Herman Cain Caught in Lie During Debate - 10/12/11

[Laughing_Man]

" I understand pros and cons just fine. It is you who does not understand the double edged sword analogy. Again, being a flip flopper would be a double edged sword."

http://www.usingenglish.com/reference/idioms/double-edged+sword.html

Ron Paul’s radical argument: Massively cut the size and scope of government

Helps him: Showing to voters that he is serious and sticks by his ideas.

Harms him: Congress is less likely to work with him because of his argument.

I think I am using the idiom correctly but honestly can we get off this bender of word usage?

“Let me put it to you this way. Do you agree with my assessment about a Ron Paul presidency and why it would be so effective?”

Well yes and no. Just to be sure you see what I mean I am going to post the section that I thought prevalent to what you are discussing:

@John James

That’s the thing I think a lot of people don’t realize (or don’t want to admit). Even some liberty-minded individuals like to try to rain on Paul’s parade and claim there’s really nothing he could do as President, he’d still have a Congress to deal with, blah blah blah. Some I think it’s because they truly don’t get it, others I think because they have a need to be contrarian and rag on people, and still others because they’re narcissistic pricks who don’t know how to constructively deal with their jealousy. Not only do I not think these people have a full appreciation for the power of the Executive Branch (especially in the hands of someone who is a voluntarist), but I also don’t believe they fully see the big picture. Most people still don’t even know who Ron Paul is other than possibly “that kooky Republican guy who wants to end the wars”. And that’s only if they’re lucky. The minute that guy wins even the R nomination…let alone the Presidency…the whole game changes. Everything he says automatically becomes infinitely more legitimate, and heard by 100 times more people. The impact someone like that could have, not only on policy in a bully-pulpit sort of way, but on public opinion in a leader/teacher sort of way, is unimaginable.

He talks about how he’s not just trying to win an election, he’s trying to change the course of history. I guarantee you, if that man becomes President, that’s exactly what would happen. And not because of anything he’ll do in government. He won’t pass some law that will redefine the political system. He won’t eliminate some department that history will call “the repeal that changed everything”. He will affect change in the greatest, most important way possible…in the minds of people. Just imagine 4 whole years of that man talking…with the Presidential Seal hanging behind him. And as if that wasn’t enough, times are going to get tougher…probably as tough as they’ve ever been, relatively. People will be ready, more than ever, to listen. You thought people were scared, hurting, ready for change, and looking for a leader with Obama…just wait.

Yes I agree that what Ron Paul is engaging in is a battle of ideas in order to change the minds of Americans. He has said this repeatedly in his interviews and debates. That is the yes part. This is the no part. No I don’t think just because he is president, people are more apt to listen to him. Having a presidental seal behind your head does not validate your ideas. When Obama was elected, did Republicans watch tv saying “You know a lot of what he says is right! I’m becoming a Democrat now.” If such a thing did happen, then I think it is an exception. The “whole game” doesn’t change. Democrats will still be trying to advance welfare programs and strengthen the safety nets, Republicans may lighten to his economics but never to his foreign policy. The in house political fighting will still be around, the system of representation will still be around. Really the only thing I see changing is the foreign policy because Ron Paul can unilaterially control that. If you thought that was going to be the game changer and that alone then I would of fully agreed with you.