Lawrence made Herman Cain look like the jackass that he is.
If you missed The Last Word last night, you really must watch Lawrence O’Donnell’s take-down of Herman Cain (after the jump).
It was a thing of beauty.
At the outset, I agree with Nicholas Wilbur: This man doesn’t stand a chance at being elected, nor do I think he thinks he stands a chance at being elected.
First, calling black Americans “brainwashed” for refusing to consider an alternative to Barack Obama is not a way to win the hearts and minds of black people. Essentially, he called black folks too stupid to realize the glory that is Herman Cain. To that, I say “pfffft!” I can only assume he buys into the “Lincoln was a Republican and freed the slaves, the Democrats are the real racists” line of crap.
Second, Herman Cain’s 999 plan is a load of hogwash — an analysis suggests that the plan would cause the largest deficit since World War II and would increase taxes for most Americans:
Cain claims that his plan would not be “regressive on the poor,” but economists disagree due to the imposition of a national sales tax that would wallop the poor significantly harder than the rich. Cain also claims the plan will be revenue-neutral, in that it would raise as much revenue as the current tax code. I had Center for American Progress Director of Tax and Budget Policy Michael Linden run the numbers on Cain’s plan, and it turns out that it wouldn’t be deficit-neutral — not even close.
~snip~
“Even if we reduced federal spending to the ‘historical average’ (when the population was younger and health care cost much less) it would still leave us with deficits over 11 percent of GDP (bigger than any deficit since WWII, including the deficits of the past three years),” Linden noted.
Linden also found that someone in the bottom quintile of earners — who currently pays about 2 percent of his or her income in federal taxes — would pay about 18 percent under Cain’s plan (9 percent on every dollar they make, plus 9 percent on every dollar they spent, which would likely be close to all of them). A middle-class individual would see his or her taxes go from about 14 percent to about 18 percent. But someone in the richest one percent of Americans would see his or her tax rate fall from about 28 percent to about 11 percent.
Methinks Cain’s 999 plan is not well-thought out — sort of like his ridiculous “I won’t sign any bills longer than three pages” idea (which he quickly walked back). Me-also-thinks he better recognize that he can’t sell the same old failed Republican policies to black people and expect us to buy them simply because he’s hella black (as opposed to so-so black like President Obama (more on that below)).
Third of all, Herman Cain stammered his way through a particularly revealing line of questioning regarding why he decided to “stay out of trouble” and sat on the sidelines of the civil rights movement. Cain’s reasons for doing so (he was “too young”) were flimsy, and that he expects folks to believe that the civil rights movement had some sort of age requirement for participation demonstrates exactly how stupid he thinks people are.
Did he participate at all? Maybe. He attended Morehouse College and I actually find it extremely hard to believe that he sat on the outside of the most important social movement of that time ; moreover, the manner in which he stammered and blinked furiously through the line of questioning suggests that Cain was not being entirely forthright in the interview. Can he admit that he participated? Of course not.
As a black Republican, Cain has to walk an excruciatingly narrow tightrope; he cannot win the Republican primary by representing himself as a man who stood up for the rights of black people. Hell, he can’t even criticize Rick Perry for hunting at “Niggerhead” without having to turn around, backtrack, or else be forced to face the Rush Limbaugh music.
But black people who did participate in the civil rights movement know damn well that his claim that kids under the age of 18 did not participate is a flat-out lie. Women and children were right there along with “of-age” men getting hosed, beaten, and attacked by dogs. Herman Cain? Well, he decided to sit out because “he might have had a sick relative.” Riiiight.
And finally, I want to point out the laughable hypocrisy of the right-wing meme regarding this burgeoning Battle of The Blacks™:
A few take aways: If anyone in the media had treated Barack Obama this way when he was running for president as a U.S. Senator in 2008, they would have been immediately accused of racism.
Re-heally.
I can’t wait for the massive cognitive dissonance-induced head explosions that will surely be set off once Teabillies start demanding Herman Cain’s birth certificate.
Then again, Herman Cain doesn’t share Barack Obama’s latent Kenyosity, so perhaps he’ll be safe from charges of MOOOOSLIM!!! — especially since he has already let his Islamophobic freak flag fly.
Besides, the right-wing nutbags already have their narrative: Herman Cain would be the first “real” black president, unlike Barack Obama’s mulatto ass. (Zandar has a must read post on Laura Ingraham’s offensive comments that Barack Obama isn’t “all the way” black.)
Anyway, enough jibber-jabber from me — just watch the videos, crack open a cold can of awesome, and then watch them again:
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Viva LO’Donnell!
SIDENOTE: The notion that President Obama’s comments to the CBC that they should “take off their bedroom slippers and put on their marchin’ shoes” had some sort of racial undertones is a crock. Obama used the exact same line to a mostly white crowd at North Carolina State the prior week. Whether or not that rhetoric should be removed from his speeches is one question, but the attempt by Maxine Waters and others to cry havoc! smacks of desperation.
You have to love the Harvard educated white guy questioning a black man on his black credentials. And no, Cain would be up 20-points in the lead for GOP and up 2-points on Obama regardless of whether he chose to join civil rights protests or whether he chose to stick with his studies. Your idea that he would sink himself with GOP voters if he “admitted” he’d taken part is delusional.
Truth is, outside the MSNBC clones and the hate-filled Garafalo / Morgan Freeman types who believe there is only one way for a black man to think and vote would cringe if they saw O’Donnell’s combative and aggressive haranguing of this presidential candidate. Thankfully, not that many people actually tune into MSNBC.
Mr Cain’s problem is that he called 80% of African Americans brain washed, while his college age behind sat on the back of the bus, while my teenage brothers marched for his liberation.
His Dad told him to stay out of it while he was in HS. He was being an obedient son. If only kids nowadays were more like him.
As for brainwashing. I once listened to a brother rant on for 15 minutes about how Herman Cain was a Racist KKK member. I said to him “Well, That is quite an Accomplishment. A black Man getting into the Clan.” The look on his face was priceless.
Your idea that he would sink himself with GOP voters if he “admitted” he’d taken part is delusional.
care to explain why he couldn’t criticize Rick Perry’s “Niggerhead” nonsense without an outcry from the right?
i’m not the one who is delusional, here.
If I remember correct, Perry was still the front runner and Cain in 3rd when the n-head story broke. Now it’s Perry that’s in third and Cain with a 20-point lead in the latest Zogby poll.
Now what was that you were saying about some outcry from the right when Cain called out Perry on that? Seems to me more like a huge surge in support for Cain.
It is a non-issue! Perry’s father painted over the word when he leased the property. Perry’s family has not used/leased the property in maaany years, and in the meantime, the paint washed off and the word is now showing again. How does that make Perry a racist? Good grief! Get a brain!
Your talking points aren’t even close to being credible. Let Mr. Cain have his 15 minutes so he can go back to making pizza while we 99% ers can still afford to buy it!
Herman Cain’s father and family are an example of the strong, patriarchal black family of the 50′s & 60′s: an uneducated man who worked 3 jobs to support his family, and who raised his sons under strict discipline because he wanted a better life for them. In this type of family, children grew up respecting and obeying their parents until they were able to stand on their own: “as long as I am taking care of you, you will do as I say”. Herman Cain is the product of what a black family with a strong father figure used to be before Democrats and their “Great Society” tore it apart.
The so called “social programs which were supposed to benefit blacks and provide social justice” had one peculiar requirement in order to qualify: there could not be a husband/father who worked at any job as part of the family. The result was the DESTRUCTION of millions of black families. Was this consequence coincidental or intentional? Common sense rules out “coincidental”. The damage done by the so called “social justice” is undebatable: fewer marriages; more children born out of wedlock and being raised by their mother; no strong father figure to lead & discipline the way Mr. Cain’s father did because the welfare check took the place of the father; no incentive “to want to do better”, because the government provides all the basic needs; higher school drop out rates; higher teen pregnancy, higher crime rate, and on, and on.
Herman Cain represents a greater threat to Democrat that a nuclear bomb, because blacks are finally going to hear the voice of a man who was raised “the old way” and who is the embodiment of not just their dream, but the American dream for anyone of any race.
Third video appears to be a repeat of the first.
My takeaway from Parts 1 and 2? Herman Cain: doooooouuuuuuuuuche.
D
thanks for the heads up! i fixed it.
Cainunism [keyn - yuh - niz - uhm] – noun
1. A theory or system of economic organization based on a wildly optimistic regard for the fiscal discipline of Congress and the President. Adherence to this theory typically requires the suspension of disbelief concerning the ability of increasing the government’s power to tax, without substantive spending cuts, to actually reduce burdens on taxpayers and to produce economic recovery.
2. The intentional use by politicians of resonant slogans which obfuscate and distract some voters from the otherwise conspicuous absence of thoughtful, realistic or realizable fiscal or monetary plans and policies.
Cainunist [keyn - yuh - nist] – adjective
1. Of, characterized by, favoring or relating to Cainunism; Cainunistic
In a sentence: “Imagining that a ‘9 – 9 – 9’ percent tax ‘plan’ would not soon be 9.9 – 9.9 – 9.9, then 19 – 19 – 19, and so on, is just more magical Cainunist thinking.”
Origin of Cainunism: term used by informed voters to describe the economic-sounding slogans that originated from the 2012 vanity presidential campaign of Herman Cain (1945 – )
Synonyms for Cainunism: 1. Prevarication, 2. Deception, 2. Cozen, 3. Hucksterism, 4. Hoodwink, 5. Sales Pitch, 6. Razzle Dazzle
Antonyms for Cainunism: 1. Common Sense, 2. Objective Reality, 3. Free Market, 4. Tax Reduction, 5. Economic Liberty, 6. Less Government, 7. Constitutionalism
Synonym for your analysis: dog squeeze. Brevity is more effective.
Wow, Uncle Ruckus Lives!! Did this coon admit that as grown Black man in his 20′s, he no interest in the Civil Rights movement?! WTF?!! If Lawrence O’Donnell would have called Herman Cain a Trifling Uncle Tom, I couldn’t get too mad at him. Even O’Donnell couldn’t help but to point how much a self-loathing Stepin’ Fetchit Herman CAin is. Like I said last night, Herman ‘Big Daddy’ Cain is the slave that massa sent out to catch runaways.
Word. He should have never even talked down to black people. He is not ready for prime time, when a while guy called him out, ON prime time, no doubt.
Sorry Mike,
Sure, Lawrence was confrontational. We like that.
Herman Cain sat there and compromised himself for the entirety of a 30 minute interview.
The man is a corporate bone smoker.
More of the same shit that got us here.
Get over it.
Please tell me you’ll do an update with what happened on last night’s show. Reverend Al Sharpton, Melissa Harris-Perry, and Goldie Taylor were invited on to discuss Herman Cain’s reaction to the Last Word interview. They stopped the show. Lawrence kept trying to change the direction of the discussion and they refused to back down from how horrid and misinformed Cain’s statements were.
At one point while Sharpton was talking about the shift in black voter support from Republican to Democrat, MHP was grinning ear to ear and nodding her head so strongly that she had this momentary “oh crap, I’m on live TV” moment and adjusted herself to appropriate guest response face. It was magnificent to watch them calmly and intelligently tear Cain’s arguments apart.
On the contrary, it is so sad to watch two well educated women waste their intellect & talent only because of their ignorance of history. I am a LEGAL immigrant who came here over 40 yrs. ago, and since I did not study American history in my own country, I did it on my own here. I learned the following: 1) The Emancipation Declaration was the idea of Republicans, and it was signed by Abraham Lincoln, who supported it, 2) That white Democrats took over control of the governorships in all southern states shortly after the Union troops left,and they remained in power until fairly recently (ex. Georgia elected its firs Republican governor since Reconstruction in 2003!), 3) Democrats proceeded to terrorize freedmen through the KKK, 4) The Civil Rights Act of 1870 was introduced by 2 Republicans (Charles Sumner & Benjamin Butler),it was signed by Pres.Ulysses Grant (R), but the Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional, 5) The segregationist Jim Crow laws were written, legislated, & enforced by Democrats, 6) It was the Republican party who supported the Civil Rights Act throughout the decades until it was signed into law, and that it was Republicans who marched with & were killed alongside blacks, 7) Pres. Woodrow Wilson (Democrat)filled his cabinet with southern segregationist Democrats, and implemented segregation at the federal level 8) Martin Luther King is said to have been a registered Republican, but Democrats deny it and claim he had no political affiliation,in my opinion, an obvious attempt to hide the truth for fear of the repercussions, 9)L.B. Johnson was a staunch racist;however, he signed the Civil Rights Act bragging that by signing it he “would have n*****s voting Democrat for the next 200 yrs.”, 10)’HE WHO CONTROLS EDUCATION ALSO CONTROLS THE WORLD’ Here is the clincher: Since Democrats controlled the state governments, they also controlled public education, and they made sure that History books are “sanitized” to leave out the political aspect of black history & their struggle for civil rights (no mention anywhere of the role played by each political party) PRESTO!: Since a Democrat president signed the Civil Rights Act, blame the Republicans for the terrorism carried out by Democrats.
If I was able to find these facts, what excuse do Ms. Perry, Ms. Taylor, Al Sharpton, or any other Democrat have for their ignorance?
You had me at Emancipation Declaration.
Sorry about this. It should be Emancipation Proclamation.
I’m with you on a lot of this. That’s the history. I don’t think anyone was doubting that last night. I also don’t think that was quite the point they were making, either. It seemed the focus–at least of Goldie Taylor who said it straight away and kept returning to it–was how Democrats began to focus more on social and economic issues that were more import to African Americans while Republicans shifted their focus away from those issues. Rev. Al Sharpton also repeatedly mention that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his family were Republicans for quite some time. The exception to Cain’s comments wasn’t a historical misunderstanding but an over-simplification of the political issues.
I didn’t view their commentary on Herman Cain–in the context of the Civil Rights movement–as a referendum on partisan politics before and during the Civil Rights movement. It was focused on Herman Cain. They explained many reasons why voters shifted to the Democratic Party after 1965. The statement that a Democratic president signed the acts, so that’s why there was a voter shift seems like the same oversimplification and hive mentality commentary they were rallying against last night.
My one disappointment was not getting to see what the three guests would have added to a discussion of the Vietnam War and the analysis of politicians. It might have given a more rounded view to their arguments which did, by the end, reach Maddow-levels of cyclical rhetoric.
If any of you out there is interested in the truth, read Rev. Wayne Perryman’s books: ‘Blacks, Whites, & Racist Democrats: The Untold Story of Race and Politics in the Democratic Party from 1792 – 2009′ & ‘Unveiling the Truth’
It is truly a sad spectacle to listen to anyone supporting a party with such an ugly, racist history, but it is even worse to listen to those who were their victims defend them out of ignorance, in spite of a high level of education. By the way, Rev. Perryman is black, lives in Washington state, and like Herman Cain, is trying to shine a light on the truth. DON’T BE CLOSED MINDED AND LISTEN CLOSELY TO WHAT THEY HAVE TO SAY. THEY ARE TELLING THE TRUTH. STOP BEING THE STOOGES FOR THE DEMOCRAT PARTY!
Yes, let’s discuss the history of racism in the Democratic Party. It’s a really fascinating topic, especially what happened to them after the passage of the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts.
You see, they either repented of their racist past and dedicated themselves to advancing opportunity for people of color, like the late Robert Byrd, or else they became Republicans, where they could continue their Klan-inspired efforts to disenfranchise people of color while simultaneously using them as cumrags, like Strom Thurmond.
The ugliest, nastiest, most virulent racists that ever called themselves Democrats are all Republicans now.
Thanks for bringing it up so we could have this chat!
No, they did not repent. The result of the so called “concern” for social issues affecting the black community has been the exact opposite from what blacks expected. Cain’s family is a prime example of what a strong, nuclear black family used to be in the 50′s & 60′s: his father worked 3 jobs to support his family, and children respected, admired, and obeyed him as the head of the family. Cain’s father made the decision that his sons would have a better life than his, and he would not allow them to get off the track that he had put them on, and that is the reason Cain was not involved in demonstrations. L.B. Johnson & his “Great Society” destroyed the black family, because his social programs which were supposed to “help” blacks, had a peculiar condition: there could not be a “husband” as part of the household to be eligible for benefits. As a result, many families were broken just to be able to qualify, and gradually, the government substituted the husband as provider. Just look at the statistics of the number of black households led by women, the high rate of school drop outs, of juvenile delinquency among black teenagers who now grow up without a father, the high crime rate, etc, etc. There was even a movie made in the 70′s which pointed this out, starring Diana Ross, but I can’t remember the title. Was this an accidental or an intentional consequence?
If only Monica possessed some kind of device that allowed her to search through electronic archives of data, then she could find the name of the Diana Ross movie that is the totality of her extensive research into the history of social welfare programs in the US.
Dear, dear Allan! If only YOU would take the time to do a small fraction of the research I have done, you would realize how incredibly ignorant you are.
Monica, if you were any more feculent it would be spilling from your ears in a loathsome cascade.
I cannot stand Cain, and I want him as far away from the White House as possible, but I am watching these clips and am seeing nothing even close to a ‘take-down’ on O’Donnell’s part. Is Cain full of shit? Yes. Are his answers the usual lame-ass bullshit right-wing bluster crap that can be taken apart easily using logic and smarts, as ABL did above? Yes, yes, and yes. But all that is happening here is that O’Donnell asks a question, Cain bats it away with bullshit, receives applause; O’Donnell asks another question, Cain bats it away with more bullshit, receives applause. Lather, rinse, repeat. I guess I don’t know what the proper definition of ‘take-down’ is, but not for a moment does Cain lose his cool, or his momentum, and not once does O’Donnell put him in a place where he seems to fumble.
No Monica.
Slavery was physically setroyed as contrband of war, just as railroads, bridges and farms were destroyed. The emancipation proclamation was a war measure, in order to help destroy the southern means to fight. Abolitionsists were a minority in the North; which was just as prejudiced as the South.
After the war, and Reconsruction ended ( see the election of 1876) the blacks were left at the tender mercies of the whites in the South. Jim Crow was installed, and the northen whites said nothing and did nothing. You couldt on the fingers of one hand the number of whites who anything to help blacks. ( slight exaggeration). Blacks were on their own.
The South became solid Republican after the Civil Rights Bill and the Voting Rights Bill and Richard Nixon took advantage with his Southern Strategy.
The Solid South went from lily white Democrat to lily white Republican.
Madam, you do not know your american history. Do more research.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but with the exception of New Mexico, the governorships of the slave states that formed the Confederacy were dominated by the Democrat party up until the 1970′s and later into the 20th century. Only Missouri, Kentucky, & Arkansas had some shifts between the two parties, however, the Democrat party was still dominant until the latter part of the 20th century. (I incorrectly refered to segregationist states as Southern states; however, when most people talk about this subject, the South comes to mind first.) Your are correct, however, in the fact that Northern states were just as racists, and that economic issues (slave labor, not the welfare of the slaves) was the driving force. That was the sad reality then, and it is still so, otherwise, why is it that the more money is spent on social programs, the worse life gets for most blacks? Answer: Because social programs have taken away the incentive to work and to become self-reliant, and instead, they have become a way of life for too many (and for many whites & others, as well). How can anyone dare say that they have resulted in a net benefit for the black community?
By the way, that phony illiterate lingo is too obvious. Try something better.
Are you suggesting that black people are better off now than they were in the 60′s? I don’t think that’s a position that will get much traction around here. Maybe you meant to compare it to a more recent time period. I still don’t think you’re going to get much agreement there either. I’m not black though, so I could be wrong.
As for your last dig there, I don’t know what “phony illiterate lingo” is supposed to mean. Wouldn’t “phony illiterate” mean that someone is trying to prove they are less intelligent than they actually are? I assume you meant he was trying to sound smart, but I don’t see any big words in there unless contraband is a big word now.
Good grief! How could you possible even think such a thing! My point is that the FAMILY STRUCTURE was stronger because children were raised by TWO parents who took the responsibility of providing for them seriously, as well as for teaching them values, disciplining, and guiding them seriously so they would become responsible citizens. Have you been living overseas, and that is why you have never heard any reports on the break down of black families because many black couples do not even get married just so they can be eligible for all the social programs, and that because of that, many men have become nothing more than sperm donors and want no part of raising their children. Are you really oblivious to the negative impact of it on their children?
Look around in your community, and see for yourself, it is really not a secret!
Thank you for keeping our communications at a civil level, unlike some of the scum who is also allowed to post on these sites.
As for the comment I made about the “illiterate lingo”, computers have a ‘spell check’ feature, and it was put the the toolbar for a reason.
Monica:
“scum who are allowed to post on these sites” ?
Translated into english:
These people do not agree with me.
Fact of life Monica: your approval is not required. never has been, never will be. Deal with it, as best you can
many black couples do not even get married just so they can be eligible for all the social programs, and that because of that, many men have become nothing more than sperm donors and want no part of raising their children.
i’m sure you have a citation for this, right?
give me a break.
‘scum’? see, when YOU resort to name-calling, you betray yourself
as an undisciplined person who puts up the veneer of being ‘civiized’.
that’s what an adolescent does, not an adult. do better, think better,
and if that’s too much for you go somewhere else.
Monica:
Stooge for the Democratic Party?
Thanks but no thanks.
I am not buying your sales spiel.
Have a nice day.
So who is this drivel-purveyor “Monica” anyway?
Lewinsky? She would probably make more sense anyway.
Well, they certainly would’ve both been better off keeping their mouth shut!