*Written by L.B. Frank.

Wow, was I in for a surprise last night. I had the pleasure of attending a US Congressional Candidate Forum for District 19 last night. I’m not going to say what state I live in, nor the names of the people running for office. I will make up names for them that better exude their personality or my impression of them. The following are my thoughts on the questions and their answers.

There were 8 candidates on stage last night. We had a Mitt Romney Wannabe, a Lawyer Kid, a Guy They Say doesn’t have a Chance, a Bean Counter from Washington, a Mitt Romney Wannabe #2, a Duck Phillips, a Formerly Libertarian Leaning Radio Show Host, and a Democrat. 7 of the 8 people on stage are running in the Republican Primary for US Congressional Seat 19 in our district, the last guy is the only Democrat running for the seat.

They were asked a series of questions off of the GOOOH questionnaire, and a series of questions from the audience. I submitted three questions, and none were asked. Boo. They were asked the questions, and then they had to hold up a red or green sign whether they were for or against the topic.

The first question was “Would you support any legislation that would alter the promise made to those 55 and up when it comes to their Social Security benefits?”.  All but one said “No”. That is “No” to privatizing, “No” to voluntary disassociation, “No” to raising the cap, “No” to lowering benefits. The Formerly  Libertarian Leaning Radio Show Host was the only one that said we have a $16 trillion dollar debt, and was the only one that would say that we had to look at everything on the table. I can respect that. I submitted a question to be asked, that wasn’t, “Is Social Security a Ponzi scheme?” The way that Social Security is run right now, it’s relying on the forced confiscation of wealth earned by tax payers in the form of FICA withholdings on their paychecks. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that Social Security will run out of money and be in perpetual RED in as little as 2016. The last time I looked at the calendar, it’s 2012. So, in an effort to garner the votes and campaign donations from the nearly 300 people in attendance, they said “No, I would rather let the Social Security bankrupt our country instead of tell you the truth”.

The second question was “Would you support any legislation that would alter, remove, abolish the Tax Code as it stand now and replace it with a flat tax or the FairTax?” All Greens on stage. The Lawyer Kid said basically that he supports a flat tax and the FairTax is dangerous. The FairTax is a 194 page legislation, but takes an over 400 page book to explain. That is not even remotely true. The FairTax legislation is 133 pages as written today, the book written by Neal Boortz and Congressman John Linder is  188 pages, that includes the Table of Contents and the Index in the back. He said it was dangerous because we don’t know what it will do, but it is wholly acceptable to support a flat tax, even thought that only adds to the complexity of the 3 million word, 76,000 page Tax Code we currently have today. He was saying that it is wholly acceptable to only tax producers in our economy. He was saying that is wholly acceptable to continue to have the world’s highest corporate tax rate. He was saying that it is wholly acceptable to keep the IRS to track you down and put you in a cage if you make a mistake on your tax forms and point a gun at you and force you to pay your taxes in weekly withholdings, whether you can afford it or not. He completely misunderstood and misrepresented the FairTax, where there are no corporate taxes, where you don’t have to file taxes, where you keep 100 percent of your income and investments. Only The Guy They Say Doesn’t Have a Chance said that the FairTax returns the tax system to the original constitutional restrictions and treats everyone equally, removes loop holes and lobbyists. The rest of them basically said, “Yeah, pander, pander, pander.” No solutions, nothing. If we want to get serious in this country about the economy, about jobs, about the future, we have to look at a solution that is simple and makes sense that also takes power out of the hands of government and returns it to the people. The FairTax is that solution. If only these people on stage would stand behind it, they promise “To fight for you!” Bull, show me by supporting legislation that will get the government out of my finances, out of my pay check and won’t throw me in jail if I don’t understand something with 76,000 pages and 3,000,000 words.

Later the question was asked, “Would you support any efforts to use legislation to decriminalize marijuana?” Now, I’m going to be as honest as I can, even though I’m writing on the Internet where nothing is true yet everything is believable. I have never smoked marijuana. I have never put any drugs into my body other than alcohol, caffeine, and medications. It’s not something that appeals to me. But, I am a warrior for freedom. I am a defender of liberty. And when I heard this question last night, I thought “Finally! A question that actually has value!” Nope. These so-called liberty-loving Republican candidates said “NOPE”. The Repubs all raised the red flag of the War on Drugs. The Lawyer Kid said “It’s a gateway drug, it’s dangerous, I don’t want kids smoking it and also there is this thing in the Constitution called the Commerce Clause, so yeah, I don’t think it’s a good idea.” The rest of them parroted his sentiments. Even though I know at least one of them on that stage has smoked before. “Commerce Clause??” Really? If the user grows the plant themselves, in their own garden, on their own property, and uses it in their own home, while consenting to administering the smoke of some sort of vegetation into his or her own body and THAT is enough justifiable reason for the imperial federal government to reach into your home and yank you out and put you into a cage?

“Article I, Section 8, Clause 3: [The Congress shall have Power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes”

Where does it say that they have the authority to do so? These people, these men, these human beings, are appealing to us, the audience, the voters, more human beings, for  the authority and permission to hire men with guns to tell us how we are allowed to live. Don’t ever forget that. These holier than thou, righteous men want the power to tell you what you must do, what you are not allowed to do in your own home.

“IV Amendment of the Constitution: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.”

I’m sorry, but that is just wrong. And the worst part, the audience applauded them. Freedom dies every time the audience applauds unjust laws. They got us into $16 Trillion in debt, the “War on Drugs” has cost us a trillion dollars. After 40 years of this, even U.S. drug czar Gil Kerlikowske concedes the strategy hasn’t worked. “In the grand scheme, it has not been successful, forty years later, the concern about drugs and drug problems is, if anything, magnified, intensified.” We have already tried the whole prohibition thing, it doesn’t work. Violent cartels are making hundreds of millions, we are paying hundreds of millions to imprison hundreds of thousands for victimless crimes, we paying billions in a “war effort” that doesn’t make sense. If someone has a drug problem, they can be treated just like someone with an alcohol problem. If they are caught driving while intoxicated, treat them the same as with alcohol. The whole supply/demand paradigm works with drugs too, the demand is still there today, after forty years, but supplies are scarcer due to the black market effect and it raises the cost. If you increase the risk, you increase the cost. As the costs go up, but demand stays the same, the risk taking to get the money to purchase the product goes up, thus crime, violent crime. That is what should be punished and that is what would go down. Market forces would reduce the prices of the goods; reduce the crimes inherent in procuring the goods, tax dollars won’t go to waste in incarcerations. debt goes down.

If the thought that if it is dangerous and therefore should be outlawed is true, the candidates should have proposed to outlaw cotton candy, hamburgers and alcohol, among everything else in life. Too much of anything is bad for the body, the best way to reduce its use is through education and not more guns and more political power.

This Lawyer Kid and the rest of them are just pandering to the masses, while trying to sound strong, and in effect, trample on the Constitution, our Rights, they are treating us adults as children. We have brains, we can think, we don’t need a government to make decisions for us, and these people are trying to get the power to do so.

They asked a bunch more questions, like about ending the Federal Reserve, they all send “No”. “We need market stability” and crap like that. As if the market was worse prior to the Fed, fiat currency and so forth.

I walked away with more disgust in my stomach than anything else. They were cheered; it was like those in the audience didn’t even listen to them. “Yay! Take more of my rights away!” Remember the old saying “One man’s trash is another man’s treasure”? It’s the same thing with rights, just because you don’t use all of your rights, there might be someone else that does. Just because you don’t value some of your rights, doesn’t mean that there is another person’s freedoms being trampled on, and if their freedoms are being trampled on, so are yours.

This primary season and this November, please remember to vote on principles. Vote on what your heart tells you. Read the Constitution and vote down the line on what the Constitution authorizes and nothing else. These people last night, if elected, will get to vote on hundreds of issues over their time in office. They are promising you that they will vote on principles when they get there. You do the same. The way I see it, if they get to vote 100 times in Congress, and you only get to vote for them once, you have to make a decision that is 100 times more principled than theirs’. If everyone does the same, we might actually be able to vote a better class of people into Washington and have a better, freer future of us and our children. As for the Republican Party, I wished they learned from their mistakes from the past instead of repeating it like they did last night.

Just one month from today, Japan will lower their corporate income tax rate from 39.5 to 35 percent.  When they do so, the United States will officially have the dubious distinction of possessing the highest corporate income tax rate in the developed world, a federal/state integrated rate of 39.2 percent.

To put that in perspective, the average in the developed world (OECD) is only 25 percent.  Our six major trading partners–Canada, Mexico, the United Kingdom, Japan, Germany, and France–will all have a lower rate than we will have.  As a result, capital and jobs will continue to flow overseas, rather than staying here to create jobs, increase wages, fund pensions, invest in new business, or grow nest eggs.

President Obama last month proposed a plan to raise net taxes, but in the process lower the U.S. corporate rate to about 32 percent.  That simply isn’t worth it.  In exchange for a jobs-killing net tax hike, the Obama plan would still leave us with a tax rate higher than the OECD average, and higher than all our major trading partners except Japan and France.  No thanks, Mr. President.

Source: Americans for Tax Reform.

*Written by Rob Rimes.

Introduction:

I don’t hate Mitt Romney but I am certainly not a fan, which should be obvious at this point. I do hate the goddamned media for giving him an unfair advantage over the other candidates but truthfully, that isn’t his fault. Romney isn’t the absolute worst presidential choice out there, which many of my colleagues and readers may disagree with vehemently, but he is still a progressive statist bastard that is hellbent on controlling the lives of all of us in an effort to keep the giant wheel of the establishment machine rolling. I have been nasty to the guy many times in my countless diatribes about the 2012 election but my distaste and malcontent has been for a very good reason. Point being, I know that Romney can’t save this country and I feel that this is painstakingly obvious even though I find myself completely befuddled over the fanfare and support that this guy gets, not just form the media – their support is understandable, but from the conservative voting public who are all pretty much in unison behind this guy’s idea of smaller government, less taxes and squashing the budding police state. This guy will not solve any of those problems. In fact, he will only magnify them and dig our giant pit of legislative bullshit deeper and deeper. Hell, the pit is practically bottomless at this point but electing Mitt Romney will only solidify that fact even further.

I’m certainly not saying that Obama is a better choice out of the two. Realistically, I don’t think there is much difference between one or the other. This is a prime example of there being just one big government party with two wings: one that wears blue shirts with donkeys on them and one that wears red shirts with elephants on them. The worst part about this is that most “conservatives” are following Romney, as well as Gingrich and Santorum, believing in the hypocritical rhetoric that they’ve got a small government guy on their side who will fight for them. Realistically, those who support these guys are ignorant in economics and foreign policy. It is incredibly unfortunate but as Ron Paul said in a recent debate, “Conservatives have lost their way.”

Now I can’t completely cover every negative thing on Romney’s record, as there is a lot, but I am going to talk about a few points. In the end, it is really your decision as to where you want to put your vote but you really need to think this through and ask yourself where you want to be in four years. Do you want to be climbing out of the hole or do you want to be yelling at the guys that are still digging and digging?

Smaller Government:

The first thing worth getting into is definitely the issue of Mitt claiming that he’ll work towards making government smaller. Mitt Romney, who has preached for this over the course of all these debates, has a really shitty record of practicing what he’s been preaching. In reality, Mitt has been feeding into the desires of the voter base and has been stringing them along with his version of the popular rhetoric of the day. The sad thing is that many of the people who support this douchenugget are taking all this bullshit at face value and not looking at reality. Truthfully, maybe Romney actually believes his empty words and his supporters might not be adept enough to see through the Orwellian doublespeak. Let me rundown his track record of big government bullshit by ripping the fucking band-aid off: exposing the man’s economic sores.

I could write a whole damn article about the monstrosity that is Romneycare but I won’t bore you or myself with the details that have already been recycled a million times and beaten into the ground with Thor’s hammer by every critic for several years now. I’m over the Romneycare issue personally. I don’t like it, I think it’s shit, it was the blueprint for what became Obamacare but it was done at the state level, not the federal level and most Bay Staters still approve of it, so that is their economic cross to bear.

One thing that many Romney supporters don’t know or just choose to ignore is the fact that he significantly raised taxes in Massachusetts while he was governor. While preaching fiscal conservatism and pimping himself out as friendly to business, Governor Romney increased the tax bill on businesses by $300 million! He and his cronies also approved hundreds of millions of dollars worth of higher fees and fines on businesses in just four years! Many business owners were incredibly dissatisfied with Romney as governor. Essentially, corporate taxes under Romney almost doubled in just his one term.

I guess the tax hikes were necessary though, as Romney drastically increased spending in Massachusetts. In 2006, Ol’ Mittens increased spending in just that year by 7.6 percent. In 2007, he increased spending again, this time all the way up to 10.2 percent. During just his four years in office, he increased state spending by a total of 20.7 percent! That’s a lot of debt thrown on the taxpayer but at least those hefty tax hikes on corporations absorbed some of the burden. Maybe this tax burden accounts for the fact that Mitt Romney managed the 47th ranked state, out of 50, in the realm of job creation. That brings me to my next point.

Romney has been touting his job creation success while working at Bain Capital. He proudly boasts about creating corporations like Staples, Sports Authority and Steel Dynamics, all of which have created hundreds of thousands of jobs. However, as governor, unemployment was a real problem in Massachusetts. Sure, he did great in the private sector and as Romney himself has said, “Jobs are created in the private sector.” However, all of his job creation skills didn’t translate to success when he reached office. So what makes the public think that this job magician’s magic wand will suddenly work this time? Yes he is a self-professed business master but he couldn’t tap into that while running Massachusetts so essentially his trial run at it was a failure. On the issue of Romney’s job creation woes, Boston Herald business reporter Bret Arends wrote:

During the four years Mitt Romney was governor of Massachusetts, it had the second worst jobs record of any state in America…it wasn’t a regional issue. The rest of New England created nearly 200,000 jobs.

The question no one ever seems to ask Governor Romney is how many jobs were destroyed in an effort to build his monstrous corporations. Now I am not attacking him for building giant successful businesses, as that is the nature of the beast – good or bad. I am just trying to point out how skewed these sorts of statistical claims are because if you created say 300,000 jobs but your new businesses eliminated the jobs of say 250,000 people whose businesses you closed down through competition, well then you’ve only really created 50,000 jobs. This is a simple ballpark example but it should show you how some statistical claims can be made when you only tell one side of the story. Hell, government has been using these sorts of statistical tactics for years when releasing inaccurate numbers to sway public opinion for a candidate, a bill or whatever else they have needed public approval on.

Another issue that shows how non-small government this ass clown is, is the TARP bailouts. Mittens hates when people bring the subject up and has gone as far as lying and completely denying that he ever supported it but there is tons and tons of evidence that says otherwise. In fact, Romney was incredibly passionate about poorly run banks getting a massive taxpayer funded bonus for sucking at business. On CNN, a few years back during the bailouts, Romney said:

I think there is a need for economic stimulus. Americans have lost about $11 trillion dollars in net worth. That translates into about $400 billion dollars a year less spending that they’ll be doing, and that’s net of additional government programs like Medicaid and unemployment insurance. And government can help make that up in a very difficult time. And that’s one of the reasons why I think a stimulus program is needed.

Sounds like small government to me! So why would he be so pro-big bank? Well, let’s look at his top campaign contributors from a recent list. His top contributor is Goldman Sachs who gave $354,700. Next up is Credit Suisse Group at $195,250 and Morgan Stanley at $185,800. Every other contributor in the six figures is also in the banking industry. You’ve got HIG Capital, Barclays, Kirkland & Ellis, Bank of America, PricewaterhouseCoopers, EMC Corp. & JPMorgan Chase. His top ten contributors are all fucking banks! Occupying Wall Street should start on Mitt’s front lawn! This shows a sharp contrast from Ron Paul whose top three campaign contributors are the Air Force, the Army and the Navy. Paul’s biggest contributor is also a lot less than six figures. So who really understands the plight of the average person? Romney is so far up on the Wall Street crony capitalist ladder than he can’t remember how to get down – not that he wants to.

People that call Barack Obama the Wall Street president haven’t seen anything yet. On campaign contributions from the big banks, Obama has made significantly less than Romney. Goldman Sachs gave Obama $49,124, Morgan Stanley coughed up $28,225, Bank of America gave $46,699, JPMorgan Chase came in at $38,038 and Citigroup was at $36,887. You do the math but it is obvious who the bailed out banking industry supports.

Another thing worth noting is that Romney has gotten more money from lobbyists than all other Republican candidates combined. I guess you need all that special interest money to work towards smaller government. Damn it! That Mitt Romney doublethink is taking over my brain!

The fact of the matter is, love it or hate it, Mitt Romney has a proven track record of being nothing less than one of the heads on the big government hydra. He is an economic nightmare but because people take him at his word and don’t look at his record, he can continue to dupe the masses into thinking that he’s on their side.

Mitt Romney will say anything to get elected.

Continued in Part II: Foreign Entanglements..

*Written by Rob Rimes.

Let me start by saying that even though I’ve referred to other debates as the worst, this one definitely took the cake and showed us just how godawful these things can be. This debate came to us from Tampa, Florida and was hosted by NBC. Brian Williams was the moderator and he was a shitty one at that. To start, there were no intros and the audience was not allowed to participate in any way. This means that the crowd could not applaud, boo or get fired up like they have in most previous debates. While I understand that this is done to speed up the process and fit in more quality time with the candidates, it creates bad television and boring debates, especially when the candidates argue incessantly for long periods of time and the moderator is too chicken shit to break it up and stick to his own rules regarding time. My biggest regret about watching this goddamned thing is that I only had one beer in the whole fucking house. I was also too lethargic from a 20 oz. New York strip to get up and mix a stronger drink. At least the ecstasy I got from my giant piece of premium American red meat kept me from losing my shit and going completely insane throughout this episode of ‘Three Statists and a Constitutionalist’.

So we start with Newt Gingrich being asked to respond to Mitt Romney recently calling him “erratic” and a “failed leader”. Woohoo! Here we go already starting with the personal attacks over policy issues. Gingrich immediately dropped several Reagan references and was shocked that he didn’t get any applause. Oh yes, the crowd must stay silent or be forced to stare into the droopy eyes of Brian Williams who has been known to turn people into hipster liberals with just a quick glare. This didn’t bode well for Newt as he was waiting for the crowd to react to his empty one-liners. Gingrich said he was like Reagan, who ignored Carter and went on to win the election. Really Newt? You’re ignoring the attacks against you? Funny, because every show I’ve seen you on, you’ve just gone on and on about all the attacks against you.

Gingrich is immediately given a second question, as Williams asks him how he has changed since being Speaker of the House. Gingrich says that as Speaker he had four consecutive balanced budgets, which he says is unheard of. He also brags about how many jobs he created and how he reformed welfare. This is also funny because in a recent interview he took the Romney approach and said government doesn’t create jobs the private sector does. So which is it Newt?

Brian Williams then directs his attention to Mitt and I can already tell that Paul and Santorum are probably going to get the shaft on time this round. Romney is asked if he is electable, which is a dumb fucking question. It’s a dumb question when anyone is asked this, really. Romney talks about how he saved the Olympics and created tons of businesses. He doesn’t actually answer the question he just runs through his already well-known yet well-rehersed talking points. He then switches to attacks on Gingrich and disses him for talking bad about the Paul Ryan Plan and for aligning with Nancy Pelosi on several occasions.

Newt Gingrich says that he isn’t going to spend the entire evening “chasing Mitt’s misinformation.” Yes he will, just keep reading. Gingrich says that the American people need a discussion on how the candidates are going to beat Obama and that they need to move passed the bullshit. Romney jumps in and points out that 88 percent of the Republicans in the House of Representatives voted against Newt, which caused him to resign from his position in disgrace. Mitt also points out that Newt’s approval rating when he left Congress was 18 percent. Romney then takes a stiff shot at Gingrich when he says that we can’t retake the White House if the person leading the fight was in the pocket of Freddie Mac. This fight then goes on forever and Brian Williams just lets them duke it out regardless of time restraints and the fact that there are other candidates who haven’t even talked yet. Gingrich tries to explain how he left Congress, which is all bullshit and just leads to him arguing with Romney over who has the most inaccurate attack ads. I thought you were ignoring the attacks and weren’t going to spend the evening “chasing Mitt’s misinformation”? Can we please discuss the real issues?!

Rick Santorum finally gets asked a question and as much as I loathe the guy, I’m glad to see him at this point. Of course he is asked to comment on the Romney-Gingrich spat because Brian Williams wants the two feuding idiots to be front and center to help discredit the GOP as a whole. Santorum rambles some nonsense about painting a positive vision for the country and adds that he creates a real contrast to Mitt and Newt. Um, not really homeboy unless you’re referring to the religio-fascist part. Santorum then claims to “..have a track record of being a strong conservative.” Well that depends on what your definition of a conservative is, as it varies greatly from candidate to candidate.

Brian Williams then takes a shot at Santorum and says that he lost his seat in the Senate by 18 percent. This was of course after Santorum bragged about winning the seat in a liberal state. Santorum responds to the criticism by saying that the Republican governor in Pennsylvania lost worse than he did that same year. What the fuck does that have to do with anything? Santorum also physically crouched down when he was rambling incoherently and actually said the word “crouch down”. Thanks for the visual buddy.

Finally Ron Paul gets brought into this thing! Williams reminds us that Paul once said that he never visualized himself as winning the nomination so why does he think he can win now. Paul says that he doesn’t sit around and dream about being in the White House like everyone else on stage. He points out that, according to polls, when he is put head-to-head with Obama he has a better chance at beating him than anyone else in the GOP. Paul also clues the masses into the fact that Iowa was just a straw poll and the real winner hasn’t yet been decided, as it will be the person who acquires the most delegates. He’s asked if he will run third party because every goddamned moderator has to seemingly ask this question. Once again, Ron Paul says that he has no intentions to do so. He is then asked if he would ever support Newt. Paul gives Gingrich props on his stance with the Federal Reserve and the gold standard but adds that he needs to change his stance on foreign policy. Newt responds by giving Paul some props on economic issues.

They then get into the boring topic of Mitt Romney’s tax returns which just shifts all the attention back to Tweedledum and Tweedledumber – that being Romney and Gingrich, you can choose which is which. Romney says that his income tax info will show how he made profits and rewards. He then goes on to claim that he’ll drop corporate tax rates while reshaping the entire tax code in an effort to simplify it. Gingrich jumps in and channels Mitt’s dad, who released a dozen years worth of tax information. Newt then says something about a Hong Kong tax model. This guy’s always pulling obscure shit from other countries. Romney jumps back in and says he and his father disagreed on many things and unlike his dad, he will only release a few years worth of his personal tax data. Romney then goes on to say that he inherited nothing and made his own mark in the world. He name drops Staples, Sports Authority and Steel Dynamics as ten minutes have passed without mentioning them. Truthfully, I think everything Mitt says is a pre-recorded statement and he just moves his lips to the words.

The mic in this rap battle is then passed back over to Santorum. He takes a shot at Newt and Mitt when he says that they claim to support capitalism but how can they make that claim when they supported the bailouts. Santorum says that we should have allowed these moronic financial institutions go through bankruptcy. What some people might not know though is that Rick Santorum wasn’t in office at the time of the bailouts so he couldn’t vote on TARP; so it is easy for him to say he didn’t support it. When looking a little deeper however, Rick Santorum did support the bailout of the airline industry. So would he have really rejected TARP? Based off of the $15 billion dollar airline bailout and his past voting record with other things, Santorum looks to be a pro-TARP motherfucker. Lucky for him he lost his seat in the Senate and didn’t get stuck with TARP on his record.

Newt is asked about more criticism from Mitt, who apparently claimed Gingrich “peddled influence” with Freddie Mac. Why couldn’t this be addressed the first time in this very same debate when Newt was asked to comment on Mitt’s criticisms? Time wasting bullshit! Newt said he never “peddled influence” and added that Romney’s approach about the Freddie Mac situation is nasty. Gingrich claims that he never lobbied for them and actually says that he brought in experts to teach his staff how to not lobby. Sorry, I just find that laughable. Romney quickly lashes back at Gingrich saying that Freddie Mac doesn’t pay “historians” as much as they paid Newt. Romney also points out that Gingrich was pushing GSEs every chance he got, which is a form of lobbying. Newt said he only made $35,000 per year, which is a lie. Why do people like either of these shady bastards? Aren’t Americans sick of criminals in power?

The Mitt-Newt show goes on for a long time as these two duke it out with no buzzer going off and Brian Williams sitting quiet – wasting our precious fucking time on this bitch fight. Williams, after minutes of this nonsense finally cuts in to stop it but only because NBC has to go to commercial break. Brian Williams has the spine of a squid.

After the commercial break, the issue of the housing crisis comes up. Santorum is the first person asked to address it. He claims that he saw the crisis on the horizon and tried to stop it. Yep asshole but you were about a decade behind Ron Paul on seeing it. Santorum, while explaining his fallacious knowledge on the subject, actually utters the phrase: “Let capitalism work.” Hilarious! This guy doesn’t know what capitalism is! Santorum immediately follows up his pro-capitalism line by saying that the government needs to step in and help the people who have lost their houses. Here we go with the doublespeak! Santorum continues by saying that people need the freedom to get out from under these houses and get relief. Really dude? Just “let capitalism work”?

On the same issue, Paul is asked if the government owes the people anything. Paul says that they owe the people a free market and sound money. He says that the interest rates were kept too low for far too long. Ron Paul says that he introduced legislation to help prevent the housing bubble from bursting years before it actually did. He declares that the bubble and the consequences of these actions were easy to spot but no one in Washington did. Paul says that the government needs to get out of the way. He then closes by saying that the Federal Reserve dumped so much debt on the taxpayers after wiping the slate clean with banks and corporations they bailed out.

Brian Williams, who apparently wants to suck Mitt’s dick, gives us another Mitt-Newt session when he brings them in on the housing issue. Romney says that the government has to help the people they fucked but immediately after that says that the government has to get out of it. Which is it bro? Gingrich says we need to repeal Dodd-Frank as it would improve the economy overnight. He says that the bill led big banks to get bigger. Newt is asked if the financial system is overregulated, which just proves how stupid Brian Williams is. Romney jumps back in to monopolize more time and says that the markets need regulation to work. What? What happened to capitalism? He then adds that we need up-to-date regulation not that old shitty regulation.

Williams, who wants to keep Romney in the spotlight, switches the subject and asks him about opening up Cuba. Mitt actually says that he’d be glad if Fidel Castro died and went to see his maker.. WTF?! Romney says we can’t talk about opening up Cuba but we need to support those in the country who want freedom. Okay, so how are we supporting them by contributing to making their economy shit? Why do you think that it is so easy for Castro to convince his people that America is bad? This is why! Romney wants to help Cubans by punishing them and not “giving in”.

Gingrich adds to Romney’s “glad when Castro’s dead” comment by saying that he won’t meet his maker but that he’ll essentially go to Hell. Newt starts talking about a “Cuban Spring”. He says that we need to reach out to younger Cubans who want freedom. Of course he, like Mitt, wants to do this without working with them in a productive and positive way. These guys must believe in magic.

When the discussion shifts back over to Ron Paul, he says that he has a lot to teach these guys on foreign policy. Ron Paul calls Newt and Mitt’s tactics “isolationist”. Funny watching Ron flip the script when every idiot out there calls him an “isolationist” as the idiots don’t really get what it means. Paul points out that the Cold War is over and the Cuban Missile Crisis was 50 years ago. He adds that we prop up Castro with our sanctions and embargo as it helps him stay in power by gaining support through pointing the finger of blame at the United States. Paul reminds the candidates that we used to talk to the Soviets and currently talk to the Chinese while we’ve had major problems with both. He even adds that we went in and talked to the Vietnamese after the disastrous Vietnam War. He says that we are living in the dark age if we are going to refuse to talk to Cuba.

Santorum, who apparently ignored Paul’s great insight, calls for us to use sanctions against Cuba until the Castro brothers die. He says that for right now we have to keep the current policy active and we shouldn’t embrace Cuba until the dictators are dead. Santorum then goes on a dumb tangent about how Cuba works directly with jihadists. Here we go with the fear mongering!

On Iran, Romney says we need to build a super strong military to scare the fuck out of everyone. Gingirch says that we are a country that likes peace and stability. Apparently he means between all the wars he wants to bring forth. Gingrich adds that he feels that we should defend the freedom of the sea. He then shares his thoughts on Obama, saying that Iran keeps testing us because our president is weak. Ron Paul gets in the Iran talk and says that our blockade of Iran’s strait is an act of war and tells us to imagine if the roles were reversed. Paul points out that Iran needs the Strait of Hormuz as much as we do. He warns us all that we have too many wars and the thought of invading Iran is ridiculous as we don’t have any money.

Santorum is asked how he would attack Iran when they have such a large target list. Santorum doesn’t answer that, he immediately goes right into the fear mongering he is so good at. He says that if Iran gets a nuke, the whole world will change. He then says that Obama’s Iran policy is a failure and feels that no one in power is serious about the Iranian threat. He then claims that Iran’s leadership is the equivalent to having a country ran by Al-Qaeda. He hammers the point that it is reckless to not try and stop Iran from building a nuke. He then flips the script and starts rambling about manufacturing and energy in Florida.

The candidates are then asked why it is okay for them to court voters in Spanish while they are all in favor of English as a national language. Gingrich says that the common bond that unites a country is one language. He says that there will be 300-400 languages used in the U.S. very soon so we need to unify the people with just one. Romney agrees with Newt before rambling about Massachusetts teachers teaching in other languages. Ron Paul steps in and says that we need to have one language at the national level but adds that if states want ballots in Spanish, such as Florida, it is their right to do so. Paul says that you can make English the official federal language without interfering in what the states want to do.

On illegal immigration, Newt says that the children of illegals should be allowed to join the military so they can go off and die for his senseless wars. Romney says he would not sign the DREAM Act in its current form but he would if it included military service. Romney then goes on a weird rant that illegals should “self-deport” themselves, go back to their country of origin and apply for legal citizenship. Santorum, who didn’t think the “self-deportation” comments were obscure, says that people have been self-deporting for awhile now due to our shitty economy. Santorum keeps referring to illegal immigrants as “they” as if they are something other than individuals.

Newt is asked about sugar and goes on to ramble about sugar types. Romney, who gets a bunch of money from Florida sugar farmers, says that we need to kill sugar subsidies. He then goes on a rant about homes in Florida, diverting his attention away from sugar. Romney says that too many homes in Florida are underwater. OMG! Global warming is drowning us! Oh.. wait.. that was a figure of speech.

Ron Paul is asked some dumb question about saving the Everglades and then we go to a commercial break. Why couldn’t they ask that dummy Santorum about the Everglades? He’s a snake, he’d have more invested in the issue. We also get Williams asking abut the Terry Schiavo case, which happened years ago and has nothing to do with anything that is going on right now. Gingrich and Paul address it but it is just a time-waster.

Romney is asked if space is a priority. He says “yes” but adds that Obama doesn’t have a real vision for NASA and because of that, Florida is suffering. Actually dude, I live in Florida and I’m doing okay, so don’t speak for me. Mitt says that the right mission for NASA needs to be determined by the president. Um.. I thought you were a capitalist guy? Romney then adds that NASA shouldn’t be solely funded by the government but that it should be funded by a collaborative effort of the military and companies that have ties and can benefit from the institutions work.

Keeping with Romney, he is asked what he’s done to promote conservatism. Mitt gives the stupidest answer when he says that he has created a family and worked in the private sector. Really, that’s your answer? Gingrich is then brought in and asked to comment on Mitt and replies with, “I don’t want to spend my time commenting on Mitt.” Well what the fuck was he doing the first half of this goddamned debate?! Santorum jumps in and rants and whines about a bunch of shit regarding Gingrich and Romney not being as conservative as he is.

Brian Williams then asks Ron Paul if Gingrich and Romney are insufficiently conservative. Why didn’t Williams ask if Santorum was? Ron Paul says that it all depends on what your definition of conservative is. He points out that conservatives have lost their way completely and asks how can a person be conservative when they’ll cut food stamps but won’t stop wasteful spending overseas. He adds that you can’t have smaller government if you keep creating all these wars. He also adds that you can’t promote personal liberty and then try to legislate all the crap that the GOP wants.

Mittens says that he has a solid conservative record, just look at it. Okay dickbag. He then diverts and brags about how Ted Kennedy had to take a loan out on his house to beat him in the governor’s race back in the 90′s. Yeah, he still beat you dude. He finishes his soulless rambling by saying he will repeal Obamacare and leave health care up to the states.

Gingrich is asked about his numbers being on the rise and what scares him the most about possibly becoming president. He just says that the next president will face enormous problems. No shit cuntpickle! He then warns that there are too many huge special interest groups working against the country and only for their own benefit. Somehow he expects to defeat that. This ends the debate, twenty minutes early and Brian Williams introduces NBC’s crack staff to analyze the debate for the remainder of the time. I turn off the TV.

God this shit was awful.

Grading Scale:
Grade B: Ron Paul
Grade D+: Newt Gingrich
Grade D: Rick Santorum
Grade D-: Mitt Romney

*Taken from Reason. Written by Steve Chapman.

For a while during last Tuesday’s Republican debate, it wasn’t clear if Herman Cain was running for president of the United States or the Fruit Vendors Association. Responding to a criticism of his “9-9-9″ tax plan, Cain said, “This is an example of mixing apples and oranges. The state tax is an apple. We are replacing the current tax code with oranges.”

When more criticisms came, he again took refuge in the produce aisle. Cain was not taking a position on apples, but he was stoutly in favor of oranges, and he was adamant that they should never be placed in the same bag.

What the exchanges revealed is that Cain lacks a flair for metaphor as well as a working grasp of his own platform. He emphatically denied the charge that his 9 percent business levy would function as a value-added tax. But the analysis commissioned by his own campaign, which he urged everyone to read, takes a somewhat different view.

CONTINUED..

*Written by Rob Rimes.

1. Introduction:

This isn’t an attack on Herman Cain. I’m not going to be a complete dickhead to Mr. Cain as I was with Rick Perry in my article “American Psycho: The Ballad of Rick Perry“. However, as Herman Cain is leading in many polls and could legitimately win the Republican nomination if the primaries were held today, I do have to rip apart his platform and expose why this guy is not who we need running this country. Most of the reasons as to why you shouldn’t vote for Herman Cain should be blatantly obvious but yet, many of you still insist that he is the best choice out there. While he would be better than our current president Barack Obama and current Republican frontrunner Mitt Romney, Mr. Cain still isn’t worthy of the American throne and would ultimately perpetuate many of the problems we have right now.

Now I have met Herman Cain and have gotten to talk to him, albeit briefly. At that time I didn’t know much about him but there were rumors of him running for president so I felt that if he was in my neck of the woods, I’d have to go down to the event, shake his hand, get a picture with him and try to pick his brain on some things. As there was a large crowd lined up to kiss ass and praise this unproven potential candidate, I didn’t feel that it was the best time or place to air my grievances with the government in an effort to hear his solutions and ideas. I’d really need more time with him to fully discuss these things and I didn’t want to put him on the spot like that in front of hundreds of people. Knowing what I know about him now, I’d have no problem with it today. In fact, I’d have a camera with me.

Anyway, at the time, I did know that he was a staunch FairTax supporter and that alone had me initially interested in his campaign but then again so was Marco Rubio but he abandoned the issue once he got elected (I wrote about that in “Tea Flavored Kool-Aid, Part II: The Fall of Marco Rubio“). I left the event feeling like Herman was genuinely a good guy that cares for this country and I still believe this. However, I wasn’t aware of his association with the Federal Reserve at the time. If I was, my brief meet and greet with Mr. Cain would’ve been different. In fact, in his eyes, I would’ve just been one of those “ignorant” Paulites asking him “stupid” questions.

2. The Federal Reserve:

Now in regards to the Federal Reserve, Herman Cain has been a defender of their horrible and certifiably insane fiscal policies. Well, he has come out and talked some smack here and there about Ben Bernanke but truth is, if he were to give Bernanke props, he’d get booed off the stage and he knows this. Everyone hates Bernanke on the right. Now don’t get shit twisted, they don’t hate him because of Ron Paul taking him to school and spending a lot of his time trying to educate the masses on the tyranny of the Fed. Nope, people on the right hate Bernanke because Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly hate Bernanke. Many righties don’t understand why they hate him, they just know that they’re supposed to.

However, before Ben Bernanke, there was another just as tyrannical monetary dictator. That man was Alan Greenspan. Greenspan was Herman Cain’s boss when Mr. Cain worked for the Federal Reserve branch in Kansas City back in the 90′s. Recently when Cain was asked which past Fed chairman he would use as a model for a replacement for Bernanke, Cain without hesitation said, “Alan Greenspan”. Really homie? I guess the warning signs and economic lessons of history must’ve just passed this Super CEO by. Maybe Cain doesn’t realize that Bernanke is just the hellspawn of Greenspan. Maybe Cain doesn’t understand inflation. Then again, maybe Greenspan was one hell of a mentor and this Fed insider is going to bring about a Greenspan-style fiscal policy. No thanks bro, you can keep your Greenspan bullshit for your pizza parlor.

For those not educated on the horrendous shit that fucknut Greenspan gave us, here are a few examples. First, Greenspan was directly responsible for the housing bubble due to adjusting interest rates down to historic lows. He also contributed to the recession we’ve been dipping in and out of over the last few years. He recently dodged the bullet of responsibility on this when he blamed the recession on the Cold War. Yes, the fucking Cold War! Didn’t that end like over 20 years ago? Another thing that Greenspan gave us was trade deficits and bad economic policies that contributed to companies leaving the United States. Alan Greenspan was also the king of inflation. But yeah, this is who Herman Cain would use as a model for a new Federal Reserve chairman. This is who he selected without even putting any thought to the question. I guess those guys from the Federal Reserve have some sort of blood oath they all swear to. Suck my dick and I’ll suck yours.

Apart from just the Alan Greenspan issue, Cain has been overprotective about the Federal Reserve and has shown some pretty thin skin whenever the tyrannical and unconstitutional institution is criticized. First of all, I implore all of you to read “The Creature From Jekyll Island” by G. Edward Griffin if you haven’t yet; especially if you are going to vote for Herman Cain. You need to know the history of the Federal Reserve and how and why it was founded. For Cain to have been a part of it should raise some damn eyebrows and for him to defend it should raise those eyebrows even more. What is he trying to hide by continuously downplaying the issue and trying to divert everyone’s eyes elsewhere?

You see, Cain has criticized those who criticize the Fed, especially Ron Paul supporters. He refers to them as “ignorant” and their questioning him about it as “stupid”. He has been pretty vocal about his distaste for us crazy Paulites, as he calls us. He said that we would find nothing if we were to audit the Federal Reserve. Funny, because not too long after he made that statement we were able to get a partial audit. In that partial audit we discovered a lot of tyranny and some pretty questionable acts. For instance, the audit this past July revealed that the Fed gave out over $16 trillion dollars in secret bailouts! That’s pretty fucking profound and that’s just scratching the surface! Yet, Mr. Cain said we wouldn’t find anything. Well Mr. Fed Insider, here is a breakdown of the secret bailouts which can be found on page 131 of the GAO (Government Accountability Office) Audit:

Citigroup: $2.5 trillion ($2,500,000,000,000)
Morgan Stanley: $2.04 trillion ($2,040,000,000,000)
Merrill Lynch: $1.949 trillion ($1,949,000,000,000)
Bank of America: $1.344 trillion ($1,344,000,000,000)
Barclays PLC (United Kingdom): $868 billion ($868,000,000,000)
Bear Sterns: $853 billion ($853,000,000,000)
Goldman Sachs: $814 billion ($814,000,000,000)
Royal Bank of Scotland (UK): $541 billion ($541,000,000,000)
JP Morgan Chase: $391 billion ($391,000,000,000)
Deutsche Bank (Germany): $354 billion ($354,000,000,000)
UBS (Switzerland): $287 billion ($287,000,000,000)
Credit Suisse (Switzerland): $262 billion ($262,000,000,000)
Lehman Brothers: $183 billion ($183,000,000,000)
Bank of Scotland (United Kingdom): $181 billion ($181,000,000,000)
BNP Paribas (France): $175 billion ($175,000,000,000)
and many more including banks in Belgium

Herman Cain says the Federal Reserve has nothing to hide. As my Aunt Rita used to say when one of us kids was lying, “Mmmhmm.” If anything, this just proves that a full audit of the Federal Reserve is absolutely necessary. Abolishment of the Fed would be even better.

Herman Cain also believes the Federal Reserve to be constitutional. On the Rusty Humphries radio show he said:

First of all, it’s not unconstitutional. What happened was, in 1913 the Congress of the United States designated the authority of the Federal Reserve to be created. So how can that be unconstitutional? Congress has to pass the law, Congress has to pass the authority to do things and that is what they did. So it is not unconstitutional number one.

Really dude? So with that logic, we should just accept all laws created by Congress whether tyrannical or not. So really, based off of your own point-of-view, you should shut the fuck up about Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, Don’t Ask Don’t Tell and your confusing stance on abortion among many other issues. Cain is like a character from an Orwell novel.

3. TARP:

All this brings me to my next issue, which is the fact that Herman Cain supported the TARP bailouts. Yeah, that sounds like something a Fed insider would do. In fact he said that he supported it but didn’t know how they were going to implement it. M’kay, so to me, that sounds completely ignorant. He supported it without knowing the whole picture. Then after it turned to shit, which was obvious, even back then, to those who understand free market economics, he says he didn’t like it. So Herman Cain is essentially and unknowingly admitting that he is not only not a free market guy, as he has claimed, but that he doesn’t have the foresight to recognize the disastrous effects of this sort of fiscal policy. But hey! Now he’s got some economic advisors to guide him! If only Herman Cain would’ve absorbed Milton Friedman’s prophetic wisdom in his “Free To Choose” series. Hell, dude could’ve read anything from the heavyweights of the Austrian School and learned that this sort of policy would only lead us down a path of fiscal insanity.

However, I believe Cain knew what he was supporting. In fact, here’s a quote from an article he himself wrote in 2008 when supporting the big bank bailouts:

Earth to taxpayers! Owning stocks in banks is not nationalization of the banking industry. It’s trying to solve a problem…

Wake up people! Owning a part of the major banks in America is not a bad thing. We could make a profit while solving a problem…

The ownership by the taxpayers is going to be relatively small and nowhere near the amount needed to be called nationalization. So what’s the problem?

Now don’t tell Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, but if this works, and I believe it will, the Bush Administration will have gotten this one right.”

*rolls eyes. Here’s some more:

..the free market purists want you to believe that this is the end of Capitalism that we know it.

..the treasury has changed tactics and will buy equity positions called preferred stocks, which gives us taxpayers an ownership stake in their success for a limited period of time.

Preferred stock means that we get paid a dividend before any other stockholders…when they make a profit. You got a problem with that?

The free market purists objection to this is that it smacks at government control of banking industry, which is called nationalization. They are correct.

He recognized that it was nationalization of the banking industry, yet he still supported it. He recently came out in a debate and owned up to it, not that he could hide from it. Looking at it objectively though, being that he is a Republican presidential candidate and knowing that his voter base hated the bailouts, wouldn’t he come out and talk smack about them now? Where I sit, this is a bigger issue than all the Romneycare bullshit that sucks up so much debate time and hatred from the righties.

By the way, while on the subject of Romneycare, Herman Cain supported Mitt Romney for president last round in 2008. So does that make Cain cool with Romneycare? Well, he had to have been down with it at some point, right?

4. The 999 Plan and the FairTax:

Herman Cain got a lot of notoriety and Tea Party love due to his very passionate and very vocal support of the FairTax. He was one of the loudest voices championing in probably the best form of tax reform this country could ever have. In fact, when the debates started, he was front and center pimping out the FairTax every chance he could get. Somewhere along the line that shifted and he no longer mentioned the FairTax. Now he was talking about his 999 Plan, which was another style of tax reform that he claims simplifies every thing. It calls for 9% corporate tax, 9% income tax and 9% national sales tax (which doesn’t exclude state and local sales taxes added on top).

The 9% national sales tax is basically the FairTax (which by itself would be roughly 23%). The big difference here is that the FairTax calls for a repeal of the 16th Amendment, which would kill the income tax because the FairTax would be its replacement. The 999 Plan does not call for a repeal of the 16th Amendment.

Now many Cain supporters that are also FairTax supporters still seem to be on this guy’s dick, which puzzles me. He’s abandoned their pet issue in favor of his own plan. Many of these people consider 999 to be a stepping stone to get to the FairTax, including nationally syndicated radio talk show host, ‘The FairTax Book’ author and Cain’s BFF Neal Boortz. I think this assessment by Cain Brains is complete bullshit for several reasons.

The fact that the 999 Plan doesn’t call for a repeal of the 16th Amendment is completely careless and horrible. Not to be a negative Nancy here but say 999 is implemented and the 16th Amendment is not repealed, we would be stuck with the current tax code on top of this new 999 Plan. So we would have the current income tax, corporate tax and all other taxes on top of a 9% flat tax, a 9% corporate tax and a 9% national sales tax also on top of all local and state taxes. How could this plan even be developed without taking this into consideration? If Cain understands the FairTax, which he has proven that he does, how could he be so careless with his 999 Plan?

The FairTax and Flat Tax movements have always been somewhat at odds as the FairTaxers know that the Flat Tax will just lead us back to this point economically. You see, we already have a flat tax, it was implemented in the Reagan era. However, after decades of congressional meddling, we now have an out of control insane income tax system. You see, the flat tax can be tweaked and modified to the point that its whole existence is damn near pointless. Cain knows this, yet he includes it as one-third of his plan. It has proven to be a failure long-term. People just ignore history or just don’t know that we’ve been down this road already. To include a flat tax and essentially the FairTax (sales or consumption tax) in the same tax reform plan is fucking ridiculous.

Now one issue that everyone criticizing this plan brings up, is that what is to prevent 9-9-9 from becoming 15-15-15 or 23-23-23? The answer is “nothing”. There is nothing in the plan that will prevent congressional meddling and as we all know, as history has always proven, some people are just going to toy with it and we will be stuck up shit’s creek without not just a paddle but no boat as well. The fact of the matter is, trading a giant leviathan for three baby leviathans is never a good deal. The village may be safe from destruction for a little while but eventually the beasts will grow and the damage will be catastrophic!

Now the whole idea of this being a stepping stone is laughable. The reality of the situation is that Cain has abandoned the FairTax issue. I know that none of you FairTaxers out there want to believe it, especially since you’ve sent this guy a check already but that’s the truth. We’ve got ourselves another Marco Rubio here. The passion of the average FairTax supporter is dangerous because earning the love of the movement can bring a candidate to the dance. This is just another case of that. There is no way that 999 is a stepping stone. When has a stepping stone ever worked in Washington? Not only that, but both the 999 Plan and the FairTax are HUGE tax reforms. Does Cain think he will be able to accomplish two huge tax reforms in his presidency? That’s beyond fucking absurd.

First of all, most people already hate this 999 Plan to begin with, so good luck with that. But even if he were to pass it, he’d then have to convince everyone that the FairTax is better. Dude, no one is going to believe you at that point because you gave us a plan that you weren’t confident with and obviously weren’t even sold on. And if he is sold on the 999 Plan, then he’s not going to give us the FairTax. It’s a pretty easy assessment if you ask me. To think it is a stepping stone doesn’t make a lick of sense! Truth be told, if you really are looking for the FairTax candidate, get the fuck off of the Cain Train and get on the Gary Johnson Cruise Ship. He’s the only true FairTax supporter in this race now.

5. Misuse of Campaign Funds:

One fucked up thing Herman Cain has done is misused campaign funds. In fact, he has used funds to enrich himself and his associates. The biggest example of this is that he used over $100,000 of donated money to buy copies of a booklet from a corporation called T.H.E. New Voice, Inc. Problem is, Herman Cain owns T.H.E. New Voice, Inc.! Essentially, he is spending campaign money to buy campaign materials from a company that he owns and profits from. Sorry homies but this is just shady as fuck. When criticized about the issue, Herman Cain said:

If they know Herman Cain, they wouldn’t even make such an assertion. How’s that for political correctness!

What a dick. The more this guy talks, the more it is pretty obvious that he is his own biggest fan. Sorry Herman, we DON’T know you because you jumped on the scene a few months ago and have no political track record other than a failed attempt at a senate run in 2004 and your tenure as Director of the Federal Reserve’s Kansas City branch which is wrapped in secrecy.

Cain has been using every campaign stop to sell and promote his new book “This is Herman Cain!: My Journey to the White House”. What a title! He’s pretty full of himself already thinking he’s a shoe-in for the American throne. But anyway, one has to question if he is in this to truly become president or to make a profit. If it is to be president, then he needs to stop setting up shop to collect a profit from his Cain Brains at his campaign events. He should be focused on putting all that money towards the campaign itself. Then again, he’s just using that to make a profit off of as well. Either way, Super CEO Mr. Cain has this whole money making scheme figured out.

Apart from his fancy literature, Cain has also profited a lot from speaking engagements while he has been on the campaign trail. This year alone, Herman Cain has already banked $250,000 from making personal appearances. Between this and all the other campaign abuse shenanigans, the Daily Mail points out:

Political pundits have compared the situation to that of Sarah Palin, who lost her vice presidential bid but made hefty pay checks afterwards due to speaking fees, book sales, and television rights.

The other, more sinister, comparison is to Jim Wright, the former Democratic speaker of the House of Representatives in the late 1980s who resigned in the wake of an ethics investigation looking into the connection between bulk purchases of his book and gifts from supporting groups.

Granted other candidates throughout history have been guilty of similar self-promotional bullshit but that doesn’t excuse it and there should at least be an investigation into it. Wouldn’t Mr. Cain be all over Barack Obama if the roles were reversed? Hell, any of the candidates on the Republican stage would be pointing the finger.

6. The Police State, the PATRIOT Act & War Powers:

If Herman Cain had his way, he’d be standing on the bridge of a Super Star Destroyer while his Imperial Stormtroopers pillaged Hoth in an effort to thwart those homegrown terrorists. Why would I make such a correlation between Mr. Cain and Darth Vader? Well, let me explain.

Recently, in an interview with The Atlantic,  Darth Cain came out and said that he had no problem with warrantless wiretaps on American citizens if it was being done for counter-terrorism. He also said that he supports the biggest tyranical monstrosity of all-time, the PATRIOT Act. Cain in defense of the PATRIOT Act said:

If 90 percent of a counter-terrorism law is sound we shouldn’t worry about the other ten percent.

Wow! Really? That’s pretty fucked up. Nope, no need to worry about this 10 percent of tyrannical bullshit because this other 90 percent seems okay! When asked about the domestic side of counter-terrorism, he said:

I’m a little troubled by police officers being able to go into a home without a warrant or a court order… But that being said, I would rather error on the side of detection.. ..I also believe that we’ve got to give our intelligence agencies the leeway in order to be able to protect us.

It was Ben Franklin who said:

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

Herman Cain must’ve never read that quote, which doesn’t surprise me considering he has continually misquoted the Declaration of Independence as the Constitution.

Cain also doesn’t necessarily disagree with the tyrannical TSA he just feels that they “lack common sense”. For the record, Cain also said that harsher drug laws were needed. Apparently Cain is not educated on prohibition, Constitutional law, individual rights, property rights or common sense. Sorry folks but Cain has adopted the views of a neocon on these issues.

When asked about what he thought on Obama and the use of war powers in regards to the Libyan situation, Cain said:

My thoughts are less on whether he has the authority to do what he’s doing than why is he doing what he’s doing. Clarity of what he’s doing and why is more important than whether or not he has the authority to do it.

M’kay, that’s just fucking scary! Cain doesn’t care what the law is! All that matters is “what’s the motivation”. These two sentences sum this guy up pretty well across the board. This pro-Constitution Tea Party conservative really could give two shits about the law. We don’t need another king that thinks he’s above the law that just acts on his gut.

7. The Super CEO & Lack of Experience:

People keep touting how great of a business man Herman Cain is and that he is this political outsider that is going to take Washington by storm, clean up the girdlock and make our country as fiscally efficient as America’s 9th largest pizza chain. That all sounds great but Cain Brains are overlooking reality and are just accepting Herman Cain’s business prowess at face value.

To start, you can’t say that the man has no political experience, he does. Whenever Cain says that he is a Washington outsider, he’s full of shit. To be a director of a branch of the Federal Reserve one has to play the political game. That is not a position for drones. Granted he had a boss in Alan Greenspan but he still had to work within the political system and have a pretty solid understanding of it to be able to effectively hold that job. To think that this is a non-political position is asinine. Also, he did run for senate and has had some political experience in that aspect. This is not his first campaign, he is not going into this blindly.

However, lets entertain the idea that Cain is an inexperienced outsider, as he claims that he truly is. Why would any of us want that? One of his famous overused catchphrases when asked about his lack of experience against experienced candidates is:

Well, all the people in Washington D.C. have held public office before. How’s that working out for ya?

Typically the Cain Brains cheer when they hear this catchphrase; I cringe. Does not having experience against those who do, who have been shitty with it, somehow make you a better choice? Besides, not everyone in D.C. with experience is bad. The people that rally behind this are just easily swayed by catchphrases and slogans and can’t separate reality from Cain’s charismatic schtick. It’s like the Bachmann Bunch cheering every time Michele rambles incoherently and then adds, “Let’s make Barack Obama a One! Term! President!”

Herman Cain professing that his lack of experience is why we should vote for him is like a blind guy telling us that he should drive the bus because the last few drivers who could see got us into a few accidents. But then again, Cain’s been working and lobbying in D.C. for decades. His staff just can’t come up with a good one-liner to express the truth effectively.

As for being this great CEO, a lot of information has come out as of late that makes these claims seem somewhat overinflated. Yes he did work for several big companies and helped turn some of them around and on paper that makes him look like a business genius. Regardless of if he was the genius or if he just had good people around him is a moot point, as being the CEO he gets the credit. Well, he also gets the credit for some of the questionable things that have risen to the surface in regards to his potentially shoddy management style.

Recently, the Atlanta Post and Mother Jones Magazine, ran articles that talked about how Cain, as well as his board of directors, were being sued by the employees of Aquila, an energy company in the Midwest. Mother Jones describes Cain’s tenure at Aquila:

..scrubbed from Cain’s official story is his long tenure as a director at a Midwest energy corporation named Aquila that, like the infamous Enron Corporation, recklessly dove into the wild west of energy trading and speculation—and ultimately screwed its employees out of tens of millions of dollars.

In 1992, Cain along with Aquila’s board of directors allegedly steered employees to take money out of their retirement funds and to move it into company stock. Granted they didn’t put a gun to the heads of their employees but this was still the product of these unethical schemers worried about their own personal bottom lines. After doing this, the company left its conservative business model behind and became more aggressive by carelessly engaging in risky energy trading. Money was lost and the employees who dumped their money into company stock were super pissed. Their lawsuit claims that Cain and the Aquila board of directors violated a 37-year-old federal law that states that employers must responsibly manage employees retirement programs. Cain has been asked about this, not by conservative pundits mind you, but he and his campaign refuse to comment on the issue.

You see, between his desire to keep the Federal Reserve shrouded in secrecy on top of his questionable business actions and his verbal distaste of us “free market purists”, Mr. Cain is apparently a practitioner of corporatism not capitalism. Herman Cain is the living embodiment of what the Occupy Wall Street protestors are angry about, at least the smart ones who know why they are down there. This is why Herman Cain is so critical of the OWS protestors. After admitting that he didn’t have “all the facts” but suspected that the protests were orchestrated to distract from Obama policies, he told the protestors that if they aren’t rich, to “blame themselves”. While it can be said that there is some truth to that, you’re not going to gain any votes taking cheap shots at a whole movement.

You could blame Cain’s harsh words on his supposed inexperience but I really just think he has a hard time not putting his foot in his mouth. Cain needs to think before he speaks and that statement alone just alienated a huge segment of the country that he could’ve worked towards getting as supporters. What Cain should’ve done is gone down there like presidential candidate Gary Johnson did. Talk to the people, break some bread and discuss how we can come up with a solution. I mean, homie is a self-proclaimed “problem solver” or is that just another catchphrase?

Despite the conservative media’s claims, there are people down there with real concerns who want answers to real issues plaguing them. You can’t discredit an entire movement based off of an influx of idiots that have showed up to take the spotlight in interviews. Besides, it’s not like the media isn’t looking for idiots to showcase. Essentially, Fox News and other conservative media outlets are hypocrites that are doing exactly what they bitched about when the liberal media was looking for every excuse to discredit the Tea Party. But whatever, two wrongs make ratings.

8. Religious Intolerance:

One issue that irritates me about Herman Cain is that he has no respect for individual rights. Then again he probably thinks he does but his religious intolerance blinds him to reality. One example of this is when he said:

I believe that homosexuality is a sin because I am a Bible believing Christian. I know it’s a sin but I know that some people make that choice. It’s their choice. ..I believe it is a choice.

Wow dude, really? This is that typical Republican Evangelical bullshit that keeps the GOP in the stone-age and allows the Democrats to justifiably gain the support of gays, lesbians and other groups affected by this sort of bigoted intolerance. Herman Cain believes that homosexuality is a choice. Blind faith in such idiocy that has no scientific evidence to support it is well.. never mind, he is a faith driven man who disregards science. That’s not a shot at Christianity, it’s just a shot at this sort of right-wing stupidity.

If Cain believed in individual rights, he wouldn’t care about someone’s sexual orientation. What they do is no one else’s business and they are free to live in this society in any way they want, as long as what they do doesn’t infringe upon the rights of anyone else. Then again, people with Cain’s mindset feel that seeing two dudes holding hands in a park is an attack on them personally. How dare they infringe on his rights by being happy in front of him! On social issues Cain is no different than a guy like Rick Santorum or Pat Buchanan.

Cain also shows his intolerance with his incredible fear of Islam growing in the United States. Yes, we do not need Sharia Law in the U.S. but guys like Cain are so paranoid of it that they would have you believing that we are on the cusp of an Islamic revolution here in the United States. This sort of fear mongering breeds more hatred, more racism and more intolerance. Those truly affected by it are the Muslims that don’t practice the very rare extreme form of their religion. In effect, their religious freedom is hindered and criticized. Somehow the biggest offenders of this intolerance are Christians who disregard the fact that their religion also has an incredibly violent history that forced people to change wherever it staked its cross in the ground.

On the issue of abortion, Cain is all over the fucking place. He says he is “pro-life from conception.” When asked if he thinks that some form of abortion should be legal, he says “government shouldn’t be involved.” Then he says that “people shouldn’t be free to abort because if we don’t protect the sanctity of life from conception we will also start to play God relative to life at the end of life.” Uh huh.. what? Where does Cain stand on the death penalty? Well, he officially has no stance which means that he doesn’t believe his own words about playing God “at the end of life”. Cain says he is “pro-life period!” When asked if a woman is raped should she be allowed to abort the baby, Cain says, “That’s her choice. That is not government’s choice.” So then he is asked if abortion should be legal and Cain snaps back with “No!” WTF?! Anyone else confused?

9. Conclusion:

Now there are other issues with Cain besides all of this but this article is already pretty massive. The point is, after knowing all this, how could you vote for Herman Cain? He’s a pretty shitty candidate at the end of the day and he will only give us more of the same. Sure, he’d probably be better than Obama but that is not a reason to vote for him because frankly, he is not the best choice.

Truth is, if you have read this and still want to vote for him and want to continue to make excuses for all of these points, you are a part of the bigger problem. You shouldn’t vote for a candidate you have to make excuses for. No one is perfect but Cain is further away from perfect than some of the other choices out there. He is NOT going to pass the FairTax and hell, his 999 Plan is dead in the water right now. In fact, it is the sales tax part that has everyone up in arms. He’s considering changing the 9% sales tax to 9% of something else. The sales tax part is the FairTax part! If he omits it for something else or is even considering it, which he is, then he’s not really trying to bring the FairTax to the table. He’s sticking to his 999 Plan because it is a fucking catchphrase, nothing more.

When pressed by EVERYONE on how shitty the plan is, he can’t defend it. He gets visibly irritated and just says to go to his website and re-read it. This guy doesn’t have the confidence or the understanding to defend his magic plan and on top of that, his skin seems to be getting thinner and thinner on the subject. On a side note, the 999 Plan was created by his economic advisor who works for Wells Fargo and looks like a bald Ben Linus from ‘Lost’. Do you really want to trust a bald Ben Linus?

You see, Herman Cain is just charisma and catchphrases with little to no real substance. Voting for Herman Cain would be like voting for the WWE Intercontinental Champion. A few flashy words to fire up a crowd isn’t going to change the world let alone get us out of our current economic peril. Cain is a professional politician, contrary to what he claims, because he knows how to play the people, which is what he is doing. It has gotten to the point that I almost find it offensive. Unfortunately, too many people just can’t see beyond all of the colorful rhetoric. It kind of parallels Obama in a way.

All I’m saying is that you probably need to make a wiser decision. This “inexperienced” guy holding office is a scary thought. If you want more crony capitalism and a guy that admits he isn’t knowledgeable repeatedly and always turns to some secret advisor, then vote for Cain. Frankly, he is not presidential material; he is motivational speaker material. The problem is, too many have been duped by his over the top presence and are taken in with his message. The reality of the situation is that the message just isn’t clear and with Cain’s track record, could easily shift or change. You can’t rely on a guy that relies on his advisors to shape his gut reaction. Not that having advisors is a bad thing, but Cain’s let it be no secret, albeit inadvertently, that they are calling the shots. In the end, I think Cain just sees this as the start of a long-term business plan and that is unfortunate. This time next year he’ll probably be a co-host on ‘The Five’.

*Written by Rob Rimes.

This debate was awesome! No, it wasn’t necessarily the best as far as content and hammering home runs but it was by far the most entertaining. There were fights, poking, prodding and almost a few punches thrown in. In fact, I have never seen Mitt Romney turn so red. It was great and the best part was that the three candidates I like the least looked like the biggest bitches of the night. How so? Well, let me break down the debate and expose the little hoes for their little hoe actions while the adults and misfits in the room just stared on in gleeful excitement of what should have been a few campaign implosions. Of course there aren’t any implosions because the media has to continue to prop up their golden boys.

To start, we are given Anderson Cooper as the moderator of the debate. I like having one moderator and I like Cooper much better than throat-gurgler John King and the man with the coolest name ever Wolf Blitzer. Coop did a good job at keeping the debate moving, probably better than any moderator on any other channel. He also stirred the pot in a good way to get the trio of prima-donnas worked up just enough to make for great television. My hat, if I were currently wearing one, would be tipped for Mr. Cooper.

The debate started off with the generic introductions. Santorum came out and waved to the crowd like a dork dick. He used his kids for an early cheap pop from the crowd and came off as a lame ass. Bachmann was smiling so wide that you couldn’t see her eyes. She was dressed like a cast member of ‘The Love Boat’. Ron Paul referred to himself as the “champion of liberty”, which he is compared to this bunch. Cain said he’s a problem solver and Mitt said he was as well. Mitt’s already jacking for beats. Perry calls himself an “authentic conservative not a conservative of convenience.” Ex-Democrats are funny. Newt then steps up and just lets us know that he’s up in the house in rabid honey badger form!

Hey, there’s no Jon Huntsman! Oh, that’s because he is boycotting Vegas because of some early primary drama or something. It’s pretty goddamned stupid to boycott a pivotal debate when your numbers are so dismal but whatever. In any event, this was Jon Huntsman’s best debate yet! Santorum was also supposed to boycott but apparently he doesn’t stand by what he says. He should have because he failed in this debate and looked like a total fucking bitch. In fact, let me break down Racquetball Rick’s performance at the Las Vegas debate.

Rick Santorum, the poster boy for Penn balls, starts off his portion of the debate jumping in on the 999 bashing. He claims that Cain’s 999 Plan is not good for families. Rick Santorum isn’t good for anyone, plain and fucking simple. Santorum also squeezes in some time to suck the peepees of Romney and Perry when the discussion of job creation comes up. Santorum is a panderer who knows he will lose and is trying to butter up the golden boys in an effort to get a job when his teaching gig at the tennis club is over.

However, just to set himself apart in a wasted no-win effort, Santorum drags the Romneycare skeleton back out of the closet. When Mitt dismisses it and promises to kill Obamacare no matter what, Santorum has a meltdown and acts like the biggest bitch ever; I think his water must’ve broke! In fact, Santorum talks over Mitt and runs down Mitt’s time to respond and when the time runs out, Santorum gladly taunts Mitt by saying, “You’re out of time Mitt!” Wow, what a fanciful tactic employed by such a worthless maroon. This would not be the only time Mitt faced some heat. All this did though was make Santorum look like a bratty child and it hurt his run for the White House.

Santorum, the time thief, then gets into a spat with Rick Perry which is also a waste of time since it is between these two. He goes on some pro-relgio-family rant that no one is paying attention to. Santorum is asked if what religion a candidate is is important. He responds with values, values, morals, morals, family, family, faith, faith, Jesus, amen. When the issue of military spending comes up, Santorum promises not to cut a penny and says that it is the president’s job to protect the people. If that’s true, Obama better step in homie and protect you from yourself because every time you open your mouth it is like witnessing career suicide. And that’s basically it for Santorum.

Where’s Gary Johnson?

The next candidate I should examine is Michele Bachmann. Like Santorum and Huntsman, I can’t believe she is still in this race. I guess performing in Vegas for the GOP crowd with Wayne Newton in your corner is a potential campaign booster but I doubt it will matter here. In fact, it really doesn’t. Bachmann just does her Bachmann schtick and unless she is giving out free concert tickets like she did in Iowa for straw poll votes, she’s pretty much a non-contender at this point.

Somehow, Bachmann was lucky enough to get the first question from Anderson Cooper. She used this opportunity to jump right into bashing Herman Cain’s 999 Plan. She went as far as to say it could become 90-90-90. Yeah, that’s pretty extreme lady, even for the federal government. Scare tactics, even ones that carry some truth, eventually backfire. Bachmann goes on to explain, from her POV, that the 999 Plan is just going to open the door for a VAT tax. She’s not necessarily wrong here. It amazes me though that Bachmann has 5 years more experience in politics than Herman Cain does. He’s so smooth and calculating while she just feeds into my worst media-manufactured fears about her.

At some point during the debate when others are talking, Bachmann keeps calling out “..Anderson, Anderson, Anderson..” like Mr. Cooper is one of her 9,743 foster kids. She goes on some generic “repeal, repeal, repeal” spiel and tells us to visit MicheleBachmann.com. I guess she’s running a special Tea party Beanie Baby sale or something. With her weird cruise director-style frosted white shirt and crazed look, I can’t help but think she looks like a piece of fascist angel food cake.

When it comes time to talk about illegal immigration, Bachmann admits that not only does she want to build a fence, she wants to build a double fence! Whoa! Lady that’s crazy! I thought you were a “fiscal conservative”? Isn’t a double fence essentially two fences? And aren’t two fences twice as expensive as one fence? Maybe the fence store is running a two-for-on special on fences this week. If that’s the case, I guess she can somewhat claim the title of “fiscal conservative” but realistically, even one fence is expensive as hell.

Other Bachmann highlights are that she says she will enforce English as the language of America. Not sure how she’ll enforce it but it sounds like something a neocon would say right before putting a gun to your head. Bachmann says she is concerned about magnets. Apparently, those pesky illegals get stuck to them and we can’t get them off. Bachmann also says that she spends most of her time talking to moms. One has to wonder if they are real moms or her alter-egos. She’s stealing a page from the Palin playbook with her mom comment but at least she didn’t call them grizzly bears or bullfrogs or whatever. Bachmann goes on to sell us on the Iran charade about them wanting to eat our kids and blast us with bombs they don’t have. Bachmann has no real answers to any real questions except the one about Israel. She basically says she’ll throw money at them which gets a cheap pop from the crowd. Closing out the night Bachmann says she is the “most different” candidate from Obama on the stage. Nope, Ron Paul is lady. You’re just shit smeared on burnt toast.

Next up is Captain Boring a.k.a. Rick Perry. This guy is dry, humorless and a horrible wordsmith. Between the long pauses and the staring off into space, Perry’s verbalized thoughts were incredibly hard to follow. He has no substance, just very boring talking points and a haircut.

Rick Perry also jumps on the anti-999 train, as it is the popular thing to do. He goes off on Cain about his plan even though he has no plan of his own. As he says at every debate, his plan is “on the way”. After the 999 exchange, Perry goes on some sort of energy speech/rant that gets some applause. I think they were just clapping because he finished a thought albeit somewhat sluggishly. It was hard to follow what he was saying as it was about as coherent as my drunk Uncle Seymour singing Klingon opera over Soulja Boy beats.

Perry claims that Texas has one of the best medical systems in the world which brings up the discussion about creating magnets for illegal aliens. This discussion almost turns into an all out war between Perry and Romney. Perry claims that Romney knowingly hired illegal aliens to work in his mansion, which sets Romney off. Romney tries to argue back but Perry, like Santorum, talks over Romney trying to sabotage his defense and use up his time. Romney gets angrier and angrier and visibly turns red. The Mormon fire is burning inside! However, the Texas fire is burning too! Both guys take some low blows and some cheap shots and no one really cares about the substance, we just want to see a fight. Man, I wish they would’ve started swinging so it would kill both of their campaigns. Then again, people would probably applaud it and both would skyrocket in the polls. Where I stand, these guys failed miserably, as did Santorum. My three least favorite candidates looked like a trio of whiney emotional tools.

Other Perry highlights include him calling for a virtual defense program over a fence. He also mentions that drones are being trained. I guess he thinks drones are people. Aw.. that’s kinda cute. Perry is a special fella. Perry goes on to punk out Bachmann on her double fence talk however it backfires as all his two-year-old bitching is getting him, at this point, is boos. One good thing Perry does say though, is that we need to seriously look at the issue of foreign aid and that we need to defund the UN. Perry then claims he made Facebook, eBay and Caterpillar or something like that. He did work for Al Gore so I can see where those sort of delusions may have come from.

Looking at Mitt Romney’s performance is tedious. Yes he looks presidential and he even acts presidential considering that the last handful of them were pandering thieving lying douches. In fact, he is also a copycat as he goes right after Cain’s 999 Plan to kick off his side of the debate. Mitt and Herman exchange blows and their argument does nothing to convince me that either is right in their stance.

Apart from the War of the Haircuts between Mittens and Perry, there weren’t many Mitt highlights. He spent most of his time defending himself while being talked over. He also turned a weird shade of red a few times. However a few notable things were that he pimped out states’ rights and he showed that he has more catchphrases than the Rock. He also tried to educate Ron Paul on foreign policy but this was like watching a preschooler telling a surgeon how to do open heart surgery. Mitt did have a great diss though when he equated Perry’s experience as governor to a college football coach that has lost 40 games.

Newt Gingrich was somewhat of a savior for the debate as Anderson Cooper usually went to him after the children in the room were having a spat. Newt in his cool, calm and collective way worked the room like a goddamned mastermind and once again shined and earned the respect of those watching. As I’ve said several times, I do not fully agree with Newt’s policies but goddamn he’s a leader and a fucking statesman. I used to loathe this guy and he has won me over which is damn near impossible to do once you’ve made it on my shit list. Newt has done just that though and I love watching this guy debate. He’d eat up Obama like a Kid Cuisine. If Ron Paul wasn’t in this race, I’d probably vote for Newt. Unfortunately, Gary Johnson, my second choice, gets no respect and he can’t gain momentum without being invited to the debates.

Newt also gets involved in the 999 debate and says that there are a lot more complexities to the plan than Herman Cain is letting on. I agree. Newt gives Cain props for bringing us something real to discuss and look at but he can’t fully support the idea. Newt goes on to call out Romney as a big government stooge with his Romneycare plan. Mitt then rebuttals Newt with a lie about Newt and Newt quickly checks his ass like Wolverine backhanding a stray cat. Newt don’t care! Newt don’t give a shit! “Watch out”, says that bird!

Herman Cain, who surged after the last debate, had a pretty weak performance in my opinion and I believe it is because his lack of political experience is finally showing. As the debate started with everyone attacking his 999 Plan, he really did nothing to defend it. He continually told everyone that they were wrong, regardless of their information. He told everyone to read the plan and to do their own math. Sorry brother but this isn’t going to fly. You can’t keep telling people to read it, you have to educate the people first and get them passionate about it. If you don’t have the ability to defend your plan without just brushing off criticism as being wrong, then no one will care. My biggest fear is that Cain really has no rebuttal because all the critics are right. By how this has been handled by Cain himself, I’m siding with the critics. Besides, everything they’ve said, I’ve thought about myself before this debate. After reading the bill, I can’t find anything in it to correct or even soothe these concerns. All Cain really gives us is talk of “apples and oranges”. He seems to get really flustered by all the haters and his tone changes a bit with each candidate who doubts him. As pimpalicious as Cain can be, he showed signs of having thin skin.

Getting away from the 999 issue, Cain tells us that we need to repeal Obamacare and look at revisiting bill HR 3400 as a way to help solve the issues with health care in this country. I’ll have to read up on that. Cain also mentions that we need to promote our path to citizenship in an effort to help alleviate the illegal alien issue. Cain owns up to flip-flopping on TARP. He’s had many other economic follies however. Cain says the anger of the Occupy Wall Street Movement is misdirected yet he takes a bullet for the Federal Reserve again. Cain is a minion of the Fed, that much is clear at this point. This spawns into an argument with Ron Paul about the tyranny of the Federal Reserve, which I’ll touch on in a bit.

Cain tells us he will not negotiate with terrorists under any circumstances which contradicts something he said in an interview earlier in the day before the debate. Cain closes out the night by pimping his skills at running small companies. I never knew that Coca-Cola, Burger King, Godfather’s Pizza, Pillsbury, Nabisco, Whirlpool and Reader’s Digest were small companies. Surprising, because I see them everywhere.

Ron Paul probably had his best debate yet. He starts by calling the 999 Plan dangerous and that we need to replace the income tax with nothing! Hell yes! He says that he promises to cut $1 trillion dollars in his first year! Oh hell yeah! I bet “fiscal conservative” Bachmann dropped a turd in her ‘Love Boat’ digs when she heard that. When asked about an alternative to Obamacare, Paul says there needs to be no alternative and that individuals should be allowed to opt out of government medicine if they want to. I can dig that. Ron Paul points out that as soon as the government becomes involved in anything, lobbyists line up.

Ron Paul calls for us to examine the real reasons why illegal aliens flock to America and that we have to end these incentives and promote citizenship. He points out that in a free society the group mentality would dissolve, there would be no more “us versus them”. Herman Cain cuts in to tell us that 999 will give Latinos the American dream. Ron Paul talks about securing the border but shows us our own folly when he informs the clueless pack of non-liberty candidates that they are more concerned with the Afghanistan-Pakistan border than the United States-Mexico border.

On the Yucca Mountain issue, Ron Paul calls for states’ rights and says that no state should be forced to be the other 49 states garbage dump. In this case, Nevada would be made the United States’ nuclear waste dump. This is an issue that gets brushed under the rug, as the only people it really effects is the people of Nevada.

The next big Ron Paul moment came at the expense of Herman Cain when he was compelled to educate Fed insider Cain on the reality of the Federal Reserve, which he willingly took another bullet for. In reference to Occupy Wall Street, Paul tells Cain that we need to take the anger to the Federal Reserve and that we need to understand bubbles and their origin. Paul tells Cain to not trust the government and to put his trust in the marketplace. True words from a real man.

Ron Paul then feels the need to once again educate the candidates and the people watching on the difference between military spending and defense spending. He warns that we are spread too thin all over the world and that we are overextending our resources. He says that we’d be safer if we weren’t in so many places. On foreign aid, Ron Paul refers to it as a system that steals from the poor in a rich country (the United States) and gives to the rich in a poor country. He talks about how our foreign aid makes Israel dependent on us and it prevents them from fully standing on their own two feet. Ron Paul’s shocking honesty is met with gasps because the truth hurts like a motherfucker.

In the end, this was a pretty good debate. The lovers quarrels were entertaining and Anderson Cooper ran a smooth show. Cooper also gave a fair amount of time to everyone for the most part. I felt that Ron Paul was on more of an even playing field with the golden boy candidates and everyone really got their say in about most of the topics. CNN certainly stepped their game up and it was kind of refreshing.

Anyway, this was like the 37th debate and I know we have several dozen more so it is going to be a long road for all of these candidates. I will say this though, it is time for Santorum, Huntsman and Bachmann to drop out. You’re wasting our time and without you there the top tier guys could get more time to hash some shit out. I know, I know.. you’re still in the hunt. You can’t back out yet, you’re all just on the cusp of going from 3% to 4%. Besides, who am I, or anyone else for that matter, to ask for any favors. Ah well, guess I’m stuck watching the preliminary card before the real fight.

Grading Scale:
Grade A+: Ron Paul
Grade A-: Newt Gingrich
Grade C-: Herman Cain
Grade D: Mitt Romeny
Grade D-: Rick Perry
Grade F: Rick Santorum
Grade F: Michele Bachmann
Grade I: Jon Huntsman
Grade I: Gary Johnson

*Taken from the Cato Institute.

Presidential candidate Herman Cain has made a splash with his 9-9-9 tax reform plan. I love his 9 percent income tax, but the skunk at the tax reform picnic is his 9 percent retail sales tax. Mr. Cain is an articulate advocate of free enterprise and I wish him well in the contest, but he should ditch the sales tax.

Adding a retail sales tax to the federal government’s powerful tax armada would be a terrible idea from a small-government perspective. Democrats are desperate to find ways to fund soaring entitlement costs, so it’s dangerous to give them conservative political cover to add a new federal funding source.

Cain’s 9 percent business tax is also a problem. It is similar to a value-added tax (VAT) because it would disallow a business deduction for wages, which would make the base much broader than the corporate income tax base. And like a VAT, Cain’s business tax would apparently be imposed on all businesses, not just those currently paying the corporate income tax.

CONTINUED..

*Written by Tho Bishop.

Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 plan has caught the political world on fire, best demonstrated with his prominence in the latest Republican debate. Though few viewers could likely recite any answer Mitt Romney gave, anyone who follows politics has likely heard about Bachmann’s evoking the dreaded mark of the beast, or Huntsman’s latest lame attempt at a memorable debate joke. (Off topic: How pissed is he that Gary Johnson, in one debate, accomplished what Huntsman has failed to do in four months?) In spite of the attacks from his critics, Cain’s 9-9-9 plan has catapulted him to the top of the polls and now even carries the support of noted economist Arthur Laffer. But is it REALLY a good idea?

In the interest of full disclosure, I am a proud supporter of the FairTax movement. If you aren’t familiar with the FairTax, it is a 23% national sales tax that would replace all federal taxes on personal and corporate income (for some of the finer details try Google). Of the 2012 Republican nominees, only Gary Johnson and Herman Cain has voiced support for this proposal with Cain offering the 9-9-9 plan as a transitional step towards implementation of a full FairTax. It was this very issue that initially gave me a favorable opinion of Cain’s candidacy. Unfortunately, while I sympathize with what Cain is trying to do, if the 9-9-9 plan ever became reality it would likely be one of the gravest mistakes in many decades.

On the surface there is a lot to like here. Assuming it would pass as is, 9-9-9 would completely flatten the tax code, eliminating horrific 20,000+ pages of tax code that no one truly understands. Not only would this save incalculable man hours in filling out repetitive tax forms, but millions of dollars in the cost of tax compliance for families alone. Further, with a genuinely flat tax code, lobbying will decrease as tax credits disappear. These are all reasons why I support the FairTax.

There are also a lot of poorly thought-out criticisms of 9-9-9 (and sales tax in general). Relying on the political go-to move of the demagogue, defenders of the status quo describe horror stories of poor people being forced to starve due to the added cost placed on goods with the sales tax. While it is true that a sales tax will increase the retail price of goods and services, this line of reasoning typically only looks at one side of the equation. Since payroll taxes are gone, people have more take home pay. Since corporate taxes are reduced in 9-9-9 (or eliminated completely in the FairTax), the price of producing goods goes down (which is reflected in prices). The ease of tax compliance makes administration costs go down (which is reflected in prices).

But is it regressive? Since Americans typically spend a greater amount of their income the less wealthy they are, some critics complain the tax benefits the wealthy at the expense of the rich. While it is possible that a greater percentage of income will be taxed, the less wealthy also enjoy the greatest benefits of this sort of reform. A flat 9% corporate tax attracts foreign industry more likely to employ new blue collar workers than white collar executives. No pay check withholding means working class Americans are no longer deprived of potential interest on earned wages. Most importantly, with a flat tax rate, the working class will be on the same playing field with more powerful groups who can currently take advantage of tax code loopholes though costly political manipulation. This isn’t tax regression, but tax equality.

If I can dismiss some of the most common criticism of Cain’s plan, why can’t I support it? Unfortunately 9-9-9 is dangerously naïve and tragically short-sighted.

Grover Norquist best highlighted the flaw in Cain’s proposal when he said recently, “Having three taxes, all of which can grow – it’s like having three needles in your arm taking blood out, it’s much more dangerous than having one.” If you are going to open a door for government to collect revenue by way of a sales tax, you have to slam shut others. 9-9-9 leaves the income tax wide open.

Now Cain would probably respond by saying that he would never raise income taxes, and that 9-9-9 is only a stepping stone to a true sales tax. Unfortunately his word isn’t enough. Herman Cain, should he win the Presidency, won’t hold the office forever. As Obama has learned, the ability to accomplish a key campaign promise early in your presidency, doesn’t mean you will be able to follow through on others later. 9-9-9 plays a dangerous game of Trust Washington and I have no interest in playing. Though Cain’s lack of true government experience has served to be a political weapon, it is this same inexperience that may be the source of his apparently legislative naivety. I have a hard time seeing anyone familiar with Washington gridlock making a proposal heavily reliant on legislative restraint and future promise the focal point of his campaign.

Herman Cain should be celebrated for his continuing to highlight the need for serious, bold tax reform and applauded by his continued insistence to bring new proposals to the conversation. But, as Michelle Bachmann would probably delight in reminding the former CEO, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.