Herman Cain admits he didn’t understand ‘Right of Return’

I’ve got all kinds of respect for a man who can admit he made a mistake, that he didn’t understand something, and Herman Cain did that tonight. He was heavily criticized yesterday for his response to Chris Wallace’s question on the Palestinian Right of Return. He now admits to Hannity that he was caught flat footed in the interview and that he was unaware of the concept.

Kudos Cain. Now don’t let it happen again.

Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.
  • Honesty will get you far with the Tea Party people— Cain is not my guy, but I have to admit that telling the truth would definitely ease my voting for him.  I’m not claiming to be a Tea Party person, but I am glad to see that at least one candidate seems to be in touch with the people.

    • Tyler

      One truth…still has 3 flip-flops to explain…but I’m sure he won’t have to.

    • PK

      Honesty to admit own error is a good virtual but not neccesarily the best policy for a presidential candidate. Those who often do so weaken their standing and discredit their own credibility, as Gingrich, Trumps, Romney did… It’s better to  do youir homework, research, articulate your position and details about key issue before going on national TV and be caught off guard. Damage control is after all, after the fact. 

      • Josh

        I think he learned that lesson too.  Next time someone catches him off-guard, I bet he says, “Let me get back to you on that one…”

  • The Fair Tax would be a disaster because it would be SO DAMN HIGH.  The Right Of Return?  The Right Of Return?  Who cares?

    • Jim

      Unlike the income tax you mean?

    • You have woefully mis-characterized both the Fair Tax and Herman Cain’s position.

    • West

      Stop being ignorant. First of all the fair tax would be far better than our current tax system that 40%+ of the workers don’t pay a dime into. Second, letting Israel duke it out by themselves is NOT in the best interest of the US. Once the Muslims take out Israel they will turn their sights on the US and every other “infadel” country on earth. This Islam problem is mush larger than the you think and isnt just a middle east issue.

      • You are EXACTLY right.

    • Mikemorrison281

      The Fair Tax would reveal just HOW HIGH hidden taxes are RIGHT NOW. THEN, and only THEN, could we decide what our Constitution requires government to pay for with our taxes and stop socialist and communist programs that have turned us into an entitlement society.

    • Anonymous

      The argument that the FairTax would be too high is possibly one of the worst arguments against it.  The FairTax simply replaces our current 70,000 pages of code with a simple, fair and transparent national retail sales tax.  It is designed to raise the same amount in taxes as the current system.  Isn’t the fact that it would be too high an indictment of the huge amount of taxes that the government collects rather than an indictment of simplifying our tax collection system?

      • Anonymous

        Anyone who thinks a Fair Tax would replace the IRS and the current tax code is kidding themselves.  All the Fair Tax is is another name for a VAT or Value Added Tax.  Even if it did replace the current tax code, which will never happen, it would add to cost of so many goods, services, and utilities that the “prebate” idea is ripe for the same type of corruption that got us the tax code we have now.  And then we’d still all have our state and local taxes on top of it. 

        • Anonymous

          The Fairtax is absolutely nothing like a VAT tax.  With a VAT tax, taxes added at every stage of production and hidden in the cost of an item.  With the FairTax, the tax only added at the retail level and is printed on your receipt.

          Yes, you’re right, whatever system we have is always subject to corruption.  That is why we must always be vigilant.  However, because the FairTax has no loopholes or exceptions, it is much less “ripe” for corruption than our current system.

          If you don’t like the FairTax, then what is your solution?  Should we stick with our current horribly complicated system of 70,000 pages and growing?  If you like a flat tax, remember that our current system started as a flat tax.  Also, a flat tax taxes income and not consumption.  Which do you want to encourage, income and productivity or consumption?

          • Anonymous

            Do you want to pay 23% tax to buy a house? A car?  A flat screen TV?  Your water?

            Explain the “prebate” idea.  I don’t get how that won’t turn into another corrupt crony game.  I just bought a house for cash and my kid will turn 19 next year so I’m about to lose my biggest tax deductions and I still think I’ll be better off than under the Fair Tax.

            • Josh

              Easy.  If you brought home the extra 30% that is currently being taken out of your check…

              The problem with explaining the Fair Tax is that people are so entrenched with payroll deduction that they cannot imagine life without it. 

            • Josh

              Easy.  If you brought home the extra 30% that is currently being taken out of your check…

              The problem with explaining the Fair Tax is that people are so entrenched with payroll deduction that they cannot imagine life without it. 

            • Anonymous

              A very, very important point is that the prices of things would not increase by 23%. This is why: The prices of virtually everything you buy already include “imbedded taxes.”  Imbedded taxes are the taxes that the corporations paid (primarily payroll and corporate taxes) and are simply passing on to consumers in the form of higher prices.  This is the crux of the argument that corporations do not really pay taxes – they just pass them along to consumers.

              The prebate is very simple. EVERY household would receive a monthly check based on the size of their family and the poverty level.  For example, every family a 4 would receive the same monthly check ($500 for example) regardless of their income or spending).  This is what makes the FairTax progressive.  To a family at the poverty level, that would cover virtually all the sales taxes that they paid.  To a wealthy family, it would be negligible.  Therein lies the reason why it would not become a “Crony” game.  There would be no exceptions or no way to game the system.  Everyone would get the same prebate – it would just be more material to some than to others.

              Don’t forget that you would also receive your entire paycheck.  The FairTax would replace FICA taxes, which is an extremely regressive tax.  FICA taxes are paid on dollar #1.  Poor people pay more in FICA taxes than they do in income taxes.

              • colorado_golfer

                According to the fair tax site with 2010 poverty data, a couple with 2 children would receive $559 per month.

            • colorado_golfer

              One man’s deduction is another man’s loophole… 

              If you did not buy a NEW house, the tax is not in play, just like used cars, ebay,  etc. Only on NEW consumer items.  This tax eliminates ALL of the current federal income taxes including personal, estate, gift, capital gains, alternative minimum, Social Security, Medicare, self-employment, and corporate taxes. All the people who don’t pay today who should… immigrants (illegal or not), underground businesses, tourists, tax cheaters, etc would be contributing to the overall tax burden. The 23% comes from our current GDP x .23 to equal the total amount of taxes collected today. HB25 says the 23% rate is listed in a new amendment to the constitution and is included on EVERYTHING new that is sold to the end consumer… no special exemptions. And the price of the products, based on the economics of the fair tax would be reduced by 23%. For example, cereal makers would not have any corporate/payroll/whatever taxes to pay so they reduce the product to the grocers. The farmer who sold the grain to the cereal makers would not have any taxes so their products are reduced to the cereal maker, John Deere would not have any taxes in their tractors and combines sold to the farmer so that is not taxed, the sheet metal maker, the tire maker, the seed supplier, etc… so a $10 product today would still sell for $10 and the retailer would WANT to sell it at $7.70 because of the reduced costs along the way and then add $2.30 for the federal govt. 

              Read the book… or go to http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_faq_answers

        • Mark7

          @Jaynie59:disqus You should actually read the provisions of the FairTax before you pooh-pooh the idea.  Pat of the bill requires that the 16th Amendment be repealed BEFORE the FairTax system is implemented. 

          You are right about the state and local taxes though.  However, the FairTax was never designed to replace those taxes, NEVER.  This is a system to replace many taxes on the FEDERAL level.  Like I tell my folks in D.C.    Read the freaking bill!

          • Anonymous

            Actually, the FairTax does not change state taxes per se, but if adopted, almost all states would almost certainly follow suit and eliminate their income taxes as well.  Florida and Texas already have.

            Just to recap, poor people receive 100% of their paychecks, receive a monthly prebate ($559 for a couple of 2) and pay slightly higher amounts for the new goods and services that they purchase (after adjusting for imbedded taxes). They can avoid the sales tax for the things that they choose to purchase used (cars, clothes, food, well maybe not food).  How is that bad for poor people?

            No more IRS. April 15 would be just another beautiful Spring day.  We could tell our grandchildren about the stupid tax code that was around before the U.S. economy skyrocketed and provided everyone with jobs.  And we stopped running gigantic deficits.

    • las

      Fool!  Your comments prove what makes the utopian libertarian position is the mirror opposite of the hate of the progressive left.  It’s becoming more and more evident to me that the soft headed mush of the libertarian in too many respects is simply licentiousness (to use an old religious adage). 

      Wiping Israel off the table with the dirty rag of “Who Cares!”.  How dare you!  You libertarians twist the meaning and intent of words just like the intolerant and bigoted left.  Instead of labeling it the protection and upholding of Israel’s right to exist against murderers, liars and thieves of the Muslim world… the sanctimonious Libertarian uses progressive speak saying,”I will no longer advocate for our troops to die on their behalf” totally ignoring the reasons for such protection and reducing it to a fatuous libertarian trope designed to impress the simple.  Well I’m not impressed. In other words you don’t give a damn about the principle of freedom and protection for others and you pretend to care about American Troops.  No you don’t!   Fool.  Stick your head up your butt and explore the utopia of extreme libertarianism, just like Ron Paul.

      Man!   Just had to get that off my chest.

    • las

      P.S. Robert… please forgive me.  I’m the fool for calling you a fool.  That’s no way to conduct discourse, so my apologies.  I should think twice before hitting send.

      My other comments do stand, however.  That Lib’ians live in a Utopian World which would ignore the realities of real evil and worldly dangers is the thing that grieves me the most.  I see libertarianism as a signpost… with useful ideas on how to manage and structure our economy away from the monstrosity it has become.  I think we need to be familiar with its ideas and its warnings agains loss of freedoms.  But to many Libertarians (not all) Libertarianism has become a rigid religious like movement with it’s doctrines and tenants of faith as well as pronouncements of anathema on others who take contest against its more utopian dictates.  Ron Paul groupies spring to mind… people who display all the bigotry and hatred of the progressive left.

      Your post against Israel embodied that attitude.  But as West in response to you said: “Once the Muslims take out Israel they will turn their sights on the US
      and every other “infadel” country on earth. This Islam problem is much
      larger than you think and isnt just a middle east issue” 

      Having lived in Europe I’ve seen the changes Islam is making, and it is frightening.  And it is NOT Israel against the “fakestinians”.  It is Israel against all of Islam.  Huge difference!  I hope you will begin to investigate what the real realities are and not hid behind the “non-interventionism”/ isolationism of Libertarianism…. because the World and America is way beyond the World of 1776.

      Again my apologies.
      Regards, las

      • Absolute CLASS!

        Excellent post, sir.  EXCELLENT.

        CM Sackett

      • KenInMontana

        Regarding this “”non-interventionism”/ isolationism of Libertarianism”, the two are as different as night and day. The Libertarian position of non-intervention is the condensed version of this ideal,”Equal and exact justice to all men, of whatever state or persuasion,
        religious or political; peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all
        nations, entangling alliances with none; the support of the State
        governments in all their rights, as the most competent administrations
        for our domestic concerns and the surest bulwarks against antirepublican
        tendencies; the preservation of the General Government in its whole
        constitutional vigor, as the sheet anchor of our peace at home and
        safety abroad; a jealous care of the right of election by the people”,hardly isolationist, unless you believe Jefferson was an isolationist(which would be in error).  Isolationism is almost an ideology unto itself,if you want a good example of isolationism think China from the Ming Dynasty, completely closed off to the outside world. Just because Libertarians don’t believe that we as a nation should be hopping around the globe sticking our noses into every other nation’ business does not mean that we would hesitate to hand anyone who attacks this country their backside on a platter. Libertarianism is no more utopian than a Conservatism, individuals can indeed be utopian but the ideology is not. I would add that not all Libertarians are in the tank for Ron Paul. Paul was only the LP’s candidate for President once out of the ten elections in which the LP fielded a candidate,hell most people of a Libertarian “bend” abhor the Party. The Neoconservative policy of intervention can be traced back to Teddy Roosevelt’s view of the US as the “world’s policeman” and consider this, is it not very,very similar to the policy of “a responsibility to protect” put forward by Zero’s new foreign policy “czarina” Samantha Power (Cass Sunstein’s wife)?
         As for my own position on the current snafu by Zero in regards to Israel? I think that the greatest service we could do for the nation of Israel would be to stand up and very pointedly say to the nations posturing at her and the Palestinians threatening her “This is our friend, and you all know how much we value our friends, DON’T YOU?”

  • Sorry, Herman, you can’t fumble these questions when you’re under the magnifying glass of the MSM. You get one chance to make a first impression and the impression you’re giving us is that you’re not ready.

    Go T-Paw!!

    • Horrible reason to not support somebody, never base your support on how opposition perceives the person. You let them dictate to you.

      • No. It’s how I perceive Cain. He’s running his campaign like a Tea Party rally and it’s not going to fly. I look at Cain the way swing voters will look at him. As I’m sure you know, it’s swing voters that decide elections.

        • “Sorry, Herman, you can’t fumble these questions when you’re under the
          magnifying glass of the MSM. You get one chance to make a first
          impression and the impression you’re giving us is that you’re not ready.”


          • Right.

            • Here’s the thing… he didn’t fumble, his answer was correct. Obama fumbled… because he wanted to go back to something Israel didn’t want but the Palestinians did.

              • Publius

                Forget the MSM?

                If not for the MSM, how would you get a majority of citizens to believe Palin (or any other conservative from Republican from Eisenhower to Bush II is stupid)?  If not for the MSM, how would you get a substantial majority to say they would not vote for Palin?

                For Repubs and conservatives, I’d say the MSM is a greater obstacle than the Dems.

                • No doubt.

                • DCG

                  The “MSM” is the “SRM”…they will do everything in their power to make a con look bad while letting D’s get away with murder (a certain Kennedy come to mind?).

                  Look at what they did to get the empty suit elected.  Doesn’t matter what Cain says, according to SRM he’s just “entertainment” as are all cons.

              • Josh

                Obama fumbled into his own end zone, then held off all of his guys so the other team could recover the ball and make a touchdown.

        • las

          Nick… I kinda agree with you.  I am struck that candidates running often don’t rehearse and re-rehearse every possible issue before coming out and confronting the press.  And saying that he does not have access to top intelligence and military briefings was just lame.  What the heck do they have exploratory committees for?  Having said that, a Tea Party focus is fairly narrowly defined.  It is best to be a Tea Partier like Allen West… But then West has weaknesses I feel on economic issues.  As of yet there are no perfect candidates.  But try not to be too quick to brush Cain off.  A man who can admit his weakness in an area is ethical and right… he just has to be smarter and more up on his game next time and he must make sure there will be no more apologies in the future.

          • Sad to say Allen West is not running. He said no in an interview and Scoop has it up here. West is a no nonsense guy and I take him at his word.

            Cain still has time to do his home work and focus his message, but He needs to do it soon because the field is getting tight and it will be hard for him to play catch up. The other thing that hurts Cain is the “Fair Tax” canard. Art Laffer was one of Reagan’s favorite economists and he thinks a “Flat Tax” is the way to go.

            Go T-Paw.

    • Steven

      T-Paw is neither Establishment nor Tea Party. How does he win? It will come down to Mitt Romney or the Candidate who can consolidate the Tea Party Movement, as Rubio did, as O’Donnell did, as Angle did, as Miller did, etc against the Establishment. That’s the new paradigm in the GOP nominating process since Doug Hoffman in NY-23 back in 2009. So I am not saying you can’t support T-Paw, by all means do, but I don’t see his constituency. 

      • T-Paw will build his constituency as he gains name recognition. He also came out today against ethanol subsidies in…Iowa. This is NOT an establishment position. He is willing to take on the GOP establishment and you will see it as time goes on.

        BTW: Beck played Pawlenty’s announcement on his radio show and he was thrilled. He pointed out that T-Paw admited his mistake in initially supporting Cap and Trade and said he was wrong. Romney, on the other hand, has never admitted RomenyCare was wrong.

        Stay tuned.

        • Rich

          Ok, so I can’t understand your initial position on Cain then. T-Paw gets to take back a mistake, but Cain doesn’t? ………….explain that one.

          • Cain has made a number of mistakes. This one was one that shows he hasn’t studied his foreign policy. If he doesn’t change his approach he will be stuck in last place 6 months from now.

            • Rich

              You’re still not telling me why it is Pawlenty gets to walk back his mistakes but Cain doesn’t.

      • Odin147

         TPaw is the only who can consolidate conservatives of all types, Romney has Romney care to deal with. TPaw cannot be pinned as a wingnut which the MSM will undoubtedly do, as he was 2 term governor of a very blue state, he can appeal to the moderates without being moderate, this will be key going forward.

    • Rich

      Shall I remind you of Pawlenty’s first impressiong? You know..all global warming happy and what not? Seems you’re allowing him more than one chance. Either that or you agree with his previous stance on global warming.

      • “previous stance”

        Those are key words. T-Paw is getting lots of attention including from Beck and Rush. So far they have been very positive. He has a great record of fighting Dems and stopping spending. A record that will be coming out in the next few months. He came out against ethanol subsidies on Monday. That is a very bold, cost cutting, anti-establishment move.

  • J.A. Topfke

    “The thing you’re going to learn about Herman Cain is if he doesn’t know something he’s not going to try and fake it or give an answer that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.”–Herman Cain

    Yet that is exactly what he did in the Wallace interview. By his own admission he didn’t know what the right of return is, yet he tried to fake it and gave an answer when he didn’t know what he was talking about. Namely he answered, “It should be negotiated.”

    It’s easy to be honest when everybody and his Facebook friends already knows you were caught out, but why couldn’t he be honest at the time it happened? Even in his admission of guilt he couldn’t be completely honest. He had to throw in that “he’s not going to try and fake it or give an answer that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about” when that is demonstrably false.

    • The right of return is a specific historical issue, dealing with Palestinians settling within the Israeli borders and that the Arabs kicked em out, etc, he said it in the interview exactly what he didn’t know, the part you didn’t quote. THe part of course you didn’t quote would of thrown a wrench in your reasoning.

      So, what he did not know was the specific history that he elaborated on in the Hannity interview that you didn’t quote, but his foreign policy is clear. Let Israel negotiate. Plain and simple, that is clear and concise foreign policy that he originally articulated, which is why he said he stands by his answer, as do I. Let our friends deal with their situation until they need our help, let our enemies not have anything they want…

  • Anonymous

    He is not my guy and I still don’t think he is qualified but I do admire his honesty here.

  • He still stood by his answer… His answer or his instincts were still solid. I like it.

    I have not been moved, I will vote for Cain.

  • hb sheep


    EVERYONE  please keep in mind ~ our country a 2-party system,,,
     therefore who’s ever name reads opposite this global empty suit
    otherwise this great (not perfect) United States of America
    will be another third world country….
    G-d speed

  • He seemed to be caught off guard because he is an American first, not a politician, thus the question to ask is… What average American has the right of return on their mind? We are worried about debt, debt, economy, immigration, leadership, oh did I mention debt? Oh and the biggest national security threat in the next 10 years, our debt. A businessman can get out of this debt we are in, Cain has done it before and in record time, he can do it with the US.

    His caught off-guard reaction was a reflection of America more so than some deep flaw in his Presidential attempt.

  • Anonymous

    Cain needs better advisors if he is gonna survive.   That is absolutely critical!

    • True, but I think now he has to of boned up quite a bit on foreign policy and middle east geopolitics. You can bet he will be challenged on this till kingdom come, much like Obama was until he got Biden. Although Obama’s ineptness is bringing new weight of criticism on his fp decisions.

      I am sure Cain knows this, and he should start with some reading of Samuel P. Huntington if you ask me.

  • Odin147

    cain keeps saying the same thing, there is the problem, assigning the priorites, putting the right people to solve the problem, I don’t think we need a 101 lesson on problem solving, he needs to get specific, but I guess it is still very early in the process.

    • Actually, yes the government DOES need a lesson in it. Have you not been following things the past 20 years? Fore petes sake man!

      • Odin147

        Govt would be a mess even if they knew problem solving, the only best govt is a very small one.

        • Exactly what Cain has been articulating.

          Only a small govt can fully utilize his methodology of problem-solving. So he intends to cut spending and problem-solve… I like it.

          • Odin147

            i guess it is early…i am eager to hear what he has to say about the solutions, rather than methodology. Cut spending yes but how, where, who is effected when spending is cut, are there back stops in place, if he wants to abolish the irs, will he replace it with the fair tax, if so how is that implemented, who will it effect, does he have the courage to actually make fair tax happen, if he does, does he have the ability to cobble large coalitions of all kinds of people to make these large changes happen, nothing in his record indicates that he can. These problems are huge, and I don’t think he can handle it, being ceo of a pizza joint isn’t good enough.

            • Here you go Odin, I just found this site today. Its got all his solutions laid out to view.


              He wasn’t just a CEO of a pizza joint. He was a mathematician of the Navy. He turned Godfathers Pizza around from bankruptcy in MONTHS, saving like 12000 jobs. That is what we wanted, or at least what I wanted from Obama, this type of private sector experience.

              Also he has extensive grassroots experience with Americans for Prosperity and http://www.hitm.org

  • I’ve liked Mitt since early 2007 so I don’t really have a problem with
    him being the nominee.  The fact that President Obama is more scared to
    face Mitt than anyone else and that Mitt seems to get under Obama’s skin makes me like Mitt even more.


    • Mitt vs Cain?

      Cain all day long :D.

    • Tyler

      When has Mitt gotten under Obama’s skin?  Obama’s actually THANKED Mitt for providing the blueprint for Obamacare.  You’re sadly mistaken if you really think Mitt is going to win and even MORE sadly mistaken if you think he would be any better for our country than Obama if he actually pulls it off.

    • RCL

      That’s nonsense.  Obama would cream Romney.  

      Like Herman, I voted for Romney last time around.  His cowardice has become so apparent since Obama took over that I now have a visceral loathing of the guy.  

      He’s a terrible speaker.  He’s phony from his head to his toe.  He’s a market insider.  A hedge fund trader for God’s sake.  They’re drooling at the DNC to take this guy on.  That’s why the media keeps pumping him up.If Romney gets the nod hundreds of thousands of conservatives will sit on their hands, me included.  Job one is not defeating Obama but purging the traitors in the GOP or killing it off altogether.  

      • Steprock

        If Romney got the GOP nod, I’d probably vote Independent and possibly leave the party. I think that he’s an empty suit, a quintessential politician, and he still hasn’t backed down on “Romneycare”.

  • Herman Cain is the real deal.  He is not a politician and may not know intricate details of diplomacy yet, but i have complete faith in his ability to handle anything thrown his way.

    In a field of Romney (typical two faced RINO), Pawlenty (Romney-lite phony), Gingrich (really?), and various other underwhelmers, I have to back Cain.  Things can change and people can join the race, but as of today, i trust him to do what he says and to set the country free again. 

    The typical political sort just wont do this time.

    • Tyler

      You should do some more research.  He has ran for office before, so he’s far from new to the political scene and its games.

      • No he is not. Read my comments, he has been in the scene for 20 years, especially pushing against the Fair Tax.

  • refreshing honesty.

  • Rich

    I mean I’m not an ardent supporter of Cain, but if we are to take Pawlenty and Romney seriously, who both have had bigger flubs than this, then why can’t we take this guy seriously? Why is not allowed a flub? Especially when he actually admits the very next day, that indeed, he did flub? If we are going to write people off after one mistake then we might as well not even have an election, because no one is passing the test.

    • Tyler

      There are 3 straight-out flip-flops which he should explain…but probably won’t be forced to.

      • Name them for Cain… Please.

        • Tyler

          I’ve already done so before…but I’ll do it again…and in order.

          1.) I’ll use the one that everyone else seems to defend more easily because they refuse to admit that they allowed themselves to be duped.  He supported the bailouts and then only after the damage has been done…didn’t.

          2.) He first claims there is no need to audit the Fed.  Then, as he realizes that more people are seriously concerned about them…he then supports Ron Paul’s plans to get to audit them.

          3.) Within 24 hours, he goes from saying that the debt ceiling should not be raised to that the Rs “have no choice,” but to raise it and agrees with Ben Bernanke who’s never been right about anything.

          • 1. He supported the bailouts, not the implementation. No flip-flop but not in accordance to how he would do it. Cain wants more direct stimulus prolly, where the govt doesn’t pick winners and losers.

            2. So he wants to put even MORE scrutiny on the Fed. Fine with me, not a flip-flop but support for more rigorous scrutiny. Again, I love it!

            3. Actually Cain still supports not raisng the debt ceiling, but now because it is in disaster mode because the R’s and D’s both didn’t implement sound problem-solving methodology, we are stuck and have no choice. If we confronted it head-on with real leadership we wouldn’t have to. Again saying that Ben is never right is just a blanket generality and really doesn’t display any proof of a flip-flop.

            • Tyler

              1.) There is no “support the bailouts, but not the implementation.”  The bailouts themselves ARE an implementation.  You use taxpayer money (or just borrowing it from Bernanke at an interest rate) and give it to companies who should not receive corporate welfare for their bad decisions.  That’s the very definition of a bailout.

              2.) You should do some research for yourself to see how far apart the two comments actually are.  There’s no seriousness to his “support” for Paul when you hear him talk about the audit…but he’s PASSIONATE when he talks about not auditing them.  All you have to do is go to YouTube and type in “Herman Cain Inconsistent” and you will see what I’m talking about.  I’m sick of posting it for people.

              3.) Yes…chalk it up to him simply thinking that the Rs “have no choice.”  HE made a choice…why can’t they?  Also…WHY is this idea that there’s “no choice” being played out EVEN BY FOX.  There’s a very simple choice.  STOP GIVING THEM THE ABILITY TO BORROW.  That’s real plain and simple…no matter who the leader or non-leaders are.  Cain actually suggesting that they “don’t have a choice” is giving those in Congress who just DON’T WANT to choose more ammo for taking the easy way out.  Also…Ben Bernanke said there was “no choice.”  Again…there’s ALWAYS a choice and he’s WRONG on this just like everything else.  Cain AGREED (specifically saying that Bernanke was right).  If this ISN’T a flip-flop…then it’s JUST PLAIN WRONG about a VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE.

              • 1. He sees the govt jumping in as favor to unions, so what they bailed out was wrong. The implementation was wrong because it was politically based not market based. http://hermancainissues.com/category/economic/bailouts/
                2. Stop with your silly “he not as passionate in this one”, means nothing. He supports rigorous insight into the Fed.
                3. Yes I know he said he was right, it would bring uncertainty to market… I agree with him on that. You have not shown why he is wrong. You just are griping about Bernanke.

                • Tyler

                  1.) A TRUE free market involves NO bailouts…PERIOD.  NO bailout is TRULY market-based.  ANY bailouts is called crony capitalism plain and simple.

                  2.) I know what he actually said.  I was hoping you would’ve seriously paid attention to how short of a time apart he said these two things.  He supposedly “changed his mind,” from not wanting to audit them to now auditing them and supposedly there’s not supposed to be a committee, but Congressional oversight which really makes no sense because a committee is simply groups of those in Congress.

                  3.) How is the government saying “Yes.  We need to borrow more.” bringing “certainty” to the markets?  How is borrowing and spending more bringing “less uncertainty” than finally being fiscally responsible?  I am not griping about Bernanke, but pointing out that in his short time in office…he has not been right about any of his policies and prints money “quantitatively eases” money or whatever you want to call it and tries to pretend that we’re experiencing “deflation.”  He’s WRONG…plain and simple.  I believe that a man as smart as him is NOT THAT STUPID, but is INTENTIONALLY doing this.  Cain’s SUPPORT of this man is obvious as daylight, yet people don’t see it.

                • 1. The govt is to be a just umpire. Any free market worth its salt has some oversight. THe point is there is 100 years to much on the American free market today. A lot of that through taxation, which Cain wants to directly confront.

                  2.  Not sure where you are pulling this from. He is fully aware of Pauls committee membership, go to the link I posted.

                  3. Because this financial stability is brought about by shocking the system, namley restructuring taxes. Which is why Cain proposes a permanent nature of his policies, giving the uncertainty a limit, and thus it will go away after initial spike as certainty overcomes the market.

                • Tyler

                  1.) “Any free market worth its salt?”  Do you have any idea what the free market is about?  The market takes out businesses that aren’t “worth their salt.”  We don’t need government to EVER pick winners or losers.  If food isn’t safe…then customers can eat at places that are.  If factories aren’t safe…then employees can work at factories that are.  Every bit of “oversight” or what I prefer to just call unnecessary rules and regulations is exactly what kills businesses and makes them feel the need to ship jobs overseas.  You really believe that the last 100 years has resulted in “too much” free market?  Then you clearly don’t know what a free market actually is.

                  2.) No need.  He’s said there’s “no need” because of hiring extra committee members.  Then, he “supports” Paul’s efforts to audit the Fed.  Then, he claims that his original comments about not auditing the Fed when someone called him out on his flip-flop was that he never claimed that people didn’t need to know what was going on, but just that a committee was not necessary.  Doesn’t make sense, if you honestly believe he’s telling the truth…which I do not.

                  3.) That makes no sense.  If you believe it does, then there’s no point in me attempting to talk to you further about this.  Borrowing more does not promote certainty in markets…plain and simple.  There’s a reason why the IMF is talking about taking away our dollar as the world’s reserve currency…and it’s not because we’re “bringing certainty” to the market.  How is doing more of the same going to fix that problem?

                • Hey tyler, just wanting to jump in, maybe add my 2cents to your points(which are all great i might add), to help this fellow see what you are going for.

                  This is for tony:

                  1. if chevy and chrysler hadnt had a bailout, ford(and maybe even toyota) would have absorbed them, keeping the vehicles that sell(corvette, p/u, and those that sell), and flushing the rest down the toilet(smart cars, and the likes that arent worth their weight in gold). i am truely baffled that someone thinks that these automakers deserved(optimum word) to be saved. what have they done to deserve it………..the union, thats who. the union begged and won. YOU the taxpayer, lost, end of story. mr. cain supported saving these guys(not directly, but by sayng yes to bailouts…….aka, even the implementation of them to save these guys). no one likes to loose their job, but hanging on to something just because an american works at it, doesnt cut the mustard with me. if a product isnt selling(most american automakers werent, even ford), either the company comes up with a new product that WILL sell(called restructuring), or they go belly up……this is as stupid as the government regulation that loggers have to plant trees after cutting down trees………this is a no duh moment. if a logger wants to continue business, they plant trees so they have something to cut down, otherwise, no trees, no business………….the government comes up with ways to wipe before you poop, then telling you whoops, we got it wrong again, time to change the regulation to wipe AFTER you poop. do you really need this regulation? government screws it up, so they have something to fix, now that they screwed up, they are trying to fix it(aka, screwing up again).

                  2. mr. cain WORKED for the FED, he KNOWS what is happening there, and doesnt want the public to know how greatly they are about to be screwed when inflation takes off like a rocket. the ONLY reason he supports paul at this moment, is because the “audit” will be done behind closed doors, and he thinks he can influence paul not to release damning information(its called buying time to save his own skin). the problem is, paul WILL release the info, and that might have mr. cains name even attached to some of the negative info that comes out. mr. cain wants to cover his tracks, trust me, because he knows what is happening. now, i will grant you, he didnt stay with the fed all that long, but, that still doesnt make it seem right that he is trying to cover something up, whether it be him, or just how screwed we are, something is trying to be covered up by this man.

                  3. help me out on this spot, somehow, someone thinks that raising the debt ceiling is going to somehow makes things all better?! i wish that same thinking worked for me in the REAL WORLD. can i just call up visa, mastercard, or any other credit card company, and just ask to have my credit limit raised………….HELL NO. then how come the government can? i cant see us raising a debt limit any more, as a matter of fact, we need to lower it by nearly 75% to make this country solvent again. this includes, and yes you can quote me for killing granny, getting rid of social security, medicaid, medicare, and food stamps. this is not even apart of our debt, and should be i might add, especially since it is over(at 6:42 am cst) 114,942,803,000,000. all i ask tony, is explain how raising my credit card limit makes me solvent…………..if it dont work for a single person, how in gods name does it work for the nation?

                • 1. If the bailout was executed properly we could of made a lot of money, we didn’t because the bailout wasn’t implemented properly.

                  2. You are putting words into his position. He wants an audit, plain and simple.

                  3. OK.

                • 1. Yes, free markets need govt oversight.
                  2. Nope don’t think so, I don’t see that anywhere.
                  3. Oh well, fail to address the topics, you would rather just claim nonsense, when something is clearly explained to you.

                • Tyler

                  I DO support the black market because it IS the only TRULY free market.  If only it were legal…then the crimes that happen within it would disappear.  The point is that Cain’s BSing you by now saying to audit the Fed when that’s what you want to hear.  The IMF will never be off our backs as long as we have the Federal Reserve which is basically just our branch of them.

  • Tyler

    I couldn’t care less about Israel because I believe our involvement either way undermines their sovereignty as a nation.

    Instead, I’ll use this thread to address some of the Fair Tax comments in this thread.

    You have to realize 2 things here, folks.

    1.) The Fair Tax in order to work properly would have to REPLACE the current system.  There are TWO PILLARS holding up the current system…both ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE to remove.  First…the 16th Amendment to our Constitution.  Second…the Internal Revenue Service.

    2.) Our government is too inefficient to take a new idea and either do what should be done with it or toss it aside.  The most likely scenario no matter WHO the president is with the Fair Tax…is that they’ll implement it IN ADDITION to the current system which will bring our economy to Europe’s level of income AND national sales taxes…which by Cain’s own percentage proposed would make ALL OUR TAXES DOUBLE.

    Just something to think about.

    • 1. You are right, but SOMETHING has to be done. I will put my support for the Fair Tax over the ugly sight that is the 16th Amendment application by the IRS.

      2. No way, the Fair Tax itself will never be supported in that form, namely the form that will add to current taxation. That would defeat its purpose and thus render it useless thus unlikely the outcome would be. Most likely it may become voluntary alongside current system, phasing out the current system over a period of years to ultimately be based on the Fair Tax.

      • Tyler

        I’ve said this in another thread before.  A true alliance should simply be about helping your ally when they need it.  We’ve built them up to be far superior militarily to every country around them combined.  If they ask for our help in a real war…then we can declare war properly and fight the country(ies) who attack.  Then again…ask yourself this question.  Considering that we already spend ourselves into the ground with our current “War on Terror,” can we actually afford to fight WWIII?  Also…do WE pay the HIGHER TAXES REQUIRED NOW to fight that war…or do we KEEP BORROWING like we have SO FAR and make our future generations debt slaves to our own printing press who is the largest holder of our debt in the world?

        • Yes we can afford it, because if it does get that srs, we pull everybody home and implement strategy number 1, protect Israel. That is the core of the War on Terror.

          All the while paying down our debt and eliminating wasteful spending.

          • Tyler

            Why don’t we save our resources NOW instead of nation-building?  Pull the troops out NOW instead of continuing to just pick off small fries…MANY who are NOT EVEN OUR ACTUAL TARGETS?  Wait…that’s right…this so-called “war” has no specific targets which means it was designed to be never-ending.

            We need to protect ourselves FIRST.  WE OURSELVES are not faring too well, if you haven’t noticed.  It’s like turbulence on a plane when you have a small child with you.  They say to MASK YOURSELF FIRST…and THEN mask the child…because WITHOUT YOUR ability to breathe…then you pass out AND the child’s screwed.

            • I agree… hehe

        • 1. Its about changing the dynamic, we have to turn the ship around. We have to be bold and support bold positions. I fully agree with this position of the Fair Tax. I understand how hard it would be, I also understand important things don’t come easy, especially politically for America.

          2. The govt may repeal laws as the legislation dictates. Its a phase out system, so it will phasae out laws and such in accordance to the time allowed during the phase. 70,000 page tax code now compared to a page form for Fair Tax… hmmm… I see a lot more potential of corrupt stealing in the current system.

          • Tyler

            1.) “Politically.”  Glad you chose that word.  Cain’s not the “non-politician” everyone claims he is.  He’s campaigned before.  He understands the political world just fine.  Being political at all is NOT being “bold.”  You want to REALLY be bold?  Get rid of the 16th Amendment and the IRS and replace it with NOTHING.  Taxation is theft and the government DID raise revenue in other ways BEFORE people and businesses were taxed through fees and tariffs.  THIS however would require a SERIOUS reduction in government all across the board…to the Constitutional level that was authorized.  Entire departments must go, social safety nets must disappear, and militarism must end as well.

            2.) You think the government WILL honestly do that?  Especially with more important tools to the great beast’s survival like the 16th Amendment and the IRS?  There’s plenty of corruption and stealing with virtually any system there is.  Plus…the new law introduces new language which is never a good thing in any legislation proposed. You should actually read the Fair Tax itself.  It starts as 131 pages.  No law ever finishes at its original page number.  Also…you think the current tax code STARTED at over 70,000 pages?  Slowly yet surely…there’s always new rules and exceptions put into existing laws.

            3.) The fact that the 16th Amendment exists means that even if hypothetically speaking, the IRS DID go away and the current code WAS fully replace with the Fair Tax…that amendment existing would ALLOW Congress to ADD MORE LATER.

  • halfmadjesus

    It’s not a deal-breaker that Cain didn’t know about something like Right of Return this far out from the primary. But he needs to get up to speed on things like this right away, or risk coming off like the candidiate Charles Krauthammer and other establishment guys think he is.

    If Cain’s still struggling with similar issues 2-3 months from now, that’s going to be a real problem for him, regardless of whether or not he owns up to his ignorance.

    • Tyler

      The illusion of certain people being a part of the “establishment” is a trick.  If you think Cain isn’t a part of their game, then you’re mistaken.

      • Constance

        Okay, we get it.  You do not support Herman Cain.  I don’t think we need to continue hearing from you on this subject any longer.  How many posts can one person possibly add basically saying the same thing on the same thread?  Don’t vote for him then!  Chill out.

        • Tyler

          I told someone else this already.  There’s too much blind support for the man.  What I am attempting to do is a modern version of the Socratic method.  If people still believe in Cain after digging deeper…there’s nothing anyone can do about that.  Just know who and what you’re voting for instead of giving into the media which will not educate you on what is truly wrong with the candidate(s).

  • Mary Beth House

    Yes… it disturbs me that he wasn’t familiar with the term. Especially given Netanyahu’s detailed history lesson and statement on the topic just a few days prior.

    What bothers me more though… is that in not knowing what it meant, he still gave an answer.

    While it is admirable that he’s willing and able to admit now that he didn’t know what “right of return” meant when asked, this admission highlights the fact that he voiced an opinion of the topic when he didn’t know what he was talking about.

  • Anonymous

    Good comment on the interview, @TRScoop !  Cain being honest like that shows some courage.

    Think about a decision-maker, folks.  Think about how they do it.  The ones who have principles and experience will make them quickly, and will just as quickly cut their losses when necessary.  Compare that to “Mr. Sixteen Hours For A No-Brainer.”

    Cain needs better media people, and someone to help him with his foreign policy.  Let’s see how quickly that happens.

    • Tyler

      “Better media?”  Fox practically throws this stuff to him.  He’s THEIR GUY.  The “establishment/anti-establishment” spiel is all part of the game.

    • PK

      True, to run a successful campaign, not only must he be able to raise fund, he needs a well-oiled campaign engine, a team of policy advisor, media/PR communications expert and planner.  Some formed the exploratory team to survey the political landscape, gauged  the chance of winning, count the cost but decided not to run. To go all the way, one needs just more than “fire in the belly” to your hat in the ring and run, it’s very expansive business proposition and endeavor. 
      Could this be one of the reasons that West did not declare himself as a presidential candidate? as so many hope that he should.  West can be tapped to run as VP running mate without going this route. 

  • Maxwell Genaw

    Herman Cain is Federal Reserve scum he worked on the board for several years.

    • Tyler

      The arguments to defend this are baffling at best.

    • KenInMontana

      He was on the level C board for three years at the KC Branch, a part-time civilian advisory board, a board which does not make policy. The civilian advisory board members are selected by the branch board of governors (the actual policy makers) from local businessmen who are familiar with local economies. You guys really need to work on doing research.

      • Tyler

        Just because you don’t make policy doesn’t mean you don’t know what’s going on in your organization.  You gotta think for yourself rather than going off of what the media throws at you.  Just doing some proper research and realizing that the Federal Reserve has stopped at nothing to steal our country’s wealth since it was created should be enough to make note that anyone who willingly works for them should be questioned about it and grilled hard for it.

  • Dazle1

    How can you NOT be aware of the RIGHT OF RETURN, this guy is a baffoon!

    • Constance

      How?  Well, I wasn’t aware of the Right of Return, and I consider myself to be well-educated on world events.  Guess what?  It isn’t possible for someone to know EVERYTHING.  What, you do?  Geez, you people need to step off the bus and leave the next election to the rest of us.  People like you will get us another four years of Obama, and I for one am not going to allow it again.  Grow up.

  • Dazle1
    • Tyler

      Thank you.

    • Anonymous

      Humble Libertarian?  Oh, that’s funny.

  • PK

    Media/PR communication advisor and policy advisor as part of your presidential campaign team. 

  • Just as there is a law of unintended consequences there is also a law of unexpected benefits.

    No one is perfect.  No man knows everything.  Now we know, in Herman Cain’s case, what to expect from him when he is caught flat-footed.  Will he dodge, bob and weave like Obama, telling us that he has always espoused exactly the opposite position of what he just told us he strongly believed (but that has since proven unpopular)?  Will he tell us to our faces that he was “taken out of context” even though we all know the context of what he was saying and the meaning could not be more clear to anyone with an IQ above 80?

    No, Herman Cain will looks us in the eye, explain that he blew it and promise to do better next time.  Average people can relate to and respect that – much more so than to some policy wonk that pretends to know everything about everything.

    So, according to the law of unexpected benefits, Herman Cain may actually win because voters can now relate to him as imperfect (like them) but quick to learn from his mistakes and correct his course.  Sometimes it is the good captain who steers around the approaching iceberg rather than hitting it at full speed simply because he had told us there would be no icebergs and he could not bear to be wrong.

    Bold leadership means making bold decisions with limited information then possessing the humility to adjust one’s course as new facts become available.  Because of his ego, Obama is incapable of this which makes him a very dangerous leader.  Maybe Cain has shown us here that he is different.  Early yet, we’ll have to wait and see.

    • Tyler

      Um…please refer to my description of 3 flip-flops about major issues from him in this very same thread up above.  He’s not different.  He’s ran for office before, so he’s not the non-politician he’s being touted as.

      • Constance

        No thanks.  I’m tired of listening to people find every possible reason to dismiss this man.  Listening to you, we would all vote for Gingrich or Romney?  Would that be better?  Tired of this nonsense.

        • Rich

          No, we should all vote for Ron Paul according to Tyler. Which is fine. I don’t mind Ron.

          I do mind people constantly looking for stuff on other candidates.

          Seriously, the man working at the fed disqualifies him? It makes him some sort of scum? Ok, then by that same logic the fact that Ron Paul has been a part of the Washington establishment longer than anyone else in the damn field disqualifies him too.

          • Tyler

            Paul actually has an “anti-establishment” or as I’d better call it a common sense record.  That’s why he’s my guy.  He’s been consistent and doesn’t flip-flop.  People find minuscule things to either disagree or distrust him because of as well. Maybe not you, Rich…but many who blindly support this guy or blindly support someone else do.  Cain’s already proven 3 times (twice just within the past 6 months) that he does not have an actual principled stance.  That’s not “finding every little thing,” but pointing out the lie that’s being marketed to people. I’ve even admitted that nobody’s perfect and neither is Paul…but he’s the closest thing to a founding father and ACTUALLY IS what the rest ONLY CLAIM.

            The fact that you believe someone working at the Fed should not at least be questioned with more scrutiny than it is tells me you don’t understand the seriousness of their economic terrorism that’s been going on for 98 years now. Our dollar is about to no longer be the world’s reserve currency soon and…yep…it’s their fault.

  • Anonymous

    Cain gets big marks for honesty.  OK.  But I can’t get past the reason he didn’t know what Right of Return meant.  All he had to do was watch the 6 minute video of Netanyahu’s statement to Obama in the Oval Office.  That’s all.  Bibi explained it in just a couple of sentences in that video.  Arabs were told to leave Israel because the Arab nations were going to attack it and destroy it.  Jews living in those same Arab countries that were getting ready to attack Israel were displaced from their homes.

    Israel welcomed all the displaced Jews and absorbed them.  The Arab countries refused to take in the Arab refugees who later started calling themselves “Palestinians”.  It’s as simple as that. 

    All he had to do was watch that video and he didn’t do it.  That’s a deal breaker for me.

    • When Obama was on the campaign trail in 2007, someone asked him about the  Hanford Site clean up.. he has 0 idea this issue.. he never even heard of the Hanford Site… 

      Not every candidate is going to know all the answers.. I dont expect them to, and if they do, they are blowing smoke up my a$$

      • Constance

        I agree.  All these purists on this thread are a bit annoying.  
        I never trust anybody who knows everything.  That means they know little bits about different things, and they can talk their way around the truth.  If somebody doesn’t know something and they tell me so, that’s cool.  I can respect that.  I believe America has had enough politicians and double-speak now.  

        • Tyler

          If you really read into all his words and not just recent interviews…you’ll realize that’s all you get from Cain.

    • Constance

      I wouldn’t throw a wonderful candidate under the bus for a mistake.  We don’t have the luxury of “deal breakers” this time around.  If people continue to dismiss viable candidates because of one or two issues, we will end up with Obama again in 2012.  Please rethink your staunch line in the sand.

      • Anonymous

        Other people can do whatever they want.  I’m not trying to convince anyone of anything.  But I can’t stand laziness on the internet and I sure as hell expect more from a candidate for President.  Cain did not have to take a crash course in Middle East history.  All he had to do was watch Bibi’s statement to Obama that was all of 6 minutes long, which is STILL viral with liberals claiming how “rude” he was.

        Mary Beth House makes a great point in a comment down the page.  Cain had no idea what he was taking about but he stated an opinion anyway.  That’s a classic management tactic.  I spent 30 years working for the phone company and, trust me, I sat through more bs meetings listening to high ranking executives blow more smoke up our butts than I can remember.  Nobody is better at throwing bs around than people like Cain and that’s exactly what he did.  If you don’t know something, fake it.  Most of the time you’ll get away with it because TPTB care more about how you handle yourself with the peons than whether what you said makes any sense.

        I like Cain.  He’d make a great Commerce Secretary.  But I wouldn’t vote for him for President after that performance. 

  • I have heard some very positive things about Herman Cain, all from a year ago or so.  At the time I was really looking forward to liking him as this campaign season (ugh) got underway. 

    However, …  Everything I’ve read and heard about and from him in the last 2-3 weeks has soured me on him.  And the latest one is perfectly described by J.A. Topfke in this thread.  Put his name in the Ctrl-F field and read away!

    • You shouldn’t let what you read dictate to you how to feel about a candidate. THat is politics 101.

      • PK

        Like every other POTUS candidate in the vetting process, Cain has to prove himself and earn his sport as the TOP-DOG in the pack. The individual profile of his strength/weakness, his core values and platform policy will come under spotlight close scrutiny, and that’s a healthy democratic vetting process of selection-and-elimination by electorate. I won’t dismiss Cain just yet because of a few gaffes or lack of prep, but Cain must be solid and consistent in presenting his platform policy to compete for the TOP job.     

  • Mark7

    We seem to expect our leaders to know everything about everything and have the absolute best answer to worldwide issues. 

    he have known what to say? Maybe so, but then again he’s running for
    office in the U.S., not in Israel, Syria or Egypt.  I’d rather he have
    plans to control illegal aliens filling American jobs, make changes to
    government to allow for better economic growth and ensure the freedom
    and prosperity for the citizens here. 

    The nay-sayers will always say “He didn’t have an answer for this,
    or that was something he was clueless about”.  Not having an answer off
    the cuff for an issue as complex as the Israel/Palestine issue doesn’t
    concern me very much.  If he was asked how the tax system here effects
    business and he was stammering, I’d be worried and probably wouldn’t be
    supporting him anyway.

  • Redwood509

    It is clear that Mr. Cain is clueless. International politics is no pizza marketing. The Right of Return is kaput. The 900,000 Jews  thrown out by the Arab rulers after 1948 had to be absorbed in Israel, the Arabs who departed from Israel at the urging of their wild Imamas and Fatwa dispensers, took their chances and their grandchildren should look for a solution elsewhere. 600,000 Jews faced 5 Arab armies in 1948. War has consequences. History cannot be rewritten. Where would 2-4 million Palestinians, settled in different parts of the globe be housed ? There is no land nor water for more. Israelis want to live as a free, democratic, Hebrew speaking nation. Arabs should seek redress among their own where they should be most comfortable.

    • Oh please.

      • The jews absorbed their refugees. 

        The ARABS did not. Hence the “Palestine” refugees.The Palestine (?) people were NOT welcome by ANY of the OTHER arab nations.

        the rest of the arabs nations LIKE it that way. 

        They can stir up Palestine (?) people to  suicide bomb Israel for them.

        With NO direct consequences. What’s NOT to like from their point of view.

        So Israel is left with no choice but to say NADA.

        And by the way to be clear, I stand WITH Israel.

  • bestalexguy

    I see many people are OK with choosing between an ignorant who admits he is and one who even doesn’t. Dismissing all kind of ignorant people and only choose among those who aren’t apparently is not the best option for them. Obviously the talented piss off a lot of ordinary guys. But I stick with the plus of being ruled by someone who can tell a breathalyzer from an inhaler even when the prompter goes off.