nobody thought through the consequences of a 3rd party payment system. We have no nat’l hearings on fraud at McDonald’s because you ask for a Quarter Pounder, they give you a Quarter Pounder, you give them money. There is a direct relationship. Medical insurance is not like that."


Position that Excites me Most as a Conservative: In the last part of the debate, Gingrich said “I don’t think you solve poverty problems by considering people helpless.” I couldn’t agree more. We treat the poor as so helpless and useless that they need government to care for them. This is the cornerstone of the liberal mentality that must be changed. People, regardless of their current fiscal property, have the ability to lift themselves out of poverty given the proper impetus. The left doesn’t want that…they believe you need government to save you from poverty. We as conservatives believe that, to paraphrase somebody I don’t like “Yes YOU can.”

Winner of the Debate: Newt Gingrich by a mile. Newt was more articulate and more Presidential. I do believe I’d give my right arm to see Gingrich debate Obama.

I’d love to see a Gingrich/Cain ticket in 2012 (with Newt at the top of the ticket). It would serve multiple purposes, including giving Cain experience as the #2 and grooming him to be President after Gingrich.

Between the Debates - Checking in on the GOP Race

It's been a while since we've been able to assess where candidates (and their stock) are standing in the current race. The last debate was on October 18th, the next full debate is on November 9th.  It seems like it's a good time to check in and do a round of buy, hold, sell, sell all or sold to assess where the candidates stand in the race.  As always, we'll continue to put the previous debate's comments for each candidate in italics and their previous stock rating in parenthasis.

Michelle Bachmann – Sell (Hold):

Congresswoman Bachmann came out swinging last night. She really had some great moments. I honestly do not know if this response will build any support for her. She had some great moments. My favorite was when she brought up that Barrack Obama’s relatives are still in this country illegally. Honestly I don’t know if she’s going to pick up any support, but I thought her debate performance was solid.

Congresswoman Bachmann hasn't really capitalized on the debate performance from October 18th.  She still sits at around 3% in the current polls.  It's going to take something huge for her to contend.  Keep an eye on her as a potential Vice Presidential candidate.  I also think if Speaker John Boehner loses a Tea Party primary challenge, I think you could see Bachmann as Speaker of the House.

Herman Cain – Buy (Buy):

He took it hard on the 9% sales tax in the debate from the other candidates. I think he did a good job of responding and explaining that the plan is replacing the current pipeline, not giving a new tax pipeline.

In the last month I’ve done a 180 on Herman Cain. He’s become a viable candidate and is the current contender to Mitt Romney at the top of the race. I thought he did a very good job of explaining his 9-9-9 Plan and continuing to invite people to go to his website and view the plan in full. He did a great job to explain that his plan is replacing significant taxes that go into the price of every product we buy. He’s going to have to do a lot of explaining to get that fact into people’s heads. Yes, there would need to be significant and potentially Constitutional safeguards for a plan like 9-9-9 to work. But he did a good job I think of shaking off the attacks and staying firm on his plan.

Cain has become the frontrunner in the race.  He's leading Mitt Romney in basically every national poll and is doing well in several key states, including leading Mitt by 7% in the most recent Quinnipiac Poll (1).  The left has tried to take him out by bringing out the old, tried and true sexual harrassment claims on Cain, and his support, along with his fundraising, went UP.  Liberals are absolutely dumbfounded now....they have no idea how to beat Cain. This could be very, very interesting.

Side note: I'm very interested to watch Cain and Newt Gingrich square off in a Lincoln-Douglas style debate on Saturday.  Should be fun to watch.

Newt Gingrich – Buy (Buy):

Newt joins Herman Cain in the category of making me look bad, and I’m glad of it. I really like Newt. If he can show himself to be a viable option and not a throw away vote in my state’s primary, I’d strongly consider voting for him. He’s got great ideas and he would absolutely cream Obama in a debate. He had great moments in the debate. I’d like to see Newt really take the next step. Let’s see what happens.

Newt has pulled into 3rd place and is staying there.  If Cain falls off at some point, I'd expect Newt to be one of the contenders for the official "Not Mitt" spot in the race of Mitt vs. Not Mitt.  I'd love to get behind Newt...he's just got to prove to me that he can win.  He's a true dyed in the wool conservative, just what this country needs, and if the current liberal attack machine on Herman Cain ends up doing any damage, watch out for Newt to be the new "Not Mitt" option.

Jon Huntsman – Not In Attendance (Sold):

I’m glad Huntsman wasn’t here. I’ve run out of funny statements for him. I’ll work on it before the next debate. Any suggestions, send me a tweet @UpstateMetFan.

I still need suggestions...tweet me!

Gary Johnson – Not in Attendance (Sold):

See Jon Huntsman note.

See John Huntsman note.

Ron Paul - Sold (Sold):

Ron Paul forgot to sound crazy tonight for the majority of the debate. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, I agree with him on 85% of his policies. Unfortunately the other 15%, which only came up minimally last night, scare me about him, like his isolationist policies that do not make sense in our modern world. I stay where I’ve stood, he won’t be the President. But I’m glad he’s in my party. Also, I’d like to give kudos to Paul on one statement, “We have rights, and they come from God.”

I've said it before and I'll say it again, Ron Paul isn't going to be the GOP nominee.  Unlike the other people who have no chance, however, I respect Paul, so I won't go past that.

Rick Perry – Hold (Buy):

I felt Perry rebounded pretty well. His plans to use the energy resources we have to power this country makes far too much sense to ignore. I can’t tell you what a boon to my budget it would be to see my energy costs go down. I’m fortunate enough to live in a town with local, municipal electricity, but even so, if gas prices were cut in half and energy prices were cut in half due to increased supply, that’d be a 10% increase in my monthly available budget, and that would be absolutely huge to me. For the rest of American that would be so as well. I felt he did a decent job on immigration as well.

Most importantly, I felt Perry did a good job of taking it to Mitt Romney. In fairness, Perry really should have let Mitt finish his sentences, but the reality of the situation was that I think Mitt sounded like a he was whining while Perry seemed like an attack dog. While Perry’s statement about Romney hiring illegal immigrants may not have only been true in name only (and I’ll look for a fact check on that), if Romney’s response was indeed true, it still did bloody Romney a bit. Perry may have started to rebound last night.

I just don't know what to do with Perry.  On paper, his ideas are great...Flat Tax, Balanced Budget Amendment, Drill Baby Drill...and yet I'm not convinced he can effectively communicate those ideas.  There's an old adage in sales:  A good salesman could sell ice to an eskimo, but a bad salesman couldn't sell a man dying of thirst a glass of water. This is where I am with Perry...which salesman is he?  Conservatism is a good product, but if you're not a good salesman you can't even sell someone precisely what they need.  Perry's next debate performance will be key.  Has he taken time to practice and work on his message?  If so, he's got a shot at my vote and being the Republican nominee.  If not, he's done on both counts.

Mitt Romney – Buy (Buy):

Mitt stood his ground last night and did as well as he’s continued to do. I want to see a fact check on his claim that his “illegal immigrant hiring” was actually him contracting for landscaping with a company who hired illegals, which is, in fairness, not something I can legitimately blame Mitt for. However, where I think he looked bad was when he was defending himself against the interruptions by Perry. I know, it doesn’t sound right, and in most cases I would think that Perry sounded like a jerk and Mitt like a victim. Yet, in that particular instance, Mitt came off to me as condescending and Perry as someone who was legitimately looking for answers.

That exchange (and the subsequent Twitter reactions during said exchange) showed Mitt’s biggest problem. The conservative Republican base really doesn’t want him. That’s why there’s been a perpetual battle of Mitt vs. Not Mitt. (The role of Not Mitt has been played recently by Donald Trump, Michelle Bachmann, Rick Perry, and now Herman Cain.) Republicans are desperately seeking somebody else, and that will hurt Mitt.

Romney is what he is...a Rockefeller Republican who would be better than Obama, but we can still do better than Mitt. Conservatives don't want him...but the other Rockefeller Republicans do. I've talked to a few independents as well who like Romney, but I still think there's better choices out there, and with the Democrats seemingly intent on running Obama again, we have the opportunity to run a real conservative and give America a real choice.  However, I can live with Romney if I have to...I just hope I don't have to live with Romney.

Rick Santorum - Sold (Sold):

Santorum was swinging away again tonight, and I still don’t think he gained any traction. I like him, but his highest possible realistic goal is Vice President.

Santorum can't get traction, and if he hasn't gotten out of the basement yet, he's simply not going to now.  He might be Vice President, and that's an outside chance.


The next debate is five days away, and it's going to be interesting to see how this break between debates effects certain candidates.  Personally, I still haven't made up my mind.  Have you?  I'd love to hear from you if you have.  Email me at biblicalconservatism@aol.com with your thoughts!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

(1) American Voters Like Obama Better This Week, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds; Cain And Gingrich Up As Romney Stalls And Perry Fades

Left Breaks Out Same Tired Playbook on Herman Cain

It’s one of the oldest plays in the liberal playbook…come out with a story with anonymous sources with vague accusations of sexual harassment or some other such thing at a conservative and trumpet it as “the seriousness of the charge demands our attention,” regardless of the nature of the evidence. It happens especially often when a black American dares to succeed outside the framework of the Democrat party…without affirmative action, without liberal victimization, just on their own merit…especially if they dare to be conservative.

This is precisely what the left is attempting to pull on Herman Cain. This time it’s a claim of sexual harassment, reported by the liberal favorite Politico, that was found to be baseless after an investigation, and based on, at best, a tremendous overreaction, or at worst an intentional attempt to tear down a good man.

To his credit, Mr. Cain has done a fine job of responding to this baloney. He explained the supposedly offensive gesture in an interview last night with Greta Van Susteren on Fox News.

“She was in my office one day, and I made a gesture saying -- and I was standing close to her -- and I made a gesture saying you are the same height as my wife. And I brought my hand up to my chin saying, 'My wife comes up to my chin.'" At that point, Cain gestured with his flattened palm near his chin. "And that was put in there [the complaint] as something that made her uncomfortable," Cain said, "something that was in the sexual harassment charge." (1)

Now THERE is an avert sexual advance…you’re about the same height as my wife, she’s this tall. (If you’re picking up my sarcasm, it’s good, because I’m laying it on pretty thick.) Now we don’t know the context of this conversation, but I’m pretty sure discussing someone’s height as a relative to the height of someone else in your life is something I do all the time when the subject comes up. For example, if someone complains that they’re too short, such a response would make an awful lot of sense…you’re not that short, you’re the same height as my wife.

Yes, I know there was a settlement paid. For those of you who have never worked in corporate America, I’m going to explain to you how the world works in such cases. Businesses perform a cost-benefit analysis and often decide that the cost of fighting a lawsuit would be significantly more than the cost of paying a small settlement, so they pay the settlement rather than fight the case and paying the legal fees. It means precisely nothing. It means that the case was settled rather than pay the legal fees to fight it and nothing more. The investigation that occurred after the fact cleared Cain of any wrongdoing, which backs up this fact. (1)

Of course, when a liberal Democrat is accused of the same thing, every attempt is made to sweep it under the rug. When the Monica Lewinski scandal first broke, the claims from the same liberal press was Lewinski was stalking Clinton and that Kenneth Star was “obsessed with sex.” Quite probably if Lewinski hadn’t kept the famous blue dress as a souvenir, she would have had her reputation as tarnished by the Clinton administration and the media as Paula Jones, Juanita Broadderick, and Kathleen Willey…and those claims ranged from sexual harassment to sexual assault to rape...these of course were swept under the rug. We were told these claims didn’t matter because they didn’t affect his job. These were claims that were spread out across many women and were widespread and also very serious charges, and yet the Drive-By Media didn’t run with them. On the contrary, they took Clinton’s part in the whole thing.

I, for one, am sick and tired of this high-tech lynching of any black American who dares to succeed without help from the Democrat party. It’s precisely the same game used by the left to try to destroy Clarence Thomas when he was appointed to the Supreme Court. The same type of accusations were leveled at Thomas, but never proven…once again it was the “seriousness of the charge” and not the nature of the evidence that mattered.

Here’s the truth: Herman Cain terrifies the Obama Administration. If he was the Republican nominee, it would take away the favorite ad homonym attack to explain why conservatives dislike Obama (racism). Yet how can we be racist if we staunchly support a black man who agrees with us politically? It’s almost like we conservatives will support any qualified conservative candidate whose values we support, regardless of their skin color! He would mop the floor with Obama in a debate. He’s got real ideas and real experience. He can talk to a crowd as well as Obama could in ’08, and now the President has a record to answer for rather than just lines about hopeychange. Obama does not want to run against Herman Cain, so now the Drive-By Media is going to carry his water and try a hit piece on Cain.

This story was proven baseless years ago and without evidence. Shame on Politico for running this story in the first place…shame on the rest of the Drive-By Media for running this non-story…every one of them owes Herman Cain an apology.

---------------------------------------------------------

(1) Washington Examiner: Cain details gesture that led to sex accusation

Understanding Herman Cain's 9-9-9 Plan

Recently, a friend of mine asked me my thoughts about Herman Cain's 9-9-9 Plan, expressing concern about the addition of a 9% sales tax to he already pays, a total 8% sales tax in Upstate New York between state and local. He was concerned about seeing his sales tax increased to 17%.  I understand the concern, however, when the plan is explained more clearly, basically everybody is looking at a cut in their overall tax burden.

Before we proceed, it is important to understand that Cain does not intend 9-9-9 to be the permanent tax plan.  Rather it is Phase 1 of a two phase plan to institute the Fair Tax as the new tax system of the nation and completely erradicate our current system.  To read the entirety of the plan, visit Herman Cain's Website or Click Here to see the plan in PDF form.

One must remember that if you are paying taxes, you are paying not just your current income taxes but an additional 6.2% in payroll taxes.  So if we use the current Median Household Income of approximately $50,000 per year, let's look at what they would be paying in taxes under the current system vs the 9-9-9 Plan.

Under our current system, the family making $50,000 per year would be paying 25% Federal Income Tax and 6.2% Payroll Tax, for a total of a 31.2% tax burden.  Let's break that down:

$ 4166.66   Income Before Taxes

-  1041.68  Federal Income Tax (25%)
$ 3124.98 After Federal Income Tax

$  3124.98 After Federal Income Tax

$ 3124.98 After Federal Income Tax
-     258.33  Federal Payroll Tax (6.2%)

$    2866.65 After All federal Taxes

So under the current system:

Total Taxes paid: $1300.01 Monthly
Total Spendable Income: 2866.65 Monthly

Now under Cain's 9-9-9 Plan, all that would be replaced with a 9% income tax and a 9% sales tax.

$ 4166.66 Income Before Taxes

-    374.99 Income Tax (9% Rate)
$ 3791.67 After Income Tax   

$ 3261.67 Total Money After Paycheck

$ 3261.67 Total Money After Paycheck
-    327.30 Total Sales Tax (If 100% of Paycheck Spent)
$ 2934.37 Income After Taxes

So under the 9-9-9 Plan the median American family would have:

Total Taxes paid $702.29 Monthly

Total Spendable Income: $ 3498.12 Monthly

$597.72 LESS taxes paid each month.  That's $597.72 MORE MONEY in your pocket, every month! What would an extra nearly $600 per month do for you?  If the Median American family had $600 extra each month to spend, what do you think that would do for the economy?  I'll tell you what it'd do:  A whole lot.  You want to talk stimulus?  How about an extra $600 in the pockets of the average American family. 

You want to talk about fundamentally changing the American tax system to one that's fair?  How about a plan that taxes on what you buy, not on what you earn.  Also, remember that there are no taxes on used items, like a used car or purchasing an existing home.  By the numbers, the 9-9-9 Plan as written is good for America.

Now look,  I recognize the need for some very heavy safeguards in the program.  Requirement of a super-majority within the plan to raise the tax rates is one of them.  Without the safeguards, a lot can go wrong.  However, overall, I think if properly implemented it's a good plan.

Reactions to the Washington Post Bloomberg Debate

Last night, the Republican Candidates met for a debate in Dartmouth, NH and shown on Bloomberg Television, because apparently the media couldn't find a station that fewer people had access to than Bloomberg Television. Apparently Aurora, IL Channel 2 Cable Public Access wasn't available. (If you got that joke, let me know in the comments.)

First and foremost, I have to say this was just about the worst moderated debate I've seen this campaign season. It made me miss that first CNN debate with the "Elvis or Johnny Cash" questions. The fact that they dared take Ronald Reagan so far out of context as to quote that same "wealthiest pay their fair share" comment from Reagan in 1985 that was shown out of context. Let me give you that context: The tax system Reagan reformed was one where the "janitor" named in the speech was paying 10% of his wages in taxes and the wealthy individual was paying 0%. Reagan's "fair share" was a top marginal rate of 28%. If the wealthy paid what Reagan considered their "fair share," is a full 17% lower than what Barrack Obama calls the rich's "fair share," which, at last check, was 40% (whether he does it through "millionaires surtaxes" or "ending the Bush Tax Cuts.")

I wanted to high five every moderator in that debate in the face with a folding chair several times during the debate. It was ridiculous. I wanted to drive to New Hampshire to smack Charlie Rose in particular. Especially when he kept interrupting candidates because he was losing his debate.

So now let's play everyone's favorite Biblical Conservatism post-debate game: Buy, Hold, Sell, Sell All or Sold. (For those of you from Palm Beach County, FL, that's a stock market analogy.)

Michelle Bachmann – Sell (Hold):

 After the last debate I thought Bachmann was going to swing upward. Unfortunately, she hasn't. In this debate she did okay, but she didn't really stand out as she did last time. For now I'll hold her stock, but she could be at the sell point soon. She needs to really make her stamp, or else she'll find herself in the Vice Presidential Nominee discussion but out of the Presidency. She seems to have become an attack dog at Governor Perry, but that's going to benefit Romney, not Bachmann.
Congresswoman Bachmann was articulate and said some good things in this debate. Unfortunately she didn't really have any great moments that really made her stand out. I think she's dropped off the radar in this race, thus far. That can change. I'm not selling all yet, because I know that we are still a full three months away from casting any vote. For now, however, I'm selling off Michelle Bachmann stock.

Herman Cain – Buy (Sell):

 My opinion on Cain hasn't changed. His 9-9-9 Plan sounds good to me. I wish he had enough support nationally that I could consider voting for him. But right now his support is such that a vote for Cain could be a vote that doesn't cancel out the vote of a Democrat or Independent voting for the RINO in an open primary state. He'll be a great cabinet secretary or Vice President, but he's not going to be President.

 Cain really knocked this debate out of the park. He explained and articulated his 9-9-9 Plan wonderfully. The explanation that the new sales tax is not just offset but actually overcome by the repeal of the Payroll Tax and the Federal Income tax and lead to a smaller tax burden. The other thing he explained well is that the 9-9-9 Plan is the only plan where EVERYONE is paying their real "fair share," which means that EVERYONE is paying taxes, not just 52% of us paying 100% of the taxes while the 48% pay 0% of the tax burden and receive the majority of the tax benefits. He really nailed it.

He took it hard on the 9% sales tax in the debate from the other candidates. I think he did a good job of responding and explaining that the plan is replacing the current pipeline, not giving a new tax pipeline.

Newt Gingrich – Hold (Hold):

Gingrich again is strong and does well in debates. He'd kick Obama's butt in a debate, but he's not going to get the nomination. He scores well in debates, but he doesn't do well in polls. I'm leaving him as a hold for now, because there's a small chance he turns it around, but for now I don't expect him to go far. He is, however, another person who could find a place in a new Republican administration in the cabinet. I stand on my previous statements with Newt. Once again he had great moments in the debate. He had great applause lines. He's just not doing well enough to be a viable candidate in 2012.
Newt really took it to the moderators. He's the reason I didn't hop in my car and drive to NH to smack Charlie Rose. (That and my desire to not spend money to drive to NH and smack someone and then go to jail for assault. That was in there too.) Newt has started to rise in the polls a bit. I'm holding on to Newt's Stock because he's just so good in these debates. He'd crush Obama in a debate. I'd love to see Newt as the Vice President, or for that matter as the White House Press Secretary if he'd take the job. Let's see if he can get back into this thing…because he could really take it to Obama.

Jon Huntsman - Sold (Sold):

 Take me out to the ballgame, take me out to the crowd, buy me some peanuts and Cracker Jack, I don't care if I ever get back! Let me root, root, root for the home team, if they don't win it's a shame! For its one, two, three strikes you're out at the old ballgame! (Huntsman is such a waste of time I decided to sing "Take Me Out to the Ballgame" instead of wasting time on him.)

 I think the kids in those Peter G. Peterson Foundation commercials explaining how economics work would make better candidates than Jon Huntsman. Also, who names their kid Peter Peterson? Moving on.

Gary Johnson – Sold (Sell All)

 Who? I mean seriously…who let Kermit the Frog in the debate? But seriously, he's in the Huntsman category, although Johnson's not a RINO. But he isn't going to be our nominee. Moving on.
Kermit stayed home this time. Miss Piggy wouldn't let him come out and play I guess. Too bad. (Not really.)

Ron Paul - Sold (Sold):

 It occurred to me since the last debate that, in the strictest sense of the term, Paul is a RINO. (For those of you from Palm Beach County, FL, that's "Republican In Name Only.") Now, Paul isn't the moderate, wimpy, half liberal sort of RINO. Not in the slightest. But Paul is a Republican by default, because the political term that most applies to him is Libertarian. Now that's not a bad thing, my friends. As I've said before, I agree with Paul on about 75% of issues. However, he's not in line with the mainstream conservative Republican party, and that's why he won't get the nomination.

 No change in my opinion from Paul. Unlike the last two candidates listed, I respect Ron Paul. So I'll just leave it at that.

 Rick Perry – Hold (Buy):

 I'm buying, but I'm buying slower. I felt Perry was on his heels a lot. He went head to head with Romney and I felt Romney got the better of him. I question his opposition to a border fence on our Mexican border and also his allowance of in-state tuition to the children of illegal aliens. He had some good moments too. Here's the problem I have thus far with Perry, I feel he's a little vague. I need to know more of what I can expect from a Perry Presidency beyond platitudes. Not sure if he's obfuscating or just not making specific promises before he finds out what's going on from the Oval Office desk. Where I felt he did well, however, was presenting his views on small, limited government. He's still a valid conservative, but I just want more information!

 Rick Perry is losing people fast. He needs to have specific plans. Right now it still feels like he's obfuscating (that's "being confusing without saying anything" for those of you from Palm Beach County, FL). He really has lost a lot of potential in my mind. When a Republican can't respond effectively to a Ronald Reagan question, there's a problem.

Mitt Romney – Buy (Buy):

 I felt Romney won the head to head with Perry and the debate overall. He had moments that made me cringe, like when he went on and on about protecting the middle class, because I don't believe in any separation of Americans. We're all Americans. We all pay too high of a percentage in taxes, and we all should see a rate reduction. I thought Romney was playing the class game a bit, and that bothered me. Where I do trust Romney is understanding how to create a positive business climate, because, as he's said, his experience is mainly in the private sector. His weakness, however, is Romneycare and that hurts him in my book.

 Another great debate performance from Mitt Romney. His tough stance on China was impressive, if he lives it out, and I felt he did a good job showing that he is a good candidate on the economy. Now Mitt is not my first choice, and pretty much the only way he'll get my vote in the primary is if Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, Michelle Bachmann, Rick Perry, and Rick Santorum are out of the race (in that order). That said, he's doing a good job of convincing me that, if Mitt becomes our nominee, it wouldn't remind me of holding my nose in 2008 and voting for John McCain. (Actually, in 2008, I voted for Sarah Palin and her boss.)

In short, Mitt to me is like a vanilla ice cream cone. By comparison, my current favorite, Herman Cain, would be like eating a big delicious ice cream sundae with all the fixings*. I'd be happy to eat a vanilla ice cream cone. I'd enjoy it. I'd rather eat a sundae with all the fixings. That's the line with Mitt…we can do better as conservatives. We also can do a whole lot worse. Unfortunately, Romneycare could be a big problem for Mitt.

Rick Santorum - Sold (Sold):
 I stand on my previous belief on Santorum. Now, there was one moment he said something I really liked; that a person's sexuality shouldn't be even an issue in the military, and treating Don't Ask Don't Tell as a rule that applies to both heterosexual and homosexual individuals, specifically, one's sexuality belongs in private time, not public. Such things are rarely discussed in my private sector workplace, and I work in an industry that discusses such things more (radio). Ultimately, Don't Ask Don't Tell should be reinstated, FOR EVERYONE. Let's make sexuality a topic not discussed in the military on official time, just like politics tends to be in the military.

Santorum spent a lot of time trying to get back into the spotlight. It didn't work. Considering he's from Pennsylvania, he's got a shot at being the Vice Presidential nominee in an effort to turn that 2008 blue state into a red state in 2012. But he's not going to be the President, at least not without serving first as Vice President, and not in 2012.


In a final note, I'd like to note to Charlie Rose that here at Biblical Conservatism we've been using the alphabetical order for the candidates for now four debates. Please feel free to use us as a source for that purpose.
We're still seeing the field shape up. So much can change. Last time I wrote one of these responses, I was writing Herman Cain off. I've been proven wrong. So much can change. I think we could see more changes as this time goes on. This field could change too. So my recommendation to all of you is to support the candidate you think is best and don't concern yourself with "electability." Pretty much every one of those candidates on stage is more electable than Barrack Obama. This is a time for choosing. Pick the most conservative person and vote for him or her.



*In 2008, I compared John McCain to eating a meal of plain white bread and Barrack Obama to eating a turd. I said I don't want to eat just white bread, but at least its food and nourishment and won't make me sick. Jon Huntsman would be white bread, for the record. Mitt Romney would be an improvement on not just Obama but on John McCain in 2008, but there are better options.

Here Comes Herman Cain

Well, friends, it looks like I was wrong about Herman Cain. As of the last debate, I was continuing to say that, while I like Cain as a candidate and I think he'd make a good President, I also did not think he was going to get the nomination. Now Mr. Cain is making me wrong. I'm very happy to be wrong about this by the way, and it is neither the first time I've been wrong nor will it be the last time I am wrong.

All of a sudden, here comes Herman Cain! He's filling the grassroots Tea Party void that Michelle Bachmann has unfortunately left. Last time I wrote about the candidates I considered Cain at best a Vice Presidential nominee. Now I'd have to say he's at worst the VP. Just think about this: Cain has the frankness and the moxie to say it like it is and have people listen. Combine the frankness of Chris Christie with the conservative credentials of Sarah Palin and wrap it up in the experience of a man who has lived the American dream and you've got one heck of a great candidate.

I'd have to say, right now, if my state's primary were today he'd get my vote. Let me tell you why:

• Cain has real business executive experience. He has run Burger King Corporation and Godfather's Pizza under the banner of the Pillsbury Corporation.
  
• Cain's 9-9-9 Plan combines two common sense conservative tax principles, the Flat Tax and the Fair Tax. I find this idea intriguing, actually. Most people who speak of a flat tax talk about a flat rate of 10-17% (depending on who you ask), whilst the Fair Tax is generally expected to be about 23%. (Please note that the Fair Tax is intended to replace ALL Federal taxes whilst a Flat Tax would replace all income taxes, so it makes sense that the Fair Tax would be at a higher rate.)
  
  Cain's plan takes both these concepts and essentially takes the best of both. He creates a 9% personal income tax and a 9% sales tax would be a net 18% tax on individuals. That's just about the average of say a 15% Flat Tax and a 23% Fair Tax. It would create two tax bases: One income based and one that is consumption based. The net result of the consumption end would be a significant amount of fresh money in the economy that would be spread out into further purchase, which by the way would create a new tax base. The 9% flat income tax rate will provide for the necessities of government that cannot ebb and flow with the economy. It's a good plan.
  
  For those of you concerned about the 9-9-9 plan's impact on your personal income, please note that if you are in the 15% tax bracket or higher, you are looking at a tax CUT, because your current 15% rate plus 6.2% in payroll taxes for a total tax of 21.2%. Cain's cut would put you at 19% total, and actually a bit less because the 9% sales tax would not include food.
  
• Cain tells it like it is, but he does it in a way that is loving and grandfatherly. He doesn't talk down to people like Obama does, but he doesn't talk above people the way someone like a Newt Gingrich tends to do. My point is not "Cain is a good speaker, elect him" (we've learned how that doesn't help the country at all), but rather that Cain has the rhetorical tools to effectively communicate conservatism.
  
• Cain is a real, dyed in the wool conservative. He believes in freedom, he believes in America. Even though he was born into the segregated South, he doesn't walk around expecting to be given constant repayment for this wrong, rather he appreciates this nation's ability to change away from the mistakes of our past and to constantly strive toward a more perfect union.
  
• Cain is a shining example of how the opportunities of America can take a man from rags to riches through the sweat of his brow and his own hard work. Cain has shared that his American dream started with making a lower middle class salary. He felt when he hit a modest middle class salary "His American Dream had come true." However he didn't satisfy himself there, but rather he then set a new goal. He went from so poor that he felt poor didn't describe it to becoming a very wealthy man. He earned it, and he understands that you can make whatever you want out of yourself in this country with hard work and sacrifice.

Herman Cain is taking the field by storm. There's still a long way to go, but Mr. Cain has made a believer out of me. In a Gallup Poll released on Monday, he's trailing Mitt Romney by a mere 2%, which is within the margin of error, aand is beating Rick Perry by 3% (1). He's the frontrunner for my vote, and I think he can be the man to beat out Perry or Romney in 2012 for the nomination. Game on.

1. Cain Surges, Nearly Ties Romney for Lead in GOP Preferences

"Racist" Tea Party Helps Herman Cain to FL Straw Poll Victory

The Tea Party is so racist, especially in the south, that they just helped a black man win the Florida Straw Poll...wait...what?  How could the "racist" Tea Party support a black man, if it's all about race?

While you ponder that statement, explain why the same "racist" conservatives (who would eventually form the Tea Party) do their best to defeat John Kerry, Al Gore, Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, and Lyndon Johnson, especially because all but Kerry were/are southern white men?

Of course, the Tea Party was never racist, and conservatives never opposed Obama because he was black.  Frankly, the people who expect others to support Obama and never criticize him BECAUSE he's black are the racist ones.

Meanwhile, the Tea Party and conservatives in general want candidates who support small government and original Constitutional values.  We will happily support a black man or woman, or a white man or woman, or an Asian man or woman, or a purple man or woman or a polka-dotted man or woman (provided he or she is meets the Constitutional requirements for the Presidency) if they have a) experiences that make them qualified to be President (public or private sector experience are both acceptable) and b) good ideas/values for governing.

Herman Cain fits those criteria.  He has executive experience running Burger King Corporation and Godfather's Pizza and he has good ideas/values for governing like his 9/9/9 plan. 

You know who didn't have experiences who qualified him to be President?  Mr. Community Organizer and Vote Present in the Illinois State Senate and U.S. Senate, Barrack Obama.  You know who didn't have good ideas/values for governing?  Mr. Obamacare, Keynsian Redistributionist, Government Spending can grow the economy Barrack Obama.

Congratulations to Mr. Cain, and thank you.  It shows once again how ad homonym and false the "racist" claims against us in the Tea Party continue to be.  Also, I may have to change my stock picks on Mr. Cain in my next debate response, as he's apparently now rising to the top. 

I'd love to see Mr. Cain run against Obama, if only because it would fly in the face of the "racist Tea Party" claims the Left seems loathe to retract.  I've said it before and I'll say it again, I'd love to see Cain on the 2012 GOP ticket.  Meanwhile, liberals, drop the "racist" claims.  At this point, you just sound like darn fools.