Some voters are getting wise. Despite a brief lull in fundraising, Herman Cain is back to his usual stride. After it was discovered that, of the three woman who accused him of sexual harassment, all 1) spent some time living in Chicago, 2) had ties to David Axelrod, and/or 3) were connected to the current Presidential administration, they were less inclined to take seriously any attempts to take it to the next level, which fits the description of an alleged thirteen-year affair quite nicely. "Fool me once ..." (Check out this empty suit in the second video. How are such questions as those asked by the interviewer "out of line"? Is there anything that is not?)
We are told by so many middle-of-the-roaders to settle for the least offensive candidate possible. But most people do not respect anyone, whether in their neighborhoods, on their jobs, or in public office, who try to please everybody. They do respect people who actually stand for something, and have the unmitigated gall to stick to that. People like Cain, Paul, and Ryan have put genuine proposals out there for the voters to consider. Many have found fault with some of those ideas, but at least they presented them. When your goal is to play it safe, you will not take that risk. That makes you the least offensive choice, but hardly worth getting excited about, never mind worth electing.
The current President, despite approval ratings now lower than even Jimmy Carter's, could still win the election in 2012, unless somebody comes up with a better idea.
There is no rule that says we have a choice between the lesser of two evils.