Cain Was Not Able By Raynard Jackson

Cain was not Able

December 8, 2011

By Raynard Jackson

Former presidential candidate, Herman Cain, proved that despite a load of God given talent, he was unable to be a serious contender for the highest office in the land.

In the immortal words of former British Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, “to every man there comes a time when he is figuratively tapped on the shoulder and offered the chance to do a great and mighty work; unique to him and fitted to his talents; what a tragedy if that moment finds him unprepared or unqualified for the moment that could be his finest hour.”

Cain, by far, was the best candidate in the Republican field in terms of oratorical skills and ability to connect with an audience.  But, like Sarah Palin, he refused to take the necessary time to study the issues so he could articulate thoughtful answers to basic questions one would expect a presidential candidate to speak upon.

Cain had the innate abilities to be considered a legitimate candidate, but was not able to understand what would be required of him to be successful.  He had been planning his presidential run for more than two years.  But, when he received his tap on the shoulder, he decided to engage in buffoonery; as opposed to studying to show himself approved unto God, a workman that needs not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15).

I literally cringed when he spoke at the National Press Club and a white person asked him to sing—and he obliged; during another speech, he went into this tirade about the Koch brothers being his “brother from another mother.”  The Koch brothers are 2 white billionaires who he considers a friend.  These examples evoked the worst of all stereotypes about Blacks—that they are there for the amusement of their white audiences.  I don’t think this was intentional on Cain’s part, but this is what happens when one tries too hard to please a narrow part of the electorate.

Cain is a very likable person with a very intoxicating personality.  In some ways he reminds me of former president, Bill Clinton.  Cain (nor Clinton) ever met a stranger.  When you meet Cain, he makes you feel like an instant friend.

If you could merge Cain’s personality and style with Newt Gingrich’s command of policy, Obama would be toast!

Cain reminds me of a professional athlete that everyone concedes has the talent to be the best in his sport, but refuses to practice to be the best (LeBron James).  This athlete could win the ultimate prize of his sport, but just won’t dedicate himself to fully exploiting his God given talent.

This is why I am so disappointed in Cain.  I would not have had a problem if Cain was defeated by his opponents, but I do have a problem with him losing because he was unprepared.

Cain was tapped on the shoulder and offered the chance to do a great and might work, unique to him and fitted to his talents.  I find it very tragic that he was found unprepared for the moment that could have been his finest hour.

The media did not destroy Cain’s campaign, nor the women who made unsubstantiated allegations.  What destroyed Cain’s campaign was the man in the mirror.

When Cain was tapped on the shoulder, he was found totally unprepared and proved to the world that Cain was truly not able.

Raynard Jackson

Related articles

• WATCH: Jon Stewart Mocks Herman Cain’s Goodbye Speech (huffingtonpost.com)
• Herman Cain Endorsement: Newt Gingrich To Reportedly Receive Cain’s Support, Campaign Reportedly Denies Announcement (huffingtonpost.com)
• Newt Had Something To Say About Cain In 1995 (huffingtonpost.com)
• Andy Ostroy: Hubris, Hubris, Hubris. Explaining Herman Cain’s Downfall (huffingtonpost.com)

Civil Rights? A Perspective by Raynard Jackson

Enter Site

WCN Transmedia Group in Association with the Africa Heritage Society’s International Goodwill Ambassador Oscar J. Webb announced The CIVIL RIGHTS TO PLATINUM RIGHTS MOVEMENT.   Forwarded to my attention was this article filed by Mr.Raynard Jackson:  Could he have hit the nail on the head.  Isn’t it time to move forward and create new opportunities for financial growth  Join The Africa Heritage Society Today and subscribe to this blog for more information.  IT’S HERITAGE TIME.

Raynard Jackson is president & CEO of Raynard Jackson & Associates, LLC., a D.C.-public relations/government affairs firm.  He is also a contributing editor for ExcellStyle Magazine (www.excellstyle.com) & USAfrica Magazine (www.USAfricaonline.com).

July 21, 2011

Raynard Jackson

As the two supposed premier civil rights groups gather this week and next for their annual conventions (the N.A.A.C.P and the National Urban League, respectively), I want to challenge their agendas and then pose a few questions for them to answer.

When civil rights are discussed in the media, you never have the reporter define what civil rights are?  When you see Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton described as civil rights leaders, what does that really mean?  Who made them leaders and what is their leadership based on?

How did civil rights come to mean protections and rights based on sexual preference, gender identity, and illegal status in a country?

If civil rights theory is based on the protection of the individual and his rights; how do you then  explain the constant demand for inclusion in the definition of civil rights by all kinds based on group identity?

So, now you have groups like the N.A.A.C.P. and the National Urban League expending precious political capital on extraneous issues like:  equal rights for illegal immigrants (they want illegals to have every right that citizens have—access to social programs, driver’s licenses, in state tuition for colleges and universities, etc).  What sense does it make to give benefits to members of a certain group (American citizens) and then to allow someone who is not a member to get the same benefit?  That’s insane!

Can you imagine a non-member of the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame demanding the same benefits as a member?  They would be run out of court if they petitioned the courts for such a benefit.

Are civil rights a “universal” right and who defines what those rights are?

There are a lot of Muslim women in the Middle East that don’t want women to be able to dress like a “modern” woman, or have the right to vote.  A perfect example is Saudi Arabia.  While there is some demand for reform, there is significant support for the status quo.  Who’s right?

The N.A.A.C.P. and the National Urban League have both lost their way.  They have strayed way off course from their original vision.

Could this be, unlike the days of old, why high profile professional athletes have no relationship with these groups?  Could this be why people like me will never join these groups?  They are both arms of the Democratic National Committee (though they both claim to be non partisan).

If you go to both of their websites and look at who is paying for their conventions; it’s the who’s who of white corporate America.

But, why is there no financial support from any of the most successful Black businessmen in this country?  People like Earl Graves (publisher of Black Enterprise, Dave Stewart, CEO of World Wide Technology, Earvin “Magic” Johnson, former N.B.A. great, etc.)

If you can’t get support from within your own community, how then can you make the case for someone else to support you?  In other words, do you have “skin” in the game?

Maybe there is a reason for this lack of support.  Maybe these groups are not saying or doing anything that is relevant to these individuals or companies.

Political or financial capital tends to go where there is a need and where there is some hope of a return on investment.  What do these corporations get in return, other than “race” insurance?

While the Black unemployment rate continues to climb above 16 %, these groups are fighting to legalize 7 million illegals who are going to compete for low-skilled jobs with the very people they claim to represent.

While the Black family is disintegrating right before our eyes, these groups are focusing on gay rights, though the Black community does not support this.

The first Black president has totally ignored his own community, but yet these groups remain silent.  They seem more concerned with White House invitations and photo-ops, not a substantive agenda.

If these two groups disappeared tomorrow, would our community be any worse off?  Maybe at the margins, but not in reality.

So, while these groups are spending millions of dollars for their conventions, what is the relevance of these groups to our community if their mission continuously moves further and further from its core purpose?  In the military, this is called “mission creep.”

I fully believe organizations must evolve to remain relevant; but you can’t allow the organization to morph into something that is not part of the core mission.  Are they about civil rights are about pursuing a liberal agenda?

I will get a lot of heat for posing these questions, but I hope we can be civil, right?

POINT OF DISCUSSION

While the  opinions expressed in this article that of Raynard Jackson we hope this post will be a forum to start the discussion for Self Empowerment, Self Determination, and the fulfillment of our respective callings as individuals, corporate citizens, and organizations  It’s Heritage Time!!  Jay O’Conner Chairman & CEO WCNTV.