You're right in that the rich don't benefit from every single government service more than all other groups combined. They do, however, benefit from somethings more than all other groups combined, namely, defense and law enforcement.

I have to say, it's not like I'll probably have to convince anyone on the point of Herman Cain being politically ******ed by this point (I don't think he's a dumb guy, but I can't remember a less politically savvy candidate...natural I guess, given his lack of experience in the field)...but accepting a one-on-one debate with Newt Gingrich is just as mind-numbingly dumb as it gets.

For starters, Newt is much smarter than Cain. Not only is he much smarter, but he is one of the most skilled debaters in existence. He'll be able to toy with Cain and basically score as many debate points on him as he chooses to. I'm guessing he'll keep it friendly in keeping with his manner of campaign during this election, but he'll still leave little doubt to any objective observer that he is the brighter man who can better handle a debate with Obama.

The thing is, even if we were to assume that Cain can keep up with Newt on a debate stage, it's STILL insanely stupid to be doing this, because it insta-legitimizes Newt as a player in this thing. When you're leading in most of the national polls, you don't breathe all kinds of life into a fringe 3rd/4th place guy who is only now just threatening to get into things a bit by agreeing to go toe-to-toe with him as if he's an equal to you.

Just dumb, dumb, dumb all around. I understand that Cain himself is inexperienced in the politics game, but his handlers have dealt with a campaign or two in their lives...assuming he's heeding any of their advice at all, they're just doing a horrendous job.

I get the feeling his campaign wants as much free publicity as it can get. There are some liberal shows where you should know going in that your not going to get asked any worthwhile questions. That they will spend a half hour talking about how wrong your smoking add is and do you really want alligators and a moat in Arizona. Yet he accepts those appearances as well.

It is one of the down falls of having an under funded operation or maybe not really serious about winning but rather selling books not sure.

Yeah, but accepting a hostile interview isn't nearly as damaging as accepting a national TV encounter with Newt. Most of the audience of a left-wing talk show isn't going to vote for Cain regardless of what he says, so the damage is limited. Line up in an official debate against another Republican and true undecideds who are considering him will tune in and see. I just think it's an egregious mistake.

I think Cain is a fine debater for his audience. Sure, Newt and Romney are better technically, but they don't have the soundbites that Cain does, and Cain doesn't sound like a stereotypical politician.

Cain's not a bad debater. Honestly the only truly bad debater in the whole field is Perry, and man is he horrendous. But the format of Cain's debate with Newt isn't just going to be 30 second windows of opportunity to say something...they intend to talk for longer periods of time and get more deeply into substance, and I just don't think that Cain has the depth of knowledge to deal with the situation very well.

By no means am I suggesting that it will be a comedy act like Gingrich vs. Perry or Romney vs. Perry would be, but I do think it will hurt Cain.

Not sure where the person only wants to trip you up and asking negative questions I think your better off walking away. You do not see Obama or Bush accepting such interviews.

I wasn't arguing that it was a good move for him to do those. It isn't. Just less damaging than this coming one-on-one debate IMO. He has proven himself to be quite the gaffe machine, so those interviews are definitely fraught with the perpetual danger of doing something harmful to himself.

Yes... this "news" conference really turned out to be a ****ing Waterloo for Cain.

Cliffs: Mouthpiece Joel "I can't remember" Bennett reads a statement with the blessing of Cain's former employer.

Anonymous #1says she "stands by" her compliant of inappropriate behavior by Cain. She doesn't bother to say what they were. Of course she stands by it.... did you think she was going to say she made it all up and here's the money back? However, she refuses to corroborate anything, give any salient details or anything, nor allows herself to be examined by the press, etc.

NRA says they are happy to release her from any confidentiality should she want to comment .

She also tells the whopper of all whoppers, "She and her husband see no value in revisiting this matter now nor in discussing the matter any further publicly or privately."

What??? She knows a perv is running for President and she sees no value in revisiting it? LOL

KCl right to the heart for old Mr Cain!!!

In more breaking news, Politico reinforces their reputation as an arm of the DNC by declining to pursue a story of sex discrimination against Jessee Jackson by a gay man:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_974310.html

Let's see... how many stories did Politico run on this sex discrimination case and how many did they run on Cain's sex discrimination case? But no bias.....nahhhh

Politico should cover some washed up former candidate for president as much as they cover a current candidate for president?

Yeah seriously. Jesse Jackson is laughable but has been officially rendered totally irrelevant. You only cover him if it's a truly slow news day.

LKJ

Personally, I give Cain and Gingrich huge props for doing this. This is what the process should be, the contestants going mano a mano over ideas and let the chips fall where they may. I agree this is a tough spot against Gingrich, but I remember people predicting Bush would get hammered by Gore and Reagan couldn't possibly compete with the intellect of the nuclear submariner Carter.

If he should happen to survive it would be a gigantic plus for him. Plus he would gain valuable experience, which he clearly needs.

So, I guess I hadn't heard about a one on one debate between the two of them. Pardon my confusion. Are they going full Lincoln/Douglas?

Going toe to toe with Romney would be a gigantic plus. Going toe to toe with Gingrich, arguably an even tougher task, doesn't gain him as much. I just think it's a really tough spot.

The Bush-Gore comparison is an apt one since, despite his speaking fumbles, Bush wasn't too shabby of a debater ("you forgot Poland" aside) but just wasn't a technical master at it. I think this will be a bit different in that Gore largely did hammer Bush on points but got sunk amongst independents by his considerable likability issues. Gingrich can have some of his own likability issues, but as I said above I expect him to keep this to a respectful debate where things stay above board and he just outshines.

Guess we'll see. I look forward to it, but mostly because I'm a fan of Newt's and I want him to become a serious contender in this race.

Yes. Tomorrow night on C-Span. They're calling it Lincoln-Douglas, though I don't know if they're actually doing the "candidates get 60 minutes each and then 30 minutes of rebuttal time" thing that the original Lincoln-Douglas debates were comprised of. Hard to imagine that happening in this day and age, though I'd certainly be interested to see it.

EDIT: Apparently the debate will be 90 minutes total. So maybe cut the original times in half, with 30/30/15/15? We'll see.

Right... Mr Jackson isn't a prominent Democrat politician. When he has a sex harassment charge by a gay guy against him it certainly isn't newsworthy.

Pardon me.

He really isn't though. The "cut Obama's nuts off" thing is the last I've heard of him and by that time it was just so clear that he had become a joke even to his own side.

I have no idea how rough and tumble the Lincoln-Douglas debates were but I doubt Gingrich goes after Cain in any meaningful way. He seems to believe in Reagan's 11th commandment. "though shall not attack other Republican's."

[ ] Jackson is running for elected office.
[ ] Jackson holds an elected office.
[ ] Jackson is employed by the Democratic National Committee

Funny definition of "Democrat politician" you've got there.

The last thing Wikipedia mentions Jackson has done was attend Barack Obama's election victory party. Nothing else since 2008. Although it has the discrimination complaint now. That's a huge gap where Jackson has been 100% irrelevant.

I agree from a policy standpoint Gingrich is best qualified among the R's. I think Cain realizes Newt is his only competition as the Non- Romney race. If he can stand up to Newt, there really is no argument for Newt since he has such likability issues.

Cain knows he a long shot and is on a complete free roll parlay. He's taking a shot to make him the leader in the clubhouse as the un-Romney. He has that position now, but he sees Newt creeping up the leaderboard.

Interesting. No such thing as bad publicity.

good post

only difference is I wouldn't vote any of the R's except Ron Paul and Gary Johnson

Right... he isn't an Democrat and he isn't a politician of note. Should I call him a Democrat rabble- rouser?

I mean if I was a D, I'd want to sweep Mr.Hymietown under the rug, too.

That's like saying Richard Nixon wasn't a Republican politician in 1967 when he didn't hold public office, wasn't running for anything and wasn't an official in the R party. You think if tricky Dick was caught in a sex scandal, it wouldn't have been reported? Bobby and Jack Kennedy could double team MM but that wasn't anyone's business.

The more things change.......

The dude hasn't even roused any rabble since 2008.