Can't Give Specifics on CNN Interview

[GopBlackList]

I thought this was entertaining. :D


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KvZjdEh2k0&feature=youtu.be

It is odd that there are people out there that want to elect someone that has even less public office experience than the current President.

[ItsTime]

He is clueless. lol

[Romulus]

It is odd that there are people out there that want to elect someone that has even less public office experience than the current President.

No. It's common. Voters don't want politicians... but they always vote for them somehow.

[Dr.3D]

Hard to be specific when you are a flim-flam man.

[LibertyEagle]

Well, in all fairness, I think Spitzer was an ass. He studied the numbers beforehand and he damn well knew what he was going to do to Cain. I don't fault Cain for not knowing a specific regulation having to do with "innovation". Give me a frickin' break.

Frankly guys, I doubt Ron Paul would have some of these specifics on the tip of his tongue, either, and he is a sitting Congressman.

Personally, I don't give a rat's behind whether a candidate has "experience" in public office. All I care about is that they will uphold the Constitution. That is why I am voting for Dr. Paul and it wouldn't matter to me if he had never spent one day in Washington, D.C.

[VanBummel]

Wait, has he been able to give specifics before?

[ItsTime]

Um Cain should have already studied the numbers as well.

[K466]

Change the title to Cain't Give specifics... ;)

[LibertyEagle]

Um Cain should have already studied the numbers as well.

A specific regulation having to do with INNOVATION? Give me a break. Do you know how many regulations there are?

Be careful, because Ron Paul threw out a few numbers in the last election that he was off on too.

Cain's interview was nothing but a setup.

I wouldn't even consider voting for Cain. But, I'm also not going to bash him for a setup job by an ultra-liberal.

Cain's supporters are going to go somewhere, fellas. I would like them to consider Dr. Paul. I'm going to do my best to take the high road, as I do not want to run them the hell off. But, you do whatever you want.

[AlexAmore]

Stewie: Ooh, let me have some of that Cool Hwhip.
Brian: What'd you say?
Stewie: You can't have a pie without Cool Hwhip.
Brian: Cool Hwhip?
Stewie: Cool Hwhip, yeah.
Brian: You mean Cool Whip.
Stewie: Yeah, Cool Hwhip.
Brian: Cool Whip.
Stewie: Cool Hwhip.
Brian: You're saying it weird. Why are you putting so much emphasis on the H?
Stewie: What are you talking about? I'm just saying it. Cool Hwhip. You put Cool Hwhip on pie. Pie tastes better with Cool Hwhip.
Brian: Say whip.
Stewie: Whip.
Brian: Now say Cool Whip.
Stewie: Cool Hwhip.
Brian: Cool Whip.
Stewie: Cool Hwhip.

[Bern]

Cain -> Laughably shallow and out of his league. IOW, Sarah Palin redux

[Pro-Life Libertarian]

Lets be honest, Spitzer was being an idiot. Not even people running for President know all of the reports.

Cain is a problem solver and he would be a good Veep :)

[specsaregood]

A specific regulation having to do with INNOVATION? Give me a break. Do you know how many regulations there are?
Be careful, because Ron Paul threw out a few numbers in the last election that he was off on too.
Cain's interview was nothing but a setup.
I wouldn't even consider voting for Cain. But, I'm also not going to bash him for a setup job by an ultra-liberal.
Cain's supporters are going to go somewhere, fellas. I would like them to consider Dr. Paul. I'm going to do my best to take the high road, as I do not want to run them the hell off. But, you do whatever you want.

I think the difference is the approach, because Cain is still promoting central planning. So if one is suggesting running for the job of chief executive central planner they should know the specifics.
Dr. Paul's approach is that it isn't his job to plan, so he doesnt' need to know the specifics he wants turn that control over to the states.

[LibertyEagle]

I think the difference is the approach, because Cain is still promoting central planning. So if one is suggesting running for the job of chief executive central planner they should know the specifics.
Dr. Paul's approach is that it isn't his job to plan, so he doesnt' need to know the specifics he wants turn that control over to the states.

Point well-taken.

However, by that rationale, some specifics would still be required from Ron Paul too. For example, Dr. Paul would need to know specifics when he talks about things like getting rid of the IRS and replacing it with nothing. Because statements like those call for detailed specifics of what would be cut and exactly where the revenue would come from and how it would be generated to pay for the limited government that he outlined.

Do you expect that level of detail from Dr. Paul? So, if Spitzer interviewed him and started drilling down on him in the same manner he did on Cain, would you think it was A-OK?

I'm just trying to make a point, here. :p

[Inkblots]

Well, Spitzer was asking a pretty dumb question. He asks Cain to give a specific example of an innovation that's been stifled by regulation. In other words, he's saying to Cain, 'Give me an example of an innovation that was prevented from coming into being due to government restrictions'. How can Cain cite an example of an innovation that doesn't exist? How can he peer into an alternate reality so as to see what we could accomplish without government distortions of the marketplace? I'm no Cain fan, but Spitzer is a real twit.

[hillertexas]

wow....that was a painful interview LOL

[jbuttell]

Point well-taken.

However, by that rationale, some specifics would still be required from Ron Paul too. For example, Dr. Paul would need to know specifics when he talks about things like getting rid of the IRS and replacing it with nothing. Because statements like those call for detailed specifics of what would be cut and exactly where the revenue would come from and how it would be generated to pay for the limited government that he outlined.

Do you expect that level of detail from Dr. Paul? So, if Spitzer interviewed him and started drilling down on him in the same manner he did on Cain, would you think it was A-OK?

I'm just trying to make a point, here. :p


I think you're being too forgiving of Cain here. Since the first debate, I've heard nothing but ambiguous, generalized answers from the guy. If this were the first time I'd heard his replies, perhaps I'd let it pass too... but its not. Yes, the host was asking for perhaps some things that are too specific, but Cain virtually always replies 'consult my advisors'... like Mitt did. THIS will make an insanely hilarious video compilation on youtube.

When Ron Paul answers, they may not always spell out every step, but at least he does exhibit a distinct philosophy behind each position he takes, going into some detail until the host interrupts and asks another question. Ron Paul lays out the framework of how things could be changed rather than generalized rhetoric like this crap. If Cain can't take a stand and say something of substance, his campaign really shouldn't be taken seriously.

[Maximus]

Spitzer is a hack, but to go on his show you need to know your stuff. Cain doesn't know squat. My brain hurts listening to that interview.

[josh b]

I think you're being too forgiving of Cain here. Since the first debate, I've heard nothing but ambiguous, generalized answers from the guy.

Yep, all of his positions are so vague and indecisive. I still remember the first primary debate where he didn't give a single straight answer. "We need leadership!" "We need a do something president!" Yeah thanks, that's helpful.

He can't make up his mind on foreign policy. His view of the Patriot Act is bizarre. "I 90% agree with it but something is just wrong." He doesn't have a concrete plan for the economy. Whatever else I'm forgetting.

I don't think he strongly believes in anything.

[ItsTime]

A specific regulation having to do with INNOVATION? Give me a break. Do you know how many regulations there are?

Be careful, because Ron Paul threw out a few numbers in the last election that he was off on too.

Cain's interview was nothing but a setup.

I wouldn't even consider voting for Cain. But, I'm also not going to bash him for a setup job by an ultra-liberal.

Cain's supporters are going to go somewhere, fellas. I would like them to consider Dr. Paul. I'm going to do my best to take the high road, as I do not want to run them the hell off. But, you do whatever you want.

Ron may slip on one question, Cain slipped on ALL questions. He had no clue what he was talking about, not even when it came to the budget! Seriously he should have had at least one answer.

Yes it was a set up, a pretty easy set up to avoid and he did a terrible job at it.

[enjerth]

I don't fault Cain for not knowing a specific regulation having to do with "innovation". Give me a frickin' break.

It's a trick question.

It's like if there's a downed tree in blocking a road, in view of an intersection, so people turn at the intersection to avoid the block. Now, as an observer, can you cite an example of one of the motorists who's intended route was blocked by the tree? Without talking to them, you can't tell if they wanted to turn or if they were forced to turn.

You can't cite, for an example, something that didn't happen.

[GopBlackList]

Well, in all fairness, I think Spitzer was an ass. He studied the numbers beforehand and he damn well knew what he was going to do to Cain. I don't fault Cain for not knowing a specific regulation having to do with "innovation". Give me a frickin' break.

Frankly guys, I doubt Ron Paul would have some of these specifics on the tip of his tongue, either, and he is a sitting Congressman.

Personally, I don't give a rat's behind whether a candidate has "experience" in public office. All I care about is that they will uphold the Constitution. That is why I am voting for Dr. Paul and it wouldn't matter to me if he had never spent one day in Washington, D.C.

Here's how Ron Paul would have answered a similar question:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=BiVy2NbWcgo

[AlexAmore]

I could give some examples thanks to a Stossel show a few weeks ago. It was all about how there are products and medicine that won't come out because they are afraid of frivolous lawsuits. A cure for Lyme disease. There ya go. That's one.

From my own knowledge I know of Ibogaine which is an all natural drug from Iboga roots in Africa that within a day will cure you of addiction. Things like cocaine, heroine...etc. It's very safe. You have to go to Mexico or Canada for it. A lot of literature and documentaries and media reports on it. It's funny because mainstream medicine kills millions but an all natural Iboga root is illegal.

I would say this is innovation stifled by government. I could have thought of something on the spot. Sure it's hard when the pressure, lights and camera are on but he couldn't think of anything. For me that might have made me go "Let me think....Uhhhhh.....ok Ibogaine", but it would have been something instead of nothing.

[BUSHLIED]

Cain should be done. This is like the third time, he was unable to give a specific answer...I believe in a debate, he was unable to answer a Foreign Policy question. But anyway, this is similar to a Sarah Palin moment. He is speaking in generalities, refusing to give answers. This 'learn as you go' approach to President is not going to fly as the debates heat up...this is a great development for us...

[Dr.3D]

If we wanted the opinion of his advisers, they should be standing next to him all the time at the debates.

[AlexAmore]

If we wanted the opinion of his advisers, they should be standing next to him all the time at the debates.

Then they would say "I would have to consult with the intelligence". Intelligence would say I need to consult with my agents. Agents would say I need to consult with my informants. Informants would say I need to consult with the leader. The leader would say I need to consult with my advisor. Advisor would say I need to....I'm sorry.

[Dr.3D]

Then they would say "I would have to consult with the intelligence". Intelligence would say I need to consult with my agents. Agents would say I need to consult with my informants. Informants would say I need to consult with the leader. The leader would say I need to consult with my advisor. Advisor would say I need to....I'm sorry.

Yeah, I'm sure having a circle jerk for a debate wouldn't work out so well either.

[JamesButabi]

This guy is toast. How do you expect to run for President and not even have a foundation of beliefs or policies.

[John of Des Moines]

Lets be honest, Spitzer was being an idiot. Not even people running for President know all of the reports.

Cain is a problem solver and he would be a good Veep :)

Ready to step up and take the oath of office right after a banker funded assassination.

[Sweman]

Innovations? Leave it to the states.

[PaulConventionWV]

A specific regulation having to do with INNOVATION? Give me a break. Do you know how many regulations there are?

Be careful, because Ron Paul threw out a few numbers in the last election that he was off on too.

Cain's interview was nothing but a setup.

I wouldn't even consider voting for Cain. But, I'm also not going to bash him for a setup job by an ultra-liberal.

Cain's supporters are going to go somewhere, fellas. I would like them to consider Dr. Paul. I'm going to do my best to take the high road, as I do not want to run them the hell off. But, you do whatever you want.

You can't possibly defend Herman Cain on this one. Liberal or not, he sounded as intelligent as a box of rocks in that interview. He thinks the right answer to everything is, "I know what to do... trust me" and thinks hindsight is the best way to solve current problems.

[BUSHLIED]

Cain is going to be in a lot of Pain come next debate....!! He better brush up and develop coherent policies...he is all rhetoric.

[Fermli]

Cain's answers are quite effective in a debate format. Short, general 1 min answers and rarely any followup questions. 10 minute one on one interviews will reveal his true colors.

[Nate-ForLiberty]

Ready to step up and take the oath of office right after a banker funded assassination.

i was hoping someone would respond to that

[emr1028]

Well, in all fairness, I think Spitzer was an ass. He studied the numbers beforehand and he damn well knew what he was going to do to Cain. I don't fault Cain for not knowing a specific regulation having to do with "innovation". Give me a frickin' break.

Frankly guys, I doubt Ron Paul would have some of these specifics on the tip of his tongue, either, and he is a sitting Congressman.

Personally, I don't give a rat's behind whether a candidate has "experience" in public office. All I care about is that they will uphold the Constitution. That is why I am voting for Dr. Paul and it wouldn't matter to me if he had never spent one day in Washington, D.C.

Come on, don't defend this. Many people on this forum could have given solid answers to every one of those questions off the top of our heads, but Cain literally never answers questions. He's 100% talking points.

[pacelli]

I still don't understand how Mr. Client #9 can get away with having his own fucking show cross-examining guests. The media really does control public perception.


Room 871 at the Mayflower Hotel was booked under the name George Fox, a pseudonym Spitzer had allegedly been using that was later revealed to be the name of his close friend, a hedge fund investor.[10][11] Reportedly, some of this information came to light from a federal wiretap.[12][13][14]

Spitzer had at least seven or eight liaisons with prostitutes from the agency over six months, and paid more than $15,000 for their services. Federal agents had him under surveillance twice in 2008.[15][16][17] According to published reports, investigators believe Spitzer paid up to $80,000 for prostitutes over a period of several years — first while he was attorney general, and later as governor.[18][19][20]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eliot_Spitzer_prostitution_scandal

[emr1028]

I still don't understand how Mr. Client #9 can get away with having his own fucking show cross-examining guests. The media really does control public perception.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eliot_Spitzer_prostitution_scandal

I don't think he should have resigned as governor... what does it matter to you what he does with his penis?

[Uriah]

What I am about to say is hearsay but this video reminded me of a story I just heard tonight.

I was talking with a friend who told me of a discussion that Herman Cain had with a young lady over lunch. She just graduated with a major in economics. The lady(whom I and my friend both know) began asking Cain questions about the economy and Cain replied "that's just all going over my head."(or something to that effect)

Hearsay, yes, but... he needs to start answering specifics if he wants to be elected and taken seriously.

[ForLiberty2012]

He did seem to have an agenda.... I'm pretty sure he KNEW Cain wasn't going to be able to specifically answer those questions. But c'mon... he didn't say, "Let's talk about this one specific one," he said "Name anything." Kind of like Palin couldn't even name one magazine she read. Especially being a business owner, you would think he could do that. Now for the debt reduction.... That's something you have to know... All the candidates should have a plan for debt reduction.... it's the most important issue because you aren't going to necessarily create jobs without reducing the debt. And what a horrible answer to say, "I'll need to talk to my advisers." I can be a president if my plan is to just consult my advisers.

[pacelli]

I don't think he should have resigned as governor... what does it matter to you what he does with his penis?

I care about how the media picks and chooses what they cover to manipulate public perception. Shouldn't the man's entire show be put in the historical context that it was all part of a carefully controlled public image re-construction? Why ignore the historical context??