I think maybe he has thought about it, and knows that Obama scored a major foreign policy achievement with his decisions regarding Libya, but is unable to express anything that is not in line with the “Obama! Bad!” narrative. Cognitive dissonace is a bitch.
Okay, just to prove that I am not a racist I will say that I would prefer Cain over Michelle Bachmann. And to further prove that I am not a racist I will say that I prefer Obama over any damned republican you care to name.
Cain: Which party was Roosevelt again?
Or, if you really wanted to confuse him, ask him to specify ‘which’ Roosevelt. Even money he couldn’t name them both and correctly attribute their party affiliation.
You’re being generous there.
Harman Cain says the Milwaukee paper was out to get him:
Obviously. Why else would they ask him questions about foreign policy?
Herman Cain: ‘I’m not supposed to know anything about foreign policy’
Cain explains that he’ll have other people to figure out this stuff for him and all he needs to do is listen to them.
So, he’ll surround himself with expertise the way a hole surrounds itself with donut? Great idea!
'Cos we all know how well that worked out last time the guy in the Oval Office did that.
In fairness, sometimes he says something sensible:
Wonder if he’d say the same thing about legalizing recreational MJ…
You know, I just assumed that was a humorous paraphrase of something he’d said - something in which that sentiment was merely implicit. It didn’t occur to me that it might actually be a direct quote. Wow.
The smart answer would be to punt the ball and express your admiration for Winston Churchill.
But the odds on Cain coming up with a smart answer? Slim. He’d be more likely to say something that would offend both Democrats and Nazis.
Cain: We shouldn’t attack Iran because it’s too hilly.
http://thinkprogress.org/security/2011/11/16/369994/cain-attack-iran-mountains/
THUMP! That’s the sound of another Not-Romney hitting the pavement. Buh-bye pizza man.
Next?!
A golden quote from a commenter on that site:
Kept me laughing for quite some time.
Obviously he’s hired Palin as his consultant re:media matters.
That doesn’t lower my opinion of him: if anything, it does the opposite. If he said more half-truths like that more of the time, he would have less time for out and out blunders and lies 
(We shouldn’t attack Iran because it’s hilly. We also shouldn’t attack Iran for many more reasons than that, but the terrain is one factor.)
You’re right, of course. The other reason is because Israel might not like it. Seriously:
[QUOTE=Herman Cain]
CAIN: That is not a practical, top-tier alternative and here’s why. If you look at the topography of Iran. Where are you going to strike? It’s very mountainous. That’s what makes it very difficult. Secondly, that would be a decision that would need to be coordinated and discussed with our friends in that part of the world like Israel. But for the United States to unilaterally go in and attack Iran to try and stop them, I would want to consult with the intelligence community, the commanders on the ground in that part of the world, which I have stated before. But we should — I don’t have all the information necessary to make that decision.
[/QUOTE]
Apparently Herman Cain no habla Cubano. link