Thanks to our friend Herman Cain, we were seated right up front at the CNN debates last night in Las Vegas. Our section mates included gaming moguls Steve Wynn and Sheldon Adelson, the Romney family, Wayne Newton, and too many other notables to list. This was not just the 1% crowd, these were decimal pointers.
If you are reading this, you undoubtedly saw the debate yourself – and perhaps noticed Joanne and me in the audience shots or up on stage with Herman immediately following the show (my son liked that part of the debates the best). So I won’t go over what you saw, just tell you a little about what you didn’t see.
We rode to the event with the Cain party, cleared by security into a large warehouse area where a fleet of RV’s awaited the candidates – identical mobile green rooms where the candidates prepared themselves. Probably the closest any of these Republicans will get to a trailer park.
The campaign staffers milling about the campground looked to my aging eyes to be in their teens, and mostly stared at their Blackberries while furiously texting the other teens to schedule whatever it is all these teens do for the campaigns. The bodyguards were all as big as the Winnebagos and we were escorted to our seats by not one but two of the sun-blotters with the squiggly ear things. Rock star.
One of the grown-ups in the room described this election cycle to me as “American Idol on steroids”. In a series of national televised auditions pitched as debates, the field is winnowed as the pundit class disposes of them one at a time. I never thought of it quite that way, but it rings true; the new paradigm is being made up as we go.
This is why a candidate like Herman Cain actually has a chance in this race – all of Romney’s money and boots-on-ground organization in 50 states can’t win him a talent contest. The more people see of Herman the more they like him; that’s why the powers that be have stooped to smearing his 9-9-9 tax plan to try and slow him down.
I love Ron Paul. He was rolling his eyes, shaking his head, looking around at the set visibly bored while Perry and Romney wasted large gulps of our short time on this earth pulling each other’s braids. Everybody wanted to, and Ron Paul did it; there is the man’s whole career encapsulated for you.
I got a chance to chat with Dr. Paul during a commercial break; thanked him for his service to liberty and for inspiring young people to discover the Constitution. Since Ron Paul is my idol and Herman is my friend, I asked them both to play nice. I was surprised and happy to learn they get on well personally, and I got to see it first-hand; I wish their supporters could learn from their example. Please.
Michelle Bachman had her hand up to say something the whole time like that Horschak character in Welcome Back, Kotter. Could you guys hear her calling out, “Anderson, Anderson!”? It was a little annoying and very weird. I lost $20 bucks when she didn’t count her kids for us again – it’s true you can bet on anything in Vegas.
In person, Rick Perry throws off a jerk vibe that makes your hairs stand up from 40 feet. That guy has got some seriously bad juju going on; and oversized hands, in case you wondered. The crowd booed him twice, nobody came up to talk with him on breaks, and the other candidates gave him that look of disgust I used to get from dads when I showed up to take their daughters out.
Newt Gingrich has to be one of the smartest guys on the planet – and he doesn’t have a prayer. Rick Santorum is not one of the smartest guys on the planet – and doesn’t have a prayer, either. Huntsman didn’t even show up, answering many prayers. And Gary Johnson was not invited, for which CNN should pray for forgiveness.
At each break, Mitt Romney came over to visit with his wife and son; since they sat next to us, he was standing two feet in front of me each time. The guy looks like a President, and that might be enough to seal the deal. For a guy who claims not to be a politician, he sure can turn that smile on an off on command, and mostly the command is the presence of a potential donor.
I don’t watch TV, so I hadn’t seen Anderson Cooper before. My opinion of Communist Network News is not great, but he did ok for a guy with no first name. He is not 360; maybe 135 dripping wet. He made tiny Michelle Bachman look statuesque. David Gergen is a big guy. Newt was the only fat guy in the whole room – rich people must pay someone else to go to seed for them.
So there you have it; Dr. Tim’s take on the CNN Las Vegas debates. Does anyone remember what any of them said? I don’t. And who cares anyway. People aren’t going to vote for a tax plan or vote to eliminate fractional reserve banking. Touting experience as an IRS lawyer is suicidally stupid, to steal the best line of the evening from Newt. And neither one of the Bickersons is going to even get their families off the couch to vote for them if they keep this up.
So Herman Cain will win the GOP nomination, because he is the most liked and most trusted – American Idol on steroids, like the man said. If you are looking for a libertarian candidate, Mr. Cain is not your first choice, please quit telling me he was on the Fed board, I knew that a long time ago. But if you are looking for a conservative candidate, he should be your guy.
Check our his 9-9-9 plan for yourself and you will see that just about everything the others threw at it last night is bullsnot; they knew it and slung the poo anyway, all those faith-driven values candidates. They only one who didn’t was Ron Paul, who simply proposed his own plan to replace the income tax with nothing.
Herman Cain is my friend and Ron Paul is my idol. They are front-runners and have the whole field talking about less government and more liberty; I never thought I would see it in my lifetime. My lasting memory of the debates is watching them share a laugh at one of the breaks – the former Fed board member and the guy who would tear it all down.
The fact that one of those two could be the next President of the United States is simply amazing. Let that day come not a moment too soon.
“Moment Of Clarity” is a weekly commentary by Libertarian writer and speaker Tim Nerenz, Ph.D. Visit Tim’s website http://www.timnerenz.com to find your moment.
MOMENT OF CLARITY 
December 7, 2011 at 20:23 |
I still might do it, but I'm not stealing your idea! I think Cain is great and he might have won in the room.
October 21, 2011 at 03:31 |
Morry… I believe that it has recently been determined (although I don't know exactly when or how) that the Chief Executive can now provide "exemptions" and "make war" and "order executions" and declare "emergengies" by fiat… and this new form of government should ensure our safety against any future problems.
October 20, 2011 at 21:28 |
PART 3 AND FINAL OF A MULTIPLE PART POSTI WANT TO REPEAT THAT ALTHOUGH TAX REFORM IS IMPORTANT, CAIN'S EXCLUSIVE FOCUS ON IT AMOUNTS TO A DISTRACTION FROM THE REAL PROBLEM, GOV'T SPENDING. TO THE EXTENT 9-9-9 DOES (FOR A WHILE) PREVENT RAPID GROWTH IN SPENDING, IT WILL NEVERTHELESS ENSHRINE THE CURRENT HUGE LEVEL OF SPENDING, AND WE CAN BE CERTAIN THAT IT WILL NOT TAKE LONG FOR "INADVERTANT" DEFICITS TO OCCUR IN A RECESSION, OR A WAR, OR OVER-HIRING OF NON-FIRABLE GOV'T EMPLOYEES, OR WHATEVER. THESE "EMERGENCIES" WILL LEAD TO THE SAME PROCESS WHICH HAS BROUGHT US TO OUR CURRENT WOEFUL STATE, BY JUSTIFYING "TEMPORARY" DEVIATIONS FROM 9-9-9 THAT WILL BECOME THE NEW NORM FROM WHICH TAXES WILL BE RATCHETED HIGHER. WE WILL DEPEND ON EVERY NEW CONGRESS FOR ANOTHER FIGHT TO KEEP 9-9-9 FROM BECOMING 10-10-10. THE FIGHT WILL NEVER END, AND IT WILL BE A ONE WAY RATCHET UPWARD. THE ONLY ONLY ONLY ONLY ONLY LONG TERM FIX IS TO RESTORE THE CONSTITUTION AS THE DE FACTO LAW OF THE LAND AS WELL AS THE DE JURE LAW. IT MUST BE OBSERVED, PARTICULARLY THE ENUMERATED POWERS SECTION, WHOSE VIOLATIONS HAVE BEEN RESPONSIBLE FOR EVERY PROBLEM WE HAVE WITH OUR GOVERNMENT. NOTHING LESS WILL DO THE JOB.I am not against lesser measures in a gradual transition toward our proper goal. In fact, I understand they are necessary. However, it would be inviting disaster to adopt temporary "practical" measures which underming the longer term goal by cementing the status of big government and which fundamentally attack our individual rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. 9-9-9 is such a measure. It avoids the real problem, it is billed as a solution when it is at best an interim measure, and whatever benefits it admittedly will confer in the short run, will be more than outweighed by its longer run damage. It takes away a lot of the gov't's pistols, and gives it a free option on all the nukes it needs in the fight to impose collectivism and big gov't on the citizenry.For all the reasons above, I think 9-9-9 is not just a far from perfect plan, and not just a distraction from the main objective, but an acutual impediment to achieving the rights our Declaration of Independence claimed for us, and our Constitution attempted to guarantee us. I like Cain too. But his 9-9-9 plan is a very, VERY bad idea.
October 20, 2011 at 21:28 |
PART 3 AND FINAL OF A MULTIPLE PART POSTI WANT TO REPEAT THAT ALTHOUGH TAX REFORM IS IMPORTANT, CAIN'S EXCLUSIVE FOCUS ON IT AMOUNTS TO A DISTRACTION FROM THE REAL PROBLEM, GOV'T SPENDING. TO THE EXTENT 9-9-9 DOES (FOR A WHILE) PREVENT RAPID GROWTH IN SPENDING, IT WILL NEVERTHELESS ENSHRINE THE CURRENT HUGE LEVEL OF SPENDING, AND WE CAN BE CERTAIN THAT IT WILL NOT TAKE LONG FOR "INADVERTANT" DEFICITS TO OCCUR IN A RECESSION, OR A WAR, OR OVER-HIRING OF NON-FIRABLE GOV'T EMPLOYEES, OR WHATEVER. THESE "EMERGENCIES" WILL LEAD TO THE SAME PROCESS WHICH HAS BROUGHT US TO OUR CURRENT WOEFUL STATE, BY JUSTIFYING "TEMPORARY" DEVIATIONS FROM 9-9-9 THAT WILL BECOME THE NEW NORM FROM WHICH TAXES WILL BE RATCHETED HIGHER. WE WILL DEPEND ON EVERY NEW CONGRESS FOR ANOTHER FIGHT TO KEEP 9-9-9 FROM BECOMING 10-10-10. THE FIGHT WILL NEVER END, AND IT WILL BE A ONE WAY RATCHET UPWARD. THE ONLY ONLY ONLY ONLY ONLY LONG TERM FIX IS TO RESTORE THE CONSTITUTION AS THE DE FACTO LAW OF THE LAND AS WELL AS THE DE JURE LAW. IT MUST BE OBSERVED, PARTICULARLY THE ENUMERATED POWERS SECTION, WHOSE VIOLATIONS HAVE BEEN RESPONSIBLE FOR EVERY PROBLEM WE HAVE WITH OUR GOVERNMENT. NOTHING LESS WILL DO THE JOB.I am not against lesser measures in a gradual transition toward our proper goal. In fact, I understand they are necessary. However, it would be inviting disaster to adopt temporary "practical" measures which underming the longer term goal by cementing the status of big government and which fundamentally attack our individual rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. 9-9-9 is such a measure. It avoids the real problem, it is billed as a solution when it is at best an interim measure, and whatever benefits it admittedly will confer in the short run, will be more than outweighed by its longer run damage. It takes away a lot of the gov't's pistols, and gives it a free option on all the nukes it needs in the fight to impose collectivism and big gov't on the citizenry.For all the reasons above, I think 9-9-9 is not just a far from perfect plan, and not just a distraction from the main objective, but an acutual impediment to achieving the rights our Declaration of Independence claimed for us, and our Constitution attempted to guarantee us. I like Cain too. But his 9-9-9 plan is a very, VERY bad idea.
October 20, 2011 at 21:26 |
PART 2 OF A MULTIPLE PART POST3. The 9-9-9 plan is supposedly "revenue neutral." But what we PRIMARILY need is NOT a new tax system — rather it's to CUT SPENDING. The 9-9-9 codifies into law the current spending level, which really needs to be REDUCED. In short: although 9-9-9 would likely have certain beneficial effects in the short run, it would end up being a bandaid that is destined to fall off and allow the infection to start spreading even faster than previously. Once a way around it is found — as WILL happen if 9-9-9 is all we get — then the pace of gov't's growth will increase FAR faster than it has been doing in recent decades. WHAT WE NEED IS FOR ALL 3 BRANCHES OF GOV'T TO OBEY THE LAWS ALREADY ON THE BOOKS, SPECIFICALLY THE CONSTITUTION. IT ENUMERATES THE SPECIFIC POWERS TO WHICH THE FED GOV IS LIMITED. THESE HAVE BEEN ABROGATED WITH GROWING BRAZENNESS FOR A FEW GENERATIONS. OBSERVANCE OF THE CONSTITUTION'S ENUMERATED POWERS SECTION WOULD PROBABLY CUT GOVERNMENT SPENDING BY AT LEAST 80%.4. The problem with a flat 9% income tax is that it implicitly (but with FULL implicit logic) enshrines the principle that the gov't owns us instead of the reverse. The current system, despite its ENORMOUS practical flaws, does allow exemptions and deductions and so on, which are LOOPHOLES AND ESCAPE VALVES FOR TAXPAYERS. IE, it implicitly recognizes that people have a RIGHT to support their children, to pay for the medical care they need, to deduct their expenses from gross income before showing it as income, etc. IE, that this is THEIR life, THEIR money, which THEY are paying by law as a tax according to rules which recognize this. Once all deductions and exemptions are eliminated, there will be NO avenue available to contest a tax authority's ruling, NO "standing to sue" or contest it. The gov't says 9%, and you have NO right to contest it. Case dismissed without trial. Next year it's 10%, then … 12 . . . etc. The net of gov't's rights to the products of our labor, and to the wealth we create, will have been extended to cover every cent we take in, regardless of expenses and associated costs and other logical deductions, like travel to do the business that brought in the income, etc etc. In effect 9-9-9's income tax establishes AS ITS UNDERLYING LOGICAL PREMISE that taxpayers are serfs and the gov't is the Master who has the right to their money and graciously permits them to keep some of it as a privileged favor from the gov't. THIS is the most dangerous aspect of a plan so defined and formatted. There will be NO excuses and NO escape from the tax authority's edicts. There are going to be very eggregious cases where people are effectively taxed, under the 9% rubric, at a true rate of 50% or more, cases where bad luck or their particular unusual business requires enormous expenditure relative to the net income, ie huge gross income relative to true net income, and their true income may be only pennies on the dollar of what the 9% law defines as income in its simple "one size for all" rule, and the 9% assessment will amount for some to a percentage FAR higher of their true actual income. With NO recourse for those people — unless and until case after case causes exemptions and special rules to be adopted, and once that door is opened, the lobbyists will enter and we'll be headed right back to the same kind of infinitely complex system we have now. It's either that, or live with the serf/master system it creates and tough luck for those whose true tax comes to 50% under the 9% nominal rate. CONTINUED BELOW
October 20, 2011 at 21:24 |
PART 1 OF A MULTIPLE PART POST:I like Cain too, but if you look past the first chess move, his 9-9-9 plan is actually very dangerous, for at least 4 reasons I can think of:1. The reason Michele Backmann gave, namely that it creates a brand new conduit for pumping money from citizens to the gov't. The dangers of this are obvious.2. Despite Cain's ability to see to anticipate the 2nd chess move, that's not far enough. He mentions that he'd want a provision requiring a 2/3 majority vote to increase the 9%. This would not work. Either congress could do a 51% vote to repeal the 2/3 requirement, or they'd find some other way. If congress (not to mention the courts and the Administration) have been able to trample mud over the Constitution (the SUPREME law of the land) for several generations, one tax law provision is not going to stop them.CONTINUED BELOW
October 20, 2011 at 04:43 |
American Idol… Are you sure that it wasn't more like "Dancing With The Stars" or "Are They Smarter Than A Fifth Grader"
October 20, 2011 at 03:55 |
How long would it take for 9-9-9 to become 12-12-12, and then 15-15-15, and then 20-20-20 ? Even if we elected the perfect President this cycle…. 4 or 8 years later we will likely have someone else who may wish to propose a budget or a new program that greatly expands the role of Washington in our lives. Starting a new consumption tax of any kind, without repealing the 16th Amendment first, is an invitation to ever larger government. Since the Presidents, and the U.S. Congress, rarely follow the Constitution anymore, what is there to currently limit the size of government other than limiting revenues ? Certainly the Supreme Court will not step in to rock the boat by declaring the government's extracurricular actions unconstitutional. It appears as though the Leviathan will grow until the system collapses under it's own weight. P.S. Unless I'm mistaken, I see no authorization in the Constitution for a national sales tax. Ron Paul is the only presidential candidate, working within the two viable political parties, that has a 20+ year verifiable record of attempting to limit government to their Constitutionally authorized responsibilities.
October 20, 2011 at 03:42 |
I am so jealous, that you were able to spend the time with my idol, Ron Paul. I've watched him from the audience, at the Rally For The Republic in Minneapolis, but I have not yet been able to meet him personally. Anyway, I'm glad that you were there, and thanks for the first-hand report from the debate. I can't think of anyone that I would trust more to deliver an honest assessment. I gave up looking for that from the press years ago, and the on-air personas are certainly not as revealing as the off-air personalities. Thanks again.
October 19, 2011 at 22:38 |
I thought I recognized you..but didn't realize it was in fact you! Thanks for your take on the race..I was just about to write a blog on my spot using the Reality TV idea..I still might do it, but I'm not stealing your idea! I think Cain is great and he might have won in the room. (MY blog liberteaRacine.blogspot.com), I wrote about it as a Cain vs. Romney race..and I doubt if Cain will take the lead, but will probably end up in second after Florida.
October 19, 2011 at 21:59 |
I thought that was you at the end. I wouldn't rule Newt out just yet. He's been climbing in the polls and has been backed by at least one of the national TeaParty Groups, TeaParty Nation. I have supported Cain since he entered the election but I think he needs to dump 999 and go back to the FairTax. We don't need a transitional tax that opens the door to both an income and sales tax.
October 19, 2011 at 21:22 |
From your keystrokes to God's ear! Please let Herman Cain be the presidential nominee!
October 19, 2011 at 20:40 |
Thanks for that fantastic post debate SITREP. I agree, Cain is the likely nominee. Your personal observations equate nicely with my own perceptions with little differences. Nice to know I'm not too far out of sync. Regarding Cain's 9-9-9, the WSJ commented that it should be 9-9-9 plus 9 to account for lost deductions but, Art Laffer had high praise for the plan. If Dr Laffer says it's good, I'm onboard with that!
October 19, 2011 at 20:16 |
Herman Cain is my friend and Ron Paul is my idol. They are front-runners and have the whole field talking about less government and more liberty; I never thought I would see it in my lifetime.