GOP Establishment, By All Means Continue To Trash Cain

It's pretty clear who the GOP establishment wants for the nomination. They want Romney.

They may not have wanted him at first, but they certainly wanted what they consider an "electable" candidate, and they began hunting for one the minute the race began.

Early in the race, it was Pawlenty vs. Bachmann, with establishment critics on either side prepared to call one or the other "the one to beat", depending on who emerged on top. When Pawlenty dropped out, the spotlight began to shine solely on Bachmann. You'd never have realized others had begun running.

When Bachmann showed that she was unable to handle herself with grace and aplomb during debates, the new "golden boy" upon whom the race centered became Rick Perry. Then Perry, who was always seen as soft on illegal immigration, made that completely uncalled for "you don't have a heart" comment, regarding those who opposed his support of the DREAM act, and that pretty much killed him.

Yes, liberals, it was his embrace of the DREAM act and his left-esque defense of it that sank his campaign, not that stupid rock. So you can shut up about the rock now.

So without Pawlenty, Bachmann or Perry, the only establishment choice left that has any momentum is Mitt Romney. Now, it's clear Americans don't want Mitt Romney. They just don't. And it's not hard to see why; he's not a conservative. He doesn't stand for what we believe in, and up until this race he's pretty much been a liberal in conservative clothing. No, we don't care about his religion. We don't see anything necessarily creepy about Romney's approach to his Mormonism. But we definitely don't want a man who created the diagram upon which Obamacare is based, who seems to support the idea of anthropogenic global warming (and would continue the attempt to force America to "go green"), who is pro-TARP and would be open to more bail-outs and who seems to be just as much an empty suit as Obama.

But the establishment wants him because he's "electable", whatever that means. So, in the absence of other "electable" candidates, Romney is their man. You hear RNC member after RNC member (the latest is Karl Rove) showing their support of Romney by trashing the only man who's beating him: Herman Cain.

Cain has polled ahead of Romney now in three major polls, and also won the Florida Straw Poll, which is also known as Presidency 5, in which Romney was a distant third. That's incredibly impressive for a man who's never held elected office. Hell, it's impressive for anybody. But all you hear from GOP leaders is Romney, Romney, Romney, and why Cain isn't our man.

Their complaints against him are ridiculous. "He's never held public office." So...holding an elected office is a guarantee you'll do a great job? Then explain Obama.

"He has no foreign policy knowledge." This is based on his flubbing of the question about the "right of return". Here's a question: if anyone had asked Obama about that before they'd asked Cain, do you think he would have been able to give an intelligable answer? Also, I think Cain can be counted on not to commit multiple offenses and breaches of protocol with visiting British dignitaries and the freaking Queen, will not bow to foreign dictators, refer to languages that don't exist, etc. If we can allow Obama to be president with his joke of a foreign policy, I think we'll be okay with Cain, who will at least listen to the experts, as he has said on numerous occasions.

"There are issues with his 999 plan." Any time I hear someone attempt to discredit the 999 plan, their reasoning seems very vague. The plan is there at his website and it makes sense. It's written in plain English a layman can understand. Why are people acting like it's a big mystery? And why, since the plan is laid out in point form on the site, do the criticisms sound almost intentionally vague? Also, why is no one suggesting another, better plan?

"He's flubbed some debate responses/interviewer questions." So far, Cain has not uttered a campaign-derailing comment like "You don't have a heart" or "If you turn the 999 plan upside down, the devil's in the details." His "flubs" are no worse than anything Clinton or Bush, Jr. said on the campaign trail. You know, those two-term presidents?

I suppose it isn't all that surprising that the "movers and shakers" within the GOP want another RINO to be nominated. Most of them are RINO's themselves, and have utterly failed to grasp the fact that a majority of Americans want to see a genuine conservative in power this time, and not just another power-seeker we're all told we should vote for. They continue to believe that the only way to win elections is to be "moderate", which means "Liberal lite". To them, we can only run people who seem to appeal to liberals, not understanding that as long as an "R" comes after a politician's name, a liberal is never going to vote for them.

Because they can't really defend Romney, they instead trash Cain. At first I was upset by this, but now I think I'd rather they kept at it. After all, they praised Pawlenty, Bachmann and Perry. Now every time another establishment GOP'er comes out in support of Romney (or trashes Cain), Cain's poll numbers go up. If they started praising him now I'd be worried.

Some say that Cain has peaked too soon, but in all honesty, this is not like the peaks we saw for Bachmann and Perry. They had the support of the GOP establishment. Cain, like so much else he's done in his life, has succeeded in his consistent lead in the polls entirely on his own. America has finally come to know Herman Cain, and they like what they know. And the more attempts there are to take him down, on both sides, the more his numbers continue to rise.

So, establishment hacks? Keep it up. Talk up Cain's lack of experience, this idea that 999 is unclear or hurtful, and keep building up Romney. You'll badmouth Cain right into the White House.