A combination of several factors, including a declining dollar and the Federal Reserve’s announcement that it would keep interest rates at virtually zero until late 2014, helped to send gold and silver prices soaring to multi-week highs. Analysts expect the upward trend to continue as paper currencies founder and gloomy news continues to dominate the economic headlines.

The spot price for gold was around $1,725 by 2 p.m. Eastern time after jumping more than $60 since the day before, up almost 30 percent from a year ago and more than 7.5 percent over the last 30 days. It smashed through $1,700 on Wednesday for the first in six weeks.

“At the moment everything points to even higher prices, given the strong risk appetite, the better mood among market players, the strong equity markets and the weak dollar,” Commerzbank analyst Daniel Briesemann told Reuters.

Analysts said the single most important factor behind gold’s strong rally was the Federal Reserve. On Wednesday, the privately owned central bank promised to keep short-term interest rates at rock bottom until late 2014, extending the date from its previous pledge to keep rates down until mid-2013.

Also bullish for gold — and bearish for the U.S. dollar, of course — was Fed boss Ben “helicopter” Bernanke’s veiled threat to unleash more so-called “Quantitative Easing,” known in simpler terms as creating new “money” out of thin air and pumping it into the economy by purchasing bonds. The dollar immediately took a hit against other major currencies.

“The framework makes very clear that we need to be thinking about ways to provide further stimulus if we don’t get improvement in the pace of recovery and a normalization of inflation,” Bernanke said during a quarterly news conference after the Fed’s report was released. Analysts and central bank critics, already concerned about massive monetary “easing” in recent years, lambasted the idea that more money would solve the economic problems plaguing America.

“If the Federal Reserve thought the economy was improving, it wouldn’t need this artificial prop to keep sustaining it,” said Euro Pacific Capital head Peter Schiff, noting that wild money printing was helping to drive the nation and its economy off a cliff. “The President and the Federal Reserve are now conspiring to create a much bigger crisis.”

The Fed claimed it would be targeting a 2-percent rate of annual inflation for 2012. However, few analysts take the government’s “Consumer Price Index” (CPI) measure of inflation seriously — especially as Core CPI, one of the most frequently cited figures, omits price increases in key sectors like food and energy.

According to Schiff, the government’s claim based on CPI that inflation for 2011 was 3 percent is completely bogus. It was actually much higher, he said, noting that officials were using phony measures like the CPI to mask the true rate of inflation. And it is likely to be even higher in 2012 before eventually morphing into a full-blown currency and debt crisis in the coming years.

“The reason they have to keep [interest rates] so low is to artificially support a phony economy,” Schiff explained. “This economy is a disaster waiting to happen — the only thing standing between us and economic Armageddon is zero-percent interest rates.”

But it can’t go on forever, and the longer rates are kept so low, the worse the looming crisis will be. For now, Schiff, whose business trades gold and silver, said investors should protect their assets by purchasing precious metals “before the price goes any higher.”

An analysis by Bloomberg published on Wednesday showed that gold — which has increased every year for more than a decade — provided the best return on investment over the last five years when adjusted for volatility. And heavy-hitting financial firms cited in the report including Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley are forecasting that gold prices will keep rising to around $2,000 in 2012 or 2013.

“People are still very under-invested in gold, and so there is a huge scope of that increasing,” explained UniCredit analyst Jochen Hitzfeld, the most accurate precious-metals forecaster tracked by Bloomberg over the past two years. Other experts noted that gold is widely and accurately perceived as a safe-haven in times of economic turmoil.

While gold prices have been extraordinarily volatile — spot prices hit $1,923 in September before crashing to $1,523 by the end of 2011 — the longer-term rally has so far been relatively consistent over the past decade. Just 10 years ago, gold was worth less than $300 per ounce.

Silver, which has also seen drastic price fluctuations, was less than $5 per ounce 10 years ago. In 2011, it surged to an all-time high of around $50 before dropping back down to about $33.35 today. The U.S. dollar, meanwhile, has not been doing so well — even when measured against other depreciating paper currencies.

Even billionaire investor George Soros, whose well-publicized sale of some 99 percent of his gold holdings during the first quarter of 2011 spooked precious-metals investors, has jumped back into the market. According to Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filings cited by Bloomberg, the hedge-fund manager had increased his stake in SPDR Gold Trust, an exchange-traded fund tracking gold prices, to almost 50,000 shares as of September 30.

Central banks around the world were also buying up multi-ton quantities of gold bullion, according to data cited in news reports. And the trend shows no signs of slowing down.

In other bullish news for the precious metal, unconfirmed reports indicate India has started purchasing oil from Iran using gold rather than U.S. dollars. China could follow, too, according to news reports.

“It shows the exodus from the dollar is gaining speed,” noted precious-metals and currency trader Simit Patel on the investment analysis site Seeking Alpha. “With the major economies of the world facing $7.6 trillion in bond payments due this year, I think the tipping point for a shift out of dollars and into a new monetary system backed by gold is not as far off as it may seem.”

With the steep drop in prices during the last few months of 2011, some analysts and traders were reluctant to get back in the precious-metals market before the appearance of a solid bottom had solidified. But the big banks and respected analysts are forecasting that as long as the fundamentals — out-of-control money printing, sovereign-debt crises, wild government spending, and more — remain the same, gold and silver prices could see massive gains in 2012.

Source: New American.

The Federal Reserve on Wednesday said it will likely not raise interest rates until at least late 2014, much later than it had said previously, as it nurses a still-sluggish economic recovery.

The Fed, after a two-day policy meeting, repeated its view that the economy faces “significant downside risks” but it offered little to suggest it was close to launching another round of bond-buying to prop up growth.

It did say, however, that it would maintain a “highly accommodative” monetary policy stance. Economic conditions “are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels for the federal funds rateat least through late 2014,” the central bank said in a statement.

Many investors had expected the Fed to push its expectations for the first rate hike into 2014, but few had thought it would be late in the year. After every previous policy meeting dating back to August, the Fed had said rates were not likely to rise until mid-2013.

The central bank also appeared more sanguine on the inflation outlook, suggesting prices were now rising at a pace consistent with policymakers’ goals. The statement also dropped a reference saying the Fed was monitoring inflation and inflation expectations.

U.S. government debt prices rose sharply after the announcement, pushing long-term interest rates lower, while the dollar fell against the euro. Stocks prices moved into positive territory.

Aside from the 2014 rate pledge, the Fed’s statement hewed closely to its last policy pronouncement in mid-December.

It described the unemployment rate as still elevated and said it expects inflation to remain at levels consistent with stable prices. In a slight shift, it acknowledged signs that business investment has slowed.

“I think what they are seeing is that the rate of growth is not sufficient to bring down the unemployment rate,” said Brian Dolan, chief strategist at FOREX.com in Bedminster, New Jersey.

Richmond Federal Reserve Bank President Jeffrey Lacker, an inflation hawk who rotated into a voting seat this year, dissented against the decision. He preferred to omit the description of the time period for ultra-low rates.

NEW TRANSPARENCY STEPS

As part of an effort to provide more insight on its thinking to financial markets and the public, the Fed later on Wednesday will begin publishing individual policymakers’ projections for the appropriate path of the benchmark federal funds rate. That release is scheduled for 2 p.m. (1900 GMT)

In response to the deepest recession in generations, the Fed slashed the overnight federal funds rate to near zero in December 2008. It has also more than tripled the size of its balance sheet to around $2.9 trillion through two separate bond purchase programs.

The policy is credited with having prevented an even more devastating downturn, but it has been insufficient to bring unemployment down to levels considered normal during good economic times.

In December, the U.S. jobless rate stood at 8.5 percent, and some 13 million Americans were still actively looking for work but could not find it.

While forecasters expect the U.S. economy grew at a 3 percent annual rate in the last three months of 2011, they look for growth of just around 2 percent this year.

Fed officials appear likely to bide their time in determining whether more monetary stimulus is needed. Many economists expect they will eventually decide on another spurt of Fed bond buying – probably one focused on mortgage debt.

There is a possibility officials will announce an explicit inflation target later on Wednesday, perhaps a hard marker of 2 percent or a range of 2 percent or a bit below. The Fed has been debating a statement on its long-run goals, but whether one will be released is unclear.

Analysts said the Fed’s shift in communications will put an even greater emphasis on a post-meeting news conference by Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke set for 2:15 p.m. (1915 GMT).

“The chairman is likely to remain non-committal to any additional policy easing, but he is likely to reinforce the Fed’s commitment to ‘review the size and composition of its securities holdings’ and be ‘prepared to adjust those holdings as appropriate,’” said Millan Mulraine, senior macro strategist at TD Securities.

Source: Yahoo News.

Stocks Are Cheaper Than They’ve Been in Two Decades … U.S. stocks are trading at their cheapest levels since at least 1990, according to such commonly used valuations as price-to-earnings and price-to-book ratios as well as dividend yield, Bespoke Investment Group says. This realization will lift the S&P 500 Index by 11 percent to 1,400 this year or maybe more, according to the research firm’s 2012 outlook report. “The S&P 500 is currently trading below its historical average P/E and P/B ratios, and these ratios are also at their lowest levels in the careers of a large percentage of money managers,” wrote strategists Paul Hickey and Justin Waters. – Fast Money/CNBC

Dominant Social Theme: Now is a golden buying opportunity!

Free-Market Analysis: OK, stocks are cheaper than they’ve been in 20 years. But cheaper than what?

This is actually a kind of power elite dominant social theme, in our view. We used to believe in the myth of the ever-abundant stock market but not anymore. Nonetheless, equity drummers keep pounding away. Stocks are just like any other widget. Sometimes they’re expensive according to historical indicators and sometimes they’re cheap. When they’re cheap you buy. When they’re expensive you … hold.

In the wonderful world of brokerage, the wisest customers never sell. In about five years from now – if the current system survives, and we doubt it will – there’ll be a virtual flood of articles about the few brave souls who managed to hold onto their equity positions for the past 15 years without flinching.

Now, we’ll be told, they’ll reap the rewards. Their stocks are up! Their patience has been rewarded. What we won’t read is the information about the lost opportunities, the funds tied up in failing stocks for a decade-and-a-half, the lack of capital to participate in gold and silver as both metals rose tremendously in value.

The rhetoric never changes. We remember the euphorias of the late 1990s and mid-2000s. Stocks, we were told, were like heirlooms. If you owned Kodak (oops) you never sold it. Or GM (oops), etc. You were supposed to pass these certificates down from generation to generation, like silverware. Here’s some more from the article:

The S&P 500 is already on track to reach or exceed this forecast, up more than four percent in 2012. Better-than-expected economic data and an emerging bailout solution in Europe are behind the gains.

To start 2012, the benchmark had an earnings multiple of 13, the lowest since 1990 and below the 80-year average of 15, according to Bespoke. It would take a move back to 1,484 to get the benchmark back to this long-term mean P/E.

The price-to-book ratio is 2.05, below the average since the late 1970s of 2.43. To get back to that average P/B, the benchmark would need to increase to 1,491.

So trading multiples are low and so is price-to-book. Sounds exciting but even the most trustworthy and historical numbers can lie. In this case, we’d point out, the analysts are looking at statistics instead of the larger business cycle.

It’s the Austrians who helped invented business cycle analysis, FA Hayek and Ludwig von Mises, and everyone who’s anyone on Wall Street is well aware of it. Central banks print money and generate stock-market bubbles. Then the markets and the bubbles collapse and the cycle starts all over.

But really, that’s not the whole truth because there are cycles within cycles. From at least 1980 to 2008, for almost 30 years, the US Federal Reserve in particular inflated the economy at the first sign of a slowdown.

Alan Greenspan did much of this by raising and lowering short-term interest rates gradually. But the result was a steady inflation of the US (and the world’s) economy. Of course, that can’t go on forever. What such endless amounts of monetary inflation do to an economy is entirely poisonous. They destroy it.

Sooner or later, larger economic forces reject the extra money sloshing around in the economy. Too much has been built, too much created, too much excess capital has been misplaced and mis-allocated. The economy collapses and central bankers rush to inject yet MORE money.

It’s the reason the banking sector (central banks’ distribution arm) is probably the largest or at least most important industry in the world right now. No matter what happens, banks aren’t allowed to fail.

The same cannot be said for the stock market. No matter how the powers-that-be try to prop up the stock market, the larger equity marts reflect the larger economy. When that slumps, so do stocks in aggregate. And it’s a fact that large economic slumps are an inevitable result of central banking monetary “crack.”

Today, and really for the past decade, the world has been in the grip of a fiat-paper bear market. It was most seriously affected during 2008 when the dollar reserve system basically collapsed. The chances are in our view that the fiat-money bear market may last several more years – even as many as four or five more.

Of course, we’re on record as wondering if this market cycle will go that far. We have a feeling that as gold approaches its higher-highs, the powers-that-be will have had enough. The dollar reserve system (which is basically no more, in our view) will be replaced by something else. Some sort of gold standard, we figure.

Of course, we likely won’t be in a favor of it. A potential new monetary standard, whatever it’s supposed to be, will no doubt be suggested and perhaps implemented by the same group that has saddled the world with 100 or more central banks.

This Anglosphere power elite will NEVER let the market have its way. They are determined to impose their will on human events at the expense of whatever human suffering is necessary. We can see them lining up the options already – a state-mandated metals money or perhaps the IMF‘s SDRs, supported by a larger basket of currencies.

Of course, whatever happens over the next few years will be reflected in the stock market. If the world does end up with a new monetary system, we can’t imagine that will be bullish in the short-term for equities. The market is no fan of uncertainty.

And for this reason, we return to our initial question – stocks are cheap, historically, but cheaper than what? Different “investments” are valued differently at different times during the artificial central-banking business cycle that we must function under.

In this case, we would argue, stocks are more likely reflecting potential chaos to come than a buying opportunity. Sure, there may be rallies during this fiat bear market but they should be considered within the context of the larger trends.

What bothers us most about these kinds of analyses is that if you mention the reality of the business cycle to many people on Wall Street, they’ll grant its existence and influence. But then they’ll go right back to banging the drum for equities as if the market can be evaluated solely on its own. (True, if pressed, they’ll suggest a government or corporate bond during a downturn.)

Likewise, regulations have been created without taking business cycle economics into account. Most SECregulations tend to narrow the strategic richness of the opportunities that people have to invest just when they are needed most. What regulations do, therefore, is to create an even more artificial and brittle marketplace where everyone is investing the same way – or trying to leave through the same door.

The regulators and the brokers are really two sides of the same coin. Stubbornly, neither will recognize the REAL business cycle or the culpability of the larger central banking system in its too-often ruinous behavior. With all the emphasis on risk, disclosure and asset diversification, this refusal to recognize the obvious is a little bit like ignoring the elephant in the room.

Of course, more and more investors are “getting it” these days, thanks to all the information available on the Internet. It is the Internet Reformation – as we call it – that is increasingly driving people’s investment behavior, and driving them away from mainstream equities as well.

As understanding about the real factors affecting the market continues to rise, we expect continued skepticism about mainstream stock markets and about the financial industry in general. Soon, we would not be surprised if the buying public begins to understand more about business cycle investing then the investment pros are willing to discuss. That will certainly make their jobs more difficult and lead to increasing confusion all around.

Conclusion: On the bright side, however, the talk about treating stocks like heirlooms may subside once and for all.

Source: The Daily Bell.

*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

*Written by Rob Rimes.

We are practically 30 debates in and we still have like 120 left. There are so many now that I have to date the debates in the article title. I can no longer write early, mid or late before the month. It’s only the 9th of November and this is the second debate just this month. We still have at least three more in November alone. There is actually another one in just three days. It’s maddening and it is getting to the point where chronicling all these GOP shit shows is taking a lot more time than I ever anticipated. At the end of the day, I do actually like writing about them and bringing you, the reader, my extended two cents. It’s just time consuming and intrusive to my life when I work more than full-time and party on top of that every waken moment. But whatevs, I’m out of mini bottles of Seven Tiki at the moment, so I guess it’s time to direct my attention at something much more important.

This debate was pretty good overall, other than the typical lack of time given to Ron Paul. However, Ron Paul, when given time, was on his goddamned A game! He was hotter in this debate than any other. His answers were on point and exacting. I think in the eyes of the standard Fox News watching conservative viewer, he may have gained some points simply for the fact that this debate was strictly economic. This allowed Paul to hit some home runs without being scrutinized every other question like when the talk of the moment is foreign policy. Not that Paul is wrong on foreign policy, he is dead right but conservatives refuse to accept reason, logic or common sense and instead continue down the path of repetitive stupidity and fear-mongering when it comes to handling our “enemies”. Anyway, this is about the debate, not conservative idiosyncrasies.

CNBC hits us weakly with their subpar video introduction which makes note of the fact that the debate is all about economics and that it is in Michigan, in the backyard of the companies that received the auto industry bailouts. Thanks for cluing us in and reminding us that Detroit is in fact in Michigan. CNBC, after the intro, lets us know that there will be no opening and closing statements, as they want to dedicate more time to the debate. Well that’s nice of them! We can’t have Bachmann wasting five minutes on telling us how her 18,371st foster kid Bruce whittled a recorder out of oak with a wolverine’s broken jaw bone. It is probably worth noting that Michigan native Romney got the loudest pop from the crowd during the brief introductions.

The moderators for this debate were pretty decent and straightforward for the most part, although this was overshadowed by the fact that they had Jim Cramer from “Mad Money” on the panel. This guy is a fucking dickwad that claims to be a real capitalist while calling for more regulations and other ridiculous bullshit. Not only that but Cramer is just a loud obnoxious moron that sounds like he is cutting a wrestling promo against his opponent whenever he asks a question. Having Jim Cramer as a debate moderator is like having the Ultimate Warrior read children’s stories after he rubbed angeldust on his gums. He’s a about as colorful, as scary and as unfunny as a clown’s dick. I’d rather have CNN’s John King throat gurgle through the entire debate than listen to Cramer ask even one question.

Another thing worth noting, moderator Steve Liesman looks like Todd Packard from “The Office”.

I’m going to start off with Rick Santorum, just to get him out of the way. Per usual, he was ineffective and barely noticeable in this sea of shitpickles. His inclusion in these debates has gone beyond just being a joke and has gotten to the point that he is wasting everyone’s time, even his own. He needs to graciously bow out and just support whomever he feels he needs to latch onto to stay somewhat relevant. Problem is, Santorum staying relevant is like a stripper staying on the night shift after her 30th birthday.

It’s hard to even pay attention to Santorum, as he just spews his relgiotarded nonsense to the point that even the relgiotards aren’t listening anymore. His poll numbers are dismal and if Gary Johnson isn’t invited to most of these, Santorum shouldn’t be either. The same could be said for Jon Huntsman but I’ll get to him in a sec.

All I learned from Racquetball Rick this round is that he was a coal miner’s daughter. There was talk of Jesus and tennis but none of that really funny whining and crying he is synonymous with. Although when Ron Paul and some others were touting health savings accounts, Santorum said that he has been on that train for years and that he pretty much invented them. When everyone is asked about Obamacare, he is the only one without a real answer, as he just uses his time to boast about all the things he has done for health care. None of these things were really solutions, they were just attempts to build up and reinforce his wobbly house of cards with an empty hand. And that’s it for Santorum. He contributed nothing except his douchenugget dorkdick smile.

Jon Huntsman, another ding dong that needs to bow out was at least a bit more engaging than Santorum. At least a few of his answers and points come to mind when looking back, where Santorum gave us nothing.

The first thing Huntsman said that is worthy of a mention is that banks that are too big to fail will cause economic contagion. He also said that he is the president of the 99% but also the president of the 1% because he was going to unify everyone. People aren’t Voltron lions dude; they don’t just come together in times of need. He also said that spending $68 billion on bank bailouts was wrong. No shit cockwart! Huntsman also says that the government needs to charge extra fees to bailed out banks to alleviate the burden shoved onto the taxpayers.

As for Obamacare, Jon Huntsman says that as president, he would sit down with all the state governors and work out state specific health care options. Huh? WTF? Are you meeting with all of them at once or on a one-on-one basis? Cause this shit could take a while homie and we ain’t got the time! I guess it’s better than spending 90% of your time playing fucking golf though. Huntsman promises to find a solution to the high cost of health care. He needs to elaborate on this but really that’s just a waste as there are far simpler options.

On Mitt Romney’s plan to deal with China, which will be touched on here in a bit, Huntsman says that it isn’t a real solution and that he is just pandering. I’m assuming he means that Mitt is pandering to the crowd because I feel the same way. Mitt claims China is manipulating currency but Huntsman points out the the U.S. is manipulating its own currency with quantitative easing. Huntsman then goes on a rant about oatmeal and swords or something and that’s it.

Michele Bachmann was her typical self and just like a throwback to mainstream media Palin bashing, I have to point out this lady’s poor fashion choice. Basically her jacket was the exact same jacket Dr. No wore in his self-titled film “Dr. No”. Granted that was a James Bond movie, but Dr. No jacked the film title like Bachmann jacked Dr. No’s jacket. In any event, I could’ve sworn I saw Bachmann wiping 007′s blood off of her sleeve when she thought the camera wasn’t on her. Sorry, this makes Bachmann bashing too easy but it is hard to knock the guys fashion sense since they all were dapper suits. Being a woman in politics must suck because of assholes like me. Whatever, just stop dressing like a high-ranking member of SPECTRE and I’ll shut up.

Bachmann once again proves that she is just too fucking nice when the moderators give her a the perfect opportunity to go after Romney. She praises him and then switches to her standard Obama-bashing rhetoric. We’ve heard the catchphrases a few thousand times now lady. All I know is that she compared taxes to Happy Meals or something. Um dude, Happy Meals are happy, taxes are sad. I’m not following you.

When asked another question, she doesn’t really answer it. She just informs us, who are apparently clueless, on how Obama is doing it wrong. Well what is the right way lady? People who are supporting this woman are just supporting senseless substance-less Obama-bashing without any real answers, solutions or fixes. Bachmann calls Obama policy “lunacy”. Yes, she described something as “lunacy” and she wasn’t even looking in the mirror.

Michele Bachmann then warns us that the Chinese live in the Pentagon’s computers. I can understand that since the country is very heavily populated and they might want some peace and quiet from the hustle and bustle of Chinese life. Bachmann also points out that they are building secret tunnels to hide weapons and snacks. She says that the American taxpayers are the ones paying for it as we keep borrowing from China. Wait.. have we been paying them back? Damn! Well I want a ride on the Chinese aircraft carrier then!

Bachmann doesn’t say anything else. Well, she does but I have a hard time with my idiocy filter on. Yes, I am probably too hard on her but she is another candidate like Huntsman and Santorum, as she is just wasting everyone’s time. These debates would be so much better if we trimmed the fat. It’s about time for this to start happening. And unless she has some more concert tickets to give away for straw poll votes, her campaign is doomed at this point.

Another candidate that should definitely hang’m up, especially after this debate, is Texas Governor Rick Perry. This debate was career suicide for Perry and as much as I severely dislike this guy, I almost felt sorry for him. The biggest fuck up in debate history that I can remember came when Rick Perry went to tell us the three government agencies he would eliminate. After he listed the first two, his mind drew a 53 second blank on the third. The extremely awkward moment was capped off by him staring at the moderators completely dumbfounded until he uttered, “Oops”. The fact that he can’t even remember the basis for a huge part of his platform is fucking scary!

See for yourself:

Knocking Rick Perry on this is just too easy and the world has given him enough heat already. He’s still an asshole in my eyes and always will be but damn, I’d be surprised if he could win a fourth term as Texas Governor at this point.

There are some other notable Perry moments from the evening. The first is when Perry sends a message to the big banks when he says, “If you are too big too fail, you are too big.” M’kay? Perry then spends time pimping out his tax plan and other ideas he has, it only took him months to get his shit together and give us something. All previous debates were sprinkled with, “I’m working on it! You’ll see it soon at RickPerry.com! Yeeeeeehaaaaaw!!! (accompanied with gunfire)”.

Perry also goes on about how America needs to get energy going. He tells us that regulations are killing America. He then gives props to Santorum, thus giving the audience a little Rick on Rick love. I bet Santorum gives Perry tennis lessons.

When it comes to the Obamacare questions, Rick Perry says that people need to be given a “menu of options”. He says, “Doctors need to be given incentives on health care rather than sick care.”

He then goes on about how he created a job creation climate in Texas with no regulatory strangulation. He says that his tax plan will help balance the budget in 2020. Yeah bro, that’s like 8 years away. Is this so that you don’t have to answer to critics when your plan fails because just by chance, if you became president, and even won a second term, this would be at the very tail end of your eight year lease in the White House. 2020 is not today, we need a fix now!

Perry goes on a tangent about how universities need to be forced to be more efficient. Okay sir, did you get that idea from Hugo Chavez? Perry then closes out his portion of the debate by bitching about the corruption caused by corporate lobbyists. As he says this, he pauses to check his Wells Fargo app on his iPhone to make sure that check from Merck cleared.

The time thief Mitt Romney was successful at monopolizing every moment he could once again. I don’t blame Mr. Mittens however, as CNBC, just like Fox News, CNN and MSNBC, spent more time asking Romney questions than anyone else. I think Mitt alone gets about 30-40% of the time in these debates. That’s the mainstream media for ya though, proppin’ up their fancy handpicked golden boys.

Romney is first asked if the United States should bailout the European Union. The fact that the moderators even ask this question is proof at how many dumbasses work under the NBC banner. Romney says that the EU can take care of their own problems and that we don’t need to bail them out. Romney goes on to say that Europe needs to take care of their own problems and the United States shouldn’t be bailing out our own banks let alone Europe’s. I can’t disagree with that. When pressed however, Romney admits that he supports the World Bank and the IMF. Yep, I knew he couldn’t give a good statement without finding a way to fuck it up. After this, Mitt claims that he saved the Olympics. From what dude? Did the Skrulls attack or something?

Mitt’s had some other noteworthy quips and I’m not referring to the little swirl at the top of Dairy Queen products. Mitt said that we need profitable businesses that can hire people and the current administration is failing at this. He also says that we need to simplify the tax code but we need to lower taxes first. When asked about Obamacare, he says that health care should be a state issue. He also agrees with Ron Paul’s point that we need to push health savings accounts. Mitt also said that people need the broadest array of health care options.

In the second hour, Romney goes on to explain that Obama is only focused on his re-election. Apparently Romney needs to re-focus on his hair because it’s starting to melt under those hot lights. Maybe his hair is wax! He’s really just some weird bald guy under there!

Disregarding his wax sculpture, Mitt tells us that he promises to not raise taxes and that he will cut spending dramatically. Funny, because Reason Magazine analyzed Mitt’s fix-it plan and discovered that his “cuts” would actually expand the federal budget (read this).

Mr. Romney then tells us a spooky tale about the Chinese boogeyman. He states that he believes in free trade but not with China because they are evil. Actually he calls them “predatory” about a dozen times over the course of two minutes. Mitt says that China is hacking our computers and manipulating our currency. This causes Huntsman to butt in with the QE comment I referenced earlier. All I hear is “I love free trade but..” and “I love free trade but..” Mitt is a doublethinker and doublespeaker. Mitt’s solution in dealing with China is to assault them with tariffs. Yep, great idea ass bastard.

In the shadow of his sexual harassment circus, Herman Cain tried to ignore the media assault in an effort to see if he could fit the slogan “Nine.. nine.. nine” in the debate 999 times. I think he succeeded. In all seriousness, I’m fucking tired of this goddamned slogan and the people en masse are vehemently opposed to this plan. Then again, there are still a shit ton of Cain Brains supporting this inexperienced hack, who quotes Pokemon, can’t answer tough questions and often admits he spoke without thinking. With all of his weaknesses and with it being incredibly apparent that his inexperience is a major hinderance, this guy is still polling insanely well. Well, lets look at Herman Cain Superstar and his performance this debate.

All things considered, with all the shit he has been put through the last few weeks, Mr. Cain did pretty well overall. That is, if you’re into his flavor of Tea. For starters, he gets the first question and being the show starter he tells us that “We must assure our currency is sound.” That’s laugh-out-loud funny coming from a Federal Reserve insider that spends a lot of his time defending and pimping the most tyrannical institution in our country’s history.

Even though the moderators said the debate was to be focused on economics, the NBC-paid moderators are quick to question Cain’s character over the sexual harassment allegations. Cain brushes off the bullshit attempt to catch him in a “gotcha” question. The crowd erupts when Cain essentially says “I did not sleep with that young intern (or the other women either)!” They asked Cain if voters care about character. Cain responded by saying that voters don’t care about character assassination.

The next time Cain is questioned, he malfunctions (or does he) and starts chanting “Nine.. nine.. nine.. nine.. nine.. nine.. nine..” over and over. He says that his solution is the only solution to the tax problem. Sure, if you believe hype and pro-Federal Reserve rhetoric. When challenged, once again, at how his plan could possibly stay at the rates of 9-9-9 with government being government, Mr. Cain said that it is transparent and that Americans will make politicians keep the rates at 9. ROFLMFAO! Yeah, just like Americans have been able to get those Tea Party Republicans to balance the budget and solve our economic woes as they promised before the 2010 midterm elections. C’mon people, unless we’re going to start cloning Ron Paul, Rand Paul and Justin Amash, all we’re ever going to get is full of shit candidates like everyone else. Maybe Cain just assumes that Republicans and Democrats are never going to hold office again. But wait.. he’s a Republican, so never mind.

Cain spends almost every other question finding a way to insert “nine.. nine.. nine..” in his answers. When he doesn’t say “nine.. nine.. nine..” he says “I have a bold solution” and then winks nine times.

When not shoving the number nine down our throats like the Count on Sesame Street, he does give us some substance. For instance, after referring to Nancy Pelosi as “Princess Nancy”, Cain tells us that the solution to Obamacare is to pass H.R. 3000. Wait, didn’t Cain say he wouldn’t sign any bill longer than three pages? Well H.R. 3000 is 270 pages. Maybe he meant he’ll sign every three pages. If that’s the case, he’ll have to sign H.R. 3000 into law 90 times! Seems like a waste of BIC SoftFeel Retractable Ballpoint Pens. I need to read up on H.R. 3000 but it seems like crap to me.

Towards the end of the debate, Cain actually talks in rhyme a few times. C’mon dude, really? We need a fucking president man! Are you running for the highest office in the land or are you auditioning for the role of Roadblock in the next “G.I. Joe” movie? FYI bro, the role was given to The Rock.

One thing is for certain, Cain is on to something. Every single time I heard the number nine, I felt a pain in my stomach and the need to drop a shit. I have a feeling that the 999 Plan is the long lost key to discovering the legendary brown note.

Now I’ve got to talk about Cain’s sweetheart, Newt Gingrich. Rumor has it that they were holding hands, when the camera wasn’t on them. Newt’s doesn’t care though, Newt doesn’t give a shit. Honey Badger comes out with a bang and with the first question asked him, his answer receives the loudest pop of the night. Not even because it was a great answer, it was just typical Newt. It was how he said it that got the reaction. Newt, who was considered “dead on arrival” by all the expert pundits when he entered the race, is now the hottest muthafucka in the streets since that time Nas dropped his Jay-Z diss track “Ether” back in 2001. Newt’s proving that he’s Stillmatic.

Out the gate, Newt calls the results of Ben Bernanke’s policies “wreckage”. Newt’s right but I love how all these conservatives are loudly applauding Newt’s criticism of the Federal Reserve when he’s just recycling the same talking points Ron Paul has been using for decades. Yet, conservatives still can’t see that Ron Paul IS the solution. Nope, but they’ll continue to jack his policy points and call him crazy.

Some Newt highlights are when he challenges the Occupy Movement by asking if Bill Gates and Henry Ford were a part of the 1% or the 99% when they started out. Point being, the 99% can make something of themselves if they try. The moderators try to “gotcha” Newt a few times but these people are just like the buzzing of flies to him. He treats “gotchas” like steak and devours the fuck out of them! Newt bashes Dodd-Frank and says that if you want the housing to come back, that the economy must come back first.

When his turn comes up on the Obamacare issue, Newt says that it is a state issue and that we need to focus on brain science. He also uses the moment to challenge Obama to a 3 hour Lincoln-Douglas style debate on health care. While that would be great, Obama would never accept the offer because he knows he’d get destroyed like Apollo Creed in “Rocky IV”.

Other Newt Points include him pimping out the Chilean model for social security and letting the world know that college is not a right therefore tuition isn’t free. In the end, Newt just kills it. Like I’ve said again and again, I don’t agree with several of his points but he has the skill and the fire to run the show, more so than anyone else on that stage. However Dr. Paul is still the best all around, which brings me to him.

Ron Paul had his best debate yet; he keeps getting better and better. I hope he keeps gaining steam through January. Truthfully, it was pretty fortunate for him that this debate was strictly economic. It allowed him to hit his economic points without having to defend himself from confused conservatives that don’t “get” his crazy stance on foreign policy.

Ron Paul says that our debt is unsustainable and that we need to liquify it. He says that our current actions are just prolonging our agony and that drastic changes must be made quickly. He calls spending a disease and points out that spending in and of itself is a tax. He promises to work towards eliminating the income tax altogether by cutting a trillion dollars from the budget each year and curing our fiscal idiocy. Paul also promises that he will try to combat price fixing. He says that the market should determine interest rates. He basically gets a “fuck the Fed” in there without actually saying it.

With Obamacare, Ron Paul says that we have to get the government out of medicine. He is the first to bring up medical savings accounts, which gets support from Mitt Romney.

On education, one of the moderators points out that students loan debt is near a trillion dollars and that Americans owe more in tuition debt than credit card debt. She also points out that college seniors have more than $25,000 in debt on average. A video is then played about how tuition rates have increased by 428% since 1990. The moderator then refreshes us on the fact that Ron Paul has said that he wants to get rid of the Department of Education. She then asks, without the DOE, how would he make college more affordable. Ron Paul points out to the idiot moderator that her argument proved that the Department of Education is obviously ineffective and a total failure. Dr. Paul then points out to the moderator that was so sure of her stupid argument, that the quality of education has gone down, the cost has gone up because of inflation and students are essentially getting ripped off and the burden is falling on the taxpayer. Ron Paul then makes sure that everyone knows, which they already should, that the Constitution does not give the federal government the authority to be involved in education.

Ron Paul is asked if he thinks that Rick Perry is a crony capitalist. Ron Paul refuses to answer the question and says that people in this country need to understand the difference between capitalism and crony capitalism as many don’t. With that, the debate is over with about ten minutes to spare on the clock.

Luckily for us there were no fights like the last big debate. I mean, that shit was entertaining but in the end, it just took away from the meat and potatoes and made the candidates involved in the bitch and whine fests look like bitches and whiners. This debate just flowed so nice and CNBC did a decent job. Well that is except for including that over-caffeinated freak Jim Cramer. I thought homeboy’s heart was going to explode a few times.

In the end, nothing really changed, everyone looks like they always do. Paul and Newt were on fire, everyone else was typical. Like I said, a couple of these people need to realize that it is time to step the fuck off.

I missed Gary Johnson, as always, but he was tweeting during the debates and in one of his tweets he texted, “I will be proposing a 43 percent reduction in federal spending. 1.5 trillion dollar reduction in federal spending.” God I hope so! He just upped the ante on Ron Paul by half a trillion! If they are going to waste our time with Santorum, Huntsman and Bachmann then Gary Johnson should at least get some time. Ah well, fuck these debate organizers.

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

*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’.

*Taken from Yahoo Finance.

Lower interest rates don’t automatically mean cheaper mortgages.

On Wednesday, the Federal Reserve will conclude its latest policy meeting and may announce further measures aimed at lowering long-term borrowing costs. One option is called “Operation Twist:” the Fed would sell some of its short-term holdings and buy longer-term U.S. debt to push yields—which are already at historic lows—even lower.

Why? One clear aim of Fed policy, as Chairman Ben Bernanke wrote in an op-ed last year, is to bring about “lower mortgage rates [that] will make housing more affordable and allow more homeowners to refinance.”

The trouble is, the relationship between Treasury yields and mortgage rates isn’t perfect. And in recent weeks, the difference, or spread, between the 10-year Treasury yield and Freddie Mac’s average 30-year fixed-rate mortgage has widened considerably.

As of last week, the difference between these two was more than two percentage-points. That compares with a low of about 1.3 percentage-points as recently as April.

CONTINUED..

*Taken from Yahoo Finance.

Chairman Ben Bernanke is proposing no new steps by the Federal Reserve to boost the economy while hinting that Congress may need to act to stimulate hiring and growth.

Bernanke said Friday that while record-low interest rates will promote growth over time, the weak economy requires further help in the short run. He is speaking at an annual economic conference in Jackson Hole, Wyo.

His speech follows news that the economy grew at an annual rate of just 1 percent this spring and 0.7 percent for the first six months of the year. Only slightly healthier expansion is foreseen for the second half.

Bernanke said he’s optimistic that the job market and the economy will return to full health in the long run.

Stocks fell lower after the speech was released. The Dow had been down about 78 points, about 0.7 percent, shortly before 10 a.m. The loss quickly extended to 180 points.

CONTINUED..