The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Pundette Likes Herman Cain

Posted on | October 12, 2011 | 100 Comments

Our longtime blog-friend has a nice aggregation about the surging GOP presidential candidate who — in case you didn’t notice — is black.

I’ve written entire 1,200-word columns about Cain for the American Spectator that never mentioned his race. And it’s funny at times to see MSM reporters try to find a less-than-awkward way to introduce race into their stories. Unencumbered by the conventions of mainstream journalism, Bill Quick at Daily Pundit takes the issue head-on:

I have a gut feeling that when push comes to shove, the GOP is not going to in the end nominate a Black man with no political experience as their candidate.  I think the attitude will be, “Been there, done that, not happy with how it worked out.”

Which may be true — except that Obama’s problem was not a lack of political experience, but rather a lack of private-sector experience or executive experience, which are in fact Cain’s trump cards.

Obama was very good (and is still very good) at campaigning and giving speeches. But his neo-Keynesian economic policies were the exact opposite of what was needed to foster recovery. And whatever you think of Cain’s “9-9-9” plan, he is at least oriented toward a supply-side approach to economic growth. As I said way back in December: “Steve Forbes with charisma.”

Many policy-oriented pundits — e.g., Charles Krauthammer — clearly distrust charisma. They’d prefer a wonk like Mitch Daniels or a bore like Tim Pawlenty to a charismatic populist like Cain. They don’t want Cain as a candidate for the same reason they didn’t want Sarah Palin as a candidate: Both Palin and Cain are personalities whose appeal to voters is their status as Ordinary Americans. The “hockey mom” from Wasilla, the pizza guy from Atlanta — they aren’t part of what Angelo Codevilla famously called “The Ruling Class,” and fighting back against the Ruling Class is what the Tea Party is all about.

The question now is, can the Tea Party elect one of its own to the White House? Is the Tea Party movement serious about taking on the entrenched power of the Ruling Class? And will they rally to Herman Cain’s banner? Let me remind you what I wrote yesterday when Chris Christie endorsed Mitt Romney:

Thanks to commenter Joe for reminding me of this headline from last year:

N.J.’s Christie Backs Castle in Del. Senate Race

Yeah. That explains a lot, doesn’t it? Guess that means Herman Cain is this year’s Christine O’Donnell. Even if Cain gets the GOP nomination, the Establishment insiders would rather see Obama re-elected than to let an outsider win an election.

It may be, as Bill Quick says, that Cain’s race is a factor in GOP resistance to his candidacy. Certainly his political inexperience is a greater factor. The last president with no previous political experience was Eisenhower, elected in 1952, and being Supreme Allied Commander in WWII was a somewhat stronger qualification than being CEO of Godfather’s Pizza.

Nevertheless, at a time when recession may be turning into a depression, Cain’s business experience and optimistic attitude makes him “a breath of fresh air,” as Pundette says. And if “raaaaacism” is indeed a factor in Republican resistance to Cain, please notice that it’s not coming from the Tea Party grassroots, but from the Ruling Class elite. Just sayin’ . . .


100 Responses to “Pundette Likes Herman Cain”

  1. Finrod Felagund
    October 12th, 2011 @ 4:13 pm

    See: C.S. Lewis’s quote about how it would be better to live under robber barons than moral busybodies.

  2. Anonymous
    October 12th, 2011 @ 4:28 pm

    Sure, it’s cheaper to prepare and figure out what you owe.  I’m not arguing that it’s like a VAT that way, but so what?  I’m saying that what will actually be paid is pretty much a VAT, even if it’s easier to figure than the way most VATs are structured.  

    BTW, the simplicity seems to come at the expense of figuring out what part of your cost of materials were already paid in taxes.  So maybe I missed your point that tax-wise, this may be worse than a VAT.Now, what about services?  If we’re not deducting wages, what are we deducting?  Also, please explain why not deducting the cost of wages isn’t just more double taxation of the same income.Simplicity of compliance is not to be disregarded, but in this case the actual effects of compliance seem to vastly outweigh it in this case.

  3. Anonymous
    October 12th, 2011 @ 4:52 pm

    I think it’s bold how Herman Cain is calling on the Super Committee to implement his plan… Phase 1 9-9-9 plan…
    “I call on the Super Committee to pass the Phase 1 Enhanced Plan along with their spending cut package.” light of how organized labor is making demands, and organizing protests aimed at the super-committee… Cain’s ahead of the curve….

  4. Dave C
    October 12th, 2011 @ 6:09 pm

    They’d prefer a wonk like Mitch Daniels 

    I never understood the love that many Republicans had for Mitch Daniels.

    IIRC, didn’t he pretty  much have the public sector unions by the gonads like Gov. Walker in Wisconsin but– unlike Walker– he let them go without nary a squeeze?

    And a few other things he did that signified more of a ‘Go Along To Get Along’ instead of the ‘Take A Stand’  position. 


  5. Anonymous
    October 12th, 2011 @ 6:21 pm

    Most probably didn’t know Daniels that well (I don’t), but knew he’d had some great results in Indiana.  He got rid of the unions without the big fight, but I think it was pretty successful.  Of course, Indiana is a lot redder than Wisconsin.

    Like everyone else, he had his downsides.  I’m sure a lot of DC types had built a relationship with him while he was running OMB in the Bush administration.

  6. Robert Birch
    October 12th, 2011 @ 6:29 pm

    Okay….as far as preferences goes it’s Ron Paul, Gary Johnson, Herman Cain and than Mitt Rommey.

  7. Richard Mcenroe
    October 12th, 2011 @ 6:43 pm

    No President can prevent his successors from doing something stupid.  Otherwise we really could blame Bush.

  8. David R. Graham
    October 12th, 2011 @ 6:47 pm

    Eisenhower was SAC Europe, not SAC WWII.  MacArthur was SAC SW Pacific and later SCAP post-war.  Nimitz was SAC Pacific during the war.  And my memory is unclear on this, but I seem to recall that Montbatten was SAC India or SE/SW Asia.  Details  and titles there may be off a bit, but Eisenhower was not SAC WWII.

  9. ThePaganTemple
    October 12th, 2011 @ 7:04 pm

    I can’t have much respect for anybody that tries to gloss over the tech and housing bubbles. I predicted the tech bubble collapse about a year before it happened, and the housing bubble collapse by at least 2002. It doesn’t take that much. You just recognize you have a bubble, much in the same way an alcoholic has to admit he has a problem. But there’s the rub. No politician wants to be seen as interfering with the market, and then when the inevitable happens, there we are all holding our dicks and the politicians are scrambling around looking for somebody to blame.

  10. ihavehadit
    October 12th, 2011 @ 7:29 pm

    I thought the Democrats were the stupid party, now after reading some of these posts I begin to wonder if it isn’t the Republican Party that is the stupid ones.  Herman Cain lied in that last debate.   When Paul asked him about his comments on a Radio program about not wanting the Fed audited, he says I didn’t say that.  He lied.  Just as he lied about saying , gun control shoud be left to the states.  Someone should have asked him if he thought freedom of speach should be left to the states also.  The second amendment must be recognized by all states and localities, The Supreme Court just ruled on that Herb.  Why are all these Cain radicals ready to accept anything he says at face vaule?  He’s funny he has a good slogan, 999.  He gives a good speach, so does a snake oil salesman, but does that mean we have to vote for a good speach giver?  Isn’t that what we did the last time??  And look where that got us.  We elected a community agitator that gave good speachs, no one bothered to check this clown out, now the Republicans are doing the same thing and they had a pattern in front of them but ignored it.  Doing the same thing the democrats did.  Cain makes them feel good about themselves and he gives good speachs.  Even tho he is saying just what the robots out here what to hear.  Get a grip people and check this man out.  We need an honest man who can actually get the job done. 

  11. Well, sure, when it’s three against one. « The TrogloPundit
    October 12th, 2011 @ 7:33 pm

    […] get cocky, McCain. You either, Pundette. Share this:Like this:LikeBe the first to like this post. from […]

  12. ihavehadit
    October 12th, 2011 @ 7:41 pm

    Finally a rational thinker.  You are exactly correct, the 999 plan is a disaster.  You can not give congress another tax to fool with.  No matter what this man says Congress will find a way to raise all those numbers in no time at all.  Remember Cain supported Tarp, so do you really think if we have another crisis, he won’t go along with the congress and raise these taxes if it means the country is in dire strats?  Of course he will.  He is trying to weasel his way out of his Tarp support and a lot the Cainbots are buying it but not the smart ones.  Herman Cain is nothing more than a snake oil salesman and too many so called tea party people are buying it.  What a shame, with people like this we deserve to lose

  13. ihavehadit
    October 12th, 2011 @ 7:46 pm

    Herb has not explained anything, he talks in sound bites.  My 999 plan is beginning to grate on me.  He said people pay 15.3% in payroll taxes, that is simply not true unless you are self employed.  Most people work for someone else and only pay 7.65%, look it up if you don’t believe me or better yet check it on your own payroll slip.  His numbers are just not reality.  He won’t tell us the other that worked on this with him because they don’t want to be recognized or else there are no others to tell about.  Herb has already proved he can lie at will.

  14. ihavehadit
    October 12th, 2011 @ 7:52 pm

    Cains whole campaign has been his 999 plan, haven’t you been listening, he has no energy plan, no foreign policy plan, nothing but his 999 plan.  I read a poster the other day that said it didn’t matter what his plan was and whether it worked or not, at least he had a plan.  With a brain like that this person needs a keeper,  heck, Obama had a plan, how is that working out for you.  Also his take on SS and Med/Care is that we adopt the third world nation of Chile’s retirement plan.  Explane that one

  15. ihavehadit
    October 12th, 2011 @ 7:53 pm

    Good grief, you have to be kidding

  16. ihavehadit
    October 12th, 2011 @ 8:01 pm

    Yes and he is wedded to it.  He can’t back out now.  So when this plan is gone over by REAL economist he is sunk.  And what does he have left?  He’s a good speach giver???  The MSM said Obama was a great speach giver. 

  17. ihavehadit
    October 12th, 2011 @ 8:11 pm

    And you have reason to be wary.  This man is not what he is pretending to be.  He is a big government Republican that loves affirmative action.

  18. ihavehadit
    October 12th, 2011 @ 8:18 pm

    Then you are not listening.  My husband runs a small business and the regulations are killing all of us.  This man has no susbtance.  At least Perry is addressing the regulations issue along with the tax issue and the tort issue.  Why do you think so many businesses have moved to Texas from California.  The regulations are killing the people in California and Obama is trying to finish the rest of the country with the same.  Cain didn’t hire people, he was the CEO.  When he took over Godfathers Pizza, he began by closing a ton of the stores and theyby getting a lot of people laying off .  He supports affirmative action but condemns Perry for instate tution for illegals,  viva la difference.

  19. ihavehadit
    October 12th, 2011 @ 8:21 pm

    Krauthammer is an inside beltway elitist.  He attends all the cocktail parties with Washington insiders.  He has no concept of what the rest of the country thinks or looks like.  I quit listening to him a long time ago.

  20. ihavehadit
    October 12th, 2011 @ 8:28 pm

    First of all you are wrong on all counts.

    1.  He is a politican that didn’t make it.  Lost every race he ran in.
    2.  He had too many business experiences if you ask me.  Why didn’t
          he remain with one for any length of time????
    3.  He ran for the senate in Georgia in 2004 and lost big.  Loser
    4.  999 is not an economic plan it is a TAX plan.  Another TAX  for us.
    5.  Personal appeal to only some people.  The charism of a snake oil
          salesman.  Everyone has an engaging life story.
    6.  He tried to run for president in 2000.  Crapped out at the beginning
          couldn’t get any traction or funds.  Loser
    7.  Grit???  Does that mean he can lie with a straight face??

    Did I mention that he has run for political office before and LOST

  21. ihavehadit
    October 12th, 2011 @ 8:29 pm

    Tells you what???  Like Cain and Romney going back 30 years to attack Perry with a racist rock on property he didn’t own???????  give me a break

  22. ihavehadit
    October 12th, 2011 @ 8:37 pm

    I’m not on any bandwagon and I oppose Cain.  He is not a genuine article.   He is a stalking horse.  Personally I like Gingrich, but his past scares me, but not like Cain’s past, present and future scare me.  I also like Rick Perry because of what he has done in Texas, but he needs to be able to take it to Obama.  Huntsman is out, Romney is out, Bachman is out, Santortum is out that leave Ron Paul.  I like Ron Paul and I believe he could more than handle Obama (even though all the questions will be given to Obama ahead of time)  But Paul has a problem with Israel that I have trouble dealing with.  So I have three choices  Perry, Paul, or Gingrich,  any combination I would be happy with.  And from those I am around most, agree with me whole heartly.

  23. ihavehadit
    October 12th, 2011 @ 8:41 pm

    Maybe they checked him out, unlike some who would vote for a pig in a poke.

  24. Shawn Gillogly
    October 12th, 2011 @ 9:09 pm

    That’s supposition without evidence. I’ve seen nothing in his life to indicate any support for Affirmative Action, unlike say, our President, who got into Harvard on AA and nominated an AA baby for the Supreme Court.

    999 is an across the board decrease to tax burden. I realize those who are hung up on “new taxes” can’t bother themselves with the basic math to see that, but it is. It also includes a requirement for a supermajority to pass any increase in any of those rates. Seen any supermajorities lately?

    I didn’t think so.

  25. Shawn Gillogly
    October 12th, 2011 @ 9:12 pm

    What “real” economist has a better background than he does?

    Oh wait. You mean the “Real” economists who gave us Porkulus. Right. They’re going to give ANY conservative plan a fair hearing.

    And for the record, there HAVE been economists say the basis of the plan is viable. Of course, they’re supply-siders, so they’re out of favor. But hey, listen to Krugman if you want to.

  26. Shawn Gillogly
    October 12th, 2011 @ 9:15 pm

    Chile’s retirement plan worked and is viable. That’s an easy one to explain. Sometimes small nations do come up with good ideas.

    At least EXAMINE the facts before dismissing them.

    And Cain HAS mentioned regulatory reform. Or what do you think his statement of “Shutting down the EPA” was meant to convey?

    Now yes, in the early debates he three 999 out there all the time. He had to. That was his ticket to being heard instead of being Glen Johnson. But he ‘has’ said other things. You’ve just chosen not to listen.

  27. Shawn Gillogly
    October 12th, 2011 @ 9:18 pm

    True. But the plan does include an insurance against rate increases: Specifically, it requires a supermajority to raise any rate.

    Can you really see getting supermajorities together often?

  28. Anonymous
    October 12th, 2011 @ 9:24 pm

    Until that becomes a part of the Constitution it’s total bullshit.  And that just ain’t gonna happen.

  29. McGehee
    October 12th, 2011 @ 9:28 pm

    If Althouse was going to reject a pig in a poke, nevergotit, she should have done it in 2008.

  30. McGehee
    October 12th, 2011 @ 9:29 pm

    Why do I have to give you a break? If you need one, just take it.

    If you need my permission you’re going to be in a world of hurt.

  31. ThePaganTemple
    October 12th, 2011 @ 9:42 pm

    Exactly. Even if that was passed as part of the bill it would probably be overturned by the courts.

  32. Anonymous
    October 12th, 2011 @ 10:05 pm

    You’re a pretty crappy excuse for a concern troll. Sharpen up your game and say something positive before I hit you with a banhammer.

  33. Dave
    October 12th, 2011 @ 10:53 pm

    Good Christ you’re an idiot. The 7.65% that your employer pays  is part of your “wages”. So is the $15K that they pay for your health insurance. (It’s all included under cost per employee for the employer. If it didn’t go to the govt or the insurance company, it would go to you) You probably don’t realize that corporate taxes are just passed through to the consumers, either, did you? 

  34. Dave
    October 12th, 2011 @ 10:59 pm

    He’s not a concern troll, he’s a Ronulan. His messiah is RIGHT, everyone else is WRONG, and he’s just here to patiently explain why until we get smart enough to realize that he’s right. Think of him as a persistent Jay Dub who won’t leave your porch.

  35. ihavehadit
    October 13th, 2011 @ 12:06 am

    How about what comes out of his mouth.  Check out wikipedia it tells the story also.  He got into college on AA and he still suports it.

  36. ihavehadit
    October 13th, 2011 @ 12:09 am

    He is not an economist and refuses to tell us who his economists are.  You are wrong and you just won’t admit it like Herb won’t admit when he’s wrong.

  37. ihavehadit
    October 13th, 2011 @ 12:11 am

    I don’t perfer either one even talking about a national sales tax.  We don’t need another tax for congress to raise

  38. maxi
    October 13th, 2011 @ 12:16 am

    Cain does not have a background as an economist.  And, yes, some independent economist have taken a look at it and have stated; in its present form it will NOT work. Most have ignored it because they know that even if he is elected 999 will never be implemented.
    The only part of his plan that Congress will take a shine to is the national sales/vat tax part.

  39. maxi
    October 13th, 2011 @ 12:21 am

    I can tell you have never owned a business.

  40. ihavehadit
    October 13th, 2011 @ 12:26 am

    Well let me see if I explain it a complete dolt.  I am an employer and my employee’s DO NOT PAY 15.3% they pay only 7.65% and that includes FICA/Medicare also they don’t pay unemployement insurance or workers compensation, those are costs to the employer and believe me when I tell you I PAY THEM not the employee and I pay them every single quarter.  When people draw unemployment my rates go up, when workers get hurt and my insurance co pays, my rates go up, so don’t tell me the employee pays any of this.  Herb was lying again and so are you.  It’s call the cost of doing business and in this country it is getting too high to do business. 

  41. maxi
    October 13th, 2011 @ 12:26 am

    We don’t have either one now!  The dems would love nothing better than for a Republican to be the one to usher either in.
    Frankly, I’m in shock that so many people are so accepting of a new tax, let alone one that comes in at a whopping 9%.
    Anyone that thinks congress will tie their own hands on raising future tax rates is smoking so pretty good stuff.

  42. ihavehadit
    October 13th, 2011 @ 12:43 am

    I realize this is a pro Cain site but are  saying  if I don’t agree that Cain is the man I am subject to banning.  So much for free speech.

  43. maxi
    October 13th, 2011 @ 12:43 am

    I guess you’re saying that anyone who is not on the Cain train is a troll? Is that the kind of blog “the other McCain” has become?  If that is the case you are going to lose a lot of readers. I’ve been coming here for years. I don’t usually post, but I really felt this was the kind of blog that allowed free speech… I guess I was wrong.

  44. Dave
    October 13th, 2011 @ 12:50 am

     Let me see if I can use small words. That 7.65% is included in your labor costs. In the simplest systems, labor cost is 100% wages: my labor cost to get my lawn mowed is the $10 I give to the kid who mows it. Now, if I had to hire the kid on payroll, I could do one of two things: Pay him $8.50, with $.75 being “his” contribution to FICA and $.75 being “mine”, or I could still pay him $10 and kick in an extra $1.50, in which case my labor cost is now $11.50. If I do the former the kid has less money to spend on soda pop, if I do the later I now have a labor cost of $11.50. The “wages” I have to pay have gone up by $1.50. This is simple, basic stuff Hadit, if you don’t get this no wonder your business is struggling.

  45. Anonymous
    October 13th, 2011 @ 1:17 am

    No, that’s not what I’m saying. Work on your reading comprehension, and while you’re at it, bone up on constitutional law. This isn’t a government site, and if we don’t like what you say, we can ban your ass or edit your posts to make you look even more stupid than you actually are. You get one more bite, dawg.

  46. Anonymous
    October 13th, 2011 @ 1:18 am

    Don’t let the virtual door hit you where the Good Lord split you.

  47. Andrew Patrick
    October 13th, 2011 @ 11:41 am

    How many elections did Abraham Lincoln lose?

  48. Andrew Patrick
    October 13th, 2011 @ 11:52 am

    Find many Congressmen suing the Congress, do you?

  49. ThePaganTemple
    October 13th, 2011 @ 1:36 pm

    Who said only Congressmen could bring suit?

  50. Anonymous
    October 13th, 2011 @ 1:42 pm

    IANAL, but since it’s a law directed at Congress, it seems like only they would actually have standing.  However, since it could be interpreted as a rule in Congress, I doubt the Court would touch it.  After all, we already have the filibuster, which is a rule made by the Senate for the Senate.