I am endorsing Herman Cain to be the Republican candidate for president.
I do so not because I would vote for him, because as a member of the nonsense-obsessed liberal media elite, that would simply not be allowed. I am supporting Cain because I think he presents the greatest contrast to Barack Obama.
And America deserves a real choice.
The two men couldn’t be more unalike, politically, personally, in any way imaginable.
(PHOTOS: Herman Cain Through the Years)
America under more Obama would continue to muddle through, struggling with a complex and uncertain future, while a Cain reign would bring about a return to a glorious and simple past.
Economically, Obama would continue to propose complicated schemes with inelegant acronyms that won’t make everything wonderful right this minute, especially if the GOP blocks them, while Cain’s plan is straightforward: three digits, either 9-9-9 or 9-0-9, or some other numbers, but no more than three of them, a national fiscal locker combination.
Socially, Obama would lead us further into a slightly left-of-center Socialist gulag, in which the gripes of the many took precedence over the rights of the few, while Cain would even the playing field with freedom for everyone, to do whatever they want to whomever they want.
In foreign policy, they are also starkly at odds. Cain’s all for waterboarding, natch, but also for a return to a kind of realpolitik unseen since the Cheney administration. “He’s our friend,” Cain said of Yemeni president Ali Abdullah Saleh, chiding Obama for calling for Saleh’s ouster over a few dozen civilian killings. “This president has been on the wrong side in nearly every situation in the Arab world.” Cain did not add, but should have, that all this fretting over Iran’s atomic bomb-making would be moot if we had only kept the Shah in power.
Cain’s total opposition to Obama’s policies extend to even the president’s putative successes such as Libya, or no it doesn’t; yes, it does.
(MORE: Who To Blame. For Everything. A Handy Guide)
As divergent as their politics are, what would make a Cain-Obama contest so vital is what different people they are.
They come from different places, Obama from somewhere and Cain from America. Obama’s upbringing was abnormal, wherever it was; Cain, meanwhile, grew up in a traditional American family with roots deeply planted in the most American of traditions.
Where Obama is intellectual and cold, Cain is instinctual and, up to a couple days ago, might have been described as cuddly. With Obama you often get a sense that he has overthought what he says; you don’t get that from Cain.
Obama is exceedingly politically correct, respecting even the most evil of religions, as well as women, while Cain is refreshingly and exuberantly politically incorrect — in word and deed. Obama is a suspected humanist, and Cain gets his orders directly from God.
If Cain can get past nonsensical distractions from his message and overcome some practical hurdles like his incompetent campaign staff and ultimately achieve the Republican nomination, America will be presented with a truly historic choice: between two nations, and which we want to live in one day, and between two men, judged by the content of their character.