Herman Cain Wins Nevada’s WRLC Straw Poll – The Significance with Analysis on the 2012 Nomination.

Cain and Gingrich, Big Benefits from Latest Straw Poll


From the Washington Times: Herman Cain has won the Western Republican Leadership Conference Straw Poll, leading the field of GOP contenders for the 2012 nomination. The second place went to Mitt Romney (29%) 2 points behind Cain, followed by New Gingrich at a healthy 20% of the vote. As far as straw polls go, in general, they have little impact outside of the particular political party; however, this poll was conducted after the CNN debate in Las Vegas, sponsored by and packed with members of the Western Republican Leadership Conference. Those are the GOP activist, the activist that will work to secure a nominee’s position in the race. Cain, who is neck and neck or leading Romney is traditional polls, is on track, with Romney and Gingrich, at this point, to become the nominee. With the promise of an earlier than usual primary season, the fact that Cain remains at the top of the GOP pack, despite the general knowledge that Romney is the preferred candidate by the so called Republican Establishment, is, it and of itself, a victory for those who would prefer to see a non-politician take the lead.

With Fox News analysts now changing their tune to “maybe money does not matter” – are now proposing a Cain/Romney or Romney Cain Ticket. That scenario may satisfy the establishment GOP; however, it may be more likely a Cain-Gingrich ticket - solidifying the more traditional Republican base with the less traditional grassroots Tea Party and Independent voters who are taking an anti-political class stance. Additionally, as the nominating process is to begin early, one must look at the critical states that will impact the entire race, and have traditionally pushed the eventual nominee on to victory. Those states are all, for the most part, located below the Mason/Dixon line and in the Heartland. The key is South Carolina – one might take New Hampshire, and one might take Iowa, but without South Carolina, and its sister states, the candidate might as well pack it up and go on home..

Although a lot can and will happen to change the fortunes of the current “front-runners” between now and either December 2011 or January 2012 (depending upon New Hampshire’s “final answer”, it is appearing more likely that the top three Candidates are solidifying their positions in the race.

2012 GOP - Herman Cain- Abortion – As a Christian and Constitutionalist Cain's Answer Correct - Romney on Abortion 1994 The Political Football

Herman Cain - Does not mix Personal Views with Political Duties - image: Saberpoint blog

Herman Cain is coming under fire for remarks he made during an interview with CNN’s Piers Morgan earlier this week: The segment in its entirety is available here on Youtube To those activist in Iowa who are ready to throw the baby out with the bath water (and elsewhere for that matter over pro-life issues (see: Huffington Post, Herman Cain Abortion Comments”) understand that when one is being interviewed, a sixty second sound bite (as are most of the anti-Cain anti-abortion videos which have been truncated) is simply not fair, and in fact, without watching the entire segment one finds a slightly different version – one that is more pro-life than those that would see Cain fail in his bid for the GOP nomination.

As those who have read this blog and understand this point of view on the subject, being unabashedly pro-life, (anti-abortion, anti-death penalty) the following is offered: When choosing the leader of the Free World, their personal views are, of course, of import, they go to character. Herman Cain is personally opposed to abortion on any level, taking the hard line. However, Herman Cain is a realist, understanding that, from a constitutional standpoint, the President, having less power than say a Governor, could issue an executive order banning abortion, which would be challenged and rightly so by the Courts, but most importantly by the people. Those who happen to be pro-life, the majority are also pro-constitutionalists, and do not care for Executive Orders. Therefore, actually watch the video segment to understand Herman Cain’s Position is spot on.

Speaking of Governors, to understand how points of view change (and by no mean am I judging a man by what he may have said fifteen years ago, or more, but to illustrate those points of view on Abortion have been a political football since Roe Vs. Wade was signed into law. It is true that in some states, Governors have taken steps to reduce abortions, while the majority defers to their individual courts and state constitutions (or Commonwealth if that may be the case).

In a debate held in 1994, between then newcomer Mitt Romney who challenged Ted Kennedy for the U.S. Senate, comes this transcripts via the New York Times archives:

THE 1994 CAMPAIGN; Excerpt From Debate By Kennedy And Romney

Published: October 26, 1994

Following is an excerpt from the debate last night between Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, and his Republican challenger, Mitt Romney, at Faneuil Hall in Boston, as transcribed by The New York Times.

Q. Mr. Romney, you personally oppose abortion and as a church leader have advised women not to have an abortion. Given that, how could you in good conscience support a law that enables women to have an abortion, and even lets the Government pay for it? If abortion is morally wrong, aren't you responsible for discouraging it?

ROMNEY One of the great things about our nation, Sally [ Sally Jacobs of The Boston Globe ] , is that we're each entitled to have strong personal beliefs, and we encourage other people to do the same. But as a nation we recognize the right of all people to believe as they want, and not to impose our beliefs on other people. I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country; I have since the time that my mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a U.S. Senate candidate.

(New York Times)

Therefore, Iowa, and Christian Voters in general, the fact that a candidate personally holds that abortion is a sin, and abhors the practice, should be the litmus test. The only candidate that should be under extreme scrutiny is a judge, either state or federal, and about to be appointed (or in some cases, voted in), as that individual does have the power to change (in some states based on state constitutions. Further, on the federal level, that individual obviously may weigh in and make a change to Roe Vs. Wade.

Herein is the question: In the years since Roe vs. Wade had been deemed a right granted protection under the constitution, why has not one Pro-Life group successfully challenged, and brought the suit to the right forum? The Supreme Court?

Herein lays the problem: Instead, one finds shortened clips of candidates, and a lot of disinformation bandied about based on a sound clip of less than half an answer – framing the entire debate. It is not up to Herman Cain, and it is not up to Mitt Romney (who has since changed his position to pro-life circa 2008), it is not up to a Senator or a Congressman, it is up to the Supreme Court.

Of course, the argument that the Justices are vetted by Congress and appointed by the President is consistently brought to the forefront of the pro-life argument, and that is where the individual’s viewpoint may make a difference. Therefore, if one believes in following the dictates of the Constitution and does not wish to abuse power by issuing mandates (Those Executive Orders that most Christian Conservatives and anyone with any sense, despise) from the White House, circumventing the Congress, and at the same time is personally opposed to abortion and has the ability to appoint justices, who may one day in a future far away see Row Vs. Wade challenged. What on earth is your problem with Cain?

From a strong pro-life, feminist (yes, same sentence – (and for my left of center pro-choice friends, you know that abortion is only one issue that effects women, we can work together on other issues that actually are not political footballs and can improve life!) point of view, Herman Cain exemplifies the perfect Conservative Candidate, and as a Christian, I have no right to judge a man/or woman, (according to one small book, most Christian’s have one). For those "activists" or those holier than though (or those using Mr. Cain’s sound bites as a political weapon – that is a break with the Holy Law, especially if one is judging as a Christian!). Therefore, to this point of view, Mr.Cain's answer satisifed two litmust tests: That of a principled moral future public servant, and one who understands and respects teh Constitution.

As to Mitt Romney’s change of heart: as a Christian one is supposed to be happy for the man who has found a good path, no matter how that individual arrived in that place, and not continue to cast judgment on what no one but God in Heaven Himself can possibly know – what the heart contains.
Stop being used by the right.
Same goes for Gay Activists.
Different subject – same football. (see previous blog posts and arguments regarding that issue.)

Herman Cain’s 999 tax plan compared to Ronald Reagan’s – Link to Calculator Included

Herman Cain’s 999 Tax plan has come under a great deal of security and in some cases, ridicule, for being too simplistic, however, it is similar to a 10% plan that was touted as a disaster during the 1980 Presidential Campaign (Spartanburg Herald Journal, September 16, 1980. The main differences between Cain and Reagan’s plan are simple: Cain proposes throwing out the current Federal Tax Code and rewriting it to include a national sales tax, an income tax, and a corporate tax, all at the same 9% rate, Reagan’s plan called for individual and corporate tax cuts in the same simplified approach (which worked very well when implemented – the economy in fact “screamed back into life”. That said Reagan left the tax code in plan, which, as Cain has correctly pointed out, is subject to manipulation and change.

The Calculator, also simplistic, estimates the hidden costs of taxes in goods, those taxes that are passed on to the consumer by corporations in the U.S. (Those that are left), then adjusts the costs of the goods, based on a 9% corporate rate. Apparently, there’s a bit of common sense involved in this, as well as a lot more in details, (one the full plan is read), that has safeguards in place for families, and those earning (or not earning) at the bottom of the economic scale. In fact, not unlike Regan’s plan, this type of reduction in taxes, would allow for more cash in hand. Of course, the plan is not perfect, and being no so-called expert (as there are so many of those weighing in), one must remember, that Mr. Cain has offered a plan – a plan that has promise, and a plan that, without throwing out the tax code, has a similarity to Reagan’s. Being no fan of taxes, hidden fees, and the like (or fees called taxes, see Governor Mitt Romney), it is refreshing to find that at least someone has a plan that reduces tax rates across the board, and also addresses the problem of the hidden tax that corporations pass down to consumers.

Two main points to consider: Cutting the Corporate tax rate to 9% would invite those companies now fleeing overseas, to repatriate, jobs would then naturally follow, and secondly, the “trickle down” effect would be a an overall reduction in the price of consumer goods, which when taxed at 9%, with the elimination of the current tax code, the result is a win for individuals across the economic spectrum. The unintended consequence, the dollar would strengthen as a result, as it would stretch further, and therefore, be worth more.

Live long enough, or to be more to the point, having lived long enough to experience the Carter Administration, followed by the Reagan Administration, and to have personally seen the surprising difference (this does take time) in personal income for those who were not earning $100,000 a year (see 1980), in the costs of food, clothing, and durable goods- under Carter, individuals abandoned cars, gave up that new fridge, (or old one for that matter) and concentrated on paying the rent and eating. (Similar to what we are now faced with). Under Reagan, at first, it was rocky, given the constant media drumbeat that we, as a nation, were doomed, but once Reagan’s plans were enacted, it was a refreshing difference. Being able to save money in the bank, pay off creditors, and actually buy that new car, while having a fridge stocked – night into day – literally.

Therefore, it is suggested that one take a second hard look at Cain’s plan, (which is available on his website), use the calculator (no it is not entirely accurate, but remarkably familiar) and consider the possibility.


To calculate what one might pay for goods under Cain's 999 Plan, follow this link:
999 Sales Tax Calculator