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 5 6

If abortion ever becomes illegal, I certainly hope that we charge everyone who ever had one with murder. Cuz it’s murder and a crime.

That’s a winner.

Right after we amend the constitution to allow ex-post-facto laws, at which time we’ll pass a bill of attainder to arrest you for being an idiot.

JSchuler on October 20, 2011 at 1:03 PM

If abortion ever becomes illegal, I certainly hope that we charge everyone who ever had one with murder. Cuz it’s murder and a crime.

That’s a winner.

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 12:58 PM

Heck in Canada it’s not even a big deal to kill your own baby. It’s considered a late-term abortion. Disgusting…

jeffn21 on October 20, 2011 at 1:03 PM

my goodness, how can people believe the government can have the power to make abortions a criminal matter but not have the power to force them to buy health insurance?

My goodness! There’s a HUGE difference between forcing one to purchase insurance for oneself vs allowing a person to MURDER an infant just because the infant is still inside you.

I’ll agree Cain’s message is confusing, but yes, I think I understand it. I believe abortion is murder. IF someone besides myself were pregnant due to either rape or incest, I’d have a tough time having the government interfere with their decision making. I think it’s murder, but I can understand that there might be mental health issues of the mother to consider.

katablog.com on October 20, 2011 at 1:03 PM

So we can have Nazi Germany or a Stalinized Soviet state as long as the economy’s fine?

No, I think germany and the soviet union proved you cannot have this. ;)

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 1:04 PM

So we can have Nazi Germany or a Stalinized Soviet state as long as the economy’s fine?

Don L on October 20, 2011 at 1:03 PM

If you’re saying continued legalized abortion constitutes Nazi Germany, then you’re saying we’re already there.

MadisonConservative on October 20, 2011 at 1:04 PM

Are we all letting Cain get away with stupid comments cause he is black and we are sooooo afarid to keep him at the standards ALL GOP candidates need to keep?

charmingtail on October 20, 2011 at 1:04 PM

No, I think germany and the soviet union proved you cannot have this. ;)

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 1:04 PM

Swoosh.

MadisonConservative on October 20, 2011 at 1:04 PM

Are we all letting Cain get away with stupid comments cause he is black and we are sooooo afarid to keep him at the standards ALL GOP candidates need to keep?

charmingtail on October 20, 2011 at 1:04 PM

Nice! You’re now calling Cain supporters racist! Way to go!

MadisonConservative on October 20, 2011 at 1:05 PM

It’s a separate life because it’s cells are differentiated from the mother. How are they differentiated you might ask? That would be the DNA strands within the cells. What else does the DNA tell us? Perhaps, what species this newly formed life might be? Why, indeed it does! The DNA of the newly formed life indicates that it is HUMAN. A HUMAN LIFE.
Wearyman

I understood quite well. It WILL BE a human life, but in the first week or two it isn’t. Others here are arguing it is. That is where I disagree.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 1:05 PM

Are we all letting Cain get away with stupid comments cause he is black and we are sooooo afarid to keep him at the standards ALL GOP candidates need to keep?

charmingtail on October 20, 2011 at 1:04 PM

No because he is conservative and doesn’t want a federal law for everything he believes or doesn’t believe in…kind of scary for you to think that you have to actually make the decision yourself, and not have the federal gov. telling you what to do…

right2bright on October 20, 2011 at 1:06 PM

And – if Herman Cain did ever become President – I wouldn’t dare try to cross the street by myself because who knows how “President Cain” would F*** up the traffic laws?

LOL

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:52 PM

There are no words that can even begin to describe the complete amount of total stupidity that is present in that statement.

well, maybe one.

racist.

Pcoop on October 20, 2011 at 1:07 PM

Pro-Life, except in the case where rape or incest is involved, then it’s a personal choice. That’s his position. That’s also my position. As he pointed out, the numbers in which that scenario fall are less than minuscule, yet it’s always the top scenario for liberals to justify abortion.

It’s the same old liberal talking points, raised in every election. Why? Who knows? Nothing ever changes. It’s not like he’s running on a platform of anti-abortion.

I know a young lady who was raped at age 14 by a much older man (who is in prison now). She became pregnant. Stop and think about how that affected her. She didn’t have an abortion though and has an adorable daughter. I admire her for that decision, but should I think any less of her, had she made the other choice in that situation?

I’m adamantly opposed to abortion. The vast majority of abortions are simply for reasons of inconvenience and lack of personal responsibility and that is sad.

BruthaMan on October 20, 2011 at 1:07 PM

And – if Herman Cain did ever become President – I wouldn’t dare try to cross the street by myself because who knows how “President Cain” would F*** up the traffic laws?

Glad to know it takes a government law for you to keep yourself alive?

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 1:08 PM

Pro-choice is the ultimate conservative opinion. Conservatives should realize that government making decisions for them isn’t a good idea. That is what liberals do.

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 12:43 PM

When you talk about terminating human life as being a choice the government should not restrict you from making, then you’re crossing over into anarcho-capitalist territory. What’s the government for? If it isn’t for making murder laws, I don’t have much use for it.

Now Herman Cain may feel (if your interpretation is right) that abortion is not the government’s business; but how in the heck does he believe The Fed is something a good conservative should support? It baffles my mind. If you want a minimal government (note, you’d still have some sort of government), the first thing to go is a central banking system backed by the government, not laws against human slaughter.

MeatHeadinCA on October 20, 2011 at 1:09 PM

Wrong. Gallup had a majority of Americans as pro-life, and this was backed up in other polls. Sorry that you’re still living in the 1970s.

IR-MN on October 20, 2011 at 12:55 PM

EVERY TIME this banning issue is put on a ballot it loses. It’s the right wing version of gay marriage.

But, the obsessed suffer from delusions of grandeur, and are convinced somehow that Americans just can’t wait for it.

Sorry you are in denial of reality.

BTW, it is totally possible to believe abortion is morally wrong, and not want the government to be involved in the situation. Just like where you decide to go to a place of worship.

But, some of you want the government to decide that too. Even though the Constitution specifically forbids it. You really are hypocrites.

Moesart on October 20, 2011 at 1:09 PM

Are we all letting Cain get away with stupid comments cause he is black and we are sooooo afarid to keep him at the standards ALL GOP candidates need to keep?

charmingtail on October 20, 2011 at 1:04 PM

spoken like a true bigot. All you see the color of the skin.

ColdWarrior57 on October 20, 2011 at 1:09 PM

Interesting that you are comparing big brother liberal confiscatory notions to letting someone choose how to live their life.

Pro-life is more akin to:
taking someone else’s property? the way we dress? murder? smoking? re-distribution

Think about it.

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 12:55 PM

That not my point. What I am saying is that there is no such thing as complete choice and freedom from government intervention (for example there is no pro-choice position on murder or stealing) Laws have been created to limit the choice of individuals based on some kind of morality, and I am sure you do agree with many of those laws. So to believe that there should be a law against abortion is not inconsistent from a conservative point of view, conservatives support many laws that limit people’s choices.

neuquenguy on October 20, 2011 at 1:09 PM

Bruthaman, thank you for that post. I support abortion only if caught extremely early, rape, incest, or danger to the mother’s life. I am against it all other times.
Yet there are those that will call us pro-choice.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 1:10 PM

MadisonConservative I am not calling Cain people racist… that is dumb… I am calling people who give him more of a break than others… Apolagist … there should NEVER be a Affirmative action for POTUS … we have that now

charmingtail on October 20, 2011 at 1:10 PM

I understood quite well. It WILL BE a human life, but in the first week or two it isn’t. Others here are arguing it is. That is where I disagree.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 1:05 PM

But the problem here is what Cain is arguing. He holds the conception position.

anuts on October 20, 2011 at 1:11 PM

When you talk about terminating human life as being a choice the government should not restrict you from making, then you’re crossing over into anarcho-capitalist territory. What’s the government for? If it isn’t for making murder laws, I don’t have much use for it.

MeatHeadinCA on October 20, 2011 at 1:09 PM

Exactly. The federal government exists to preserve the rights we were endowed with. Many people don’t take into consideration the rights of the baby.

Hiya Ciska on October 20, 2011 at 1:12 PM

You really are hypocrites.

Moesart on October 20, 2011 at 1:09 PM

I thought this thread was about Cain’s hypocrisy.?

anuts on October 20, 2011 at 1:13 PM

Stop and think about how that affected her. She didn’t have an abortion though and has an adorable daughter. I admire her for that decision, but should I think any less of her, had she made the other choice in that situation?

So, you’re saying you don’t think more of her for that choice?

JSchuler on October 20, 2011 at 1:14 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

It’s called vetting. It is better we do it than Obama. Would you rather have Cain make these gaffes in a debate with Obama? Same goes for Perry. Would you rather Obama be the first to point out that Romney is not consistent on most issues.

If we don’t do this we end up with a weaker candidate. It isn’t pretty but it is necessary.

Bill C on October 20, 2011 at 1:15 PM

More and more, Gingrich is appearing to be the only choice. The rest are either self-destructing or are being ripped to shreds by the other candidates.

NNtrancer on October 20, 2011 at 1:17 PM

This is the single issue that drives me insane about the right. Cain’s position is the same as Giuliani. He personally opposes abortion but also recognizes that it is a personal decision, not the government’s decision. What is so hard to understand about that?

How can we as conservatives/libertarians whine and moan about too much government intrusion in our lives yet demand that the government be involved in probably the most difficult decision a woman can make? The two don’t jive.

This issue is the main reason conservatives are not united. Drop it like a hot potato and focus on the economy for Phase I. Once we have our government we can go into Phase II on educating people about birth control and the right to life.

cannonball on October 20, 2011 at 12:27 PM

There is a reason that the country is getting more pro-life just as it is getting more libertarian on issues such as gay marriage and pot legalization. Technology makes it possible for us to see in ever greater detail that a fetus is alive and that as it grows it should be afforded the right to live.

This is a winning issue for us. And it is the right thing to do.

Bill C on October 20, 2011 at 1:18 PM

It’s called vetting. It is better we do it than Obama. Would you rather have Cain make these gaffes in a debate with Obama? Same goes for Perry. Would you rather Obama be the first to point out that Romney is not consistent on most issues.

If we don’t do this we end up with a weaker candidate. It isn’t pretty but it is necessary.

Bill C on October 20, 2011 at 1:15 PM

You vastly overrate your own importance.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 1:19 PM

I can’t believe people here are still trying to push the idea that you can be anti-abortion because “you personally think it’s wrong” but also be pro-choice because “it’s not the role of the govt to legislate this type of thing.” Unless you’re a Libertarian who doesn’t want the govt involved in most things.

Being anti-abortion indicates you have some reason to abortion is murder and that murder of unborn babies is not a good thing – whether due to religious or societal reasons. Being pro-choice implies you don’t care if someone else murders that baby. Now if that’s how someone feels I suppose that’s fine but don’t try and justify it by being “personally” against abortion.

katiejane on October 20, 2011 at 1:19 PM

At the end of the day I find it hard to to form a coherent pro-life position on abortion that allows for full humanity at conception without also allowing the state to step in and force a woman to remain pregnant against her will. A state that can force a woman to remain pregnant against her own wishes is also a state that can do many other terrifying things. This leaves me in an uncomfortable position similar to the his. (Or at least similar to the position he has been characterized as holding.). It’s always unfortunate when individuals resort to abortion but there must remain an element of choice in the process.

dieudonne on October 20, 2011 at 1:20 PM

Exactly. The federal government exists to preserve the rights we were endowed with. Many people don’t take into consideration the rights of the baby.

Hiya Ciska on October 20, 2011 at 1:12 PM

Agreed. When you ask yourself why you support some form of government (and all conservatives do!), you can’t walk away saying that you believe in a government that allows all individuals to make the choices they decided to make without consequences. I can’t go steal my neighbor’s property and expect not to be punished for this choice – and for good reason!

MeatHeadinCA on October 20, 2011 at 1:20 PM

Pro-life is more akin to:
taking someone else’s property? the way we dress? murder? smoking? re-distribution

Think about it.

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 12:55 PM

The fetus doesn’t belong to the mother. It is not an organ. It is a separate human being.

Bill C on October 20, 2011 at 1:21 PM

He’s having it both ways, but the gist of his point is what he personally believes philosophically is not necessarily what he’d force upon other people. Pretty darn brilliant. Isn’t this Palin’s attitude on this topic, not to mention other leading conservatives? This helps deflate the irrational fear Liberals, Indies, moderates, and yes, many men and women alike who want the hatch escape option (abortion) should an unwanted accident occur. Herman’s got his eye on the general election, not just the conservative election (to his campaign detriment or not). Might as well take this card away from the gossipy, hysterical Liberal press while you can. He’s a comin’ for your womb, woman.

RepubChica on October 20, 2011 at 1:21 PM

Bruthaman, thank you for that post. I support abortion only if caught extremely early, rape, incest, or danger to the mother’s life. I am against it all other times.
Yet there are those that will call us pro-choice.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 1:10 PM

I’m at the same position, Hard Right. I’ve always considered myself, with those beliefs, to be firmly pro-life. This puts Cain exactly where I am on the issue.

It’s hard to believe some here are “honestly” disparaging Cain for this position. I have a feeling some of these people would disparage Cain for any position, regardless.

BruthaMan on October 20, 2011 at 1:21 PM

One thing I learned many years ago in Catechism class was that there are sins of omission and sins of commission, of which I’m certain you’ll all agree-but never upon which things constitute sin.

When the state (the judges/courts/polititions/ are the state) makes the slaughter of certain innocent living humans legal-that is a sin of commission. If they erase the law(say Row v Wade) but look the other way to the murder of innocents -that is a sin of omission. (Natural law is a tough but perfect master)

First and foremost (yes, even before the economy)the state must be the protector of all innocent life (who could be against that, except those who are against the protection of all innocent life -regardless of how they conceal it in pleasant sounding phraseology ?)

Don L on October 20, 2011 at 1:21 PM

You vastly overrate your own importance.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 1:19 PM

Are you Herman Cain because you aren’t making any sense?

Bill C on October 20, 2011 at 1:22 PM

Stop talking about this. Cain tweeted that the issue is over. //

(Actually, he did.)

Here’s something I just saw:

“…back in 1999, Cain still wasn’t comfortable with publicly discussing his views on abortion. Check out this excerpt from a National Journal article:

If he runs, Cain says he will advocate market-oriented reforms of health care and Social Security, plus a ‘’simpler and fairer’’ tax system. Each of these issues ranks high on the GOP’s economic agenda. But unlike many in his party, Cain opposes school vouchers for private schools and backs efforts only to ’’revisit,’’ not eliminate, affirmative action. He declined to give his position on abortion rights.”

Linky.

capitalist piglet on October 20, 2011 at 1:22 PM

A state that can force a woman to remain pregnant against her own wishes is also a state that can do many other terrifying things.

dieudonne on October 20, 2011 at 1:20 PM

My understanding is that in many places suicide is illegal. Are you terrified?

I guess we could always look to China if we wanted less terrifying government.

MeatHeadinCA on October 20, 2011 at 1:23 PM

It’s called vetting. It is better we do it than Obama. Would you rather have Cain make these gaffes in a debate with Obama? Same goes for Perry. Would you rather Obama be the first to point out that Romney is not consistent on most issues.

If we don’t do this we end up with a weaker candidate. It isn’t pretty but it is necessary.

Bill C on October 20, 2011 at 1:15 PM

I see what your saying but I have to ask this question. Are we seeking perfection and helping the other side? Old saying dont bother your opponent when he is in the middle of commiting suicide.
I am sure the left is loving the fact that people are tearing into Cain. Is his 999 plan perfect NO. but Laffer seems to like it. It seems a hell of a lot better then the one we have now.
Remeber the main stream propaganda machines are working for obama. They dont want their man to lose. so while we vett our man lets try not to cripple him and give the other side ammo. I was very upset at the debate, when perry and romney were squabbling like 2 kids on a school yard. The video of that I am sure will end up in an ad against them if either one wins.

ColdWarrior57 on October 20, 2011 at 1:24 PM

Maybe Herman is just for getting rid of the “weeds”?.

Hey, Herman……..I don’t think your supporters are voting for a know-nothing CEO that promises good pizza. Better get your game on Hermie or your campaign is oh-ver.

But then again, the rest of the GOP field stinks too so ehhhh, it might not matter what you says.

PappyD61 on October 20, 2011 at 1:25 PM

You vastly overrate your own importance.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 1:19 PM

You vastly underrate your own impotence.

This website deserves a better class of troll.

Good Solid B-Plus on October 20, 2011 at 1:25 PM

Technology makes it possible for us to see in ever greater detail that a fetus is alive and that as it grows it should be afforded the right to live.

This is a winning issue for us. And it is the right thing to do.

Bill C on October 20, 2011 at 1:18 PM

Americans have already shown themselves to be inured to the spectacle of killing human beings on live video. Not sure you’ve got a winning point there, bud.

I wish it weren’t so, but we’re a pretty bloodthirsty lot.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 1:25 PM

I’m getting really tired of Herman Cain responding to straightforward questions with gibberish.

Mike Honcho on October 20, 2011 at 1:26 PM

charmingtail on October 20, 2011 at 1:10 PM

You said that supporters were giving Cain a break because he is black. Such an action would be racist. Hence, your accusation is that of racism.

MadisonConservative on October 20, 2011 at 1:26 PM

You vastly underrate your own impotence.

This website deserves a better class of troll.

Good Solid B-Plus on October 20, 2011 at 1:25 PM

And bifidis ain’t gonna give it to em.

MadisonConservative on October 20, 2011 at 1:26 PM

dieudonne on October 20, 2011 at 1:20 PM

We force parents to take care of their children? We force father’s to pay for child support on kids they might not have wanted. And in some states they even have to pay if they prove they are not the biological father.

Yeah, I know it isn’t the same thing as being pregnant. But doesn’t life trump pregnancy? If someone engages in a behavior that might lead to a certain outcome then gov’t should force them to be responsible for the life they create.

Bill C on October 20, 2011 at 1:26 PM

So, you’re saying you don’t think more of her for that choice?

JSchuler on October 20, 2011 at 1:14 PM

I was pretty clear in my comments. I admire her decision, but I would not think less of her if she made the other choice in that situation.

BruthaMan on October 20, 2011 at 1:27 PM

Oh I see, because some women “allegedly” didn’t abort children in the past when raped, that means it’s okay to refuse them the ability to do it now. That makes perfect sense…. to a mindless zealot like yourself.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 12:59 PM

Ok, so it’s alright to punish the child for the sins of the father then? Because make no mistake, that is exactly what you are doing when you abort murder a child because they were conceived via rape.

Think about it: Is it the kid’s fault that their dad was a monster? Is it their fault that Mom was traumatized, brutalized and violated? Is it their fault they exist at all? if you have any sense at all you will, of course, answer “No” to all three questions.

Now, if this child is an innocent, at no fault at all for even existing, then why do we choose to murder the child, when it is really the father who should be punished? To spare the mother more trauma? How much MORE trauma are we inducing by tricking women to go through such a horrific process? Quite a bit if reports from women who have had abortions have any merit. It’s not just murder for the child, it’s trauma on top of trauma for the woman impregnated via rape. What monsters we are for insisting upon it.

If anything, any resulting pregnancy should be looked at as a gift. A way to find healing through the creation and birthing of a new life. Good drawn out from evil. But no, we are too self-oriented and selfish to do that. The baby is seen as “a burden” and “a punishment” for the mother. So it must be done away with, as though that will somehow wipe the rape away. What madness.

The only place I can see there being an option for a choice is when the life of the mother is directly endangered by the continued pregnancy and/or birth of the child.

Thankfully, those situations are practically non-existent, but in those ultra-rare cases, even then I would hope that if there was a possibility to save the child, even at the cost of the mother’s life, that the mother would be willing to make that supreme sacrifice for her child. However I could understand someone choosing not to in that case.

However, in all other cases, there is no doubt, it is murder, for which the person performing the abortion should be tried for murder and punished to the fullest extent of the law. I’m also not averse to seeing punishments for the women, particularly if they perform their own abortion via drugs or some other mechanism. With exceptions for minors, of course.

Abortion is murder, pure and simple. Stop trying to weasel out of it.

wearyman on October 20, 2011 at 1:27 PM

$$$ Newt Needs Cash Money $$$

El_Terrible on October 20, 2011 at 1:24 PM

He’ll spend it at Tiffany’s. Besides, he running a campaign of ideas, not money…

gracie on October 20, 2011 at 1:27 PM

We force father’s to pay for child support on kids they might not have wanted.

Bill C:

That’s because of our corrupt legal system! /OWS protester

MeatHeadinCA on October 20, 2011 at 1:28 PM

Game over. I’m sorry I won’t have the opportunity to put my favorite Cain slogan on my car, “Rock you like a Herman Cain”. That would have been fun.

quiz1 on October 20, 2011 at 1:28 PM

Mittens says “I believe life begins at conception and birth control prevents conception.” and he looks smart.

Cain, on the other hand, looks more stupid by the day.

If pro-life clowns spent all their energy on sex education and birth control education the number of abortions would plummet.

Dave Rywall on October 20, 2011 at 1:28 PM

I’m getting really tired of Herman Cain responding to straightforward gibberish questions with gibberish straight forward answers.

Mike Honcho on October 20, 2011 at 1:26 PM

There, that’s more reasonable and accurate.

BruthaMan on October 20, 2011 at 1:29 PM

So to believe that there should be a law against abortion is not inconsistent from a conservative point of view, conservatives support many laws that limit people’s choices.

neuquenguy on October 20, 2011 at 1:09 PM

It’s a state problem, not a federal problem…you don’t want a President micro-managing, we have that.
He was making the point that he is not the person to make his personal beliefs a law…Obama thinks everyone should have health care, so you support that?

right2bright on October 20, 2011 at 1:29 PM

There, that’s more reasonable and accurate.

BruthaMan on October 20, 2011 at 1:29 PM

Stossel was very clear and Cain was just playing political games – and he failed.

MeatHeadinCA on October 20, 2011 at 1:31 PM

Then the Black Sarah Palin said “Obama’s never been a part of the Black experience in America.” Now we’re doing teenage-level disses?

What is this narrowly-imagined Black experience that Obama has never been a part of? His background is unique but he’s Black so it was a Black experience.

http://ideas.time.com/2011/10/20/is-herman-cain-the-most-unctuous-black-man-alive/

Herman, you bests get back to da plantation…..yoh folks not likin’ you bein so ‘uppity’.

PappyD61 on October 20, 2011 at 1:31 PM

Exactly. The federal government exists to preserve the rights we were endowed with. Many people don’t take into consideration the rights of the baby.

Hiya Ciska on October 20, 2011 at 1:12 PM

I could be wrong but it sounds as if you would say that ALL rights are conferred upon conception. And yet the idea of a blastocyst being endowed with full first amendment rights is patently absurd. This suggests that there is some point in time when all rights do not apply to the newly conceived. At the very least some of these rights would simply not be relevant to less developed foetuses. Protection of all life from birth to death seems like a more consistent and robust position.

dieudonne on October 20, 2011 at 1:31 PM

More and more, Gingrich is appearing to be the only choice. The rest are either self-destructing or are being ripped to shreds by the other candidates.

NNtrancer on October 20, 2011 at 1:17 PM

Agreed. Newt is very articulate and informed about the issues and looks at just about everything from an historical point of view. Honestly, though, he’s looked at as “old news,” in my opinion. He hasn’t been in office since, what, 1999? As shallow as it is, I think a lot of people would feel like they’re in a time warp of the 90s and would rather have someone new and fresh. They want another Reagan.

NathanG on October 20, 2011 at 1:31 PM

I understood quite well. It WILL BE a human life, but in the first week or two it isn’t. Others here are arguing it is. That is where I disagree.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 1:05 PM

You are welcome to disagree.

You are also welcome to disagree that the sky is blue and that water is wet.

You’ll be just as wrong then as you are now.

Your opinion does not change the scientific facts.

wearyman on October 20, 2011 at 1:31 PM

It’s hard to believe some here are “honestly” disparaging Cain for this position. I have a feeling some of these people would disparage Cain for any position, regardless.

BruthaMan

I’m starting to feel that way too. (No I’m not calling them racists tho that could be the reason for some.)

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 1:31 PM

ColdWarrior57 on October 20, 2011 at 1:24 PM

As I recall the 2008 Democrat primaries were pretty vicious. Charges of voter intimidation, the whole PUMA movement which were Hillary voters threatening to vote for McCain. It didn’t mean anything. They united in November.

I will vote for the Republican nominee and I know most of you will do the same. I truly believe Obama is toast and that anyone at the last debate could beat Obama. But I think it will be either Romney, Perry, Cain, or Gingrich.

Bill C on October 20, 2011 at 1:31 PM

Cain will have collapsed by this time next week at the speed he’s going.

Nnnnnnnnnnnnexxxxxxxtttttt!

PappyD61 on October 20, 2011 at 1:32 PM

Game over. I’m sorry I won’t have the opportunity to put my favorite Cain slogan on my car, “Rock you like a Herman Cain”. That would have been fun.

quiz1 on October 20, 2011 at 1:28 PM

I’d buy that for a dollar.

MadisonConservative on October 20, 2011 at 1:32 PM

You are welcome to disagree.

You are also welcome to disagree that the sky is blue and that water is wet.

You’ll be just as wrong then as you are now.

Your opinion does not change the scientific facts.

Wearyman

Sounds like you are the one in disagreement with the facts. Sorry, but your interpretation is wrong.

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 1:32 PM

Bill C:

That’s because of our corrupt legal system! /OWS protester

MeatHeadinCA on October 20, 2011 at 1:28 PM

Maybe I shouldn’t open that can of worms in this thread.

Bill C on October 20, 2011 at 1:33 PM

You vastly underrate your own impotence.

This website deserves a better class of troll.

Good Solid B-Plus on October 20, 2011 at 1:25 PM

Hey, if I’m here, I’ve at least showed patience enough to wait for open registration days. I actually believe that it’s NOT a good thing in America for everyone with the same political orientation to hide in their little circles of mutual … love.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 1:33 PM

Bill C on October 20, 2011 at 1:18 PM

hear, hear.

IR-MN on October 20, 2011 at 1:34 PM

“Reacting to the flurry of stories about his abortion position, Herman Cain just tweeted, “I’m 100% pro-life. End of story.””

crash72 on October 20, 2011 at 1:34 PM

Anyone else worried that Cain has NO PRINCIPLES… he just says things to get elected??? Cain is a man that the more you see the less there is!

charmingtail on October 20, 2011 at 1:34 PM

Ok, so it’s alright to punish the child for the sins of the father then? Because make no mistake, that is exactly what you are doing when you abort murder a child because they were conceived via rape.

Think about it: Is it the kid’s fault that their dad was a monster? Is it their fault that Mom was traumatized, brutalized and violated? Is it their fault they exist at all? if you have any sense at all you will, of course, answer “No” to all three questions.

Now, if this child is an innocent, at no fault at all for even existing, then why do we choose to murder the child, when it is really the father who should be punished? To spare the mother more trauma? How much MORE trauma are we inducing by tricking women to go through such a horrific process? Quite a bit if reports from women who have had abortions have any merit. It’s not just murder for the child, it’s trauma on top of trauma for the woman impregnated via rape. What monsters we are for insisting upon it.

If anything, any resulting pregnancy should be looked at as a gift. A way to find healing through the creation and birthing of a new life. Good drawn out from evil. But no, we are too self-oriented and selfish to do that. The baby is seen as “a burden” and “a punishment” for the mother. So it must be done away with, as though that will somehow wipe the rape away. What madness.

The only place I can see there being an option for a choice is when the life of the mother is directly endangered by the continued pregnancy and/or birth of the child.

Thankfully, those situations are practically non-existent, but in those ultra-rare cases, even then I would hope that if there was a possibility to save the child, even at the cost of the mother’s life, that the mother would be willing to make that supreme sacrifice for her child. However I could understand someone choosing not to in that case.

However, in all other cases, there is no doubt, it is murder, for which the person performing the abortion should be tried for murder and punished to the fullest extent of the law. I’m also not averse to seeing punishments for the women, particularly if they perform their own abortion via drugs or some other mechanism. With exceptions for minors, of course.

Abortion is murder, pure and simple. Stop trying to weasel out of it.

wearyman on October 20, 2011 at 1:27 PM

Good post. I agree that when the life of the mother is truly at risk, then we are dealing with triage, but all other abortion scenarios are putting other rights in a superior position to the baby’s right to life.

Hiya Ciska on October 20, 2011 at 1:35 PM

Hey, if I’m here, I’ve at least showed patience enough to wait for open registration days. I actually believe that it’s NOT a good thing in America for everyone with the same political orientation to hide in their little circles of mutual … love.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 1:33 PM

Having been here for five years, trust me, we didn’t need you to stir up the s**t. Tons of conservatives here, and we argue about damn near every issue under the sun.

MadisonConservative on October 20, 2011 at 1:36 PM

It’s a state problem, not a federal problem…you don’t want a President micro-managing, we have that.
He was making the point that he is not the person to make his personal beliefs a law…Obama thinks everyone should have health care, so you support that?

right2bright on October 20, 2011 at 1:29 PM

Well, we all know what Obama would do if a state made abortion illegal by legislature and/or popular vote. The Department of Justice would come swooping in to challenge it and/or the state Supreme Court would overturn the law. Sort of like the sonogram law here in Texas or the immigration law in Arizona.

NathanG on October 20, 2011 at 1:36 PM

If you don’t protect that – then society disintegrates – which is pretty much what’s been happening for the last 50 years.

HondaV65 on October 20, 2011 at 12:53 PM
Yeah, it’s a tough argument to make that abortion is the cause of our debt and growing government.

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 12:57 PM

Sorry lorien1973 but that is a strawman argument.

It is the very corruption of truth and natural moral law that has seeped into all realms of government as a strong result of the 60′s revolution against all authority -moral and civic.

This has has led to sexual malpractive and pollution of our proper relationships with each other and our God (Nature’s God -reject him and you reject your constitutional right with that)

That moral breakdown has destroyed families, our culture,and also divided a fairly solid melting pot into divisions against each other that are exploited by morally corrupt pols.

With God out of the public square and morality and truth now relative or non-existing in the minds of so many confused souls the politicians merely abused the (economy) by taxing and spending to buy power.

Row v wade and women’s liberation have gone a long way toward a general breakdown of the family and the general culture.The politicians merely follow society in being immoral.

Yes-the immorality in one thing tends to cause immorality in others. A murderer doesn’t hesitate to steal an apple.

Don L on October 20, 2011 at 1:36 PM

Americans have already shown themselves to be inured to the spectacle of killing human beings on live video. Not sure you’ve got a winning point there, bud.

I wish it weren’t so, but we’re a pretty bloodthirsty lot.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 1:25 PM

There is a big difference from aborting this and killing him.

True story, I once dated a nurse who was very liberal but she came around to being pro-life after starting to work in a NICU.

Bill C on October 20, 2011 at 1:36 PM

More and more, Gingrich is appearing to be the only choice. The rest are either self-destructing or are being ripped to shreds by the other candidates.

NNtrancer on October 20, 2011 at 1:17 PM

Please run with that, Hot Airheads. That’s the ticket. With Phillis Shafley as a running mate? Or how about that monkey still loose in the wilds of Ohio?

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 1:37 PM

There is a big difference from aborting this and killing him.

Bill C on October 20, 2011 at 1:36 PM

There’s another difference: the first choice is made by a citizen, the second is made by the state.

MadisonConservative on October 20, 2011 at 1:38 PM

If pro-life clowns spent all their energy on sex education and birth control education the number of abortions would plummet.

Dave Rywall on October 20, 2011 at 1:28 PM

Contraception leads to abortion. There’s a reason PP is in on the sex “education” business.

http://nccbuscc.org/prolife/programs/rlp/Schu05.shtml

quiz1 on October 20, 2011 at 1:38 PM

With Phillis Shafley as a running mate?

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 1:37 PM

Goddamn, you’re stupid.

MadisonConservative on October 20, 2011 at 1:39 PM

Hey, if I’m here, I’ve at least showed patience enough to wait for open registration days. I actually believe that it’s NOT a good thing in America for everyone with the same political orientation to hide in their little circles of mutual … love.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 1:33 PM

You can get an account without open registration.

Anyway, HA is anything but a “circle of mutual love.” You might have a point if you actually tried to engage people here on issues, instead of just spewing bile such as “Republicans just LOVE getting abortions.”

Good Solid B-Plus on October 20, 2011 at 1:39 PM

Having been here for five years, trust me, we didn’t need you to stir up the s**t. Tons of conservatives here, and we argue about damn near every issue under the sun.

MadisonConservative on October 20, 2011 at 1:36 PM

Too bad. I’m not going anywhere, so live with it, junior. And I’ve been here nearly as long as you, actually.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 1:39 PM

And I’ve been here nearly as long as you, actually.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 1:39 PM

And yet you haven’t said a single thing that wasn’t idiotic. Amazing.

MadisonConservative on October 20, 2011 at 1:40 PM

Please run with that, Hot Airheads. That’s the ticket. With Phillis Shafley as a running mate? Or how about that monkey still loose in the wilds of Ohio?

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 1:37 PM

Noot Gengrich/Phillis Shafley 2012!

I’ll try and get the Zanesville Monkey to make an HA account so he can take over for you during your lunch break.

Good Solid B-Plus on October 20, 2011 at 1:41 PM

Abortion is murder, pure and simple. Stop trying to weasel out of it.

wearyman on October 20, 2011 at 1:27 PM

Once again -it’s legal, therefore not murder -it’s worse. It is the evil justified slaughter by a society of the most innocent helpless precious humans. It is not the “woman’s body” that is being aborted -it is a complete and separatly formed human with it’s own DNA growing until it is terminated.

Don L on October 20, 2011 at 1:41 PM

… instead of just spewing bile such as “Republicans just LOVE getting abortions.”

Good Solid B-Plus on October 20, 2011 at 1:39 PM

The fact is, Republican women — and their daughters — are getting abortions all the time in America.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 1:42 PM

Boy, it sure makes the thread go faster when I know to skim over certain trolls. Too bad, I used to read their comments, now not so much…treading thru their garbage leaves a stench on the whole thread…

lovingmyUSA on October 20, 2011 at 12:37 PM

LOL. You actually took the the time to write that^.

Punchenko on October 20, 2011 at 1:42 PM

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 1:42 PM

Roe effect. Far more democrats are getting abortions.

I’m all in favor of democrats aborting their future voters! Yay for choice.

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 1:43 PM

He was making the point that he is not the person to make his personal beliefs a law…Obama thinks everyone should have health care, so you support that?

right2bright on October 20, 2011 at 1:29 PM

Not sure how that question fits in this discussion, however no, I don’t believe the government should mandate that everyone should have health insurance. On the other hand I do believe that government should protect people from murder, and I believe abortion is the murder of the most innocent and defenseless among us.

neuquenguy on October 20, 2011 at 1:43 PM

Goddamn, you’re stupid.

MadisonConservative on October 20, 2011 at 1:39 PM

Rage.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 1:43 PM

errrm…?

Really people? Really?

Daemonocracy on October 20, 2011 at 1:44 PM

I’m starting to feel that way too. (No I’m not calling them racists tho that could be the reason for some.)

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 1:31 PM

Apparently, Herman Cain’s position is the same as Rick Perry’s. Against abortion, except for rape, incest or threat of life to the mother.

Romney…I think we all know he’s had myriad positions and it depends on where he is running for office that defines is latest position.

Bachmann does not support the extremely rare case of rape, incest (unsure on threat to life of mother)

Ron Paul believes such cases should be handled with the morning after pill, not abortion

Newt’s position is the same as Herman Cain’s

Huntsman’s position is the same as Herman Cain’s

Santorum does not support the extremely rare case of rape, incest (unsure on threat to life of mother)

It would appear that those disparaging Cain for his position, are either going to vote for Bachmann or Santorum, or are unaware of their own candidate’s position, or a exercising their right to be hypocrites.

BruthaMan on October 20, 2011 at 1:44 PM

Don L on October 20, 2011 at 1:36 PM

Rise of the welfare state is killing families. Ask the black community about that.

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 1:44 PM

Are we all letting Cain get away with stupid comments cause he is black and we are sooooo afarid to keep him at the standards ALL GOP candidates need to keep?

I couldn’t care less about the color of Obama’s, Cain’s, Romney’s etc. skin. I care about their ideals for governing this country.

I believe Romney is a politician. I don’t like him because he’s too slick for me. I like Cain because stumble or not, he says what he thinks – except in this case I think he was a little too squishy.

I want an honest, moral person in the White House who doesn’t necessarily know everything, but is willing to lead and learn, willing to answer for his mistakes and actually take responsibility. Face it, no one will EVER lead perfectly, but will they admit their mistakes and learn?

Obama is a joke. Forget anyone of the GOP candidates not vetting well or debating well against him. Remember, he still thinks these 57 United States created the intercontinental railroad where Lincoln started the GOP! As for “us” not vetting Obama – sorry, take responsibility for yourself. Many of us DID vet him and knew what he was and who his friends were. We shouted from the roof tops and got called racists for it.

katablog.com on October 20, 2011 at 1:44 PM

I think Cain is a terrible candidate, and I am certainly up front about it.

Here’s my take on this:

Everyone is trying to interpret Cain’s position, as if the position itself is the only thing at issue.

The problem is broader than that, in my opinion:

Cain has a very confusing way of stating his positions, while maintaining that he’s clear and it’s the fault of the listener if they don’t get it. (He’s also called people “stupid” and “nuts”, but his lack of a presidential voice is another topic, I suppose.)

If your answer to a direct question can thoroughly confuse John Stossel, Stossel isn’t the problem. He’s not stupid.

Today, he’s declared the “end of [the] story” on this, like he did when he got blowback on the rental property rock. He believes he can just say something bizarre or confusing, and he gets to decide when people have questioned him enough.

When he does that, he comes off as arrogant and controlling. Add that to coming off as confused and ill-informed, and if you think that’s a winner, be my guest…but I maintain nominating this man is a horrible mistake. Even if he manages to win, I think he’ll be the photo negative of Obama in office – just…not a good president.

capitalist piglet on October 20, 2011 at 1:44 PM

Hard Right on October 20, 2011 at 1:32 PM

My interpretation? It’s yours too bub. Go back to my first post. I quote YOU saying “It’s life”. Then you were all “It’s life, but it’s not human yet”. I stomped that argument flat so now you are back to “It’s not life, err.. I mean, It’s GOING to be life but it isn’t yet, or something.”

Just admit that you were clearly WRONG and didn’t understand the science. Your opinon is based on FEELINGS and not fact.

FACTS:

1. A fertilized egg is a living cell.
2. A fertilized egg is differentiated from the mother.
3. A fertilized human egg is distinctly human based on it’s DNA.

Therefore, based on these simple facts, we can easily determine that a fertilized human is alive, distinct, and human.

If you cannot follow the above simple science and clear logic, you are either intentionally attempting to obfuscate the issue, deliberately trying to promote the murder of children, willingly ignorant, or a moron. You pick.

wearyman on October 20, 2011 at 1:46 PM

Roe effect. Far more democrats are getting abortions.

I’m all in favor of democrats aborting their future voters! Yay for choice.

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 1:43 PM

I doubt anyone can actually prove that. But even if it is true, there’s no question that thousands of GOP women and their daughters get abortions every month in the USA.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 1:46 PM

The fact is, Republican women — and their daughters — are getting abortions all the time in America.

bifidis on October 20, 2011 at 1:42 PM

The fact is, Democratic men – and their sons – are raping the elderly and infirm all the time in America.

See, I can lie about stuff too.

Good Solid B-Plus on October 20, 2011 at 1:46 PM

Contraception leads to abortion. There’s a reason PP is in on the sex “education” business.

Contraception is nothing but the murder of millions of potential babies.

Pablo Honey on October 20, 2011 at 1:47 PM

Cain has a very confusing way of stating his positions, while maintaining that he’s clear and it’s the fault of the listener if they don’t get it.

See. Now this is a good point.

lorien1973 on October 20, 2011 at 1:47 PM

Rush Limbaugh has made the same statement. He is pro-choice, but hopes they choose life because he is anti-abortion.

jediwebdude on October 20, 2011 at 1:48 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6