-->

Conservative Daily News - The best news, analysis and opinion articles written by a collection of citizen journalists. Covering a range of important topics in blogs, op-ed, and news posts, these upstanding patriots are bringing back American exceptionalism with every entry..

In Search Of The “Perfect Candidate”

In Search Of The “Perfect Candidate”
Republicans Take Careful Aim and Shoot Themselves In Both Feet
By Dell Hill

Obligatory Disclaimer: I have made no decision as to whom I will support as a Republican candidate for president. I learned long ago that the political landscape can change at a moment’s notice, and I need to be constantly aware of that fact and act accordingly.

Whether they realize it or not, Republicans are giving President Barack Obama the greatest gift possible – their own foolish search for the “perfect candidate” to run against him next November. With each passing day, each of the nine announced candidates has elected to utter statements and issue press releases slamming the most insignificant issues possible in an effort to gain ground in political polls, and therefore win the parties nomination for President of the United States.

The latest example of this brand of schoolyard politics involves the candidate I honestly thought to be the least likely – Herman Cain. The “Herminator” jumped all over a Washington Post hit piece on Texas Governor Rick Perry, obviously in hopes of sticking a fork in one of his stronger opponents. It’s now the infamous “N Rock Scandal” and Cain is taking a HUGE amount of heat from every angle for doing exactly what he says is wrong with politics and politicians who practice said trade. He played the race card, and in so doing, has lowered himself to a level that most thought (including me) was beyond his learned qualifications.

Cain has become a strong potential nominee. He was on a serious roll with straw poll wins coming one after the other. He was favored with an op-ed piece at Fox News, which gave him a sensational opportunity to say things like this:

“As I launch a two-week book tour around the USA promoting “This is Herman Cain! My Journey to the White House,” it’s a perfect time to reflect upon my campaign for president – and thank God for the opportunities I’ve been given in this great nation. Entering the race to make the world a better place for my grandchildren – I made a commitment to do what I could to bring this country back to what Ronald Reagan so famously referred to as the “shining city on a hill.” Deeply disturbed at what I saw coming out of the White House under President Obama – from forcing ObamaCare on an unwilling public, to weakening our military, to bowing down to foreign leaders, to his dreadful handling of the economy and soft-on-terrorism policies, it was impossible for me to remain on the sidelines. With 14 million Americans out of work, an unemployment rate of over 9%, and a weakened dollar – we’re facing the worst economic times since the Great Depression.”

He goes on to attack the real political opponent – President Barack Obama – using his trademark honesty, facts and common sense delivery to his greatest advantage. Why then, did he get sucked into believing and responding to a many decades old report from one of the countries strongest liberal newspapers? Why didn’t he pick up the phone and call Rick Perry to inquire about this “story” before making such a foolish mistake?

Cain’s knee-jerk reaction was obviously politically motivated and was probably strongly suggested by his campaign advisers. After all, that’s what they get paid to do. But, the fact remains – the final decision was Cain’s, and candidate Cain lost a LOT of support on a non-issue simply because he showed the world how to get him to make an irrational decision – just create a story involving race and bait Herman into a foolish response.

Not only did he make a major mistake, he joined the ranks of his fellow candidates in a style of politics guaranteed to boost Barack Obama’s chances of being re-elected. The field of Republican candidates need to understand one critical point: We are primarily interested in learning your position on several very important issues and we want to know how you would address those issues as compared to Barack Obama.

Quite frankly, we don’t care what you think of each other personally, and it would be to your advantage to stop feeding the Obama re-election campaign by attacking each other. Attack the socialism and socialists currently ruining this country. There is no perfect candidate; so quit searching for one.

Rich Mitchell is the Sr. Managing Editor of Conservative Daily News. His posts may contain opinions that are his own and are not necessarily shared by Anomalous Media, CDN, staff or .. much of anyone else. Find him on twitter, facebook and google+

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to Reddit Post to Technorati

Conservative Daily News allows a great deal of latitude in the topics contributors choose and their approaches to the content. This is due to our approach that citizens have a voice, not only the mass media. Readers will likely not agree with every contributor or every post, but find reasons to think about the topic and respond with comments. We value differing opinions as well as those that agree. Opinions of contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of CDN, Anomalous Media or staff. Click here if you'd like to write for CDN.
Put This Story in your Circles and Share with your Friends

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Comments (0)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. An excellent post – thank you for sharing. I also did not see the mistake though.

  2. Douglas M. Reddick says:

    Dell, You said “phased.” You meant “fazed.” See below:
    faze (fz)
    tr.v. fazed, faz·ing, faz·es
    To disrupt the composure of; disconcert. See Synonyms at embarrass.
    _______________________________
    As for “phase”–see below:
    Atr.v. phased, phas·ing, phas·es
    1. To plan or carry out systematically by phases.
    2. To set or regulate so as to be synchronized.

    • Dell Hill says:

      Would be so kind as to tell me where I made that error. I’d be happy to edit and correct, but I’ve read the piece four times and don’t see it.