*news
*election
*fail

Adding video to channels (Election, Fail, News) - requested by NetRunner.

The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by Boise_Lib.

He made some good points here but undid them with his double talk.

A deliberative (not deliberate as Cain said) leader is a good thing. They take information on board and make pragmatic decisions rather than sticking to ideology. This is something that is rarely touted in US politics.

He basically said that he was not in a position to know if it was the right decision. Saying that he mistook the premise of the question which was do you agree that intervention was acceptable which is a much broader question.

stick with pizza

Sorry, are all the Republican candidates complete morons? At least be a decent politician. Have an interest in politics, Read the papers. Inform yourself.

I...

can't....

remember....

my...

talking...

point...

Oh, right it was something about the opposition being bad and Gaddafi killing people, or something. I'll ramble about that.

..

Nailed it!

The reporters here are much, much, much to kind to him. After he said he is the type of President that would want all the facts on hand before making a decision I'd have interrupted him and asked why then as a candidate has completely failed to even attempt to look for or remember any facts about Libya?

"Even tho I know nothing of the situation now or how it was assessed by Obama at the time and I approve of the results, I would have done a better job."
Pure obstructionist stream of consciousness.

I don't see it that way at all. He is merely stating that he doesn't feel Obama spent enough time assessing Qaddafi's opposition. However he also states that he is not privy to what assessment Obama may have done, if any. Especially since Obama is getting the praise for it all when it was supposed to be a United Nations operation. But that is a whole different thread...
I think it's a pretty fair answer in all. You ask a question about how someone may do something differently, knowing full well there is no way they could have all the information about it. He's not in the government...yet.

The response I would have liked to have seen would have been:
"How the hell can I question what the President did or didn't do? I don't have top secret clearance yet. But I would have hoped that he spent plenty of time researching and understanding Qaddafi's opposition so we don't wind up with some puppet government like all the other failed puppet governments we've put in place before. Only time will tell if the United Nations and Obama screwed the pooch on this or not."

At least he knew where Libya is and who was in charge. Better than some of the politicians we've had in the past. Looking your way there Bushy boy...
>> ^HenningKO:

"Even tho I know nothing of the situation now or how it was assessed by Obama at the time and I approve of the results, I would have done a better job."
Pure obstructionist stream of consciousness.

You're right. That would have been a great response. But he didn't do that, did he? He did exactly what Henning said he did -- knee jerk rejection of anything Obama does or did, without using critical thinking or judgment.

And Cain didn't answer the reporter's follow up question -- there wasn't anybody in charge of the opposition. That is known. So what would you have done then, different than Obama?

As someone who has hung around business people some, I hear "business speak" -- what do managers do in business? They gather information and make decisions. Good managers gather good information. Herman Cain was talking boiler plate biz talk, with attempts at sounding In Charge and Manly. POTUS is not a fricking fracking business manager. He/she has a much bigger job than that.

Cain hasn't a clue. And he doesn't even know he doesn't have a clue.

>> ^My_design:

I don't see it that way at all. He is merely stating that he doesn't feel Obama spent enough time assessing Qaddafi's opposition. However he also states that he is not privy to what assessment Obama may have done, if any. Especially since Obama is getting the praise for it all when it was supposed to be a United Nations operation. But that is a whole different thread...
I think it's a pretty fair answer in all. You ask a question about how someone may do something differently, knowing full well there is no way they could have all the information about it. He's not in the government...yet.
The response I would have liked to have seen would have been:
"How the hell can I question what the President did or didn't do? I don't have top secret clearance yet. But I would have hoped that he spent plenty of time researching and understanding Qaddafi's opposition so we don't wind up with some puppet government like all the other failed puppet governments we've put in place before. Only time will tell if the United Nations and Obama screwed the pooch on this or not."

At least he knew where Libya is and who was in charge. Better than some of the politicians we've had in the past. Looking your way there Bushy boy...
>> ^HenningKO:
"Even tho I know nothing of the situation now or how it was assessed by Obama at the time and I approve of the results, I would have done a better job."
Pure obstructionist stream of consciousness.