US President’s Weekly Yahoo News Updates

Once per week, I consolidate comments I’d posted to recent articles appearing on Yahoo News. I share my views, written as if I actually were the US President. [I’m working on that.] The following were posted between Oct. 17 and today, though appear below in no particular order. As is my usual custom, if I open with a quoted item, that’s from the article itself.

I hope you enjoy all 17 of these mini-essays/comments.



ONE:

[As for Susan Sarandon calling the (current) Pope a Nazi.]

It won’t be too long before Popes don’t matter – to anyone. That will become an irrelevant title in a defunct enterprise that (ultimately) couldn’t stand up under the weight of its hypocrisy and sheer unbelievability.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Does that mean I’m anti-Catholic. No, it simply means I’m anti-stupid.”

TWO:

[On how likeable GOP candidate Cain is.]

I don’t like Cain at all. And you won’t either, after reading my blog post analyzing a certain anecdote from Cain’s latest book. This concerns Cain reveling in how his daddy had threatened a rich white man with a gun (jokingly, of “course,” but the gun was real enough). This was posted on ind4prez2012.blogspot.com on Oct. 15.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Cain was stupid for including that story in a book he hopes will pave his way to the White House.”

THREE:

“Iraq's Sunnis long have worried about Iran's burgeoning influence in Baghdad, where the Shiite-dominated government has built ties with Tehran…”

Listen carefully: There never were any weapons of mass destruction and there never was any threat to US security. By going into Iraq (at the insistence of ONE man – George W. Bush), we basically handed Iraq over to Iran on a silver platter.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“I hope Dubya lives long enough to see the result of his ego-fueled folly.”

FOUR:

“…about 4 in 10….That's far more than say they are disinclined to vote for a Mormon…”

Oh, that’ll change to 8 out of 10 after people see a pending YouTube clip showing “Romney” being sworn in as POTUS using the Book of Mormon rather than the Bible. One picture may very well be worth 1,000 words. But a video clip can be worth way more than that. You think I exaggerate? You haven’t seen the clip.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Google these words: Romney YouTube Searle for the script of this clip.”

FIVE:

Here’s one question that should have been asked [of the GOP candidates during the most recent speed-dating event aka the Republican Presidential Debate]: “How many more US troops would you be willing to send to central Africa, and for how long, to fight the Lord’s Resistance Army, beyond the 100 President Obama recently assigned?”

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Why is absolutely no one in the media raising red flags about sending in our troops to do battle with (according to Obama’s own figures) at most 200 – 300 ragtag fighters armed only with light weapons?”

SIX:

None Of Your Business posted this in response to my post (NINE, above), “Because it’s only 100 troops?”…to which I replied:

It's easy to say "it's only 100 troops." But that’s exactly how we got sucked into Vietnam. “It’s only X-number of ‘advisors’ and the boys will be home before Christmas.” [Yeah, right…]

100 might not seem like many in your opinion – though as Commander in Chief, I would never use the word “only” to describe even one soldier. For every soldier is more than just an “only” to his or her loved ones. So, let’s get out of the “only” business, okay?

Besides, my question was meant to give the candidates a chance to say we shouldn’t have sent any troops to central Africa, especially since quashing 200 – 300 lightly armed guerrillas is really a mopping up operation any local government should be able to handle. If not, this should be referred to the United Nations or the EU. There’s way more to our troop commitment here than meets the eye, which is why I hoped the GOP candidates would have been given the opportunity to address this issue.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Must I spell everything out?”

SEVEN:

Bill wrote this, which I follow immediately with my response:

"I promise you this, if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, that is the first thing I will do. I will bring our troops back home, we will bring an end to the BUSH wars, you can take that to the bank” - Barack Obama 27/October 2007."

Is it just me or do others here think, just perhaps, obama lied to us, YES...NO?

My response:

Ahem…when I ran against Obama in 2008, I had made a similar promise. However, mine was in the form of a written contract (containing 47-points). These two points should be of interest:

ONE: Within 90 days of my inauguration, all U.S. military forces will be completely withdrawn from Iraq and Afghanistan, regardless of the "situation on the ground." This withdrawal also applies to any covert operatives currently operating in Iran.

TWO: If I violate any of the terms of this contract, I will be removed from office by means of impeachment. I hereby affirm, in advance, that I will not defend myself nor authorize any other party to defend me against any impeachment activity in the House or trial by the Senate. I further agree to a speedy trial - within less than 10 minutes, if deemed necessary by the Senate.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“By the way, I’m running again. So you’ll get a chance to do it right, this time. I will never offer ‘Change you can believe in.’ I offer, instead, an enforceable written contract.”

EIGHT:

I responded (below) to Nobody, who asked: “And why shouldn’t Israel pay back US money spent there?”

Just try and collect. It’s not easy to collect from a country that has nukes – one that wouldn’t have any problem using them against us, if push should come to shove. Rest assured, Israel has its own equivalent of our Pentagon’s War Room. And part of what gets discussed there is, what to do if the US should “turn” against Israel. As the saying goes, nothing’s been taken off the table.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“In the world of the triumphal tribal Zionist, there are no friends; there is only the matter of survival. And they know full well, God can’t be counted on to save the day.”

NINE:

Here’s a half-baked idea – which some of you might refine (please do). Congress should enact legislation to phase in tax cuts across the board. The following assumes no change in personal income for the years in question. For the first year, everybody pays 10% less in personal income taxes to the feds than they did the year before. The next year, same deal. I’m tempted to add yet a third and a fourth year to that – same deal. But corporate tax rates wouldn’t be changed.

Social Security payouts and Medicare wouldn’t be touched. But Defense spending would be the first to feel the pinch. I propose that each US corporation (and any patriotic private citizen in a donating mood) voluntarily contribute to whichever threatened government program they favor. This might be a form of ultimate brinksmanship, but I am firmly convinced that corporations will pony up since they know how good they’ve got it and would be in the best position to contribute. Not to mention: Corporations think they own this country anyway, so we should force them to make the contributory choices necessary to protect what’s theirs.

Maybe it’s about time US govt expenditures were calculated as part of a business plan. Then we’d see how much we really need to spend from hard-headed businessmen who know about bottom lines and reasonable business expenses, not giving a hoot about earmarks or about pleasing special interests. Oh, did I mention a permanent cap on government borrowing? And maybe (just maybe) the stimulus our economy needs would come from the increased spending from We-the-People having less of a tax burden.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Don’t beat me up too badly about this, since (honestly) this thought just popped into my head. In any event, it’s got to be better than 9-9-9 or Perry’s flat tax (Perry’s obviously desperate at this point).”

TEN:

[Shooting Game responded to my post above by asking, “well is not defense one of the main responsibilities of the federal government?]

@ Shooting Game,

We’re all responsible for our national defense, aren’t we – not just the feds? For instance, the way we vote could affect how large or small that defense is, regardless of whether it’s supposed to be “one of the main responsibilities of the federal government.”

The security of the United States is not only the concern of each citizen, it is the concern of those who make the most money from this enterprise. If push came to shove and my plan were to be enacted, we wouldn’t even come close to not having enough money to defend ourselves. Corporate and, yes, even personal charitable contributions would keep the Pentagon afloat. If not, then what would that say about how much we care about our country? In other words, maybe it's time the more hawkish among us put their money where [their] mouths are.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Don’t worry…if it even looks like we might come up a little short, foreign countries would be anxious to contribute. Maybe it’s about time they did.”

ELEVEN:

Israel is not our ally. All Israel cares about is Israel. They have not lived up to their billing as a “light unto all nations.” But they fail to look into a mirror and ask why that is.

In an ironic twist, it is the US that is dependent on Israel because [dramatic pause] we’re giving them all that money! Our politicians need to give them all that money to secure Israel’s approval and a steady flow of AIPAC campaign contributions.

I salute Ron Paul for being brave enough to dare challenge that status quo, though his reasoning is bogus. Our aid isn’t teaching them to be dependent and reducing their sovereignty. Has Paul been living in a tree to reach such conclusions? But still, he’s right – though for the wrong reasons – we have to cut off aid to Israel [and, to be fair, to Egypt as well].

I, however, will salute myself for being the only candidate brave enough to say he’ll void US diplomatic recognition of Israel immediately after my inauguration. And…bestow recognition on Palestine. Oh, I can’t wait to hear the wailing and gnashing of teeth from our AIPAC-dependent, lackey Congressmen. Too bad, because they couldn’t stop me.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“With friends like Israel, we don’t need enemies – cases in point, the USS Liberty and Jonathan Pollard.”

TWELVE:

When Cain was asked if Mormons are Christians, he answered (in effect), “They believe they are.” If you ask any unbiased observer if Cain is serious, they should answer the same way – “He thinks he is.” As for “Are Mormons Christians?” and “Is Cain a serious candidate?” – the answer in both cases is “No.”

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“The masochist in me wants Cain to be nominated, just for the satisfaction of seeing the GOP nominate a Black man.”

THIRTEEN:

Coach posted his two words of wisdom “about an hour ago” – “Occupy Congress!” And this gets 57 thumbs-up (vs. 1 down). But apparently no one notices that Coach didn’t say what we should “Occupy Congress!” with. Are We-the-People supposed to storm that sacred sanctum and pull something like an Occupy Wall Street? Or what?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“As for the 57 who gave their thumbs-up: You don’t ask for much in the way of details, do you?”

FOURTEEN:

I don’t think Cain’s business plan took into account that he might actually get to the point of becoming a viable, serious candidate. And you know what they say about businessmen who have short-sighted business plans – they fail. If his handlers think they can transform this newbie into a policy wonk overnight, they are sadly mistaken.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Maybe Cain’s business plan went something like this: ‘I’ll shuck and jive as if I’m a candidate, but my real plan is to sell my books and jockey for more pay on the lecture circuit.’”

FIFTEEN:

All the anti-Romney activists have to do is (as they used to say in the days of the Inquisition) “put the question” to the Christian churches, especially the leadership. The question: Do you consider Mormonism to be a Christian faith? As soon as each and every US Christian denomination says “No” – and they will (each and every one of them) say “No” – that will sink Romney and Huntsman. And if that doesn’t, YouTube clips like the one I scripted will. Google these words: Searle You Tube Romney.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“As a Buddhist, I don’t mind saying I consider Mormonism to be very Buddhist, especially the part where Mormons claim, ‘As Man is now, God once was; as God is now, Man shall one day become.’”

SIXTEEN:

[Melvin responded to FIFTEEN (above) with these 5 profound words: “Bigot is as bigot does.”]

My response to Melvin:

@ Melvyn,

How am I a bigot? I did write, after all: “I don’t mind saying I consider Mormonism to be very Buddhist,” while saying I am a Buddhist. My real reason for opposing Romney is the same reason I oppose the entire slate of GOP wannabes: They’re part of the Two-Party System, which makes them part of the problem. And that includes Ron Paul.

The only way out of the wilderness is to vote against all incumbent Congressmen, an act which will pave the way for independents to someday get elected. I picked on Romney’s Mormonism for a practical reason: That’s the one angle that, if hammered home again and again to the voters, will sink Romney/Huntsman. To me, that’s two down, six to go. And I’m working on the others, in different ways, depending on their weaknesses. Except I won’t bother with Santorum; he has no chance and isn’t worth my time.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"Next time, bro, see if you can manage a response of more than 5 words. On second thought, don't bother replying at all, seeing how you blew it with those 5 words."

SEVENTEEN:

As I’d posted in FIFTEEN (above): All the anti-Romney activists have to do is (as they used to say in the days of the Inquisition) “put the question” to the Christian churches, especially the leadership. The question: Do you consider Mormonism to be a Christian faith?

Jay wrote in response:

But just to be sure we get a quality sample, let's be sure to get outside the Bible Belt and at a minimum ask the seven Christian churches that share custody of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem (Eastern Orthodox, Armenian Apostolic, Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox, Coptic Orthodox, Ethiopian Orthodox and the Syriac Orthodox)… 

@ Jay,

Sure, why not? But to me, a quality sample would include every Christian church within US borders. Since this is a US election, what would our voters care about how non-US Christians would feel? And I still maintain, every single US church (especially its leadership) would not say Mormons are Christians.

All you have to do is look at the name of their church: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Their doctrine has less to do with Jesus Christ and too much to do with them. And they call themselves Saints? And that isn’t narcissistic?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Joseph Smith? Meet L. Ron Hubbard. And share your notes on inventing a religion.”

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party

“Declare your independence by voting for independents. If no good ones are available, simply vote out the incumbents en masse.”

Contact me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com

President Searle’s Voluntary Tax Plan

Introduction

As a candidate for the US presidency, I should share my thoughts concerning tax reform. Herman Cain offered his 9-9-9 Plan, which he claims will lead to a Fair Tax. Rick Perry’s talking Flat Tax, which he says he’ll announce in detail next week.

I call my plan the Voluntary Tax Plan. This I introduced two days ago as a posted comment to an article on Yahoo News. Yeah, I know: Yahoo News is not the world’s most prestigious forum for introducing new proposals. But as a candidate totally lacking in financial resources, I have to take what I can get.

This is what I posted:

QUOTE:

Here’s a half-baked idea – which some of you might refine (please do).

Congress should enact legislation to phase in tax cuts across the board. The following assumes no change in personal income for the years in question. [I’ll expand on the previous sentence after the word UNQUOTE below – Steve.] For the first year, everybody pays 10% less in personal income taxes to the feds than they did the year before. The next year, same deal. I’m tempted to add yet a third and a fourth year to that – same deal. But corporate tax rates wouldn’t be changed.

Social Security payouts and Medicare wouldn’t be touched. But Defense spending would be the first to feel the pinch.

I propose that each US corporation (and any patriotic private citizen in a donating mood) voluntarily contribute to whichever threatened government program they favor. This might be a form of ultimate brinksmanship, but I am firmly convinced that corporations will pony up since they know how good they’ve got it and would be in the best position to contribute. Not to mention: Corporations think they own this country anyway, so we should force them to make the contributory choices necessary to protect what’s theirs.

Maybe it’s about time US [government] expenditures were calculated as part of a business plan. Then we’d see how much we really need to spend from hard-headed businessmen who know about bottom lines and reasonable business expenses, not giving a hoot about earmarks, or about pleasing special interests.

Oh, did I mention a permanent cap on government borrowing? And maybe (just maybe) the stimulus our economy needs would come from the increased spending from We-the-People having less of a tax burden.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Don’t beat me up too badly about this, since (honestly) this thought just popped into my head. In any event, it’s got to be better than 9-9-9 or Perry’s flat tax (Perry’s obviously desperate at this point).”

:UNQUOTE.

Expansion of cited sentence, above

Now I’ll expand on the cited sentence in the quote above, which I’ll repeat: “The following assumes no change in personal income for the years in question.”

Suppose a taxpayer’s income does increase (or decrease) from year-to-year. I will take Year 1 as an example. If he earns more during Year 1, he wouldn’t pay 90% of what he paid for that prior year. He would pay 90% of what he would have paid during that prior year had he earned his higher income during that prior year. The same idea would apply for those who end up earning less, and this adjustment would be applied for any future year involving these legislated tax cuts.

“Shooting Game” objected

Someone posted a reply to my plan – calling him(?)self “Shooting Game.” He(?) wrote: “well is not defense one of the main responsibilities of the federal government?”

I replied to “Shooting Game” as follows:

QUOTE:

We’re all responsible for our national defense, aren’t we – not just the feds? For instance, the way we vote could affect how large or small that defense is, regardless of whether it’s supposed to be “one of the main responsibilities of the federal government.”

The security of the United States is not only the concern of each citizen, it is the concern of those who make the most money from this enterprise. If push came to shove and my plan were to be enacted, we wouldn’t even come close to not having enough money to defend ourselves. Corporate and, yes, even personal charitable contributions would keep the Pentagon afloat. If not, then what would that say about how much we care about our country? In other words, maybe it's time the more hawkish among us put their money where [their] mouths are.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Don’t worry…if it even looks like we might come up a little short, foreign countries would be anxious to contribute. Maybe it’s about time they did.”

:UNQUOTE.

Voluntary Tax Plan?

Of course my plan isn’t 100% voluntary. Nor am I committed to the 10% rates of reduction. Unlike Herman Cain, I effectively admitted that my plan is a work in progress – hence my opening statement (above): “Here’s a half-baked idea – which some of you might refine (please do).”

I envision major US corporations huddling, both before and as my plan wends its way through Congress, to come up with a unified response. I intend to propose my VTP immediately. I expect Congress to shoot it down without fanfare – most likely killing it committee. However, in January of 2013, I will ask the American people to vote in a new Congress for 2015. I will emphasize, the only way to change our tax system is to (at least) throw out all incumbents and (at best) vote in independents representing no political party.

This, of course, would be necessary to enable passage of any legislation opposed by the special interest lobbyists who are so ably represented by our current crop of Congressmen.

Since I couldn’t get a cooperative Congress before 2015, that will give our corporations time to develop their business plan – that is, their response to my challenge to “voluntarily” cover the shortfall my tax cuts would generate. I have a great deal of faith in the efficiency of the modern US corporation, which also would be quite unwilling to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs by starving it of “necessary” revenue.

Of course, what defines “necessary” will be a function of how our corporations and our military huddle to determine the real cost of the best defense we can buy for the amount of money available.

Comprehensive Tax Reform

I have a number of ideas concerning a total tax reform package.

ONE:  We would have to enact Economic Transparency Laws in order to remove, to the greatest possible extent, the veil of secrecy that surrounds our corporate transactions. I am skeptical of claims that such ETLs might compromise a businessman’s competitive advantage – especially since all US businesses would be covered by such laws. As for foreign corporations doing business on US soil, they would (also) have to realize: Such disclosure is now part of the cost of doing business.

Without having as much financial data as possible at our fingertips, how on earth could we possibly make intelligent laws governing business conduct and general taxation?

TWO:  I would oppose tax exemptions for charity and for religious establishments. Actually, I would oppose tax exemptions for everybody.

THREE:  We should take a serious look at how badly our 50 states undermine their own economies, while in competition with each other. My new constitutional model, based on a concept I’d developed in the 1970s, would mitigate the effects of cutthroat interstate competition. My system, which I call Cross-Sectional Representation, is linked here:

http://ind4prez2012.blogspot.com/2011/05/saving-world-chicago-style.html

http://ind4prez2012.blogspot.com/2011/05/alternatives-to-fourth-reich.html

Herman Cain vs. Steven Searle

I won’t pretend to know all the answers, so that would make me far more open to suggestions than Mr. Cain. I don’t have any secret group of economic advisers (as does Cain). I’ve never been a businessman – having been a lifelong state civil servant.

Quite frankly, though, I find Herman Cain to have far more bluster than wisdom. This quote from his website is a case in point:

QUOTE:

Phase 2 – The Fair Tax

Amidst a backdrop of the economic renewal created by the 9-9-9 Plan, I will begin the process of educating the American people on the benefits of continuing the next step to the Fair tax.

·       Ultimately replaces individual and corporate incomes taxes

·       Ends the IRS as we know it and repeals the 16^th Amendment.

:UNQUOTE.

Cain said (above): “I will begin the process of educating the American people…” Just who the hell does he think he is? Some kind of savior? Does he really think that much of himself or that little of us? Or both?

As for repealing the 16^th Amendment, enactment of the Fair Tax wouldn’t do that. Only a constitutional amendment could – and that’s no slam dunk.

I suspect Herman Cain doesn’t know squat about macro-economics. Bravo for him that he has a bachelor’s degree in mathematics and a master’s in computer science. But those don’t translate to a broad understanding of economic policy. To be sure, my humble background (an AA degree) doesn’t bestow that understanding either. Here’s the difference: I’m willing to admit it.  Cain, however, comes across as one who is trying to position himself as the mouthpiece for an Elite he respects/fears but doesn’t understand.

Herman Cain is, after all, a motivational speaker. He gets paid a shitload of cash to turn people on. I wonder, though, if anyone who listened to his paid performances feels he sat through something profound. Or was it just rah-rah, go-team kind of stuff?

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

Founder of the Independent Contractors’ Party

“None of the other candidates will be able to enact their tax reforms, since (unlike me) they are unwilling to challenge a status quo Congress dominated by the big two political parties. After all is said and done, only such a challenge will end up making a difference.”

Contact me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com

Cain for President: It’s all about Me, Me, Me!

Herman Cain reminds me of former Senator Rolland Burris of Illinois in this revealing way:

While both men can claim an enviable record of achievement over a long life, both men seek/sought to stoke their egos by inflating their public resumes.

In Burris’s case, that took the form of the scandal surrounding his appointment to the US Senate; in Cain’s case, he would be satisfied to end up being an also-ran for the US presidency who put up a good fight.

It’s all about Me, Me, Me!

That’s what I believe to be Cain’s personal motivational mantra. My suspicions were aroused when considering his so-called 9-9-9 plan. Briefly, this plan calls for:

·       a 9 percent flat tax on household income (the only allowable deduction being for charity),

·       a 9 percent corporate tax on (from his website) “Gross income less all investments, all purchases from other businesses and all dividends paid to shareholders”, and

·       a National Sales Tax of 9%.

Right off the bat, several things bothered me about this Plan. To start with, on his website, he calls it “Herman Cain’s 999 Plan” [emphasis mine], and in his 9/15/11 opinion piece in the WSJ, Cain wrote:

QUOTE:

“Cain’s Vision for Economic Growth,” also known as the 9-9-9 Plan…” [emphasis mine].

UNQUOTE.

The candidate speaks of “Cain’s Vision,” and of “Herman Cain’s 999 Plan.” On the internet, I encountered this revealing item:

QUOTE:

In an interview on “Fox News Sunday,” Mr. Cain declared that “some of the best economists in this country” helped him develop the plan…

But Mr. Cain repeatedly refused to name those bright minds when pressed by the show’s host, Chris Wallace.

:UNQUOTE [source:  http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2011/09/18/shhhh-its-herman-cains-secret-kitchen-cabinet/ ]

Mr. Cain seems overly eager to claim excessive credit (translation: to give the appearance of being in command, of being a leader) by only referring to anonymous others who had (merely?) “helped him develop the plan.”

Such an attitude speaks volumes of a monumental ego. Cain fancies himself as a motivational speaker. But it must be remembered: After all is said and done, motivational speakers focus a lot of energy telling themselves how great they are – that is, in motivating themselves. NOTE: Beware of the inferiority complexes that gnaw at even the most (apparently!) self-confident men.

As for the 9-9-9 Plan itself

It’s too much of a coincidence (too simplistic?) that all three categories of taxation are at the same level – 9%. Why not 9 -10 - 6? Or 8.5 - 9.37 - 6.235? Or does Cain take only a whole-numbers approach? Or a consistency (all 9’s) approach? And why treat all corporations as if they’re the same – as if all categories of businesses would be equally impacted by that 9% tax? Some types of corporations could and should shoulder more tax burden; others, less. But it would seem Cain paints in broad brush strokes – or deals in the brevity worthy of a sound bite that conjures up a storm of applause from his equally simplistic audiences.

Not to mention, Cain is silent on whether he’ll continue the grand tradition of seeking to borrow to pay our bills. He speaks only of cutting spending, but that would require Congressional cooperation.  In addition, Cain isn’t saying anything about cutting military costs. And that could become important should Cain ever have to ask for a “Supplementary Appropriation” to fight in yet another of our unending series of wars.

A “leader” who wants to have it both ways

From Cain’s website [Cain’s post, dated Oct. 3, 2011]: “With 14 million Americans out of work, an unemployment rate of over 9 percent…we’re facing the worst economic times since the Great Depression.” And yet these unemployed only have themselves to blame, as witnessed by this outburst:

"Don't blame Wall Street, don't blame the big banks, if you don't have a job and you're not rich, blame yourself. It is not someone's fault if they succeeded, it is someone's fault if they failed," the ex-Godfather's Pizza CEO [Cain] declared.

On the one hand, Cain wants to blame Obama for “the worst economic times since the Great Depression.” But on the other hand, he’s telling us to “blame yourself” if you don’t have a job. That must sound pretty insensitive to the millions of long-term unemployed who know very well that Wall Street played a major role in their impoverishment.

Aside: I am now going to lecture Mr. Cain about his “Don’t blame Wall Street” remark (above): “Whether someone succeeds or fails in life depends on a multitude of factors. Not everybody who tries hard succeeds, and there are those who exert very little effort who succeed due to family connections or fortuitous circumstances. And in spite of your effort to exclusively blame the little guy for his personal misfortune, there are macro forces at work which exert their influences – for better or worse. Saying stuff like this doesn’t make you sound (only) inarticulate; it makes you sound stupid. So cut it out and stop embarrassing yourself.”

Cain’s greatest failing

Herman Cain’s greatest failing is that same greatest failing shared by all currently active presidential campaigners: He’s trying to convince us that his leadership will save the day. I, Steven Searle, am the only candidate for US President saying, “I can’t do this by myself – I need the help of a Congress filled with independent patriots who aren’t affiliated with any political party. Help me do my job by throwing out all incumbents – that’s where we have to start. All good things will flow from that.”

But…Cain isn’t saying anything like that because, “it’s all about Me, Me, Me.”

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party

“If you listen more than casually to what Cain is saying, you’ll agree – he is a bit of a simpleton. Case in point: Just read his website (for very light reading indeed): http://www.hermancain.com/”

Contact me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com