Tag Archives: Herman Cain

Did your media inform you of these stories?

microphone.jpgIf not, you should consider expanding your horizons.

One of the best time-savers when discussing politics with Liberals is to ask what conservative media they consume.  Typical answer: [Crickets chirping].  Then you politely note that you consume plenty of media from both sides and then form your opinions.  That isn’t what makes you right (well, it makes you Right but not necessarily correct), but it does mean you have examined the issues from both sides while they probably haven’t.  (Yes, they could pose the same question to you, but I don’t know anyone who can only consume conservative media.  The Leftist mainstream media is very, very hard to avoid.)

This week’s examples

1. Have you heard how racist the OWS movement is?

African Americans, who are 12.6 percent of the U.S. population, make up only 1.6 percent of Occupy Wall Street.

Why isn’t the media up in arms over the “obvious” racism in OWS? After all, that was their conclusion with the seemingly low % of blacks in the Tea Party movement (please ignore the great popularity of Herman Cain — it hurts their racist meme!).

And the OWS movement has already tried to do some “affirmative action” and they still have a rate that low.

I’m not saying the OWS is racist, just that the theological liberals are racist for playing the race card against Tea Partiers while ignoring the elephant in the room for the OWS.

2. Climategate 2.0: New E-Mails Rock The Global Warming Debate – this is as big as Climategate 1.0.  This is the same trustworthy establishment that brings you Darwinian evolution.

Three themes are emerging from the newly released emails: (1) prominent scientists central to the global warming debate are taking measures to conceal rather than disseminate underlying data and discussions; (2) these scientists view global warming as a political “cause” rather than a balanced scientific inquiry and (3) many of these scientists frankly admit to each other that much of the science is weak and dependent on deliberate manipulation of facts and data.

3. The European Media Describes the Occupy Movement as “Anti-Capitalist,” Why Doesn’t the US Media?  Free markets have reduced more poverty than any government program ever has.

4. Leftist ABA rates record number of Obama judicial appointees “not qualified” – Appointing judges is one of the most important things a President does, yet most campaigning and media coverage address things that mean little.  We saw this coming: Obama said he would appoint “empathetic” judges and McCain said he appoint them based on the ability to understand the law.  An 8th grade student could see which view was accurate and Presidential.

President Obama’s quest to transform federal courts by appointing unqualified leftist ideologues is worse than previously imagined, according to a mainstream newspaper that reports the notoriously liberal American Bar Association (ABA) has rejected a “significant number” of potential judicial nominees, most of them minorities and women.

This is hardly earth-shattering news considering Obama’s judicial appointments so far. However, the ABA rebuff sheds light into the magnitude of the president’s crusade to stockpile the federal court system, where judges get lifetime appointments, with like-minded activists. In fact, Obama has made it an official policy to “diversify” the federal bench when it comes to gender, race and even life experiences.

Roundup

From the Dave Barry “I am not making this up” category, the government gives you The Christmas Tree Tax — This is an example of everything wrong with looking to government to micro-manage our lives and economy.

President Obama’s Agriculture Department today announced that it will impose a new 15-cent charge on all fresh Christmas trees—the Christmas Tree Tax—to support a new Federalprogram to improve the image and marketing of Christmas trees.

. . .

Here is government at its best: putting a tax, albeit a tiny one, on something that everyone, including the aliens who plan on destroying humanity over globull warming, knows about. There is absolutely no need for Big Government to help with marketing, research, evaluation, and information that strengthens the Christmas tree industry. Said program will probably cost more than any taxes taken in, just in administration.

The only microscopically redeeming thing is that they called them Christmas tree, not holiday trees.  That alone will probably lead to a lawsuit from the ACLU that will cost ten times the taxes they’ll collect.

The White House lied about meeting with Solyndra — did your preferred media sources tell you about that, or are they too busy giving the latest Herman Cain serial accusers 10x the press that all the Obama scandals are getting?

From the Flying Pig category, NOW (the National Organization of unaborted Women) agrees with pro-lifers — see National Organization for Women co-sponsors DC showing of “Eggsploitation”

The National Organization for Women is doing the right thing here, focusing on a very real reproductive injustice – the exploitation of young women for their eggs.

Seriously, I’m always glad for common ground like this.

Oops! Rich Got Richer Under Obama and Clinton — The title says it all.  Shhh . . . don’t tell the OWS movement that they are protesting the wrong people!

Meanwhile, during Clinton’s eight years, the wealthiest 5% of American households saw their incomes jump 45% vs. 26% under Reagan. The Gini index shot up 6.7% under Clinton, more than any other president since 1980.

So, all in all, under Clinton and Obama, the rich got richer, and the poor got poorer. Hey, Occupiers, why not go protest at Obama’s houses in Washingtonand Chicago?

 

Roundup

Great advice from a South Carolina sheriff for ladies to arm themselves to defend against rapists.  I loved this part:

 And, of course, there are already the oh-so-predictable cries of ‘but – what about fair trials! Vigilantism!” and ‘oh noes, presuming guilt before innocence’ as an idjit on MSNBC blathered today . . .

The Sheriff’s response? “Well, it’s easy to fix that. Just don’t attack a woman.” But to the left, that’s just pesky logic – reality is hard for them. They are more worried about the rapists and their alleged’rights’ than they are the women being violently assaulted and raped. Let me explain a little something to you, Mr. Craig Melvin of MSNBC – when a woman is being raped, she knows she is being raped. There is no ‘presuming guilt before innocence’because she is being raped; the assaulter is raping her. And self-defense is not vigilante justice. I’m not surprised you can’t tell the difference, though. Given that y’all on the left continue to embrace the Occupy Wall Street movement rather than denouncing it and therampant sexual assaults therein. We women should just shut up and suck it up, right? I mean, what’s a little rape if it’s for an agenda?

Another sad consequence of government recognition of same-sex unions:

Can you imagine forcing foster children to suffer just so you can advance your political agenda?

Of course not!

When I first learned that the gay marriage movement is right now actively working to shut down religious foster and adoption agencies my heart dropped. I could not believe it.

When Illinois passed a “civil union” law, the state began demanding that adoption agencies place children with same-sex couples.

And when groups such as Catholic Charities or the Evangelical Child and Family Agency refused due to religious objections, the state ripped up their contracts!

Ann Coulter on liberal racism — Why Our Blacks are Better Than Their Blacks.  Read it all, but here are some snippets:

By spending the last three decades leveling accusations of “racism” every 10 seconds, liberals have made it virtually impossible for Americans to recognize real racism — for example, the racism constantly spewed at black conservatives.

. . .

The surge in conservative support for Herman Cain confuses the Democrats’ story line, which is that Republicans hate Obama because he’s black.

Cain is twice as black as Obama. (Possible Obama campaign slogan: “Too Black!”)

. . .

When Bush made Condoleezza Rice the first black female secretary of state, terror swept through the Democratic Party. What if people began to notice and ask questions: “Who’s that black woman always standing with George Bush?” Never mind! He’s probably arresting her.

In addition to an explosion of racist cartoons portraying Rice as Aunt Jemima, Butterfly McQueen from “Gone With the Wind,” a fat-lipped Bush parrot and other racist cliches, allegedly respectable liberals promptly called her stupid and incompetent.

Joseph Cirincione, then with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said Rice “doesn’t bring much experience or knowledge of the world to this position.” (Unlike Hillary Clinton, whose experience for the job consisted of being married to an impeached, disbarred former president.)

. . .

Trafficking in racist imagery is consequence-free for liberals because they have ruined charges of “racism” with their own overuse of the term. By now, any accusation of racism has the feel of a Big Foot sighting.

It’s a neat trick, rather as if the Nazis had called everything “genocide” right before launching the Holocaust, and then admonished resisters not to “play the genocide card.”

Liberals step on black conservatives early and often because they can’t have black children thinking, “Hmmm, the Republicans have some good ideas; maybe I’m a Republican.”

The basic setup is:

Step 1: Spend 30 years telling blacks that Republicans are racist and viciously attacking all black Republicans.

Step 2: Laugh maliciously at Republicans for not having more blacks in their party.

Modalism and Stockholm Syndrome in the Church — nice recap of a debate with a T.D. Jakes supporter (Jakes holds a heretical Oneness Pentecostal position but gets away with appearing to be a mainstream evangelical).  I loved the starting quote from John Calvin:

A dog barks when his master is attacked. I would be a coward if I saw that God’s truth is attacked and yet would remain silent.

Those who put unity over doctrine usually have bad doctrine.

It will be interesting to see where this goes — Breaking: Whistleblower alleges Texas Planned Parenthood committed massive Medicaid fraud (What??  You mean that people who kill the unborn for a living might commit financial misdeeds?)

According to the complaint:

The scheme included the express policy of billing these government health care programs for a predetermined list of reimbursable services for every eligible patient who visited the clinic, regardless of whether those services were medically necessary or ever actually provided to the patient….

PPGC policy regarding which medical services to provide and bill for depended in large part on who was paying the bill…. [S]elf-pay patients were provided services based on medical necessity. WHP, Medicaid, and Title XX patients, however, were provided a series of predetermined servicesbased on what those programs would pay for with the result that patients covered by government health programs were often provided services on an “across the board” basis even when such services were not medically necessary. The medical testing services most commonly provided to Medicaid and Title XX patients on an “across the board” basis… are:

a) Gonorrhea testing (Codes 87590 and 87591);
b) Chlamydia testing (Codes 87490 and 87491);
c) HIV testing;
d) Syphilis testing;
e) urinalysis (Codes 81002 and 81015);
f) hemoglobin blood count testing (Code 85018); and,
g) pregnancy testing

Because Medicaid guidelines allow for reimbursement for counseling on primary birth control and back-up bc, each Medicaid/WHP-eligible patient was also billed for both for every visit, although such counseling was not necessary and not given.

Another trick was to hand every contracepting patient a bag of condoms and vaginal film on her way out the door, despite the fact they were not needed or requested. This allowed PPGC to bill the government for, according to the complaint:

a. Condoms $4.20
b. Vaginal film $12.60
c. Method counseling $30.60 (Primary method, plus film and condoms as ‘back-up’ $10.20 X 3)
d. Problem counseling $10.45 (Under PPGC procedures, handing out condoms justified billing the government for ‘problem counseling’ because condoms are also used to prevent STD’s) (Code 99402 + Modifier FP [$10.45])

Did Hermain Cain lie about Planned Parenthood?

Consider Cain’s words here:

Schieffer also pushed Cain on his history of comments attacking Planned Parenthood as an organization that favors “genocide” in the black community — comments Cain said he still believes.

“I still stand by that,” Cain said. “If people go back and look at the history and look at Margaret Sanger’s own words, that’s exactly where that came from … What I’m saying is, Planned Parenthood isn’t sincere about wanting to try to counsel them not to have abortions.”

Those words are 100.00% accurate.  No lies there.  It is a fact that abortion rates in the black community are three times that of whites, and pro-legalized abortion voters and Planned Parenthood deeply desire taxpayer-funded abortions that are certain to increase that rate.  Therefore, the policies most dear to them result in the black population shrinking as a percent of the total.  Just imagine the outcry if Republicans supported policies that killed more blacks in a week than KKK has done since their inception.

But false teacher Chuck Currie says that  Herman Cain lied about Planned Parenthood Lie (and Chuck would know lying, I suppose).  But what of Cain’s claims?  PolitiFact quotes Cain here:

“When Margaret Sanger – check my history – started Planned Parenthood, the objective was to put these centers in primarily black communities so they could help kill black babies before they came into the world,” Cain said during a talk in Washington, D.C., at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative group.

“It’s planned genocide,” Cain added. He wants the U.S. Congress to yank funding for Planned Parenthood, which receives about $75 million a year to provide non-abortion health services.

Technically Cain may have been wrong on the precisely worded original goals of Planned Parenthood (although it it easy to see how proud Sanger would be of how many blacks PP aborts).  But even PolitiFact notes this, though they water down Sanger’s evils:

The supposed evidence that Sanger supported black genocide is a loose collection of her most objectionable statements, her ties to the disgraced eugenics movement, and her work on what was called the Negro Project. That effort, started in 1939, brought birth control services (but not abortion) to black communities in the South.

That’s not “supposed evidence,” that’s evidence.

And speaking of lies, why don’t Chuck & Co. criticize Planned Parenthood for their serial lies in hiding statutory rape?  Or their lies about offering mammograms?  Is lying bad, or not?

Truths: The greatest killer of black human beings in the U.S. is abortion.  The abortion rates in the U.S. mean the black population is a smaller part of the whole than it would be otherwise.  Democrats support this 100%.  Margaret Sanger, PP’s founder, aggressively worked to decrease the black population.

I’m going to side with Herman Cain over a false teacher and Planned Parenthood on this one.

—–

More things to consider

Here’s one time when Planned Parenthood didn’t lie and when I agreed with them: “An abortion kills the life of a baby after it has begun.” Sadly, that was their view in this 1964 advertisement but they changed it when they realized how profitable abortions would be and how they could fulfill Margaret Sanger’s vision.

Regarding genocide: A pro-abort on Jim “the Gospel is all about wealth redistribution” Wallis‘ blog tried to insist that as a conservative and pro-lifer I was just trying to keep my majority.  I enjoyed pointing out that if I wanted to do that I would be just like her and fake Christians like Chuck: I would support Planned Parenthood, I would oppose crisis pregnancy centers and I would vote for Democrats.

Also see Group of 99% whites raises money to destroy group of 76% blacks. Anyone else find that creepy?

Yes, Herman Cain is “a black man who knows his place” — the White House!

You just can’t make this stuff up.  The racist Left just doesn’t learn and keeps accusing Republicans who support Cain of being racists who are trying to hide their racism by supporting a black man.  Their true racism shines through, as they can’t see why we vote for ideas and character and not skin color.  See Video: MSNBC Analyst: GOP See Herman Cain as ‘Black Man Who Knows His Place’.

How Herman Cain should have answered the abortion questions

Herman Cain
Image via Wikipedia

I believe that Herman Cain is authentically pro-life and that he would appoint judges who would interpret the Constitution properly.  But he tried to get too political in answering questions about abortion from Piers Morgan.

Please see How I wish the abortion-for-rape debate would go for a simple and effective way to navigate through the rape and incest exception questions.  This works whether you are being interviewed by a “gotcha” journalist or just having a conversation with a friend.

Pro-lifers need to quit apologizing for their views and start being more consistent.  This is not that complicated.  The unborn are unique, living human beings from conception.  That is a scientific fact.  They shouldn’t be killed because they are unwanted or as punishment for a crime someone else committed.

Also see ‘Controversy’ Over: National Right to Life Vouches for Cain’s Pro-Life Bona Fides where Stacy McCain advises how to navigate these questions.

Media consistency: You’re doin’ it wrong!

But what’s new?  When the Tea Party rallies allegedly didn’t have just the right mix of diversity then the charge from the liberal media was racism.  And if you like Tea Partier Herman Cain then you are extra-racist because you are obviously just voting for him to cover up your regular racism.

Yet the Occupy protesters are having the same lack of diversity. Does the media assume it is racism?  Of course not.  They rationalize it away in the most creative ways.  See Occupy protesters eye diversity as movement grows.

The outcry against the nation’s financial institutions that has swept the country in recent weeks has crossed many boundaries, including class, gender and age. But a stubborn hurdle in many cities has been a lack of racial inclusion, something noted by organizers and participants alike.

“We, the 99 percent, have to be reaching out to the cross section of the communities that we live in,” said Tim Franzen, one of the organizers of the Occupy Atlanta movement. “If you come down to the park and spend a day I think you might have a hard time saying this is an all-white movement. We are reaching out, but we’ve got some bridges to build.”

The absence of diversity is particularly notable given that some of the larger issues surrounding the Occupy movement — including the economy, foreclosures and unemployment — are disproportionately affecting people of color. And the legacy of activism present in some minority communities seems a natural segue for such a cause, which has been linked to the strategies of the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s.

African-Americans are more inclined to rally around social justice than financial literacy causes, said John Hope Bryant, founder and chief executive officer of Operation HOPE, a non-profit organization that educates underserved and low-income Americans about personal financial responsibility.

Got that?  The alleged lack of Tea Party diversity (ignoring, again, the rise of Herman Cain) was immediately and emphatically attributed to racism, yet the admitted lack of Occupy diversity is because of a lack of concern over financial literacy (Is that guy saying that blacks aren’t financially literate?!) — even when they admit that blacks are disproportionately affected by what they are protesting.

That’s radical bias, even by the mainstream media’s standards.

Hat tip: Chuck from Facebook

The ultimate Liberal tautology: You are racist for not voting for a black man and you are racist for voting for a black man

Alternate title: “Can a media personality say something more stupid than this? Probably not.”

A tautology is an essentially meaningless statement where all instances are true, such as, “It will rain today or it won’t.” I say without exaggeration that Janeane Garofalo’s version is that Republicans are racist for voting against a (half) black man (Obama) and they are racist for supporting Herman Cain.

It is obvious who the real racist is: Garofalo. She is so cynical that she’ll play the race card to manipulate people even though she has no evidence that Tea Partiers are racist for supporting Cain.

In an appearance on Wednesday night’s “Countdown with Keith Olbermann” on Current TV, Garofalo explained her theory.

“Herman Cain is probably well-liked by some of the Republicans because it hides the racist elements of the Republican Party, conservative movement and tea party movement,” Garofalo said.

“People like Karl Rove like to keep the racism very covert and so Herman Cain provides this great opportunity so he can say, ‘Look: This is not a racist anti-immigrant, anti-female, anti-gay movement. Look: We have a black man.’ And look he’s polling well and he won a straw poll.”

Note to Janeane: Please meditate on these facts . . .

  • Abortion rates in the black community are 3x that of whites. Liberals want taxpayer-funded abortions, which will only increase that ratio. Republicans oppose this. How does that fit in with your “Republicans are racist and Democrats are not” meme?
  • Democrats have had virtual monopolies on inner-city politics and education for over 50 years. How is that working out for black people?
  • Black unemployment has gone up dramatically under President Obama. Will another half-trillion of political payoffs help reduce that?

Via Garofalo: Cain’s rise in support proves Republican racism, or something « Hot Air.

With friends like these . . .

Reading How Obama’s plan to raise the minimum wage will hurt young black men reminded me of how counterproductive so many Liberal policies are for blacks.

The abortion rate is three times higher for blacks than whites, and Liberal dreams of taxpayer-funded abortions will deliberately take that higher.  Yet they are the ones claiming to have the long term best interests of blacks at heart?  Planned Parenthood kills more blacks in a week than the evil KKK did since their inception (and ironically enough, the KKK is pro-life).

They support teacher’s unions without fail and oppose charter schools, yet they are the ones claiming to have the long term best interests of blacks at heart?

They assume that poor blacks will always be poor and set up the welfare to perpetuate that, yet they are the ones claiming to have the long term best interests of blacks at heart?

Now here’s part of the post about how minimum wage increases hurt young black men.  I encourage you to read it all.

Moderate economist Gregory Mankiw of Harvard University lists the policies that are accepted by virtually all economists.

Here’s Greg’s list, together with the percentage of economists who agree:

  1. A ceiling on rents reduces the quantity and quality of housing available. (93%)
  2. Tariffs and import quotas usually reduce general economic welfare. (93%)
  3. Flexible and floating exchange rates offer an effective international monetary arrangement. (90%)
  4. Fiscal policy (e.g., tax cut and/or government expenditure increase) has a significant stimulative impact on a less than fully employed economy. (90%)
  5. The United States should not restrict employers from outsourcing work to foreign countries. (90%)
  6. The United States should eliminate agricultural subsidies. (85%)
  7. Local and state governments should eliminate subsidies to professional sports franchises. (85%)
  8. If the federal budget is to be balanced, it should be done over the business cycle rather than yearly. (85%)
  9. The gap between Social Security funds and expenditures will become unsustainably large within the next fifty years if current policies remain unchanged. (85%)
  10. Cash payments increase the welfare of recipients to a greater degree than do transfers-in-kind of equal cash value. (84%)
  11. A large federal budget deficit has an adverse effect on the economy. (83%)
  12. A minimum wage increases unemployment among young and unskilled workers. (79%)
  13. The government should restructure the welfare system along the lines of a “negative income tax.” (79%)
  14. Effluent taxes and marketable pollution permits represent a better approach to pollution control than imposition of pollution ceilings. (78%)
All this makes the race-baiting of false teachers like Chuck “Jesus is not the only way” Currie and the Leftist media so galling.  Tea Party members love people like Herman Cain because his ideas are so superior to those on the Left.  Yet they are the ones claiming to have the long term best interests of blacks at heart and that Tea Partiers are racist?  Leftists like that have no shame.

Hillbuzz on Herman Cain

In Another reason to like Herman Cain I noted how I appreciated his simply stated, biblically accurate views on homosexual behavior when CBS tried one of their tiresome “gotcha” questions:

In an interview on CBS News:

“I believe homosexuality is a sin because I’m a Bible-believing Christian, I believe it’s a sin. But I know that some people make that choice. That’s their choice.”

Of course, the mainstream media and the far Left will hate him for that.  But note that Cain (and every Christian I know) aren’t trying to get in the middle of the lives of gays.  We take a live-and-let-live approach, only getting involved when the lobby tries to redefine marriage or teach 5 yr. olds how “normal” transgenderism is and how you don’t really know if you are a boy or a girl.

But that’s why Hillbuzz is my favorite blog run by gay guys (OK, it is the only one I follow, but still . . .).  They are well aware of how dangerous the Left is and, despite being gay, they don’t follow the party line.  See  Media Manipulation (And Eeyore Breeding) Alert: Herman Cain on Homosexuality | Hillbuzz.  I encourage you to read the whole link, but especially the bolded parts below.  While the media and false teachers* will tell you what haters Christians are, there are many reasonable people who have learned who the truly vicious haters are.

I don’t believe Herman Cain is bigoted against gay people (certainly not in the same way that the LSM is bigoted against Christians.) As Kevin DuJan has said many times, as a Gay man, he has faced far more abuse and discrimination from Leftists (who want him to die a painful death) than he ever has from Christians (who, at worst, have threatened to pray for him). [Emphasis added]

Now, why would Lamestream Dinosaur Democrat Media Outlet CBS News want to put a soggy black raincloud of doom over the head of Herman Cain? Why would CBS want Republican and libertarian voters to dismiss this self-made man, who won the first GOP primary in South Carolina, has a track record of turning around failing businesses (and who, P.S., is black)? Why would the LSM want to use social issues to drive a wedge between libertarians and religious conservatives?

If you’ve been following along at home, the answer is “Because the LSM and Democrats (redundancy alert) believe Herman Cain can beat Obama.”

Herman Cain’s religious beliefs are shared by millions of Americans on the “religious Right.” (They aren’t shared by me, as it happens, but more on that in a moment.) I believe this news story was designed to drive a wedge between this segment of the Anti-Obama Coalition and libertarian-leaning GOP voters like myself.

And before Kevin DuJan taught us all about Eeyorism, I would have fallen for it.

If Herman Cain’s religious beliefs bother you, I’d like you to take a deep breath, and give the issue more thought than the LSM wants you to. I expect my take on this will be extremely controversial. But I’m going to go out on a limb and treat Hillbuzz readers like thoughtful, intelligent adults, unlike the LSM. (I realize this is a risky thing to attempt on the Internet. But I think the Buzzverse can handle it.)

. . .

Tell me again what Herman Cain’s personal religious beliefs have to do with unemployment, the plummeting value of the dollar, the unending corruption in Washington, the flight of capital out of the country, $4 gas, the ban on offshore drilling, or selective enforcement of Federal election law by Eric Holder’s Justice Department.

The answer is, as a libertarian, Herman Cain’s personal religious beliefs are immaterial, and of no concern to me, because the First Amendment and Federal law prevent him from inflicting them on me. [Emphasis in original]

Our Founding Fathers were geniuses. They created a public system that would allow for a diversity of private opinions. The Constitution and Bill of Rights protect non-religious people like me from the tyranny of a religious majority. The First Amendment prevents any candidate from inflicting his or her personal beliefs on me.

Remember, the LSM is totally and completely in the tank for Obama. You must evaluate all anti-GOP political coverage in that context.

Recognize this CBS news story for what it is…yet another transparent attempt by the LSM to divide the Anti-Obama Coalition and pick our candidate for us!  [Emphasis in original]

How many more times are conservatives and libertarians going to fall for this?

I’m so glad they see through what the MSM is doing here.

I don’t hate gays.  I’ve known a bunch and still do.  We get along great.  I have their long-term best interests at heart.  I seek to share the Gospel with them, if they are interested.  That’s love, not hate.

*False teachers include people like Jim “the Gospel is all about wealth redistribution” Wallis and race-baiting Chuck “Jesus is not the only way” Currie.

Another reason to like Herman Cain

Be sure to click the link and watch the short video so you can hear how he responds.   Herman Cain Speaks Bluntly: ‘I Believe Homosexuality Is a Sin … Their Choice’.

In an interview on CBS News:

“I believe homosexuality is a sin because I’m a Bible-believing Christian, I believe it’s a sin. But I know that some people make that choice. That’s their choice.”

Woo-hoo!  A politician who can give a straight answer and not apologize for it.  Oh, and he gets the Bible right, too:

  • 100% of the verses addressing homosexual behavior denounce it as sin in the clearest and strongest possible terms.
  • 100% of the verses referring to God’s ideal for marriage involve one man and one woman.
  • 100% of the verses referencing parenting involve moms and dads with unique roles (or at least a set of male and female parents guiding the children).
  • 0% of 31,173 Bible verses refer to homosexual behavior in a positive or even benign way or even hint at the acceptability of homosexual unions.

It is not. That. Complicated.

And I like his Libertarian edge.  He isn’t out to demonize gays or restrict their relationships, he is just stating the biblical truth.  And he is smart enough to know that the people who will vilify him for saying that weren’t going to vote for him anyway!  I wish other Christians weren’t so gutless in denying those truths.

I really hope Cain does well.  I’d love to see him on the Republican ticket somewhere.  (Having said that, I’ve been very impressed with Pawlenty lately.  The knock on him was that he was boring, but he has been bold and clear thus far.)

More from Stacy McCain:

Cain is trying to focus his campaign on jobs, the budget and economics — these are his strengths, as a business executive — but he necessarily gets asked by reporters about all sorts of issues. A key factor in Cain’s appeal is his plain-spoken nature and, when asked about homsexuality, he stated (a) his personal belief as a Christian, and (b) his libertarian understanding that people have to live their own lives according to their own choices.

For two decades at least, gay activists have used the “born that way” argument in an effort to gain civil-rights protection for homosexuals, attempting to make sexual preference a hereditary factor analogous to race. So Cain’s remark about sexuality as a “choice” is likely to offend gay activists as much as his remark about “sin.” But I think it’s important to grasp the libertarian sense in which he uses “choice.”

More about Herman Cain

Since Herman Cain is all black, will his Democratic critics automatically be considered racist for not wanting him to be President?  Can they only handle someone who is half-black?

I couldn’t care less about the skin color of Cain or Obama.  I just know that Cain would be a vastly superior leader.  Obama is destroying this country.

Watch the video.

“Stupid people are ruining America.”

Hat tip: Hillbuzz