‘Ninety percent of success is showing up,” Woody Allen once observed. This helps explain why Herman Cain is soaring and Rick Perry has gone as flat as the Texas plains.
Turn on a TV, and there is the former Godfather’s Pizza CEO. From Fox and Friends to Face the Nation to The Tonight Show, the one-time chairman of the Kansas City Federal Reserve Bank advances his message — virtually everywhere but the Weather Channel.
Advertisement
In the 18 days between the September 22 and October 11 Republican debates, Cain granted interviews to six broadcast-network programs, the Media Research Center reports, plus 18 national cable-TV news shows. Cain appeared twice on CNN, thrice on the Fox Business Network, and eleven times on the Fox News Channel. He also butted heads with an especially confrontational Lawrence O’Donnell on MSNBC on October 6.
After September 22, critics slammed Perry for letting children of illegal aliens pay in-state tuition at Texas’s government universities. A lingering controversy soon reemerged regarding a hunting camp that Perry’s family leased years ago. The camp long was called “Niggerhead,” but Perry’s father painted over that hideous word, which polluted a rock near the entrance. Precisely when the elder Perry did so remains unclear. And just after introducing the Texas governor on October 7 to the Values Voter Summit in Washington, the Rev. Robert Jeffress, Perry’s pastor, declared: “Mormonism is a cult.” Perry has yet to repudiate that insult.
Amid these media cyclones, where was Perry? He evidently vanished into the federal Candidate Protection Program. Rather than offer his side of these breaking stories, Perry largely faded into the sagebrush. Between the two latest GOP debates, Perry did two CNBC interviews and zero network spots.
Since Ronald Reagan left Washington in 1989, Republicans have yearned for a presidential nominee who could present free-market ideas with passion, energy, and commitment. They have longed for someone who would labor for limited government. And they have sunk into disappointment and simmered in rage as two generations of Bushes surrendered to their patrician instincts by ducking fights and letting the Left bludgeon them until they barely had a cheek left to turn.
Herman Cain embodies the Reagan approach. He is confident, tough, and combative, yet sunny, funny, and buoyant. Cain permanently could demolish the Democrats’ vile, vulgar lie that the GOP is the Vatican of U.S. racism. Those who oppose President Obama are not wrong, misinformed, or misguided; rather they are bigoted, Democrats too often contend. Last month, Rep. Andre Carson (D., Ind.) claimed that pro-tea-party Republicans in Congress want to see blacks “hanging on a tree.”
If Republicans nominate Cain, the Democrats’ default argument against the Right utterly implodes. Liberals then may have to battle conservatives on the merits.
Cain does not need to win 60 or even 40 percent of the black electorate. If 20 to 25 percent of black voters support this successful, self-made son of a maid and a chauffeur, the Democratic base dissolves, and victory belongs to Cain and many down-ballot Republicans wise enough to clutch his coattails.
Also, many whites backed Barack Obama to be a part of history, reboot black-white relations, or dry-clean their own racial linen. For such Americans, dumping Obama might be tough. But leaving Obama for a pro-growth Republican could be far easier if he happens to be black, too.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Rick Perry increasingly resembles a candidate who was expected to electrify the 2008 primaries. Former senator Fred Thompson (R., Tenn.) entered the GOP fray to great fanfare in September 2007. He first debated his opponents in Dearborn, Mich., the next month. Thompson took off the rest of that week and then largely avoided the spotlight. One rival campaign strategist dubbed this phenomenon “the hunt for Fred in October.”
To the astonishment of so many of his supporters — and to Herman Cain’s growing advantage — Rick Perry evidently has spurned Ronald Reagan’s example and embraced Fred Thompson’s.
— New York commentator Deroy Murdock is a nationally syndicated columnist with the Scripps Howard News Service and a media fellow with the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution, and Peace at Stanford University.
This pizza man is already in the oven and his 9-9-9 plan is being ruthlessly sliced and dismembered just like, well, a pizza pie. Are you kidding? We're going to nominate a candidate who promises to raise your taxes with a new sales tax! How do Republicans defend that? This pizza is not ready for prime consumption. Put it back in the oven and let's nominate a candidate who talks about bread-and-butter issue, like reviving our economy and creating jobs that are not pizza delivery boys!
Clearly, you've not read the plan details, and are instead reading from a disparaging article written by somone else who also did not read the plan details. Please educate yourself:
In summary: The plan calls for the elimination of ALL other taxes. Read again: ALL OTHER TAXES, in favor of 3 basic taxes (Personal, Business, Sales) of 9%.
The plan document also indicates that this is PHASE ONE of the eventual imposition of the Fair Tax. www.fairtax.org
What is the effect? To instantly give the United States the most favorable business environment on the planet. It also has the effect of allowing companies to repatriate their offshore profits. It spreads the tax burden equally among all citizens.
Government cannot create jobs, they can only influence the envrionment in which jobs are created by private businesses. This is one very effective way to do exactly that.
Com'on, use your brains. You mean the American people are actually going to elect a man who promises to raise their taxes! That's even worse than Obama's promise "to lower the oceans." I've been on earth long enough to understand that a presidential candidate who promises to raise your taxes is, inevitably, a loser--and rightly so. The Democrats will slice and dice this "pizza plan" until there's nothing left! Cain seems to be a solid conservatives whom I could gladly support but his tax plan is a sure loser in a presidential campaign mounted by a Party that has proclaimed "no new taxes" for years. This is Bush, pere, all over again and remember what happened to him!
BB Bob,
Payroll taxes (Social Security and Medicare) are eliminated - that is a tax reduction; 9% on income tax is a reduction for the 50% that actually pay taxes; 9% on corporate income is a significant reduction - down from 35% - which will ultimatley reduce prices since corporations pass on their income tax burden to customers; and a 9% sales tax will still keep prices relativley the same or lower than they are now. The 9-9-9 plan replaces the current tax code, not adds to it. It is not "NEW" in the sence that it adds or increases the current tax rates.
Listening to Carl Rove last night on Hannity I felt a weird sensation. Something about the tone, the demeanor of Mr. Rove, in his clear attempt to marginalize Herman Cain, was troubling.
I couldn't put my finger on it but I had a definite sense of unease at, for lack of a better word, his enthusiasm in minimizing the Cain phenomenon. There was a sense of urgency in the manner of his negative characterizations.
Cain uniquely embodies a deeply-felt need to get our nation back on track among many millions who hear and see him. His expressions of belief, of positive self-actualization, resonate powerfully with so many of us.
I agree with you that he speaks, as did Reagan, from strongly-held core beliefs and does so, like the Gipper, with humor and wit. You just like the guy - unlike the acerbic, persnickety Rick Santorum who also shares many of his core values.
But why the constant drumbeat of "his rise is temporary", or he "lacks Romney's organization", etc., etc., etc. coming from the right? In spite of the best efforts of the Fox crew (sans Hannity, who clearly likes Herman) and many of the main-stream conservative pundits who look askance at him, it is clear that there is a powerful, popular movement and force underlying Cain's ascendancy. These currents are strong and transcendent, uniting many from disparate political paradigms.
The reactions to his 9-9-9 plan is turning into something of a litmus test of outsider versus orthodoxy, of "I'm with the good ole boys" versus "throw all the bums out".
Republicans should remember one thing that you capture so well in your article: how long has the Party been in the weeds vis-a-vis African-Americans? By comparison Moses's desert meanderings was a stroll in the park. Herman Cain offers a rare opportunity to place this party directly in harmony with the needs of this community. The results of this sea-change would be astounding - and Cain can pull it off.
We Republicans dislike and distrust politicians, and then impugn a candidate who is not a politician for being inexperienced. Repubs are like the woman who claims all she wants is a good, reliable man, then climbs on the back of a strangers Harley after last call. In the end we go with what's bad for us because it's what we know.
"If Republicans nominate Cain, the Democrats’ default argument against the Right utterly implodes. Liberals then may have to battle conservatives on the merits."
I cannot understand why this point seems not to be understood by the Republican Establishment, to say nothing of Cain's remarkable resume, record of success, and his undeniably likable personality.
We have a true conservative with the record to prove it, yet our "betters" insist he is less electable than a smooth talking former governor and architect of the health care plan ObamaCare was based on or a successful governor who seems unable to articulate why he should be elected president.
I love the optimism, Frank, but I think this area is where Liberals have the decisive upperhand over Conservatives--and Conservatives just can't understand why. We actually think that rules matter, and the losers will own up to their misdeeds and lies when exposed. The fact is, however, that when the Liberals lose, they simply change the rules. I think it is grossly naive to believe that Liberals will stop race-baiting if Cain were nominated/elected. When have Liberals ever conceded a point--any point--to Conservatives? It won't happen. And as much as I want to hope that a Cain administration would eliminate the race issue, it simply won't happen. There will be many other reasons offered as to why we racists nominated a black candidate.
I LOVE Cain, BTW! And I wish you and Mr Deroy were correct in your logic. As Conservatives, we have to believe in the rule of law; it's in our dna. But don't think for a second that Liberals do the same. If they did, they would all be Conservatives.
But, you see...Cain ISN'T black. At least...not in any way that matters to liberals. If he is the nominee, they will do to him what they did to Clarence Thomas. Wait and watch.
Herman Cain is a charming speaker and a man of character, but he self admittedly is a one issue candidate. And that one issue is now being scrutinized and is considered by many independent economists as fatally flawed.
But for many Conservatives Cain's major attraction is is that he's not Mitt Romney, which is the main reason many Republican's will nominate him.
As a Conservative who enjoys history, one of my favorite quotes is: "Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it."
I therefore remind Republicans to remember this, when nominating Herman Cain:
I appreciate the thought. Perot seemed like a nut to me. Admittedly, I was young, or at least younger than I am now. But Perot always seemed more like Ron Paul than Herman Cain.
So far I really like Cain. I would certainly vote for him over Obama or Romney. I like Rubio, Christie, and West, but none of those guys are really ready yet.
Meanwhile, Cain is old enough, certainly smart enough, has a commanding and winning personality, and has actual accomplishments which require working and working well with other people who's goals might be very different from his.
From the current field, Cain is my man. I just hope he doesn't do anything stupid in the next year and a bit.
Why is Herman Cain always only referred to as the Godfather's Pizza CEO?
What about the fact that he was literally a rocket scientist and holds a masters degree in computer science?
I understand that his time at the Fed is something of a hot potato, especially where the Ron Paul supporters are concerned, but it should indicate that Mr. Cain does know something about how the banking system and national economy work...
(And for an article about Herman Cain, there is an awful lot of Rick Perry in it.)
