Cain to Piers Morgan: I’m anti-abortion yet pro-choice

posted at 10:40 am on October 20, 2011 by Tina Korbe

Maybe Herman Cain is trying too hard to be likable. He doesn’t need to enter attack mode or anything, but it would help if he didn’t pander to lefty media hosts, either. I have to assume that’s what this is — unless Cain really doesn’t think it’s the government’s business to ban abortion?

Last night, Cain told Piers Morgan that “life begins at conception” and said he opposes abortion “in all cases.” But when Morgan pressed him with typical questions about whether Cain would want his daughter or granddaughter to have a child conceived by rape or incest, Cain dodged. First, he told Morgan he was confusing two separate matters (apples and oranges, perhaps?). But, then, he said this, apparently still in reference to what he thinks about cases involving rape:

No, it comes down to is, it’s not the government’s role — or anybody else’s role — to make that decision. Secondly, if you look at the statistical incidents, you’re not talking about that big a number. So what I’m saying is, it ultimately gets down to a choice that that family or that mother has to make. Not me as president. Not some politician. Not a bureaucrat. It gets down to that family. And whatever they decide, they decide. I shouldn’t try to tell them what decision to make for such a sensitive decision.

Watch:

Huh?

This isn’t the first time Cain has seemed to contradict himself on the abortion issue. In an interview with John Stossel earlier this month, Cain circled around and around Stossel’s frank questions, defaulting to stock phrases like “I’m pro-life” and “life begins at conception” — but also “that’s her choice.” When Stossel asked him if abortion should be legal, though, he flat-out said “no.” That suggests that, in general at least, he does think it’s the government’s role to “make that decision.”

And in an interview with Meet the Press’ David Gregory, Cain said he opposes abortion even in cases of rape and incest because “the percentage of those instances is so minuscule that there are other options.” But “if it’s the life of the mother, that family is going to have to make that decision.”

If you put all the pieces together, at best it seems Cain believes abortion is wrong “in all cases,” should be illegal in most cases and should be a choice in some cases.

But it’s also possible he meant what he said to Piers Morgan, when he used pretty sweeping language to supposedly address exceptional cases: “It’s not the government’s role — or anybody else’s role — to make that decision.” It seems possible he’s bought into the idea that a complete government ban on abortion would somehow be an encroachment on individual freedom, rather than the most fundamental protection of it possible. Without life, what is liberty?

Yet, in 2003, he said he would support a Human Life Amendment, which would ultimately completely ban abortion. And, again, he told Stossel he thinks abortion should be illegal.

Quite confusing — and we can’t turn to his executive or legislative record to see what his actions on the issue have said. Whether his circumlocution should disqualify him with strictly pro-life voters is a matter for debate, but it would certainly help if Cain would clarify this by stating his position unequivocally.

For example (if this is his position), he could simply say: “I think abortion should be illegal and whether a person has a right to life is never another person’s choice to make.”

Or (if this is his position), he could say: “I think abortion should be illegal except in cases of rape, incest or when the life of the mother is at stake.”

Or (if this is his position), he could say: “I think abortion should be legal, but, culturally speaking, will work to oppose it because I personally believe it is wrong.”

Whatever it is, Mr. Cain, just spit it out.


Related Posts:

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 4 6

Honda, so what if he’s “pro-choice”? Little FYI, his views are closer to the mainstream than you think.
As for him signing an amendment, that somehow is him forcing his beliefs on others? That is stretching it.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 11:33 AM

not confusing to me.

georgealbert on October 20, 2011 at 10:51 AM

I agree. I didn’t find his answer confusing or troubling.

rrpjr on October 20, 2011 at 11:33 AM

Are we ready to stick a fork in the pizza yet??

Punchenko on October 20, 2011 at 11:33 AM

I think we’re watching him think it through. I do appreciate that his instinct is to ask if it is a proper function of government to delve that deeply into individual lives. As one who thinks that prohibition is not the way to reduce abortions, I’ll be interested to see how this develops.

TedInATL on October 20, 2011 at 11:34 AM

If he thinks life begins at conception but doesn’t think govt should make abortion illegal, then he’s a monster. Who could stand around and say the govt should do nothing if people are being murdered?!

TheBlueSite on October 20, 2011 at 11:31 AM

Who could stand around and watch it?

Ohhh …

Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Debbie Wasserman Schultz …

And Herman Cain.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 11:34 AM

I’m beginning to think Cain is starting to damage the entire conservative field, he truly is not ready for prime time. Best he figure out what he really believes in and stop appearing like little more than an opportunist capitalizing on “diversity”. I’m afraid that the Democrats/MSM have skillfully elevated Herman’s status only to used it as further evidence that all conservatives are true racists when he does not get the nomination….and if he does get the nomination he will be accurately portrayed as a rank amateur, very easy pickings for nObama. This will get very,very ugly indeed.

dmann on October 20, 2011 at 11:35 AM

Sure. That’s why we should allow Obama to win re-election by concentrting on the nonfiscal issues. That way, the prolifers win, y’see.

a capella on October 20, 2011 at 11:27 AM

There are voters out there who think their choices in this world will effect the outcome of their salvation. I don’t blame them for choosing social over fiscal issues.

portlandon on October 20, 2011 at 11:36 AM

Where did I say they aren’t free to have a problem with it Honda? You are quite dishonest in your posts, but that seems to be a trait of yours.

Well Big Orange, then you deserve Romney or 4 more years of obama.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 11:36 AM

If he thinks life begins at conception but doesn’t think govt should make abortion illegal, then he’s a monster.

TheBlueSite on October 20, 2011 at 11:31 AM

So, whatever a president thinks should be law. Got it.

There are people who believe that life begins at conception.
There are people who believe that life don’t begin until the heart beats.
There are people who believe that life doesn’t begin until birth.

There’s no absolute here that’s provably clear to everyone, so why should a president have the power to choose morality for everyone?

I agree with Cain 100% on this.

beatcanvas on October 20, 2011 at 11:36 AM

More evidence that he’s a dope or- charitably – not ready for prime time.

Mason on October 20, 2011 at 11:37 AM

I see no difference in shooting my neighbor and abortion. Both are murder.

That would be a great bumper sticker!

Pablo Honey on October 20, 2011 at 11:37 AM

No federal or state funding for abortion.

All fixed.

portlandon on October 20, 2011 at 11:37 AM

angryed on October 20, 2011 at 11:21 AM

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 11:27 AM

Spot on – - both of you :-)

Talismen on October 20, 2011 at 11:38 AM

dmann on October 20, 2011 at 11:35 AM

I think you hit it right on the head. I started really liking Cain, but am getting increasingly disturbed with his candidacy every time he opens his mouth. I thought he was a solid conservative, now I have no idea what he stands for other than 9-9-9 and getting elected.

neuquenguy on October 20, 2011 at 11:38 AM

Honda, so what if he’s “pro-choice”? Little FYI, his views are closer to the mainstream than you think.
As for him signing an amendment, that somehow is him forcing his beliefs on others? That is stretching it.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 11:33 AM

First – polls show that a plurality of Americans are against abortion – so it’s not as “mainstream” as you claim.

Second – amendments become LAW … LAW is ENFORCED on people. If he supports a PRO-LIFE Amendment then he supports enforcement of that amendment and that, by definition, has FORCE behind it.

Third – you just said he’s Pro-Choice – so why would he support a Pro-Life amendment.

Bottom line is – as usual – none of this makes any sense except to the strange mind of Herman Cain.

Tomorrow he’ll probably say it was all a joke – but not really.

I do like how Herman Cain has the power to transform his follower’s views though. First by getting them to accept releasing terrorists from GITMO under certain circumstances …

And now by getting them to become PRO-CHOICE.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 11:38 AM

No federal or state funding for abortion.

All fixed.

portlandon on October 20, 2011 at 11:37 AM

I think that would be a far more pertinent and relevant question to pose to Cain.

MadisonConservative on October 20, 2011 at 11:39 AM

I see no difference in shooting my neighbor and abortion. Both are murder.

Yes YOU see no difference, but science and reality does. Facts are annoying things.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 11:39 AM

beatcanvas on October 20, 2011 at 11:36 AM

If you think women are murdering millions of people a year, I’m guessing that’s gonna rise to the level of something you’d want to make a law about.

TheBlueSite on October 20, 2011 at 11:39 AM

I see nothing contradictory in what Herman Cain is saying, but I do agree he needs to articulate and be more clear on this. I think he is saying that he doesn’t agree with abortion but he doesn’t think it is the federal government’s place to ban or legalize it. I also take this Libertarian/Federalist view point. I think it should be left to the states.

I guess the contradiction is in a past interview where he said he would support a ban?

Jay on October 20, 2011 at 11:40 AM

You can’t want small government and expect the government to dictate your choices in life.

Thats much more confusing than Cain’s answer.

KMC1 on October 20, 2011 at 10:52 AM

All rational thinking people have the view that government is necessary for detering certain anti social behaviors through use laws that define crime and punishment. If an individual is not detered then punishment becomes the necessary component of the equation. Murder, being the ultimate anti social behavior, must certainly be included. This in no way violates small government ideology.

The difference is in the premise of the two positions concerning abortion. Pro choicers do not hold the premise that it is a life. Pro lifers believe it to be so (or some believe there is no way to know and err on the side of caution).

What Herman Cain has demonstrated here is he holds the conception premise but the pro choice conclusion. That is moral lunacy.

anuts on October 20, 2011 at 11:40 AM

Not ready for primetime.

I believe life begins at conception. I think taking that life is murder. I don’t believe that we can ever empower a government to make decisions about what goes on in the inside of a person’s body, and so I oppose the government having the power to make voluntary, professionally medically managed illegal.

georgealbert on October 20, 2011 at 10:51 AM

That is a disgusting position. Government has no role in… banning murder? Okay. Either you’re so deep in the tank for Cain that you’ll go to any lengths to square a circle he’s created, or you just don’t understand the magnitude of one human being taking another’s life. I’m thinking the latter (just because I find the former so hard to imagine in this context). My goodness.

OneGyT on October 20, 2011 at 11:40 AM

I don’t blame them for choosing social over fiscal issues.

portlandon on October 20, 2011 at 11:36 AM

I do. Their insistence on inflicting their morals on others is going to cause the downfall of the last best hope for mankind. People who want others to be taxed more are just as guilty of inflicting morals.

TedInATL on October 20, 2011 at 11:41 AM

First – polls show that a plurality of Americans are against abortion – so it’s not as “mainstream” as you claim.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 11:38 AM

Debateable.

MadisonConservative on October 20, 2011 at 11:41 AM

First of all. Life doesn’t begin at conception. Life begins at 40. Secondly, Cain is not going to set himself up to lose the general election should he get the nomination by telling all of America he has a new criminal federal law in mind for them and alienate all the independents and women voters just so that he can appease the social cons on hotair.com.

Just in case you haven’t taken note yet, banning abortion is not a top priority with people, especially independents, in 2011. It ranks just behind federal laws banning wearing white after Labor Day and you want the most conservative candidate in the field to tie his wagon to agenda? The liberals would just love to see that. They would just love to tell America in 2012 that the GOP candidate wants to put women in jail for abortion. That’s just about the only way for Obama to get re-elected. Remember, he can’t run on his record. He can only run on the idea that the GOP candidate is some backward extremist and therefore better the devil you know.

keep the change on October 20, 2011 at 11:42 AM

Yes YOU see no difference, but science and reality does. Facts are annoying things.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 11:39 AM

Oh really – please provide us with a link then – of where “science” has finally decided when life begins?

And besides – science is irrelevent here – since Cain says he believes life begins at conception.

Oh … but it’s okay to destroy it if you want to.

LOL

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 11:43 AM

I see nothing contradictory in what Herman Cain is saying, but I do agree he needs to articulate and be more clear on this. I think he is saying that he doesn’t agree with abortion but he doesn’t think it is the federal government’s place to ban or legalize it. I also take this Libertarian/Federalist view point. I think it should be left to the states.

I guess the contradiction is in a past interview where he said he would support a ban?

Jay on October 20, 2011 at 11:40 AM

He is on record with the conception position.

anuts on October 20, 2011 at 11:43 AM

I agree. I didn’t find his answer confusing or troubling.

rrpjr on October 20, 2011 at 11:33 AM

Same here. I’d say that his answer is pretty standard for a lot of pro-lifers. Many people make an exception for rape & incest.

29Victor on October 20, 2011 at 11:43 AM

Hmm. While I don’t believe that Roe vs. Wade will ever be overturned, I’m going to be perfectly honest and say that I would like to see abortion laws continue to be restrictive anywhere they can through sonogram laws, waiting periods, etc. I also believe the only way I would support abortion is in the case of the life of the mother being in danger. Even then, it seems like a very sad, painful issue. I would never want to dictate what another person is going to do, but then again it’s an issue I stand firm on.
That being said, why in the heck does anybody care about what Piers Morgan has to say? The guy has what, half a million viewers a night. Besides that, he asks loaded, liberally-biased questions. And he’s a jerk.

NathanG on October 20, 2011 at 11:43 AM

Ummm Honda, try posting honestly just once. I’ll use small words so you can understand what I say.

1)Polls are hardly the final word. You SHOULD know better. Ask most people if they are against abortion in the first week or so and see what answer you get.

2) All he does is sign the amendment. Yet that is HIM imposing his beliefs on others. Oh yes, let’s ignore all the other people behind the amendment.

3) I didn’t say he was pro-choice. You and other Cain haters did.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 11:44 AM

No federal or state funding for abortion.

All fixed.

portlandon on October 20, 2011 at 11:37 AM

I’m with ya all the way, buddy.

a capella on October 20, 2011 at 11:44 AM

I don’t see what the issue is. I can have a moral objection to abortion, but still feel it’s the duty of the gov’t to regulate clinics and license doctors.

I don’t want one cent of tax money being used for the expressed purpose of ending the life of a fetus.

bloghooligan on October 20, 2011 at 11:44 AM

<blockquoteYou’re confusing your terms. It’s the difference between social conservatism and social libertarianism. Like it or not, the conservative view on abortion is that it should be outlawed. The libertarian view is that it should be legal.

I’ve read Hayek, too, so let’s not fight definitions. He’s right, of course. But we are stuck with a confusing terminology when it comes to political ideologies, trying to cram a tripartite distinction into a binary choice. ‘Libertarian’ has been sullied by the assortment of wack jobs that have donned the label.

If you call me a 19th-century liberal, I won’t be offended. In debates with liberals it’s fun to self-identify as a liberal, and then to go on and explore just what they are liberal about. Usually not much except access to abortion, gay marriage, and legalizing marijuana; things like gun rights and free enterprise economics, not so much.

I thought Perry had it strategically right very early in the game when he said abortion rights should be a matter of state law. For a candidate who takes liberty seriously, it’s the right answer to the entire social conservative agenda. Unfortunately, he quickly abandoned that position and began the usual gutless kow-tow to the social conservatives.

Byron on October 20, 2011 at 11:44 AM

If he thinks life begins at conception but doesn’t think govt should make abortion illegal, then he’s a monster. Who could stand around and say the govt should do nothing if people are being murdered?!

TheBlueSite on October 20, 2011 at 11:31 AM

Are you serious? He’s saying it’s his personal view. Shoot, I believe life begins at conception. And I certainly think by the time a fetus has a heartbeat(which is early in the pregnancy), it shouldn’t be aborted. But you know what? That’s my own opinion. Others have their own take on it. And I think the less the government is involved in this, the better. Leave up to the individual states to decide on legality and the individual woman to pay for the procedure.

Doughboy on October 20, 2011 at 11:44 AM

keep the change on October 20, 2011 at 11:42 AM

Okay – so you’re Pro Choice. Check!

Second – Ronald Reagan and George Bush ran as PRO-LIFE candidates – they were elected. So it’s not like we don’t elect Pro-Life candidates.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 11:45 AM

So, whatever a president thinks should be law. Got it.

There are people who believe that life begins at conception.
There are people who believe that life don’t begin until the heart beats.
There are people who believe that life doesn’t begin until birth.

There’s no absolute here that’s provably clear to everyone, so why should a president have the power to choose morality for everyone?

I agree with Cain 100% on this.

beatcanvas on October 20, 2011 at 11:36 AM

Oh right – it’s “above your pay grade.” Of course, Keep the Change says that life begins at 40. So, just to be safe, let’s not legislate it at all until age 40. Then we’ll all be happy.

OneGyT on October 20, 2011 at 11:45 AM

Cain has a perfectly reasonable position here. Any republican candidate is going to be hit with the daughter-rape question. its a media favorite hypothetical. Cain handled it well.

Why do people have to dumb-down issues? You can be anti-abortion, but also be against the government imposing a decision upon other people with different opinions. Cain has a strict philosophy and he sticks to it. I tend to appreciate that.

tflst5 on October 20, 2011 at 11:46 AM

Yes YOU see no difference, but science and reality does. Facts are annoying things.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 11:39 AM

Yeah here is a fact for you. If the fetus wasn’t alive you wouldn’t need an abortion. It’s not a moral crusade for me unless we’re having a debate on whether murder is moral.

What makes this worse is I gave money to his campaign.

Big Orange on October 20, 2011 at 11:49 AM

tflst5, some of the rabid Cain haters here will bash him no matter what. Then will attack us for calling them on their irrational hate.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 11:49 AM

There’s no absolute here that’s provably clear to everyone, so why should a president have the power to choose morality for everyone?

I agree with Cain 100% on this.

beatcanvas on October 20, 2011 at 11:36 AM

Give ya a choice …

Someone gives you a shotgun – and says … “Fire around into that paper target over there.”

You get ready to shoot and then the guy says …

“Oh by the way – there might be a human being behind that target … or … maybe not.”

Do you fire at the target?

If society can’t decide when life begins (and it can’t) – then society shouldn’t destroy a fetus at any stage of development.

I’m sorry – but this is the only intellectual position on the matter.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 11:50 AM

This is an absolute deal breaker for most serious people of faith. His answers (multiple) were clear. He’s obviously thought about it. To say different now would be a reversal. Romney reversed himself on this a few years back and people have qualms about that… I don’t want to elect someone who reversed himself on this issue this afternoon!

Cain’s a very likeable guy, but I also have major reservations about his confusion on foreign policy issues.

I’m cutting checks to the Perry campaign. And I’ll see about volunteering. My only reservation about Perry is his lack of debating skills, but he’s improving. By the time he faces Obama, he’ll be fine. Besides the more people see of Obama, the less they like him.

theCork on October 20, 2011 at 11:51 AM

Second – Ronald Reagan and George Bush ran as PRO-LIFE candidates – they were elected

They were pro-life in philosophy. As is Cain. They were not asked if they would get to work to ban abortion as president and send women to jail. Cain is being attacked for not saying yes to the latter. Big difference.

keep the change on October 20, 2011 at 11:52 AM

I tend to agree with Portlandon. I believe it would be the most realistic position to take on the issue, letting the states decide on abortion laws. States like New York, California, Massachusetts, etc. would never accept Roe vs. Wade being overturned, or any other restrictive laws similar to that being enacted. It’s just not going to happen.

NathanG on October 20, 2011 at 11:52 AM

You can be anti-abortion, but also be against the government imposing a decision upon other people with different opinions. Cain has a strict philosophy and he sticks to it. I tend to appreciate that.

tflst5 on October 20, 2011 at 11:46 AM

Sorry man – if that’s your opinion – why then did Herman Cain say at one time he’s FOR a Constitutional Amendment banning abortion?

See – there is no way to “craft” a rational for him on this – because there is none. After all his conflicting answers – Ed Morrissey is confused as to whether or not Cain is Pro-Life or Pro-Choice – and frankly – so are most of us who aren’t in the tank for Cainlusionalism.

Seriously – is he Pro-Life or Pro-Choice? Clear that up for us.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 11:53 AM

I tend to agree with Portlandon. I believe it would be the most realistic position to take on the issue, letting the states decide on abortion laws. States like New York, California, Massachusetts, etc. would never accept Roe vs. Wade being overturned, or any other restrictive laws similar to that being enacted. It’s just not going to happen.

NathanG on October 20, 2011 at 11:52 AM

Whoops. That makes no sense. Roe V. Wade would be overturned, and it would be left up to the states.

NathanG on October 20, 2011 at 11:55 AM

Yeah here is a fact for you. If the fetus wasn’t alive you wouldn’t need an abortion. It’s not a moral crusade for me unless we’re having a debate on whether murder is moral.

What makes this worse is I gave money to his campaign.

Big Orange

Depends on when the abortion is done. In the first one to two weeks, it’s not a fetus.
You want to look at this as an entirely black or white issue, and it’s gray in one area.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 11:55 AM

They were pro-life in philosophy. As is Cain. They were not asked if they would get to work to ban abortion as president and send women to jail. Cain is being attacked for not saying yes to the latter. Big difference.

keep the change on October 20, 2011 at 11:52 AM

Dude – the Republican platorm has had a PRO-LIFE plank in it forever. Well, maybe McCain took it out in 2008 – but it was in there before then.

GOP = PRO LIFE Party.

Pro-Choice is NOT a mainstream view in this party.

Second – you can’t slight Mittens now for his flip-flops on abortion because he’s always been personally “Pro-Life” but publicly (sometimes) both Pro-Choice and Pro-Life.

What is Cain doing here? Trying to emmulate the worst parts of Mitt Romney’s political evolution?

Seriously.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 11:56 AM

They were not asked if they would get to work to ban abortion as president and send women to jail.

Has anyone considered of all the jobs that would be created by all the extra woman’s prison when abortion is declared murder?

All those guards, prosecuters, contractors etc.

There’s your stimulus.

Pablo Honey on October 20, 2011 at 11:56 AM

If society can’t decide when life begins (and it can’t) – then society shouldn’t destroy a fetus at any stage of development.

So society should make criminal law based on only the opinion of one group? You have it wrong. In cases where it is debatable, no criminal law shall be passed by Congress. Capital punishment is a good example. There are many people who say it is morally wrong. As a conservative, do you then apply your logic and say that the president should be in favor of a federal law banning capital punishment is all states – since according to your thinking – the most pro-life opinion shall be the law?

keep the change on October 20, 2011 at 11:56 AM

I thought Perry had it strategically right very early in the game when he said abortion rights should be a matter of state law.

Byron on October 20, 2011 at 11:44 AM

State law that the Feds would overturn if such laws were ever enacted in the states. States cannot even enforce their own immigration laws, as is seen in AZ and AL, let alone overturn abortion which is the holiest sacred cow of the Dems.

Herb really stepped in it on this one. I can’t trust a man to pick good Justices to the SCOTUS if he himself is confused on the subject of life.

Punchenko on October 20, 2011 at 11:56 AM

tflst5, some of the rabid Cain haters here will bash him no matter what. Then will attack us for calling them on their irrational hate.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 11:49 AM

You got that right. And they will twist what is said by cain to fit their view point.
Abortion is legal. Cain is against it, but he cannot change the law. End of story. But the avid ( perhaps aphid) cain haters will do what every they can to try to make him look bad.

ColdWarrior57 on October 20, 2011 at 11:57 AM

If you think women are murdering millions of people a year, I’m guessing that’s gonna rise to the level of something you’d want to make a law about.

TheBlueSite on October 20, 2011 at 11:39 AM

Just to review your civics for you, Congress makes laws, not the president. The president executes them – hence the phrase, the Executive Branch of government. To expect the president to take the lead on this issue is cart before the horse, for one, and for two, he can legally only do what Congress has passed.

It’s not about what you or I or Herman Cain thinks. Prove it. While I personally believe it’s murder, half of a America, including my wife, does not. But I guess, according to you, it’s okay to make a law if the president thinks it.

Aren’t we living under that philosophy now?

beatcanvas on October 20, 2011 at 11:57 AM

Nice having our side tear apart our side over issues the other side doesn’t care about other than to tear our side apart over.

DanMan on October 20, 2011 at 11:57 AM

I do. Their insistence on inflicting their morals on others is going to cause the downfall of the last best hope for mankind. People who want others to be taxed more are just as guilty of inflicting morals.

TedInATL on October 20, 2011 at 11:41 AM

As long as Abortion is federally and state funded by tax payer dollars, the blood is on our hands.

Once we abolish the taxpayer funded abortions, the social cons can fight the laws all they want with a clear conscience.

As for Abortion not being a fiscal issue, it is.

Do you know how many future tax payers we are aborting? Seriously.

portlandon on October 20, 2011 at 11:58 AM

Depends on when the abortion is done. In the first one to two weeks, it’s not a fetus.
You want to look at this as an entirely black or white issue, and it’s gray in one area.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 11:55 AM

Prove to us that there is no life in a one day old fertilized embryo?

Please – link me to the scientific study that says there is no “soul” in that embryo.

We’re waiting.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 11:58 AM

If he were to leave off his conception position then there would be less to no issue here. Conception is as hard line as it possibly can get. His premise left him no room for negotiation and he held strong to the opposite conclusion. Multiple times.

anuts on October 20, 2011 at 11:59 AM

Cain is against it, but he cannot change the law. End of story. But the avid ( perhaps aphid) cain haters will do what every they can to try to make him look bad.

ColdWarrior57 on October 20, 2011 at 11:57 AM

He said he wants to change the law by supporting a PRO-LIFE amendment to the Constitution.

But then he says a woman should be able to choose?

Seriously – he’s bat shirt incoherent on this. Ed Morrissey and others are right.

Cain is all over the place on this issue – and it’s not the first issue for him to be out in left field on.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:01 PM

Depends on when the abortion is done. In the first one to two weeks, it’s not a fetus.
You want to look at this as an entirely black or white issue, and it’s gray in one area.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 11:55 AM

It isn’t gray at all. It’s not OK on one day and murder on the next. Even if you think it’s a gray area, wouldn’t you error on the side of life?

Big Orange on October 20, 2011 at 12:01 PM

When Cain gets more staff, we will proabably start seeing position papers on such issues on his website. That will help him as a candidate and voters as well.

KW64 on October 20, 2011 at 12:02 PM

Someone gives you a shotgun – and says … “Fire a round into that paper target over there.”

You get ready to shoot and then the guy says …

“Oh by the way – there might be a human being behind that target … or … maybe not.”

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 11:50 AM

Dumb analogy.

You get into your car. You might get into an accident and kill someone. Or you might not. Therefore, by your logic, you shouldn’t drive.

You’re shooting blanks.

beatcanvas on October 20, 2011 at 12:02 PM

I see no difference in shooting my neighbor and abortion. Both are murder.

That’s true on the surface, but under our laws, one will get you prison time, the other will not. Right or wrong, that’s how it is right now.

I don’t want to sound callous, but the reality is that this is the world we live in. You can scream all you want that it’s murder, and it is, but it’s a legal procedure and until we change it, there’s nothing that can be done about it. It’s a matter of choice for the individual.

It’s simple as that.

Pcoop on October 20, 2011 at 12:02 PM

Nice having our side tear apart our side over issues the other side doesn’t care about other than to tear our side apart over.

DanMan on October 20, 2011 at 11:57 AM

Okay great – the “other side” doesn’t care about illegal immigration, or in-state tuition …

So I guess we don’t care either?

Come to think of it – WHY NOT just make the other side happy and adopt ALL of their positions – including socialism, neo-feminism, anti-war, etc?

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:02 PM

GOP = PRO LIFE Party.

You brought up Reagan specifically. And I’m specifically challenging you to quote Reagan saying during the 1980 election, or during the primaries, that he was asked – and responded in the affirmative – that should he be president, he would get to work on getting a bill passed to ban abortion in all 50 states. He didn’t. He wouldn’t. If he did, Carter would have had a second term. The popular vote was pretty close. That’s my point.

That simply is not an electable campaign issue at the federal level. It isn’t. And expecting Cain to do that, is expecting him to fall on his own sword. You can’t win the White House by appealing to social cons at the expense of independents and women voters.

keep the change on October 20, 2011 at 12:03 PM

As I said last night,

I watched the HOUR LONG Morgan interview and it was phenomenal.

Naturally the one sentence he misspoke is the one that gets any attention. That’s the nature of the beast and it will sharpen his skills, so it’s a good thing.

Does Cain need to improve in his speaking? Yes. Actually, most of the candidates do. (except plastic and insincere Romney. Mr. “I can’t have illegals working for me because I’m running for office.” Why did he have to qualify that statement? I’m not saying that Perry’s attack wasn’t unfair and ridiculous.)

Show me one other candidate who has had more interviews (print and TV and radio) these past 3 weeks. Cain has been everywhere. No other candidate has come close these past few weeks in putting himself out there with in depth interview with the main stream liberal media. And in 3 weeks we only have a couple “gaffes.” Not bad for an amateur politician.

I wish everyone here saw the whole hour of the Morgan interview. Cain was amazing. Reminded me of why he is my number one choice. Mistakes and all. I am prepared to suffer through some mistakes. I trust him and KNOW he would make an excellent President and would make an actual difference. I am completely comfortable he would do the right thing on Foreign Policy. I am willing to take the good with the bad, when it comes to someone answering questions directly and not dodging the questions.

Does he need to improve? Yup. Does he need to explain 999 better? Yes. Does he need to get better answering Foreign Policy questions? Yes. But I think our patience will be rewarded. Up against Obama, the general public will forgive Cain some “gaffes.”

Reagan infuriated the liberals who called him the “Teflon President” because nothing stuck to him. I think Cain has that same quality. Mistakes will be forgiven. Especially since he is not an experienced interviewee and he is not a politician. The general public will like him and give him so leeway. They will trust his leadership. Most people will not analyze every sentence like we do, even when the liberal media will highlight it. Most vote on impressions and likeability.

This abortion quote was in the last half hour of the interview. Cain is not a politician and he answers all questions and he always answers them honestly. But his answers do not always reflect what he actually thinks. He is thinking one thing other than what he is being asked and answers that and expects everyone to know what he meant, because he has made his opinions clear repeatedly in the past. Yes, this is a problem.

But let’s not pretend he is not 100% pro-life.

He has stated multiple times he will sign anti-abortion legislation and specifically stated he would only appoint pro-life and conservative judges. He wants to de-fund planned parenthood.

What he probably meant to say here was what he said the other day. When it’s the life of the mother, it is up to the family. Because in this interview below from Sunday, he said that and specifically said no in cases of rape and incest.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pA7fCffhwTk

Elisa on October 20, 2011 at 12:03 PM

Further thoughts: Cain wasn’t talking about outlawing abortion except in the case of rape or incest… he was talking about allowing abortion in all cases. He was expressing a personal distaste for it but saying that under his presidency, abortion will remain legal right up to the ninth month, right up to partial birth.

theCork on October 20, 2011 at 12:03 PM

I don’t want to sound callous, but the reality is that this is the world we live in. You can scream all you want that it’s murder, and it is, but it’s a legal procedure and until we change it, there’s nothing that can be done about it. It’s a matter of choice for the individual.

It’s simple as that.

Pcoop on October 20, 2011 at 12:02 PM

That’s kind of the “German defense” for holocaust. “Eh, we were against it … what could we do? … we’d have been jailed / killed.”

Over 50 million kids killed in the last 40 years guy.

That’s a holocaust.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:04 PM

He clearly said he was pro-life.

I took what he said was that he does not condemn other people for their beliefs.

tinkerthinker on October 20, 2011 at 12:05 PM

That should put the nail in his candidacy coffin. Sounds like George HW Bush. Not really a conservative position.

Christian Conservative on October 20, 2011 at 12:05 PM

Further thoughts: Cain wasn’t talking about outlawing abortion except in the case of rape or incest… he was talking about allowing abortion in all cases. He was expressing a personal distaste for it but saying that under his presidency, abortion will remain legal right up to the ninth month, right up to partial birth.

theCork on October 20, 2011 at 12:03 PM

Spot on analysis – but, when it comes to Cain and his incoherent statements – his followers don’t hold him to any kind of consistent standard (like they do other candidates).

And tomorrow Cain will say this was all a joke (but maybe not really) … and all will be healed. :D

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:06 PM

Prove to us that there is no life in a one day old fertilized embryo?

Please – link me to the scientific study that says there is no “soul” in that embryo.

We’re waiting.

HondaV65

Again you have to be dishonest to attack me. Where did I say the fertilzed egg wasn’t life? You are making this too easy. Plants are alive. Human tissue is alive. Does that make ending that “life” murder? Hardly
How about YOU post a “scientific study” that says there IS a soul since YOU are apparently claiming it has one.

Big Orange, see my response to Hondah above. There is a time when it isn’t a fetus and it isn’t murder. Period. Again, science and facts.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:06 PM

Seems like there is something new to be confused about dang near every day with Herb. I really do think he’s a good man with some great principles- but if we’re questioning so many of his statements, think about what the left would do with them. Definitely something to think about when deciding who to support.

kg598301 on October 20, 2011 at 12:06 PM

He clearly said he was pro-life.

I took what he said was that he does not condemn other people for their beliefs.

tinkerthinker on October 20, 2011 at 12:05 PM

Yes – he said he was Pro-Life and then said the family and the doctors should decide.

That’s a PRO-CHOICE position.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:07 PM

And while it is legal to have one, regardless how you feel, you really have no power or authority to tell someone they should have one or not, the best you can do is to talk them out of it. Unless you have the authority to change Roe v. Wade yourself, in the next 30 seconds, this is the unfortunate reality you have to live with. In this sense Cain is right.

Pcoop on October 20, 2011 at 10:04 AM

Cain wants to be president and the president appoints supreme court justices and they have the power to overturn Roe v. Wade. That is why his opinion on abortion is important. We are damn close to overturning this travesty. We need a president who will work toward that goal. Even Romney says he is pro-life.

Bill C on October 20, 2011 at 12:08 PM

Memo to all Republican candidates:

Avoid appearing on small-audience shows with liberal hosts. The dangers far outweigh any potential advantages than can be gained.

bw222 on October 20, 2011 at 12:10 PM

so-called Conservatives have to be the biggest hypocrites in the world. What Cain said is not confusing at all…

Like I said, Hotair is in the tank for Rick perry, so of course they are attacking Romney and Herman Cain. The only people who don’t understand what he is saying there are the people who want Perry.

Chudi on October 20, 2011 at 12:11 PM

Again you have to be dishonest to attack me. Where did I say the fertilzed egg wasn’t life? You are making this too easy. Plants are alive. Human tissue is alive. Does that make ending that “life” murder? Hardly
How about YOU post a “scientific study” that says there IS a soul since YOU are apparently claiming it has one.

Big Orange, see my response to Hondah above. There is a time when it isn’t a fetus and it isn’t murder. Period. Again, science and facts.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:06 PM

Wow … just wow.

Okay – let’s try this … I want you to link me to the scientific study that shows, conclusively – when LIFE begins.

Obviously – if someone killed you – it would be murder right?

At what point did you EARN that important protection? What line did you cross in your development?

Was it AT BIRTH?

Was it five minutes before Birth? And by the way – PRO-Choice means you’re for partial birth abortion also – which happens to viable babies.

Society has GOT to define where that line is – and don’t tell me that the courts do that – they have no right to. Society must look at the scientific evidence and define when life begins – and then refuse to KILL it after that time.

I submit that answer will never be found – so that line can only be logically drawn …

AT CONCEPTION.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:11 PM

He has stated multiple times he will sign anti-abortion legislation and specifically stated he would only appoint pro-life and conservative judges. He wants to de-fund planned parenthood.

What he probably meant to say here was what he said the other day. When it’s the life of the mother, it is up to the family. Because in this interview below from Sunday, he said that and specifically said no in cases of rape and incest.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pA7fCffhwTk

Elisa on October 20, 2011 at 12:03 PM

Links to an official position paper would be helpful at this point.

theCork on October 20, 2011 at 12:11 PM

Can’t we just do away with social issues for one election? So tired of this entire debate. When we are totally broke and the whole country looks like Detroit, the pro-choice/pro-life debate won’t seem like such a big deal.

Hongqi on October 20, 2011 at 12:11 PM

I happen to agree with what I think is his position.

I’m opposed to abortion but don’t think it’s the governments role to prevent abortions except for the 3rd trimester when the baby can survive outside the womb.

I think it comes down to a religious/moral choice.

Keith_Indy on October 20, 2011 at 12:12 PM

Seems like there is something new to be confused about dang near every day with Herb. I really do think he’s a good man with some great principles- but if we’re questioning so many of his statements, think about what the left would do with them. Definitely something to think about when deciding who to support.

kg598301 on October 20, 2011 at 12:06 PM

The man does not want to be called Herb, you morons like you keep calling him herb. That tells me you don’t like him, and probably a supporter of the racist Rick Perry.

Chudi on October 20, 2011 at 12:13 PM

Yes – he said he was Pro-Life and then said the family and the doctors should decide.

That’s a PRO-CHOICE position.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:07 PM

Because we live in a pro-choice world. One step forward would be to make it a state’s right law. He supports that.

tinkerthinker on October 20, 2011 at 12:14 PM

so-called Conservatives have to be the biggest hypocrites in the world. What Cain said is not confusing at all…

Chudi on October 20, 2011 at 12:11 PM

“of course I’ll sign a PRO-LIFE amendment”

“of course I think the decision is up to the family and the doctor”

“of course I think abortion should be illegal”

“of course I think the government has no business in that decision”

Right … not confusing.

Methings YOU ARE IN THE TANK FOR ROMNEY.

And you really like Cain as a stalking horse.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:14 PM

As long as Abortion is federally and state funded by tax payer dollars, the blood is on our hands.

Once we abolish the taxpayer funded abortions, the social cons can fight the laws all they want with a clear conscience.

As for Abortion not being a fiscal issue, it is.

Do you know how many future tax payers we are aborting? Seriously.

portlandon on October 20, 2011 at 11:58 AM

I’m with you on taxpayer funding. There should be none.

If you’re going to say that future tax payers are being aborted, the other side of the equation is that some percentage(probably higher than in the general population) will be net recipients of
of “entitlements”.

TedInATL on October 20, 2011 at 12:14 PM

Republican women and their daughters get abortions ALL THE TIME. Those Bible-thumpin’ southerners love to talk faith and life, but look at their divorce and premarital sex rates.

Moral perversion and self-righteousness go hand in hand down South.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 12:14 PM

Society has GOT to define where that line is – and don’t tell me that the courts do that – they have no right to. Society must look at the scientific evidence and define when life begins – and then refuse to KILL it after that time.

And by “society” you really mean “religious conservatives”.

Pablo Honey on October 20, 2011 at 12:15 PM

Yes – he said he was Pro-Life and then said the family and the doctors should decide.

That’s a PRO-CHOICE position.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:07 PM

It’s awful that people should have a say in their own lives. :(

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 12:15 PM

You got that right. And they will twist what is said by cain to fit their view point.
Abortion is legal. Cain is against it, but he cannot change the law. End of story. But the avid ( perhaps aphid) cain haters will do what every they can to try to make him look bad.

ColdWarrior57 on October 20, 2011 at 11:57 AM

Cain makes himself look bad — real bad. He is out of his depth and is unsure about what he actually believes. I am glad that we have Romney folks like you who can explain to us all What Cain Really Meant(TM) so we can all line up and throw our vote away on an unprincipled candidate like Herb.

Punchenko on October 20, 2011 at 12:15 PM

Yes wow. You want to define where life begins and decide it’s at conception. Again, it’s not a fetus early on. Ending the pregnancy at that point isn’t murder.
BTW, where is the scientific study I asked for. YOU made the insinuation. How about backing it up?
I’m also against making a rape victim give birth to the baby. That to me is a sign of twisted thinking.

Little FYI, just because Cain isn’t adhering to your foaming at the mouth standard doesn’t mean he isn’t adhering to mine.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:15 PM

I am anti-theft. But I’m pro-theft-choice – if you wanna steal, well, I don’t approve, but the government shouldn’t get in the way. How’s it look now?

Cain just blew it for me.

psrch on October 20, 2011 at 12:16 PM

Because we live in a pro-choice world. One step forward would be to make it a state’s right law. He supports that.

tinkerthinker on October 20, 2011 at 12:14 PM

Wow – you guys were opposed to releasing terrorists until Herbie said he could do it.

Then it was all cool with you.

Then you were Pro-Life until Herbie said he was Pro-Choice.

And you guys just flip to that position even more quickly than Mitt Romney.

I wonder, if Herbie goes Socialist tomorrow – you’ll probably flip to that too!

LOL – I love cultism!

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:16 PM

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 12:14 PM

Goddamn, you’re a despicable slimeball.

MadisonConservative on October 20, 2011 at 12:16 PM

DOES ANYONE ELSE SEE WHY I DO NOT TRUST THIS MAN????? HE IS GOING TO SAY SOMETHING REALLY REALLY REALL STUPID!!!!

I am supporting Perry…. Romney & Cain are idiots!!!

charmingtail on October 20, 2011 at 12:16 PM

psrch on October 20, 2011 at 12:16 PM

If the baby manages to kill the doctor while he’s performing the abortion, I’m cool with that.

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 12:17 PM

Yes wow. You want to define where life begins and decide it’s at conception. Again, it’s not a fetus early on. Ending the pregnancy at that point isn’t murder.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:15 PM

Prove it to us – that it’s not murder. Prove to us there is NO LIFE in something that, if left alone – becomes life.

LOL

Cultism

Cainism.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:17 PM

HE IS GOING TO SAY SOMETHING REALLY REALLY REALL STUPID!!!!

I am supporting Perry….

charmingtail on October 20, 2011 at 12:16 PM

You don’t have a heart. And you were before something before you were before…against…

MadisonConservative on October 20, 2011 at 12:17 PM

Moral perversion and self-righteousness go hand in hand down South.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 12:14 PM

Plus, we have the best sweet tea.

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 12:18 PM

I could support Cain if he had won the primary in 2004 and become a U.S. Senator from Georgia. Unfortunately, he didn’t. I know plenty of people will say that he’s better off because he wasn’t part of the “corrupt establishment” and a businessman can turn this economy around better than a politician. But what about his position on foreign policy? We need a well-rounded candidate. All of them have their weaknesses, but I, maybe naively, believe that governmental experience, whether it be through the House, Senate, or being a governor, is a plus, especially because of the committees they serve on, like the foreign relations committee. I think that’s why some people, rightly or wrongly, are drawn to Mitt; they see the business acumen and four years as governor as a plus.

NathanG on October 20, 2011 at 12:18 PM

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:06 PM

Then you and Cain are pro-abort on this. I’ve been on the Cain bandwagon for a while but this derails that. Murder is not a gray area for me and I don’t know how anyone could get confused with the question that Morgan asked.

Big Orange on October 20, 2011 at 12:18 PM

Prove it to us – that it’s not murder.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:17 PM

Go to an abortion clinic. See if the women who have abortions, or the abortion doctors, get arrested for murder.

MadisonConservative on October 20, 2011 at 12:19 PM

My recollection of Reagan’s position (3 exceptions) is similar to what appear to be Cain’s views.

Jim Wrenn on October 20, 2011 at 12:19 PM

Republican women and their daughters get abortions ALL THE TIME. Those Bible-thumpin’ southerners love to talk faith and life, but look at their divorce and premarital sex rates.

Moral perversion and self-righteousness go hand in hand down South.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 12:14 PM

Since when is abortion regional?

And by the way, the Northeastern Liberals treat abortion like getting a manicure, or having a wort removed.

See? stupid huh?

portlandon on October 20, 2011 at 12:19 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 6