Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘herman cain’

Does Herman Cain support abortion rights?

Cain seemed to contradict himself in the interview. He first said that he  believes “that life begins at conception,” telling Piers Morgan: “Abortion under no circumstances.” Pressed on whether that includes cases of rape and incest, Cain seemed to say yes. (From the transcript: MORGAN: “Rape and incest?” CAIN:
“Rape and incest.”)

But Cain then accused his interviewer of “mixing two things here” and seemed to reverse himself, saying, “it’s not the government’s role or anybody else’s role to make that decision.”

“So what I’m saying is it ultimately gets down to a choice that that family or that mother has to make,” said Cain. “Not me as president, not some politician, not a bureaucrat. It gets down to that family. And whatever they decide, they decide. I shouldn’t have to tell them what decision to make for such a sensitive issue.”

Cain went on to say that “I can have an opinion on an issue without it being a directive on the nation.”

“The government shouldn’t be trying to tell people everything to do, especially when it comes to social decisions that they need to make,” he said. Representatives for Cain told CBS News they were working on a clarification of Cain’s comments on Thursday morning, but they have yet to provide one. The candidate posted a Tweet around 1:00 p.m. Eastern reading, “I’m 100% pro-life. End of story.”

Interesting. I’m all for the whole “less-government” thing… you know, being primarily libertarian, and all… but I also think that being pro-life is about as libertarian as you can get – that child has the right to life! Who are we to take that away? Regardless, if he thinks that life begins at conception, as he stated, then would not the government have a piece in that? If you believe life begins at conception, then it follows that “removing” that life is “killing” it, yes? Should the government not have a say in life and death? What are your thoughts, folks?

See my other posts regarding Herman Cain here.

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Some of you may have read my post earlier this week regarding the numbers each candidate was able to fundraise from active duty military. I also cross-posted a graph that someone else had posted, but that only included a few of the candidates. I lamented that I did not have a graph of all of the candidates, nor the time, really, to sit down and make one, what with the Wee Goon being around and all. Curiously, patience for pie charts is not something that most seven month-olds possess. Go figure.

But! Ah, but. Apparently my tenth-grade mathematics teacher noticed said lament on Google+, and the next day I received the following e-mail:

Hey there,
You mentioned on Google+ that someone should make a graph of the military
donations to the presidential campaigns. With no more prodding than that, I
quickly put together a 3D pie chart of the information. Unfortunately, I was
unable to share it there OR on Facebook. So here it is — back on the
old-fashioned, reliable e-mail. 🙂 Hope you can find a way to get it out into
cyberspace.
Well, Stephen, I have found a way! A bit of copy/pasting into Paint, and typing-in of the numbers, and here we have it!
(As a side note, it seems entirely strange to be referencing you by your first name, but since I’m twenty-two years old now, I suppose that I’m.. you know.. an adult, and can call other adults by their first name. Weird, right?)

Read Full Post »

So, I recently added Michelle Malkin back to my Google Reader RSS feeds… and today I stumbled upon her post “GOP 2012: The Hold Your Nose Tracker” which lists some of the skeletons in the closet for what she refers to as the “four front-runners” of the race: Romney, Cain, Perry, and… Gingrich?

Every single one of these front-runners is a pro-TARP interventionist with a variety of problematic Big Biz/Big Government impulses and alliances.

Which one will do the least worst job against Obama in the debates, on the campaign trail, and ultimately in the White House? Which one will insult the base the least? Which one will actually have the energy, competence, and credibility to directly challenge Obama’s corruption, profligacy, class-warfare demagoguery, progressive pandering, and epidemic failures?

It’s funny.. looking at the polls from October 17th (which I am guessing is the date she referenced since that is the date on which she wrote her post), I see six polls. One is candidate-specific (side note: is it just me, or hasn’t anyone polled the numbers of Paul v. Obama since September 30th, when they tested each of them versus Obama in… Connecticut. And… they all lost to him. Oh, and there was Florida before that, where both Romney and Paul were within one point of Obama. But since then? Nope. Just Romney, Perry, and Cain. Come on, I want to see how Paul compares in places other than Connecticut.), four are state-specific, and one is national. So let’s assume she used that one?

Romney 26, Cain 25, Perry 13, Gingrich 8, Paul 9, Bachmann 6, Huntsman 1, Santorum 2

Funny… seems to me that the top four candidates are Romney, Cain, Perry, and… Paul. Heck, in New Hampshire, Gingrich has the same polling numbers as Huntsman, people. Huntsman. I digress.

I guess my point is: it’s not just the mainstream media that refuses to give Paul time or attention. It’s the blogosphere, too. I’m glad that she’s pointing out the ties that these four candidates have to Big Government, but… can she not point out the alternative? If she doesn’t agree with Paul’s entire platform, that’s fine. I don’t agree with his entire platform, either! I mean, she comes right out and says,

As all of these candidates’ campaigns remind us — endlessly — there’s no such thing as a perfect candidate.

Yep, don’t we all know it? Politics is the Pageant of the Imperfects.

Okay… so let’s tell people about another option. The option that didn’t vote for TARP. The option that has been against Big Government all along. The option that predicted the housing bubble.

Does he not at least merit some mention?

Read Full Post »

Read Full Post »

UPDATE at the bottom of the post with some of the official numbers rather than “unofficial” ones.

Okay. Disclaimer: I have a ‘Ron Paul’ feed in my Google Reader. The following information displays in the Reader, but when I try to click through to the original post, it denies it. I’m not sure if the link has just been moved, or what – so I may end up pulling this altogether if I can’t find some sort of source to properly link. (UPDATE: links at bottom of the post.) That said, here are some initial stats on the fundraising donations by active military personnel for the third quarter (July-September, I believe?):

Good Morning All!

First time poster long time reader. I did not notice it up anywhere else so I thought this would be a good thing to register for, me being Active Duty Navy myself.

(Disclaimer: These are not perfect numbers but I pride myself in being pretty accurate. Donations counted include: Army, Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard, National Guard, Army National Guard, Air National Guard, USA, USAF, USN, USMC, Military, Military Sealift Command, Army Corps of Engineers, Marine Corps, US Navy, US Air Force, US Marine Corps, etc.)

Ron Paul:        60,815.27
Barack Obama:    28,925.15
Mitt Romney:      7,855.00
Rick Perry:       7,325.00
Michelle B:       3,526.00
Gary J:           3,000.00
Herman Cain:      2,380.00
Jon Huntsman:     1,250.00
Rick Santorum:      500.00
Newt Gingrich:      250.00

All Other Republican Candidates: 26,086
All Other Candidates: 55,011.15

Edit: here is a link with the above information. However! As the poster stated, those were not perfect numbers; I do not think at the time of his writing that the “official” numbers had been released. You can see the Federal Election Commission’s page here. When you click on that particular campaign’s link, it will take you to a page with lots of data. If you’re looking for active military personnel donations, you’re going to want to click on “contributions by employer”. Then you can go through alphabetically and sort it out… all that jazz.

If you’d rather see it in graph form (and I know that many of us are visual learners), the fellow over at The Case for Ron Paul has created a graph. (Regardless of which candidate you’re following, you can still click over to the guy’s blog. Just because he’s a Ron Paul supporter doesn’t mean that he doesn’t offer the data on a few others.) However, it only includes Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, Herman Cain, Michelle Bachmann, and Rick Perry. I would like to see someone create a graph including all of the presidential candidates’ official numbers, but I don’t think my almost-seven-months-old Wee Goon would have the patience for me to sit here and dig through every campaign’s page to tally and get the official numbers. Looking at the “unnoficial” ones, I don’t think anyone is going to be higher than Ron Paul, as The One was the closest in the unofficial numbers with approx. 28k, but if someone would like to take the time to sift through and make a graph including everyone, please leave a comment and let me know so that I can link to it!

And there you have it.

Another edit: Oh, yeah. Someone did try to tally up the figures without graphing them, and they appear to include all of the Republican candidates and Obama. I didn’t particularly like the fact that they labeled some of the candidates with nicknames, nor the fact that they didn’t seem to have them listed in any particular order, so I’m relisting them below in order by how much they were given, highest to lowest.

Ron Paul
active duty military personnel …………………..$75,201.91
Reserve/national guard, these guys might very well be currently active, but there is no way to tell for sure……….$6,372.13

Obama
Active duty…. ……………$39,828.15
Reserve……..$2,122

Rick Perry
Active duty……..$7,325
Reserve………$3,000

Mitt Romney
Active duty……………$6,555

Michelle Bachmann
Active duty………..$4,632
Reserve………………$150

Herman Cain
Active duty……………$3,295

Jon Huntsman
Active duty…………..$1,250

Gary Johnson
Active duty…….$1,000

Rick Santorum
Active duty……………….$500

Newt Gingrich
Active duty……..$250

Thadeus McCotter
Active duty…………$250

Fred Karger
$0

Now there you have it. Someone want to graph this for me? The Wee Goon is getting fussy…

Read Full Post »

Okay. 9-9-9, again. (I know, I know. I’ll shut up about it eventually.)

At first I thought, “Okay. 9% for everybody. It’s apportioned. You know, like the Constitution calls for? That’s at least a step in the right direction.”

So then I’m reading this piece by Larry Kudlow and he says,

Liberals oppose the sales tax because they say its regressivity will hurt middle- and low-income people. But the Cain plan partially deals with this by exempting everybody below the poverty line. [emphasis mine] Cain also states that sales of existing goods would be exempt. I have no knowledge, however, of the treatment of services, and I am somewhat skeptical about enforcement complexity overall.

Okay,  so someone educate me, please. How do you exempt someone below the poverty line, when it comes to a sales tax? I mean, right now with the income tax there’s the whole “refund” thing… where you calculate, and file, and either pay or get a refund, et cetera. I get that. But an exemption on a sales tax? Is it going to be based off of the previous year’s income level, or something? Because how do you judge whether or not you’re currently at the poverty line when it comes to making purchases? Unless they want you to save all of your receipts and file at the end of the year and get a refund on your sales tax… gee, this is starting to sound decidedly less simple than chanting the same number three times in a row…

So I commented over at The Lonely Conservative’s post, where I was first tipped off to the Larry Kudlow article, and asked,

So, Kudlow mentions some sort of exemption flr “below poverty level” – can someone point me toward some resources explaining how/why he plans to do this?  I’m not a huge fan of Herman Cain, but thought that he was at least looking at moving toward having a constitutional -apportioned- tax instead of the unconstitutional one we have now… and then I see mention of a poverty line exemption.

I suppose it should make me happy, since I believe my husband and I might be below said line, what with choosing to go the one-income route of having me stay at home with our little one rather than stick him in daycare – I’m not sure what the figures are, but we by far qualify for things like WIC (which we don’t utilize, as we are no comfortable with the whole government program thing)… but I’m a big fan of that thing called the Constitution and would prefer to see us stick by it rather than constantly subsidize/exempt… (And is it just me or would such an exemption encourage people to-stay- below the poverty line, rather than encouraging them to successfully move past it?)

Also, can anyone point me toward an explanation of the proposed sales tax and what it would apply to? I’ve heard that it would apply to new goods, but not used ones – so things like used cars and thrift store clothing would be tax-free, yes? What about food? Before my son was born, I worked at a local “farm market” that, aside from vegetables and fruits, also carried things like dried fruit, sesame sticks,cider, chips, bulk candy, and freshly baked goods. None of the fruits/veggies were taxed – and if I recall correctly, neither were the baked goods, cider, etc. Just the “processed” items like chips and candy. Would this change under the 9-9-9 plan?

Granted, that still leaves us the options of growing and raising our own gardens and livestock, but I was just curious. There’s already a tax on animal feed, so I guess that won’t change -too- much. Ish.

Anyway. I’d like to do some reading, and would appreciate any direction you can give me.

No response yet, but I’ll keep you posted on that front. That said, I just came across something that makes me question the “apportioned” aspect of the 9-9-9 plan even more: empowerment zones! Oh, yeah.

“I believe in empowerment zones. Most of the unemployed black Americans in this country are in these mostly economically depressed areas. It could be, and I’m only using this as an example, because we haven’t finished establishing the parameters yet. Instead of in a designated empowerment zone, it being 9-9-9, it could be, as an example only, 3-3-3.

What this does, because you have a lot of African-Americans located in cities like Detroit, disproportionately, it would encourage businesses to stay in business there or to move there. It would encourage people to work there, because if you live in the empowerment zone, you’re going to pay a smaller percentage in taxes.”

Yeah, those are Cain’s words. See the transcript here.

I’d still rather see him in office than Romney. Or Perry. Or, Heaven help us, a second round of The One. But seriously? Can people not see through this?

 

Read Full Post »

So, we all know that I’m not necessarily a huge fan of Herman Cain… (though that’s not to say that I wouldn’t take him over, say, Romney or Perry… or The One)… but I couldn’t help but laugh out loud at Doug Powers’ latest blog post:

It’s now a “9999plan: 9 percent personal income tax, 9 percent national sales tax, 9 percent business tax, and a 9 amp jolt if you try to illegally cross into the US.

Before we assume that Herman Cain’s suggestion will cause Democrats or even select Republicans to throw even more scorn in his direction, I’d suggest this: Cain could win over many of them simply by saying that in his border plan, the fence would be electrified with power provided by solar panels the government purchased from stimulus-backed green energy companies.

Love it! Thanks for making my day, Doug… 

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »