Cain: I didn’t realize in 2005 that the housing bubble existed

posted at 12:45 pm on October 12, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

As Jazz Shaw predicted, the national media has suddenly begun doing a lot of homework on Herman Cain now that he’s riding high in the polls, and the first one to take a crack at the new Not-Romney is NBC’s Chuck Todd.  Todd challenges Cain on a 2005 column he wrote that dismissed concerns of a “bad economy” and a housing bubble, the latter of which at least turned out to be all too true.  Cain admits that he didn’t see it coming, which prompts the obvious follow-up question from Todd about just how good his economic instincts actually are.  This starts about four and a half minutes in, if you want to cut to the chase:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

TODD: All right, you predicted that if — now that you’re in the top tier, you were going to get more questions. I promise you this is not a “pop quiz” about foreign leaders.  I actually want to go into some things that you’ve written.  This is something you wrote in 2005, saying, arguing that there was no housing bubble.  You wrote this in 2005, in Business and Media Institute, you said, “Coverage of the Bush economy reads like a collection of Democratic Party press releases, calling a strong economy everything from struggling to volatile or dicey.  That kind of ignorance makes homeowners fear that their most expensive possession could turn worthless overnight.  That won’t happen.” August 2005.

The housing situation — that did happen, and it only happened within three years.  What did you miss in 2005 about the housing bubble?

CAIN: What I missed in 2005 was just how bad Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had distorted the housing market.  That’s why I said what I said in ’5.  I further learned later, in terms of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — I honestly did not realize just how bad it was, just how bad it was, just how bad the whole bundling and derivatives thing was, and that we were on the brink of a total financial meltdown.  So I learned later on by looking into it deeper that the situation was a lot worse than I thought in 2005.

TODD: Well, in 2008, this is September 1st, 2008, another column you wrote about the economy, and it reads as follows.  You wrote, “The supposed failure of Bush’s economic policies has been a constant theme of the Democrats since the 2006 elections.  When the Democrats regained control of the House and Senate by convincing enough of the voters that the economic sky was falling, and that the war in Iraq could not be won.  Based on all of their convention speeches, they plan to continue those themes right through Election Day on November 4.”

Economic sky was [not] falling, you said September 2008.  Fifteen days later, of course, the Lehman Brothers collapse — we know what happened after that: a total near sky-is-falling moment.  So how — I guess I would say this.  How do you reassure voters that, despite all the experience you’re running on in the business community, your time on the Fed, you missed the housing bubble and you missed the economic collapse.

CAIN: Well, it’s real simple, Chuck.  I have economic advisers working with me now who spend time studying these various analyses.  When I wrote those papers, I was only responding to reports that I, like everybody else, was getting through the media, those kind of public reports.  I wouldn’t –

TODD: Which turned out to be right, by the way.  You were criticizing those reports, but they turned out to be right.

CAIN: Well, yeah.  But what I am saying is I’m going to have, I will have people around me who are going to help me do deeper analyses on some of these things, okay? So yeah, I missed some of these things.  I’m not perfect.  I’m very quick to say I’ve made a mistake or I missed it, but I didn’t have sophisticated analyses helping me to draw the conclusions I was drawing at that time.  And remember, I have admitted that the housing bubble and the economic meltdown of 2008 — it was much worse than I ever realized until the Lehman Brothers situation started, and until more and more was revealed about the depth of the problems at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  I admit I didn’t know all of the details of those situations.

That’s not exactly a confidence builder.  If Cain didn’t have access to “sophisticated analyses,” then why was he drawing conclusions at all?  And how sophisticated an analysis would it have taken to see housing prices had become serious decoupled from inflation starting in 1999?  By 2005, the Bush administration had already warned Congress twice about the housing market, specifically about exposure at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, to no avail. It’s not as though the overheating in the housing market was a secret in August 2005.

Given the paper trail, this is as good of an answer that Cain could have produced, but it’s going to stick to him like his Greenspan comment last night.  The saving grace of this issue in the Republican primary is that his main competition didn’t exactly set off warning flares in 2005 or 2008, either — but this will definitely be a big talking point in the general election if Cain is on the ticket.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

We’re talking about a man who sat on the Federal Reserve Board (not at the time of the bubble) and didn’t have an idea that we were in a housing bubble in 2005? Sorry, that is woefully inadequate.

MJBrutus on October 12, 2011 at 1:01 PM

Alrighty then. Enough with Cain, throw him to the wolves. Who’s left?

darwin on October 12, 2011 at 1:04 PM

No kidding. People are letting the media pick their candidate with idiotic sound bites and dumb questions. So much for the “we won’t let them pick our candidate again” mantra.

Choose someone because you agree with their points and think they would do the best job, not because they said something off. ALL of them will eventually do that.

At least Aslan’s girl is consistent. At least the Palinistas were consistent. Everyone else is looking for the next shiny new thing. Good luck with that. *shakes head*

kim roy on October 12, 2011 at 1:32 PM

What’s wrong with Romney. He was excellent last night and seemed like the guy you’d want to fix the economy. Herman Cain got much farther than he expected, like Huck did in 08. He’s just not a great candidate and is prone to saying bad/crazy things. He’d be murdered in a general. Since there’s no other cons coming in and Perry is mortally wounded, what else do we have other than Romney.

IR-MN on October 12, 2011 at 1:29 PM

Romney is not conservative. He switches his allegiances to whatever suits his purpose. Granted, he is an extremely slick liar. But that doesn’t change the fact that he can’t be trusted to govern as a conservative when he has never governed as a conservative.

Bill C on October 12, 2011 at 1:32 PM

The Bush Administration — the ones with the most to lose in a bursting asset bubble? — had twice specifically warned Congress that FNMA and FHLMC had serious exposure to a significant housing price collapse; which made this news so commonly accepted that even before the collapse you could Google “housing bubble” and get millions of hits.

Jaibones on October 12, 2011 at 1:09 PM

That’s right, the Bush people asked twice for Congress to fix FNMA and FHLMC. But as I recall it, you had to be a news junky to hear about it. It got next to zero coverage in MSM. And when it was covered, it usually included a clip of Barney Fwank assuring us that all was well there, people who were raising the questions were cruel and heartless, and the Bush administration was just playing partisan politics. MSM swept it under the rug.

petefrt on October 12, 2011 at 1:32 PM

Nobody else saw the 08′ meltdown coming in 05′ either.

BacaDog on October 12, 2011 at 1:07 PM

This is completely wrong. Literally millions of people were talking about a housing bubble in 2005.

And I’m really sorry to say this, but it’s true — certifiable lunatic Paul Krugman not only knew the bubble was going to burst, but he predicted that Greenspan would create the bubble right after the tech bubble had burst in 2000. In a published column.

Jaibones on October 12, 2011 at 1:33 PM

Your choice is Perry. Get over it.

Bill C on October 12, 2011 at 1:26 PM

So it was Perry that correctly predicted double digit percentage (to those prone to hyperventalation that doesn’t mean worthless overnight) decreases in housing values?

Remember. The trash that is today’s Democrat Party is promoting all this. It is the trash that is today’s left that is trying to manipulate us into thinking Mitten’s is the guy, with this nonsense ‘reporting.’

Seriously, what’s with so many, so willing to lean forward on a non story such as this?

MNHawk on October 12, 2011 at 1:33 PM

Romney 2012: He wasn’t asked if he predicted events 3 years into the future!

lorien1973 on October 12, 2011 at 1:34 PM

Cain didn’t quite challenge F. Todd on some assumptions he made …

When Todd says that Cain ignored media reports warning that something was wrong with the economy … Cain should have just said …

“They weren’t warning about housing Todd. The negative stories they were putting out were simply hyperbole about how we were already in a recession; “hey doesn’t this feel like a recession?”; and talking down every positive economic indicator. They are doing the opposite today – becoming absolutely “giddy” over a .1 decrease in unemployment. I miss the economic meltdown Todd – but so too – did you guys!”

HondaV65 on October 12, 2011 at 1:34 PM

MSM swept it under the rug.

petefrt on October 12, 2011 at 1:32 PM

I have some economics education, but I am the farthest thing from an insider, don’t work in economics or government and despise the MSM. I gotta say again – this was a major topic in the zeitgeist, guys. And for a guy with high-level business leadership and Federal Board experience? Wow.

Jaibones on October 12, 2011 at 1:35 PM

Nobody understood at all the impact of Credit Default Swaps would have, nobody. If they say they did they are lying.

The Perma-Bears, who every year for decades now will attempt to claim they predicted it but thats about as accurate as a broken clock appearing correct twice a day. None of them every said a word about CDS and the accounting issues which is what wreaked the real havoc causing the entire system to collapse.

jp on October 12, 2011 at 1:31 PM

Wrong. Schiller amended his book, Irrational Exuberance, to add a chapter about the housing market. Plenty of people saw it coming and were screaming from the room tops about it including me.

Bill C on October 12, 2011 at 1:36 PM

What’s wrong with Romney.

IR-MN on October 12, 2011 at 1:29 PM

I will not create jobs or hold jobs that kill people, and that plant—that plant—kills people.

Disqualified

MNHawk on October 12, 2011 at 1:37 PM

The Community Reinvestment Act, signed into law, in 1977, by the then Socialist-In-Chief, Jimmy Carter, which formed the foundation of granting loans and credit to people who generally were high-risk for defaulting on their mortgages…

Did any of the media comment on this?

Or Dodd-Frank?

Danny on October 12, 2011 at 1:37 PM

Nobody else saw the 08′ meltdown coming in 05′ either.

BacaDog on October 12, 2011 at 1:07 PM

Wrong. Housing bubble news from 2005:

Housing bubble news:

-Britain is experiencing the same phenomenon. Their housing market is cooling off.

-Young man talks about his families lust for real estate on NPR.

-Bill Fleckenstein compares our bubble with Japan’s.

-Robert Schiller, author of Irrational Exuberance, talks about the housing market. Consider him the anti-Glassman.

-Patrick Killelea’s housing bubble blog, all you need to know about this bubble and its consequences.

Bill C on October 12, 2011 at 1:39 PM

Bush made it a point in a speech to the nation how great it was for how many people owned homes…that was one of his cornerstones, until it came unraveled in 2008…

right2bright on October 12, 2011 at 1:13 PM

True, but both Bush and McCain (believe it or not) separately sounded the alarm several times (2001, 2002, 2003, and 2005). Frank and Dodd et al dismissed them and insisted Fannie and Freddie were sound and the CRA was working. Look it up.

stvnscott on October 12, 2011 at 1:39 PM

Wrong. Schiller amended his book, Irrational Exuberance, to add a chapter about the housing market. Plenty of people saw it coming and were screaming from the room tops about it including me.
Bill C on October 12, 2011 at 1:36 PM

No, they didn’t “see it coming”. They predicted catastrophe loosely related to every anomaly in the market. Like someone mentioned earlier, it’s little better than the stoked clock that is right twice a day.

Count to 10 on October 12, 2011 at 1:40 PM

Must be why Romney, during the 2007/2008 primary season was warning about the impending collapse.

Oh. right. He wasn’t.

lorien1973 on October 12, 2011 at 1:20 PM

Every time anybody tried to bring it up the media and democrats would shower whoever was critical with charges of racism. That’s how the whole damn thing was worked in the first place. The entire CRA/Bank relationship was nothing more than an extortion chamber with cooperation with the agitators as the golden door out. And there is video if Barney Frank in August 2008 claiming that claims of a housing bubble would create a self fullfilling economic collapse.

Focus people. Mitt Romney and Herman Cain are not to blame for not knowing or not speaking out about what was coming. Blame the people that were in charge and caused it.

DanMan on October 12, 2011 at 1:40 PM

Hell, most of us weren’t aware of the housing bubble… If someone had told me that less than 24 months after buying a home, that my family would be living in a home that dropped $30k in value, and 3 more years later, would be $60k less, would I have purchased the home?

Don’t think so.

Danny on October 12, 2011 at 1:40 PM

Now the media is interested in the housing bubble?

Cindy Munford on October 12, 2011 at 1:40 PM

Romney is not conservative. He switches his allegiances to whatever suits his purpose. Granted, he is an extremely slick liar. But that doesn’t change the fact that he can’t be trusted to govern as a conservative when he has never governed as a conservative.

Bill C on October 12, 2011 at 1:32 PM

Mittens oozes the karma of every oily used car salesman and slimy televangelist I’ve ever seen.

He’s the embodiment of the soulless middle management weasel who hands you your lay off notice.

But he’s not Obama, so I guess that’s what the GOP brain trust is counting on.

Bruno Strozek on October 12, 2011 at 1:41 PM

Focus people. Mitt Romney and Herman Cain are not to blame for not knowing or not speaking out about what was coming. Blame the people that were in charge and caused it.

DanMan on October 12, 2011 at 1:40 PM

Exactly.

lorien1973 on October 12, 2011 at 1:41 PM

Yeah, it’s not good when Ron Paul is better at “predicting” things. That said, did Romney predict the housing bubble?

MeatHeadinCA on October 12, 2011 at 1:43 PM

What was Barry 0bama saying about the housing bubble in 2005? That’s what we need to find out. I suspect if he’s on record as saying anything, it’s that Fannie and Freddy are doing just fine.

WarEagle01 on October 12, 2011 at 1:45 PM

No, they didn’t “see it coming”. They predicted catastrophe loosely related to every anomaly in the market. Like someone mentioned earlier, it’s little better than the stoked clock that is right twice a day.

Count to 10 on October 12, 2011 at 1:40 PM

Did you go to the link? Did you. Seriously. Did you read what Schiller wrote? Fleckenstein who blogs at MSNBC? They weren’t being vague. Robert Schiller predicted the stock market and housing bubble literal the same year that they burst. It was all related to easy money that caused asset prices to decouple from historical averages.

Good God how can people be so dense?

Bill C on October 12, 2011 at 1:45 PM

Maybe he should have seen the housing problem but for me what is more distressing is that he doesn’t see the 999 problem.

Whether it is true or not that the poor and lower middle class will pay more (which I think they will) the point is that there is no way you will be able to convince those people that they wont be paying more when they see the attack ads about their food, medicine, gas, etc going up significantly.

Also, he keeps saying that people pay 15.3% FICA so last night I pointed out that most people, except the self-employed, only pay 7.65% FICA right now. Some of you said that the employers portion really comes from my salary. That may be technically true but I am an employer and I can guarantee that if 999 passes, our employees wont be getting a 7.65% raise and neither will most people.

mrsmwp on October 12, 2011 at 1:11 PM

mrsmwp on October 12, 2011 at 1:46 PM

Focus people. Mitt Romney and Herman Cain are not to blame for not knowing or not speaking out about what was coming. Blame the people that were in charge and caused it.

DanMan on October 12, 2011 at 1:40 PM

Exactly! So the question should be, “Who’s going to be best to move forward?”

Would it be someone who might shake it up, along the lines of 9-9-9. Details to be argued about later.

Or someone who thinks coal power plants literally kill people, and would move to close them all down, no matter the consequences. Remember, they kill people.

If Mittens would be just like Obama, why not just re-elect Obama, and skip the further tarnish to the Republican name.

MNHawk on October 12, 2011 at 1:47 PM

So in 2005 he was in what government role…

Oh yeah, none. He was on talk radio. So, yes, his answer is sufficient on not predicting the housing bubble.

Keith_Indy on October 12, 2011 at 1:48 PM

Did you go to the link? Did you. Seriously. Did you read what Schiller wrote? Fleckenstein who blogs at MSNBC? They weren’t being vague. Robert Schiller predicted the stock market and housing bubble literal the same year that they burst. It was all related to easy money that caused asset prices to decouple from historical averages.
Good God how can people be so dense?
Bill C on October 12, 2011 at 1:45 PM

And the year before that and the year before that. He got lucky.

Count to 10 on October 12, 2011 at 1:49 PM

So, Chucky, did you see the Obama Bubble back in 2008? Millions of Americans who aren’t paid journalists, or whatever you call it you do for a living, saw Barry is a SCOAMF.

Oh, that’s right–you and your Make Believe Media pals were too busy carrying his water and avoiding vetting the guy.

Christien on October 12, 2011 at 1:51 PM

Save us Newt!

Punchenko on October 12, 2011 at 1:51 PM

That may be technically true but I am an employer and I can guarantee that if 999 passes, our employees wont be getting a 7.65% raise and neither will most people.

mrsmwp on October 12, 2011 at 1:11 PM

And you know what? Your competitor will, and then lure away your best employees. That’s how the real world works.

Seriously. I’m sure there are some very good argument against details of Cain’s plan. Trying something leftist on for size, along the lines of, “we can’t cut taxes for business because the evil bastages will just keep the extra profits” isn’t one of them.

MNHawk on October 12, 2011 at 1:51 PM

Funny… Ron Paul had no problem seeing long before 2005 that there was a housing bubble.

Imagine that…

JohnGalt23 on October 12, 2011 at 1:52 PM

Mittens oozes the karma of every oily used car salesman and slimy televangelist I’ve ever seen.

He’s the embodiment of the soulless middle management weasel who hands you your lay off notice.

But he’s not Obama, so I guess that’s what the GOP brain trust is counting on.

Bruno Strozek on October 12, 2011 at 1:41 PM

I used to work for a guy just like Romney. When he was kissing butt their was no one better. He could lie to your face and you would know it and you would feel bad about calling him on it. Behind closed doors he treated his employees like s***. It took every ounce of will power not to throttle that guy.

Bill C on October 12, 2011 at 1:53 PM

And the year before that and the year before that. He got lucky.

Count to 10 on October 12, 2011 at 1:49 PM

You make a good point there. But that sort of concedes that the bubble existed, was widely expected to burst, and was waiting for a reason. It is difficult to assert otherwise.

Jaibones on October 12, 2011 at 1:53 PM

And the year before that and the year before that. He got lucky.

Count to 10 on October 12, 2011 at 1:49 PM

So your saying he wrote books every year predicting disaster? If you are going to be obtuse there is not point trying to convince you. I guess you can’t trust your lying eyes.

Bill C on October 12, 2011 at 1:55 PM

Save us Newt!

Punchenko on October 12, 2011 at 1:51 PM

Ahem, no. Second look at Newt, sure; however, I don’t need him to save me.

MeatHeadinCA on October 12, 2011 at 1:55 PM

Maybe he should have seen the housing problem but for me what is more distressing is that he doesn’t see the 999 problem.

Whether it is true or not that the poor and lower middle class will pay more (which I think they will) the point is that there is no way you will be able to convince those people that they wont be paying more when they see the attack ads about their food, medicine, gas, etc going up significantly.

Also, he keeps saying that people pay 15.3% FICA so last night I pointed out that most people, except the self-employed, only pay 7.65% FICA right now. Some of you said that the employers portion really comes from my salary. That may be technically true but I am an employer and I can guarantee that if 999 passes, our employees wont be getting a 7.65% raise and neither will most people.

mrsmwp on October 12, 2011 at 1:11 PM

We don’t need a natonal sales tax. We have a spending and entitlement problem.

Bill C on October 12, 2011 at 1:58 PM

Hell, most of us weren’t aware of the housing bubble… If someone had told me that less than 24 months after buying a home, that my family would be living in a home that dropped $30k in value, and 3 more years later, would be $60k less, would I have purchased the home?

Don’t think so.

Danny on October 12, 2011 at 1:40 PM

I sold a home in Ca, at the height of the bubble, I was called crazy, because the house was appreciating so much…the number of “experts” who said it was a bad move was amazing, and these are owners of mortgage businesses, and bankers, heavy weights.
But, I just wanted to move, no great insight, so I moved to NC…that house I sold, in one year dropped $100,000, it is now about $350,000-$450,000 less than what I sold it for.
The person who bought it? Worked for the Federal Reserve as an analyst…they “knew” and were excited about buying my house for such a great “deal”.
Hope they enjoy the view…they will be paying for that for years.
My error, if I had really known, I should have rented in NC, but I bought a much more modest house, and I am about even,it moved up, than has now dropped back down to about what I paid for it.
But it is paid for, so it really doesn’t matter…
The point being, nobody knew really, except the “experts” who know now…

right2bright on October 12, 2011 at 2:00 PM

Not every bubble bursts. Stocks (outside of the insane tech price bubble, and housing was not THAT insane) have been pretty much flat for the last decade?

Why wouldn’t a rational, normal person expect that for housing? A rational, normal person not privy to all the fraud and manipulation of the housing bubble. NO ONE in 2005 knew the extent of THAT.

Back on point, to one of the worst posts I’ve ever seen out of Ed…

but this will definitely be a big talking point in the general election if Cain is on the ticket.

Why? Did Bambi raise such alarms? That usually is how one opponent makes hay out of another’s position.

MNHawk on October 12, 2011 at 2:00 PM

Funny… Ron Paul had no problem seeing long before 2005 that there was a housing bubble.

Imagine that…

JohnGalt23 on October 12, 2011 at 1:52 PM

Yes, he is right on so many other things….naysayers are always eventually right, since everything cycles…but he was wrong when things were going great, oooops, forgot to mention that didn’t you?

right2bright on October 12, 2011 at 2:02 PM

Why does Cain insist on appearing on MSNBC? Does he have a death wish? I question his judgment.

faraway on October 12, 2011 at 2:02 PM

True, but both Bush and McCain (believe it or not) separately sounded the alarm several times (2001, 2002, 2003, and 2005). Frank and Dodd et al dismissed them and insisted Fannie and Freddie were sound and the CRA was working. Look it up.

stvnscott on October 12, 2011 at 1:39 PM

Bush never vetoed any bill that would have stopped the process and forced people to take another look…look it up…

right2bright on October 12, 2011 at 2:05 PM

Yes, he is right on so many other things….naysayers are always eventually right, since everything cycles…but he was wrong when things were going great, oooops, forgot to mention that didn’t you?

right2bright on October 12, 2011 at 2:02 PM

The thing is, Ron Paul (and many other conservatives) have a reasonable way of explaining why the housing bubble happened. It wasn’t so much guessing this was going to happen as much as noticing that the more gov’t got involved the worse things would get.

MeatHeadinCA on October 12, 2011 at 2:08 PM

The reason why Bush tries to get FNMA fixed went unnoticed, cause he understood, that it would not benefit the economy to make a crash in housing market, he understood that it has to be done, without greta fanfare and not as an election issue. On the other hand dims were really happy to use any economic issue to taunt Bush, and they got their wish, they cause runs on the banks in california, they caused market crash, and then , they used their house majority to pass TARP, which they are claiming is Bush’s baby now.

anikol on October 12, 2011 at 2:09 PM

Big whoop; most “experts” didn’t see it coming. Move along…

redfoxbluestate on October 12, 2011 at 2:11 PM

Why does Cain insist on appearing on MSNBC? Does he have a death wish? I question his judgment.

faraway on October 12, 2011 at 2:02 PM

I know what you mean! But, I think he realizes he needs to get his name and face out there — he has no chance without media exposure…he doesn’t have big money like some of the others.

balkanmom on October 12, 2011 at 2:12 PM

Bush never vetoed any bill that would have stopped the process and forced people to take another look…look it up…

right2bright on October 12, 2011 at 2:05 PM

Bush sparingly used the bully pulpit. If he was worried about this blowing up in his face, and let’s face it he got far more benefit from the housing bubble than cost, he would have tried to speak up about it. Leadership is doing something unpopular like shutting down a party that has gotten too rowdy.

Bill C on October 12, 2011 at 2:12 PM

Ahem, no. Second look at Newt, sure; however, I don’t need him to save me.

MeatHeadinCA on October 12, 2011 at 1:55 PM

You say that now, but will you be saying that when you’re pulling the lever for Mittens?

Punchenko on October 12, 2011 at 2:13 PM

Bill C on October 12, 2011 at 2:12 PM

With regards to Bush, the question is not whether he handled it well (he didn’t) but whether his administration saw a problem (it did). Cain says he never saw a problem.

MJBrutus on October 12, 2011 at 2:15 PM

You say that now, but will you be saying that when you’re pulling the lever for Mittens?

Punchenko on October 12, 2011 at 2:13 PM

So you’re basically conceding Newt can’t win. Look, I don’t know what Newt can do other than continue to make sense. He’s not exactly falling in the polls, right? At the moment, it looks like the two conservative guys that have a chance at getting the nomination are Cain and Newt. Cain is ehmmmm… well, I don’t think he’s doing a great job of convincing me to support him. I doubt I’m alone.

MeatHeadinCA on October 12, 2011 at 2:16 PM

We don’t need a natonal sales tax. We have a spending and entitlement problem.

Bill C on October 12, 2011 at 1:58 PM

Amen, bruh.

Jaibones on October 12, 2011 at 2:19 PM

First, they came for Palin, then Perry, and now Cain. They will save their very best stuff for after we are stuck with Romney.

tims472 on October 12, 2011 at 2:19 PM

That’s not exactly a confidence builder. If Cain didn’t have access to “sophisticated analyses,” then why was he drawing conclusions at all? And how sophisticated an analysis would it have taken to see housing prices had become serious decoupled from inflation starting in 1999? By 2005, the Bush administration had already warned Congress twice about the housing market, specifically about exposure at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, to no avail. It’s not as though the overheating in the housing market was a secret in August 2005.

Well gee, Ed, the only economist who correctly predicted the financial collapse was RON PAUL’S economic adviser, Peter Schiff. So, according to your logic, we should elect Ron Paul President, right?

fossten on October 12, 2011 at 2:21 PM

Considering Bwarney Fwank – a PAID, ELECTED Representative, not only repeatedly denied the existance of the housing bubble, but FACILITATED it, (along with Chris “The Sweet Deal” Dodd) I am much less concerned that Herman Cain was not aware of how bad things were getting in 2005.

Additionally, Herman Cain is pushing for a revamp of our tax and regulatory systems for FUTURE growth, and I would prefer to concentrate on that.

KMC1 on October 12, 2011 at 2:23 PM

I don’t know….what is worse, not seeing a housing bubble OR seeing the housing bubble but allowing it to burst, thereby causing an economic meltdown….OR worse than that, CAUSING the housing bubble meltdown?
I truly believe this has come down to a three man race…I trust Cain, not a fan of a national sales tax, I like Newt’s answers, but hate his couch and healthcare partners, and I really hate his NY race picks…Mitt…he makes McCain look conservative…big no.

HornetSting on October 12, 2011 at 2:23 PM

With regards to Bush, the question is not whether he handled it well (he didn’t) but whether his administration saw a problem (it did). Cain says he never saw a problem.

MJBrutus on October 12, 2011 at 2:15 PM

Seeing a problem and not correcting it is better than not seeing it?
Okay, if you say so…
If I see someone batter a woman, and ignore it, that is better than a person on the other side of town that didn’t see it…if you say so…Bush could have vetoed any bill, and he didn’t…being “wimpish”, is worse than not being in the administration and having all the information they had, and not knowing those details…you think differently, you give a pass to the people in power who had the information.

right2bright on October 12, 2011 at 2:23 PM

First, they came for Palin, then Perry, and now Cain. They will save their very best stuff for after we are stuck with Romney.

tims472 on October 12, 2011 at 2:19 PM

Exactly, so easy to manipulate…like taking candy from a baby…btw, Palin was never a candidate.

right2bright on October 12, 2011 at 2:24 PM

fossten on October 12, 2011 at 2:21 PM

You just love to draw hard conclusions. Everything is not black and white. This is a negative for Cain. If it were the only one, in isolation then it would be foolish to draw your conclusion. I find that Cain’s negatives exceed those of Romney and Cain’s pros do not amount to Romney’s. that’s why I’m going with Mitt. The point is to take this and other data in perspective.

MJBrutus on October 12, 2011 at 2:25 PM

right2bright on October 12, 2011 at 2:23 PM

No. Stop playing high school debate team. The point is that not seeing a problem that was foreseeable, as evidenced by the fact that Bush saw it is a problem for Cain. Particularly when this problem is supposedly well within Cain’s area of expertise. It is supposed to be his strong suit.

MJBrutus on October 12, 2011 at 2:27 PM

We never needed Sarah Palin in the race. Michele Bachmann fills that void. Oh wait..

Now that Rick Perry is in the race, there’s no need for an authentic tea party candidate like Sarah Palin. Oh wait….

How about Herman Cain? Oh wait…..

Say hello to GOP nominee Mitt Romney. Thanks guys.

takeamericabackin10 on October 12, 2011 at 2:33 PM

This is a useless circular attack. Why didn’t someone know A when A was hiding behind B and C was obfuscating what A was doing?

Remember Barney Frank claiming Freddie and Fannia were sound institutions in 2008? That famous blow-up with O’Reilly was a couple of months later. That was when the truth that Barney Frank, who was in charge of the oversight of freddie and fannie, was either completely incompetant or lieing became apparent.

How is it now possible to criticize ANYONE that was lied to (like all of the american people were), regarding the safety and soundness of Freddie and Fannie, for whatever comments that they made in assessing the overall housing market?

The entire home loan securitization and derivatives markets were established as a secret private marketplace to be used exclusively by the banks. Individual investors had no role and no visibility of the transactions being made. This lack of competition distorted the marketplace in absurd ways. And of course, Dodd-Frank, insiders to this entire scheme, did NOT OPEN THIS MARKETPLACE which allows for the exact same problem to occur AGAIN!

Freddy on October 12, 2011 at 2:34 PM

I saw the housing bubble in 2002 and 2003 and decided to stay out of the market at that time. Sure glad I did.

It does not seem that it should have been hard to see that we had a bubble in housing in 2005. Bu then the long term affordability of homes had deviated by almost 40% upwards. In 2004, it had deviated upwards by about 60% at the low end of the market where I was looking by 2003.

This man is supposed to be an economic major and mathematician. If he cannot see trends in something he is writing about in the paper, it speaks poorly about his ability there.

Cain is still worthy of watching… This is a minor tweak on him in my eyes.

astonerii on October 12, 2011 at 2:36 PM

If only the reporter had seen this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

These were people that very well *should* have known, but resorted to calling republicans “racists” and other derogatory terms, for suggesting there were problems.

One man doesn’t know everything. That’s why he has a competent team of advisors and staff. Cain was not “in the loop” on policy and internal government issues. He wasn’t a politician.

Again, the media is going to do everything in their power to portray every GOP candidate in the worst light. And some on “our” side are going to do their best to let us know they are dumb enough to fall for what the media says.

BruthaMan on October 12, 2011 at 2:37 PM

The few that did see what was coming in ’05 were roundly ignored by the MFM. That is because of the D backing for continuing the regulations that were causing the bubble to inflate.

Just like no one is seeing the student loan bubble about to collapse because they didn’t want to report on that in ’07. Who saw it coming? The D’s were certainly saying it could go on for ever with ever higher prices getting guarantees for loans to those who had never held a job in their life…

Now the big part: the regulations, regulators, agencies and quasi-governmental agencies that caused this to happen are STILL on the books and BEING ENFORCED.

Do any of these candidates have a problem with that?

Are they willing to start rolling back the government involvement that caused this problem in the first place by getting rid of the regulatory agencies and cutting off the support to the quasi-governmental agencies and letting them collapse? These things have got to go and yesterday would have been a good day for it.

Can we get someone who isn’t looking to ‘manage’ this authoritarian system ‘well’ but who is willing to cut it down to size and lead the charge on that? You know, kill the regulatory agencies and let the States do the work? From Fannie, Freddie, Sallie, Ginnie, FHA all the way to EPA, Education, Energy, Agriculture, BATFE with a whole slew of abusive agencies and departments in between… this entire lot doesn’t need ‘management’ but the axe.

Mitt Romney was criticized as being a cruel cutter of companies down to the bone… where is that guy? Who is Mr. Sweetness about Big Government that replaced Mr. Green Eyeshades with the meat cleaver? How about Perry, what does he want to get rid of out of this government? Cain, surely he knows that an operation this large can’t work efficiently and that much of this stuff just isn’t needed, so how about it from him? Ron Paul has the hots for getting rid of the Federal Reserve, but beyond that?

Do any of these people actually have a clue as to what the problem is?

Because if they don’t, and it goes way, way, way past ‘entitlements’ which are just the poster child for authoritarian government being the most expensive cash part of the abuse. The restriction of the liberties of the people and our States is the worst of it and needs to go. I’m not voting for a pleasant manager of an authoritarian State because they won’t get rid of the abusive parts of it, which is just about every part put in since 1900 plus the Dept. of Agriculture that Lincoln really shouldn’t have brought us.

Show me the candidate with the meat cleaver ready to take to the bureaucracy in DC.

I’m voting for that person.

Better to cut way too much and get this Nation back on an even keel rather than cut so little that than having the next authoritarian decides to just make us slaves to government. We can always put back a much leaner and restricted bureaucracy if we really need it than try and tame down one that grows wildly when you aren’t looking.

You don’t need a crystal ball to see what happens if this doesn’t happen and soon.

This is your last chance for food, guns and ammo, folks, because right now we are arguing about people who won’t address the problem.

ajacksonian on October 12, 2011 at 2:38 PM

First, they came for Palin, then Perry, and now Cain. They will save their very best stuff for after we are stuck with Romney.

tims472 on October 12, 2011 at 2:19 PM

You got that right.

In the general election…all of Romney’s skeletons will come out…and bingo, we’ll have President Barack Hussein Obama again.
Skeletons:
Romney’s advisers helping Obama’s draft Obamacare.
Belief in man-made global warming
A lot of flip flopping
What else? enlighten me

balkanmom on October 12, 2011 at 2:39 PM

A lot of people missed it, but Cain did not cause the mess.

Mr. Joe on October 12, 2011 at 12:50 PM

Uhhh, not everyone.

Did Romney see it, how bout Perry, Gingrich, Santorum, Bachman???.. Paul gets a pass cuz he’s been all about economic gloom and doom for decades….

Cain worked with the Fed in the 1990′s a mere 15 years before the bubble.

kringeesmom on October 12, 2011 at 1:09 PM

LOL. How sweet.

Also, bubbles don’t build overnight.

Notorious GOP on October 12, 2011 at 2:39 PM

Palin was never a candidate.

right2bright on October 12, 2011 at 2:24 PM

Right, but they thought she might be.

tims472 on October 12, 2011 at 2:39 PM

The thing is, Ron Paul (and many other conservatives) have a reasonable way of explaining why the housing bubble happened. It wasn’t so much guessing this was going to happen as much as noticing that the more gov’t got involved the worse things would get.

MeatHeadinCA on October 12, 2011 at 2:08 PM

Uhh, he was pretty detailed about it. Do I need to go Spathi on you and find YouTube videos for you?

Notorious GOP on October 12, 2011 at 2:40 PM

ajacksonian on October 12, 2011 at 2:38 PM

That was supposed to be Perry. That’s what appealed to me about him. Sadly he doesn’t look the man I thought he was.

MJBrutus on October 12, 2011 at 2:41 PM

Cain can admit when he was wrong. That puts him up on Romneycare and others it sickens me to name.

Slowburn on October 12, 2011 at 2:53 PM

Cain can admit when he was wrong. That puts him up on Romneycare and others it sickens me to name.

Slowburn on October 12, 2011 at 2:53 PM

Amen Slow! thats the problem with most people they want some one like obama that says he is NEVER wrong!
Please.

ColdWarrior57 on October 12, 2011 at 2:56 PM

No, they didn’t “see it coming”. They predicted catastrophe loosely related to every anomaly in the market. Like someone mentioned earlier, it’s little better than the stoked clock that is right twice a day.

Count to 10 on October 12, 2011 at 1:40 PM

A simple viewing of Peter Schiff’s speech before the Western Regional Mortgage Bankers Conference in Las Vegas in 2006 would quickly dispel such a ridiculous claim. Many people with half a brain and knowledge of the housing market could see it coming from 10 miles away.

NeverLiberal on October 12, 2011 at 2:57 PM

LOL… I must say I am enjoying the scrutiny of Cain.

Cain found it pretty easy enough to deride Perry when he hadn’t been scrutinized yet.

Now 9-9-9, Greenspan, and housing bubble…

:)

TheRightMan on October 12, 2011 at 3:31 PM

We don’t need a natonal sales tax. We have a spending and entitlement problem.

Bill C on October 12, 2011 at 1:58 PM
I like floridas answer to entitlement. Want Welfare,unemployment and other state bennies Ok, but we are going to drug test you. I am OK with that idea. Dont want to be drug tested then dont ask for taxpayers money.

ColdWarrior57 on October 12, 2011 at 3:32 PM

Cain has done a lot of blithering in this campaign, particularly early on. I have been wondering why all of that has suddenly been ignored. One example was confusing the Declaration of Independence with the Constitution. There was the Taiwan gaffe, didn’t know what the Palestinian “right of return” issue was about, and the list goes on.

The man is a good guy but I think he should stick to business until he gets an education in world history.

crosspatch on October 12, 2011 at 3:33 PM

I remember, sometime around 2002, remarking that either the traditional ratio between ‘affordable’ housing costs and income was wrong, or people were making a lot more money suddenly, or house prices were bound to fall back to ‘traditional’ levels. I doubt I was the only one.

The housing bubble is a very good example of what happens when you confuse price with value: an increase in price shows increasing value, justifying a further – speculative – increase in price and away we go!

PersonFromPorlock on October 12, 2011 at 3:34 PM

Here is a link with Halperins grading of last nights debate

Not a bad analysis, Mine follows in order of weakest to strongest. They have Positive point numbers for good answers/defenses/overall presentation and negative numbers for either gaffes or cheap shots.

Jon Huntsman (+0/-0) — Mediocre at best..comes across as greasy. Too many platitudes to the point where he seems to me to sound like Obama when he was running in 2008.

Ron Paul (+1/-0) — Clear understanding of economics. Fair to midland closing statement.

Rick Santorum (+1/-0) — Good points on the fact that Romney’s waiver plan will not Repeal Obamacare…some states may still “choose” to implement.

Michelle Bachmann (+3/-1) — “Bad form” response on 9-9-9 (alluding to 666 and Devil in the details). Decent response to Romney’s assertion that Bachmann would not be effective on the economy. Has a good “insiders” view of what’s wrong and what should be attacked legislatively first (but you need majorities in both chambers to accomplish)

Rick Perry (+3/-1) — Misuse of words, slight rambling or incoherent presentation of thoughts. OK response to follow up on Romney’s points on China. Decent response to Bachman. Good clear response to his state’s green energy pursuits (this was a clear setup by the media)… I wouldn’t mind these serious questions if they had been asked at the same intensity and depth to Obama in 2008.

Herman Cain (+4/-0) — Good response about killing the tax code, and moderator assertions that it is automatic tax increase for everybody (dropping the payroll tax may actually put more money in WORKING PEOPLES pockets and say a .5 to 2% back to companies will allow them to have more capital to hire human assets). Good recover from Bailout (snare) question. Good response to Santorum assertion that 9-9-9 equals a revenue floodgate from Congress to exploit. Would require a 2/3 congressional vote to change rate, and as long as he was in office it would NEVER happen. Generally capable of steering conversation to his direction.

Mitt Romney (+7/-1) — Excellent understanding of issues, particularly good concerning pitfalls of bailout. Witty and polite. Handles balanced budget issue well. Good on China. Very good response to Cain assertions. Bad response to Newts assertion of playing favorites on tax relief. Excellent rebuttal to Perry’s –Romney Care equals Obama Care meme. Given an unusually large portion of the time to speak, Best closing statement.

Newt Gingrich (+7/-0) — Excellent on Bernanke/Gheitner/politicians lack of understanding. Excellent on Medicare. Excellent analysis of governmental paradigm that causes overlooks or lack of oversight. Excellent analogy of options using “chop off the leg” versus “shooting self in the head”! excellent demonstration of Reagan’s 11th commandment. Witty. Consistently hammers home that ANY person currently in the debates would be substantially better than OBAM (Team Player). 2nd Best Closing statement.

The OTR candidates as a whole might have been better off not going after Romney as he responded very effectively and responsibly to all attack assertions.

RedLizard64 on October 12, 2011 at 3:39 PM

I don’t care.

Cain is Awesome!!!

:D

bridgetown on October 12, 2011 at 3:43 PM

Why does Cain insist on appearing on MSNBC? Does he have a death wish? I question his judgment.

faraway on October 12, 2011 at 2:02 PM

Which other candidate have been on MSNBC? Seems like he is tough enough to take it and he knows he needs more exposure…I am sure he did some risk assessment before going in the Dragons Den.

RedLizard64 on October 12, 2011 at 3:43 PM

No. Stop playing high school debate team.

MJBrutus on October 12, 2011 at 2:27 PM

You mean just agree with your wrong premise?
Bush had his chance, he gave it lip service…Cain was not in any type of power position like Bush.
Bush could have done something, and didn’t…Cain could have written something and didn’t…
You tell me, who made the gravest error?
People had been saying for years, the housing prices can’t keep going up…and guess what, eventually they were correct, amazing.
Here…eventually a woman will be president, a man will stand on Mars, stock will recover, gold will hit $2,000 an ounce, snow will fall in Miami, eventually all this will happen, and I will be deemed a genius by you….

right2bright on October 12, 2011 at 3:46 PM

Jeez Ed, stop eating your own. Like the Democrats were all about reforming Fannie and Freddy, not. Like the Democrats ARE all about reforming Fannie and Freddy, NOT!

Cain is not-Romney. Good enough for me at this point. I trust his instincts far more than Romney-weasel who will say whatever to be elected.

And gotta love Cain’s humility in admitting error. What politician these days EVER admits error? Surely not the goofball presently occupying 1600 PA Ave.

This will NOT be a general election problem.

exdeadhead on October 12, 2011 at 3:54 PM

Did Romney see it coming? Did Obama see it coming? What has Cain learned from the collapse?

Those are all fair questions to ask and would serve Cain well. I have to say though, it was pretty obvious we were in a Real Estate bubble that would burst around that time.

Daemonocracy on October 12, 2011 at 4:06 PM

Cain can admit when he was wrong. That puts him up on Romneycare and others it sickens me to name.

Slowburn on October 12, 2011 at 2:53 PM

It also makes it more likely that he knows he doesn’t know everything and I like that, too. No one knows it all and I don’t expect them to. I want someone who shows good judgment and will appoint sound specialists on the things they are weak on to their cabinet. Be a strong leader with good common sense and surround yourself with really good people to help you. That’s what I’m looking for. That’s what I loved about Sarah Palin. She is a leader with great common sense. I think she was the best we could have, but she’s not running. *sigh*

I don’t think this oversight rules Cain out.

pannw on October 12, 2011 at 4:08 PM

Palin was never a candidate.

right2bright on October 12, 2011 at 2:24 PM

Yeah, I wonder how that happened.

kim roy on October 12, 2011 at 4:14 PM

“Mr. Speaker, it is time for Congress to act to remove taxpayer support from the housing GSEs before the bubble bursts and taxpayers are once again forced to bail out investors misled by foolish government interference in the market. I therefore hope my colleagues will stand up for American taxpayers and investors by cosponsoring the Free Housing Market Enhancement Act.”

July 16th 2002 Not Herman Cain.

LevStrauss on October 12, 2011 at 4:15 PM

You want to know about Herman Cain and the problems he is facing, then read below. Unlike some conservatives that don’t bother to vet candidates this former journalist did just that and it doesn’t look good for Cain. He may be the flavor of the month but he has a long way to go to be the candidate and with his new found arrogance that only he knows the economy, he is quickly going off the track:

Cain’s Primary Problems Continue to Multiply

by ThinkFirst

Herman Cain, riding high on a single debate/forum performance in a
FoxNews-manipulated event in Florida has only just started to be vetted,
and it is not going well for him.

Here are a few of the challenges Cain faces with conservatives and
independents:

1. 9-9-9 creates a whole new Federal sales tax, on top of State and local sales taxes, and it shifts a lot of the tax burden to the poor and middle-class.

2. He has admitted that he failed to recognize the 2005 housing bubble when many others were actively warning about it.

3. He endorsed ex-Massachusetts one-term governor Willard “Mitt” Romney in 2008.

4. He has no elected experience as an executive dealing with the
real-world process of leadership in a system of shared-powers and
competing interests with an often hostile media. (Like Barak Obama.)

5. He has no foreign policy experience. (Like Barak Obama.)

6. One of the keys to his success as CEO of a pizza chain was to close 50% of the restaurants, putting many people out of work. (Like Romney at Bain Capital.) Domino’s resolved their corporate challenges without closing half of their stores and putting all of those people out of work.

7. He will place the Social Security system at-risk as he eliminates the employer-employee split of 15% and replace it with only 9%.

8. He fails to explain how he is going to get the 16th Constitutional Amendment that authorizes the Federal Income Tax repealed any time in the near-term future (we will, otherwise, face both Income and Sales taxes at the national-level).

9. Cain assumes that Congress will voluntarily restrict themselves to a 2/3 vote for any changes – this in a defense against those who worry about incremental increases above the 9%. This reveals a dangerous naivete about the realities of the political system in Washington, DC.

10. He also said he will sign no bill over 4-5 pages. This reveals a dangerous naivete about the realities of the political system in
Washington, DC.

Source: http://nevils-station.com/qp_files/quam-plures/blog5.php/2011/10/12/cain-s-primary-problems-continue-to-multiply

PhiKapMom on October 12, 2011 at 4:17 PM

Cain better get ready. The left has choosen Mitt Romney as its candidate. They fear a Cain vs. Obama presidential race…

Theworldisnotenough on October 12, 2011 at 4:21 PM

A lot of people missed the housing bubble and many more in the Democrat Party, who were directly involved in producing it, denied it outright. I give Cain a modified pass for this. He’s right and has been right on so many issues. If he was a bad prognosticator on an issue or two, then that’s fine, as long as he admits it.

Nobody, including Reagan of Lincoln, was right on everything. Cain is a breath of fresh air because he’s honest, he doesn’t make excuses, and he stands for the right things. I trust him. I don’t trust Romney.

Aardvark on October 12, 2011 at 4:22 PM

First, they came for Palin, then Perry, and now Cain. They will save their very best stuff for after we are stuck with Romney.

tims472 on October 12, 2011 at 2:19 PM

how many more years before Palinista’s stop playing the victim card? It’s old. The only person that kept her from running, is herself. She chose to live the good life as a multi-millionaire private citizen. Not a bad choice.

hanzblinx on October 12, 2011 at 4:24 PM

The 999 plan is a time bomb.

faraway on October 12, 2011 at 12:57 PM

That is my main concern, since this is current. Newt was just on Hannity’s radio show a few minutes ago and questioned that 9% National Sales tax on S.S. Income and limited Income. 9% on the Income & 9% of purchases. Newt didn’t mention Food, but that is taxed at 9% also.

bluefox on October 12, 2011 at 4:32 PM

Every time I think I might become a Cainiac, he goes and says things like this.

Douchetastico the Wonderdog (FKA: "Paid for by the...") on October 12, 2011 at 4:38 PM

There is more about the Cain 9-9-9 Plan that looks like some on here don’t understand the ramifications but Newt Gingrich and Hannity sure do:

Gingrich – Cain’s 9-9-9 Troubling
by ThinkFirst

Gingrich on Sean Hannity’s radio talk show said today that “9-9-9 is a terrific slogan but is impossible to implement.”

He was in Manchester, New Hampshire, and noted that they had no state sales tax and strongly opposed them – also that other states already had a 9% sales tax, so Cain’s 9-9-9 would make their burden at the cash register 18%.

Hannity declared that 9-9-9 is worrisome because once a national sales tax was implemented the politicians would inevitably continually increase it. Opening that door would be a bad idea.

Gingrich replied that Cain should have gone to the flat income tax rather than a national sales tax.

More trouble for Cain.

Source: http://nevils-station.com/qp_files/quam-plures/blog5.php/2011/10/12/gingrich-cain-s-9-9-9-troubling

Looks like you have to go to blogs to discover the truth that the MSM doesn’t want to say. Some conservatives are not too keen on the facts either from what I have been reading. Don’t care who the candidate is — they need vetted which is more important then how they do in a debate. Smooth talkers with no real background tend to do well in debates especially when they are doing little else but preparing for a debate and do a little campaigning.

Romney hasn’t had a job except run for President since he left the MA Governor in Jan 2007 and from all accounts began running for President in 2004. Cain was a talk show host but when was his last job where he was in charge? Cain resigned from Godfather Pizza in 1996 and had been serving on some boards until 2008. He is also a commentator for Fox News — another Fox News person running for office. This is beyond ridiculous that Cain’s last Executive level job in private industry ended in 1996 and his tenue at Godfather Pizza is being touted so heavily?

Beam me up Scotty is all I can say!

PhiKapMom on October 12, 2011 at 4:41 PM

Yeah, I wonder how that happened.

kim roy on October 12, 2011 at 4:14 PM

Um, she chose not to?

MeatHeadinCA on October 12, 2011 at 4:41 PM

That is my main concern, since this is current. Newt was just on Hannity’s radio show a few minutes ago and questioned that 9% National Sales tax on S.S. Income and limited Income. 9% on the Income & 9% of purchases. Newt didn’t mention Food, but that is taxed at 9% also.

bluefox on October 12, 2011 at 4:32 PM

And that, in a nut shell, is what is fatally wrong with this country. Everybody wants their own personal exemptions from what everybody else pays. Everybody is looking to legally steal something from their neighbor. The United Looting States of America.

And it bothers me that the first thing my so-called side does to counter Cain’s plan, is to attack it from the left.

MNHawk on October 12, 2011 at 4:45 PM

Only a few people saw the bubble coming in 2005.

Rightyismighty on October 12, 2011 at 4:49 PM

Herb’s campaign is totally dead, you guys.

Particularly Partisan People: Cain leads nationally

Cain 30 Romney 22 Gingrich 15 Perry 14 Bachmann/RuPaul 5

KingGold on October 12, 2011 at 4:52 PM

Show me the candidate with the meat cleaver ready to take to the bureaucracy in DC.

I’m voting for that person.

ajacksonian on October 12, 2011 at 2:38 PM

Same here.

Can it possibly be a coincidence that the ONLY Presidential candidate who says stuff like this also says that 9/11 was an inside job? As Michelle Malkin is so fond of pointing out: Washington is one giant Kabuki theater; they all just take turns playing out their little arias. The only real debate taking place among politicians today is whether to Socialize America quickly, or a little bit more slowly.

As far as I’m concerned, if taxpayers don’t have a chance at taking the government, then the sooner the sh!t hits the fan, the better off we’ll all be.

logis on October 12, 2011 at 4:53 PM

Yeah, I wonder how that happened.

kim roy on October 12, 2011 at 4:14 PM

Um, she chose not to?

MeatHeadinCA on October 12, 2011 at 4:41 PM

You know exactly what I mean and that’s not it. It’s also why we get the stiffs currently running the country.

kim roy on October 12, 2011 at 4:55 PM

They fear a Cain vs. Obama presidential race…

Theworldisnotenough on October 12, 2011 at 4:21 PM

I actually think they welcome it. The debate would be cool, calm, and collected Professor Barry O up against some crazy guy shouting 999 who candidly admitted that he knows nothing about foreign affairs.

Punchenko on October 12, 2011 at 4:57 PM

Only a few people saw the bubble coming in 2005.

Rightyismighty on October 12, 2011 at 4:49 PM

How many saw it as early as 2001?

I know of ONE.

iamse7en on October 12, 2011 at 4:58 PM

Only a few people saw the bubble coming in 2005.
Rightyismighty on October 12, 2011 at 4:49 PM

And, as it turned out, they were all wrong. Only those of us who knew that the housing bubble was going to hit in late 2008 were right about it.

logis on October 12, 2011 at 4:58 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3