Cain has stated both that he is super pro-life and that the government has no right interfering with the right of a family to choose to have an abortion:
How could Cain so badly F this up? Well, understand that Cain is a complete novice and he is trying to do two things here: 1) support what he understands to be the GOP view on abortion (pro-life no matter what) and 2) support what he understand to be the GOP position on government (the government is incompetent and has no business interfering in our lives).
So, he says both #1 and #2, not realizing that they are logically inconsistent. This is really the fault of Cain's handlers. They have to explain to him that generally it is OK to take ridiculous positions that are diametrically opposed, but abortion is just not one of those times. He should have been told, "You say you are pro-life no matter what. If someone asks you whether you favor abortion, you do not. If someone asks if an abortion would save the remainder of humankind from extinction, you say Goodbye Humanity. If someone asks whether you would abort Satan's child, tell them that you believe adoption would solve that problem."
Cain's error is the second time that he has taken the stance that a President should act reasonably and be open to certain new arguments (his "I might trade hostages for hostages" comment being the other). What should Cain have learned from this? As a Republican you take about 8 positions and you do not vary, ever, from these. If you do not hold even one of these 8 positions, you are disqualified from public office and should consider the Democratic party your home.
It is a hard lesson to learn, as we can see from Cain telling people under the poverty line that they will not pay 9% income tax -- wrong again, Herman, the GOP position is that poor people need to pay their 9% so rich people can pay only 9% also. Stop trying to be logical and get on board the frigging train!