In high school, I barely paid attention to song lyrics, let alone politics. In college, I was still trying to figure out what I wanted to “be.” In the US Navy, I got to travel Europe and the Middle East while getting a very good view of how the rest of the world views Americans. After my service, I got into customer support and media creation, but it wasn’t until I met someone else who did pay attention to the political landscape that I actually started to listen.
As a veteran serviceman, it was a no-brainer that our current president had the wrong idea from the word “change.” The world cherishes American exceptionalism and invention, and they all jealously aspire to it (wouldn’t you?) Communism and socialism are interesting ideas that fail as soon as one person wants more than the next person and has the means to take it (sorry, pacifists), and it’s human nature to securely want more than enough. Sometimes it’s greed, but it’s also easy to identify that it comes from a time when you didn’t have what you needed whether it was for you or those you car about.
Now a new presidential campaign has started, and many old men and established politicians are saying the same old things with one exception: Herman Cain. I had heard him before when he sat in for Neal Boortz (who always has an interesting take on things), and I admired what Mr. Cain has been able to do with his life and his success. At the prodding of fans and friends, Mr. Cain explored the possibility of running for the US Presidency and decided to run. The message is a threat to all politicians everywhere: a non-politician who wants the government to run with the same accountability that every business and individual is responsible for. He came prepared with actual plans that backed his statements, not vague buzz words that sound wonderful when cheered by a mob.
I also recall that his biggest fear was what would happen when the attacks began, and he was most concerned for his family. With no other place to stick a dagger, opponents at last dug up the report of an affair, targeting his family life as a character assassination attempt. Thus far, it has worked, mostly because it seems to be affecting the candidate himself. While I have no idea if these allegations are true or not, consider the following: why would anyone who kept an affair secret risk their family life by putting themselves on the stage of public opinion? It doesn’t make much sense but it does make for great tabloid, and that reeks of manufacturer.
True or not, I hate the idea of voting for the “less evil” candidate, and someone like Herman Cain sounded like someone I’d be happy to vote for instead of crossing my fingers that things wouldn’t stay on course to hit a brick wall. However, my thinking is this: after weeks of steadily losing ground, talk of Herman Cain’s withdrawal is effectively getting his name back out there. If he stays in the race, it’s with the commitment of a man that deserves my support. If he withdraws, he was never really prepared to go as far as he needed to begin with.
Your move, Mr. Cain.
One thought on “Why I Love the Idea of Herman Cain”
… and just like that, it ends, or as one of my friends put it, “The Cain train is off the tracks.” So the question again becomes, is there any candidate who seems less foolhardy, radical, or clueless than the person currently occupying the big chair? Why vote for the lesser evil? Cthulhu for 2012!
Comments are closed.