Here I am.... rock you like a HERMAN CAIN !!!! by AURaptor

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Was that the one that none of the front-line candidates showed up for? The one that the Associated Press didn't attend, since they were told they wouldn't be allowed to take pictures?

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 6, 2011 3:38 PM

America loves a winner!

Cain dominated... that's the story here.

A star is born.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 6, 2011 4:51 PM

He "dominated" a crowd of nobodies?

How does that make him a "star"?

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 6, 2011 5:08 PM

Mike

You've seen the democratic and republican party debates, and met the mainsream media. How often have your heard the media pump up a Rudy Giuliani before the debates to find that when the process actually starts they barely get out the starting gate?

In 2008 recall the media telling me not inly that Rudy would be the GOP nominee, but that he would face off against Hillary Clinton in November,

2004, we were told Bush's reelection would be challenged by Howard Dean

2000, They told us Al Gore would be up against Steve Forbes or John McCain.

1996, they picked Jack Kemp, as they had in 1992, when they seriously considered Perot. 1988 i was told by the media that the democratic primary would be a tight race between Al Gore and Jesse Jackson, and that Bush would not win his own primary to follow Reagan.

These *are* the candidates. If you don't show up to the debates maybe you're some publicity hungry egotist pumping your new book, but what you aren't is a candidate.

If you want to nitpick Rap's post, nitpick it for the fact that it contained no actual Herman Cain. I'm curious. All I know about Herman Cain is that he's the CEK of Godfather's Pizza, which, IMHO, is damn good pizza. I don't know if that qualifies him to be president, but then again, what does?

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 7, 2011 11:50 AM

JONGSSTRAW

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Here I am.... rock you like a HERMAN CAIN !!!!

That's quite good AURaptor. You ought to e-mail his staff suggesting that theme for his campaign. I've liked Herman Cain for a long time. I don't think he's in any position to win the nomination, but I could see him as a great VP candidate on the ticket.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 7, 2011 12:02 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Here I am.... rock you like a HERMAN CAIN !!!!

That's quite good AURaptor. You ought to e-mail his staff suggesting that theme for his campaign. I've liked Herman Cain for a long time. I don't think he's in any position to win the nomination, but I could see him as a great VP candidate on the ticket.

He's light years ahead of Sarah Palin, so the trick now is to find a worthy front runner....

Oh, what if there isn't?

I'm 100% fine with that.

I've heard Herman's radio show from Atlanta for a while now.... he IS the real deal, folks. He's no quitter. He's not going to flub any interviews....I pity the fools who take him on when the issues are at hand....even Obama.

My prediction for the Dems in 2012 ?

PAIN !!!!!!!!

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 7, 2011 12:21 PM

I think dems have 2012 locked. Most incumbants win, theres the bin laden bump, and the conservatives are too fragmented, there will probably be a splitter.

My move if i was the GOP would be to nominate Ron Paul. People underestimate the value of a moral victory. How many "values" conservatives were won to the GOP side by the hopeless campaign of AuH2O? How many peaceniks were won by the Dems by an equally doomed McGovern?

Ron Paul would lose the general election, but so would anyone. Paul would win a hands down moral victory that would cement the libertarian vote for the Republicans for 2016.

As for VP, I'm willing to give Herman Cain a look. Certainly there are a number of people I'd discard..

Sarah Palin has blown it, utterly.
Tim Pawlenty will sink any campaign. I35?

Huckabee i used to like, but he's gone a little far over into crazy,
Romney might get the nomination, but if he does, the GOP loses the obamacare issue.

Gary Johnson is worth another look.
Herman Cain, i'll watch the whole debate when I get home.

ETA: I think Frank Luntz does what he does very well, but I don't think anyone should take literally. It's not a strike against Cain, really, smart move, hiring Luntz, but it's a stunt, not a real result. I hope everyone does get that.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 7, 2011 12:21 PM

JONGSSTRAW

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Here I am.... rock you like a HERMAN CAIN !!!!

That's quite good AURaptor. You ought to e-mail his staff suggesting that theme for his campaign. I've liked Herman Cain for a long time. I don't think he's in any position to win the nomination, but I could see him as a great VP candidate on the ticket.

He's light years ahead of Sarah Palin, so the trick now is to find a worthy front runner....

Oh, what if there isn't?

I'm 100% fine with that.

I've heard Herman's radio show from Atlanta for a while now.... he IS the real deal, folks. He's no quitter. He's not going to flub any interviews....I pity the fools who take him on when the issues are at hand....even Obama.

My prediction for the Dems in 2012 ?

PAIN !!!!!!!!

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

Men like Herman Cain and Congressman Alan West are critical to the future of the Republican Party, because they and others like SC's Green are going to be the ones to finally put an end to the Left's childish and absurd labeling of everyone against Obama as a racist. The mainstream liberal media has no response to Conservative African-Americans except to try to ignore them. I hope Cain can raise at least enough money to stay in the game as long as possisble next year just to keep the Dem's old favorite race card out of the campaign.

As for the front-runners, I'm not honestly feeling the Chris Mathews thrill down my leg for any of them. Romney's a bit wooden for me, and he seems like he'd stammer and babble some when confronted with the intellectual Obama during the debates. Gingrich may be the only one who is intelligent and articulate enough to destroy Obama's arguments and positions. I don't know if even he though can do it in a way that will endear him to Americans in the process. I could support Pawlenty if he gained momentum somehow, because he's to me a throwback kind of candidate, someone not mired in controversy and skeletons.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 7, 2011 12:35 PM

I dont think Cain's being black is really an important issue. I felt the GOP buried that issue a while ago, i mean, there were already a number of prominent black people in the Bush admin. how many in the Clinton admin? Largely, this stuff is media myth anyway. There are more black republicans than jewish republicans. The GOP has done more for Civil Rights than they have for Zionism, still, they seem to get a very decent share of the Zionist vote. They can get black votes, its just about speaking to the black community, and I don't think yiu have to be black to do it.

Here's something a black friend of mine said to me recently. He's a black libertarian, but he voted for Obama, not because he supported welfare, but because he knew a lot of other people who were dependent on it.

This is something the GOP continuously fails to grasp: Every Latino will know 500 other latinos. If one in three is here illegally, that means all latinos know people who will be personally affected by this issue.

The same si true for the balck population. The GOP needs to demonstrate that the private sector will provide for the african american community without leaving people they know out in the cold.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 7, 2011 12:45 PM

JONGSSTRAW

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
I think dems have 2012 locked. Most incumbants win,

High un-employemnt and gas prices may favor the challenger next year.

Quote:
My move if i was the GOP would be to nominate Ron Paul. People underestimate the value of a moral victory. How many "values" conservatives were won to the GOP side by the hopeless campaign of AuH2O? How many peaceniks were won by the Dems by an equally doomed McGovern?

Good points, but Republicans and Conservatives can't afford to let this election slip by, or sacrifice it in the way you suggest. I think they'll get the best candidate in the long run to go against Obama.

Quote:
As for VP, I'm willing to give Herman Cain a look. Certainly there are a number of people I'd discard..

Sarah Palin has blown it, utterly.

Huckabee i used to like, but he's gone a little far over into crazy

All true.

Quote:

Romney might get the nomination, but if he does, the GOP loses the obamacare issue.

I've heard people say that, but why? Why can't he just say that he tried it, but it turned out to be a financial nightmare for the state, and he regrets it. I think that would be a powerful statement from experience, and one which Obama would have a difficult time defending.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 7, 2011 4:47 PM

I dont think the gop has a chance in 2012, just objectively. Also, they need a moral victory, to distance themselves fro Bush. The democrats have dropped the ball by not distancing themsekves from the failed policies of the prior admin, i think the repubkicans need to define themselves as a clear alternative. IMHO

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 7, 2011 5:01 PM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!

Ron Paul is officially the top GOP candidate, and is raking in $1-million/day in donations.

CNN poll: Ron Paul trails Dictator Hussein Obama Soetoro by only 7%
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/05/05/cnn-poll-still-no-fron
t-runner-in-the-battle-for-the-gop-nomination/

Ron Paul hauls more than $1 million on debate day
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0511/54451.html
http://www.dailypaul.com/163796/ny-times-all-but-ignores-ron-paul-in-d
ebate

He's the only "GOP" who can win. With a platform of free drugs and prostitution, he can't lose.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 8, 2011 2:40 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
piratenews wrote:
Saturday, May 07, 2011 17:01
Ron Paul is officially the top GOP candidate, and is raking in $1-million/day in donations.

I didn't get that memo.

Huh.

Neither did these folks....

Herman Cain, a businessman and political newcomer, was the star of the Fox News network's television debate Thursday night. An online poll featured on the network's website showed, as of Friday night, that 54 percent of voters (1,103 voters) believed Cain won the South Carolina debate.

His closest competitor was Libertarian Rep. Ron Paul (Texas) who received the approval of 543 voters – about 29 percent .

http://www.christianpost.com/news/cain-wins-big-in-fox-news-gop-debate
-in-the-absence-of-big-names-50131/

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 8, 2011 4:19 AM

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

I don't like this ugly xenophobic streak, it sounds like he's ready to discriminate against Muslims:

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 8, 2011 7:54 AM

I'm watching the full debate right now, and so far liking Ron Paul the most.

Far has potential Cain xenophobia, it might not look nice that he does not want to go out of his way to appoint Muslim judges or cabinet members, but this is not the same thing as oppressing them because of their religion. Some of those comments make me a little uneasy as well, but I'm not ready to assume the worst yet. I need to gather a little more info.

I'll probably comment more after I finish watching the debate and research Herman Cain a little more.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 8, 2011 8:43 AM

America loves a winner!

I love his answer about appointing Muslims.

To the point, backed with solid, fact based reasoning, and no tap dancing.

He was asked a question, and answered it. He then went on to explain why he gave the answer he did,

Very refreshing.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 8, 2011 10:26 AM

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

Quote:
it might not look nice that he does not want to go out of his way to appoint Muslim judges or cabinet members

If he had said that it would have been a reasonable answer. He was asked if he would be comfortable appointing a Muslim to his cabinet or as a federal judge, and said bluntly "No I will not."

His answer showed how far he has succumed to the far-right FEAR. Certain people you can pose a question with the word 'Muslim' in it, and you don't have to mention the words 'radical' or 'extremist' or anything like that, and you get an answer choc full of FEAR. There's a term for when people have an irrational fear of something like this.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 8, 2011 11:14 AM

Still, his hypothetical cabinet members and judge choices are not elected. Is there are reason he should chose a Muslim? It doesn't look nice, but I won't consider him xenphobic/racist/whathaveyou until he actually tries to restrict their choices unlawfully.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 8, 2011 12:11 PM

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

If there's a viable candidate but you refuse to consider them based on something like religion, that's discrimination. The hypothetical question didn't specify that there were decent Muslim candidates that could be chosen (one could argue that it was implied however), but if it had, Herman Cain didn't leave any room for appointing them in his answer.

It's all hypothetical (this man won't be forming any cabinets or choosing judges), but it was hypothetical discrimination.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 8, 2011 1:04 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:

His answer showed how far he has succumed to the far-right FEAR. Certain people you can pose a question with the word 'Muslim' in it, and you don't have to mention the words 'radical' or 'extremist' or anything like that, and you get an answer choc full of FEAR. There's a term for when people have an irrational fear of something like this.

It's not personal. It's just war.

It's not 'fear', it's fact. What Cain described is actually happening over in Europe. He's only trying to make sure the same problems they're having today don't happen to us, down the road.

It's not 'irrational', in the least. Is it the best solution ? Dunno. But I give credit to Cain for honestly stating what he believes, and why.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 8, 2011 1:22 PM

KPO you're not wrong, but I don't quite agree with you (if that makes sense).

If a candidate said they would not appoint any Christian cabinet or judges, I wouldn't like it, but it would not anger me in the same way as say... making legislation that ensured Christians were not eligible to be appointed as cabinet members or judges.

Whoever he would appoint is his choice, and while I do not particularly like that he wouldn't even consider some possibilities based off of religion, there is a difference between not giving someone something they do not have and taking something from them.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 8, 2011 2:51 PM

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

Quote:
He's only trying to make sure the same problems they're having today don't happen to us, down the road.

By denying qualified and suitable (hypothetical) Muslim American candidates places in government? That's idiotic. To fear any and every Muslim is paranoid, irrational and unbecoming in a president.

Quote:
Is it the best solution ? Dunno. But I give credit to Cain for honestly stating what he believes, and why.

I kinda respect him from speaking from his gut - unfortunately he's been digesting too much fear-mongering right-wing media or something, and this was a xenophobic place in his gut. It wasn't a difficult question to answer, and to say categorically he wouldn't appoint any hypothetical Muslim to his cabinet is a ridiculous thing to say. He's clearly burning up inside on the Muslim issue; that's fair enough, even some liberals like myself concede that there is a problem with Islam. But every so often one of you guys on the right are driven to say something extreme and outside all rationality, exposing yourself to ridicule and total loss of credibility (showing exactly how much you are driven by irrational emotion on this issue). You can include Juan Williams in that actually - so some supposed 'liberals' are susceptible as well.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 8, 2011 3:09 PM

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

Don't get me wrong HappyT, if Cain gets elected I won't demand that he appoint token Muslims, that would be equally ridiculous. I just thought his answer to the hypothetical question was bad, and telling.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 9, 2011 1:33 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
Also, they need a moral victory, to distance themselves fro Bush. The democrats have dropped the ball by not distancing themsekves from the failed policies of the prior admin, i think the repubkicans need to define themselves as a clear alternative. IMHO

Well said, DT. I fear they won’t, however, and thus far what they have done has made them look like jokes to many voters. They haven’t defined themselves as anything much so far, from what I’ve seen, except being “for” the wealthy and corporations and “against” the working people. The backlash is something they should be working to overcome right now; how people will see them a year and a half from now, I couldn’t say. Thus far at least, I don’t see them having much chance.

As far as the debate goes, I didn’t see it but I’ll bet I can guess at the content, for the most part. The problem is that not all the candidates were there, they all seem to be holding back from tossing their hats in the ring, and those who did go, from what I’ve seen of them, don’t stand much chance. I’d like to see a REAL debate among all those who WILL be running, and it’s way too early for that, apparently. I’m wondering how many actual potential candidates (I don’t for one minute consider Trump, Palin or Bachman “real”) are waffling whether to run at all, given the current state of affairs. And yeah, Raptor, I don’t think too many got PN’s “memo”...maybe it was just his memo to himself?

As to Cain himself, I have seen the video where he was asked about appointing a Muslim, and his answer left my jaw on the ground. That is absolutely what we do NOT need in any kind of power!!! That’s just more GOP divisiveness and hate-mongering; it is racism pure and simple, nothing less. Trader,

Quote:
that he does not want to go out of his way

isn’t the question. He was asked if he would EVER CONSIDER doing so, and his answer was specifically because that is a way to gradually “ease Sharia law...” The same kind of idiocy was said against Blacks for how many decades?? To see people as a race or a religion across the board and to automatically attribute clandestine motives to them because of their religion is NOT an admirable quality and there’s no way, no reason I would EVER vote for someone who expressed those sentiments!

Why doesn’t it surprise me that Raptor idolizes him and thinks his answer was right on? Obviously that’s the way HE thinks, too. it’s a drummed-up tactic right on a par with “Obama is a Muslim”, plain and simple. We need THINKING, reasoned people running! His applauding Oklahoma for passing a law against Sharia sickens me. I’m pretty sure even thinking Republicans know damned well that this is a fake issue---certainly the ones promulgating it do, they know a good fear tactic when they see one and had to be drooling when they figured THIS one out.

The judge who blocked the legislation had common sense; to make a law about that is like making a law “that the sky shall never be purple”. That he should say “how DARE a judge...” makes me want to vomit. This is NOT a man I would feel anything but terror about having in the Oval Office, and I hope he never gets elected to anything. We have serious problems in this country; we need serious people to deal with them...we already have too much of the other kind as it is.

He doesn’t even know his facts. In the New Jersey case, the judge’s decision was overturned by the appeals court, stating:

Quote:
As the judge recognized, the case thus presents a conflict between the criminal law and religious precepts. In resolving this conflict, the judge determined to except defendant from the operation of the State's statutes as the result of his religious beliefs. In doing so, the judge was mistaken.

BOTH parties, by the way, were Moroccan citizens; neither was an American. Our judicial system worked the way it’s supposed to. On the other one, that case is about an argument between two Islamic groups over who controls the funds in the mosque. The judge decided to go with arbitration. That he chose ecclesiastical Islamic arbitration may well send it to the appeals court. His judgment in choosing Islamic arbitration as opposed to American arbitration is debatable, but the differences are that our arbitration means a group of people are chosen as arbitrators, while Islamic arbitration states that they

Quote:
should try to resolve a dispute among themselves. When the brothers are unable to do so, they can agree to present the dispute to the greater community of brothers within the mosque or the Muslim community for resolution. If that is not done or does not result in a resolution of the dispute, the dispute is to be presented to an Islamic judge for determination

That’s a grey area, and I’d have to know more about the details to decide for myself whether I think it’s right or not. They grey area is whether the arbitrators should be chosen the way they usually are or the way Islamic law chooses them.

Nonetheless, to say he would never appoint a Muslim in his cabinet or as a federal judge because that would be “creeping Sharia law” is obviously racist and prejudiced.

Oops, I see KPO covered it beautifully. Trader, the point isn’t “is there any reason he SHOULD choose a Muslim?” It’s “is there any reason he SHOULDN’T”. He should be open to finding the best person for the job; to eliminate any race or religion, and to do so for such specious reasoning—-in other words, not knowing a damned thing about a person except that he’s Muslim, and judging him flatly as someone trying to impose Sharia law because he’s Muslim---THAT IS RACISM, period. You know what the word “prejudiced” means, right? PRE-JUDGING someone based on their race, religion, etc.

That Raptor sees it as “fact” rather than as the irrational fear it is doesn’t surprise me, or probably anyone else. He’s bought totally into the fear mongering, and he’s quite happy to use violence to usurp the rights the constitution provides for all Americans when it’s people he doesn’t like. He’s a perfect example of a pawn being manipulated; we should all listen closely to what he says so we know what’s going on out there with the “sheeple”. Cain is the result; a politician who will play to that fear.

So we’re Europe now, Raptor? Gee, I didn’t know that. I thought we were proud of ourselves because we have learned FROM Europe and England and wouldn’t make the same mistakes... Guess not, tho’, guess our legal system hasn’t made any provisions against what’s happening there happening here. I’m afraid I believe in our Constitution far more than you do. We’ll just have to wait and see whether our judicial system decides to set up separate Sharia courts to decide on American law. You gonna eat crow when that doesn’t happen? I thought not.

Damn, after reading KPO’s last two responses, I’ll shut up now. I erased a lot of what I wrote; he’s said it all, and better than I could. Cain would be free to appoint whoever he wants, in my opinion, except that he has EXCLUDED every Muslim American from consideration. He should be ashamed; that’s exactly like excluding every Black American. That’s racism. That’s discrimination. That’s un-American and goes against EVERYTHING we stand for, everything we have fought for to improve our country.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 9, 2011 2:14 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
I love his answer about appointing Muslims.

To the point, backed with solid, fact based reasoning, and no tap dancing.

He was asked a question, and answered it. He then went on to explain why he gave the answer he did,

Very refreshing.

I've heard him asked before, and he answered that he would not appoint any Muslims to such positions, because he didn't want them trying to use their religion to run anything. He only believes "christians" should bring their religion into government, it seems.

How refreshing.

Not.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 9, 2011 2:17 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:

To fear any and every Muslim is paranoid, irrational and...

...And welcome to RappyWorld™, where fear trumps reason every single day.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 9, 2011 2:21 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
Don't get me wrong HappyT, if Cain gets elected I won't demand that he appoint token Muslims, that would be equally ridiculous. I just thought his answer to the hypothetical question was bad, and telling.

It's not personal. It's just war.

Bingo. Just saying right up front that you wouldn't even CONSIDER a Muslim, for no other reason than their religion, *IS* discrimination, plain and simple.

Imagine if I told Herman Cain that I could never vote for a black person for President? How would that come across? What if I couldn't vote for a so-called "christian", no matter what his other qualifications?

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 9, 2011 3:01 PM

Well yeah, he's got a prejudice, I ain't disputing that. I certainly hope you didn't think I was approving or promoting that kind of behavior. I'm more disputing the interpreted severity of it. There's more than a fair chance any or every potential candidate on both sides of the aisle are prejudiced in some respect. Herman Cain straight up stating his prejudice and how far it goes makes him seem less a danger to Muslims than other candidates who won't admit their prejudice. 'Better the snake you know than the snake you don't.'

I do not believe Herman Cain is out to oppress Muslims. It's his choice not to want Muslims on his cabinet. I don't think it's wise to reject them immediately. I'd rather they were chosen purely based on their skills... but it's not my choice. I can choose not to vote for him, but that choice will be based on more than him not appointing a Muslim cabinet member or judge.

Also, I have been programmed since primary school to believe African Americans can't possibly be racist.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 9, 2011 4:14 PM

Not to be too Godwinesque here, HT, but your position re Herman Cain could also be interpreted to mean that Hitler really wasn't all that bad, since at least he was up front about his intentions and prejudices regarding the Jews and other "undesirables"...

Just sayin'. It doesn't mean he'll give them a fair shake. It means he's telling you in no uncertain terms that he absolutely WILL NOT give them a fair shake.

Quote:
Also, I have been programmed since primary school to believe African Americans can't possibly be racist.

What a silly thing to believe. You should talk to the dolts who "taught" you such nonsense. Saying that all of any race is one way or another is inherently kind of racist, innit?

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 9, 2011 4:25 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Uh, Mike; I think that was a snark? Or are you snarking back? Sometimes I can't tell here...

Quote:
that choice will be based on more than him not appointing a Muslim cabinet member or judge

It would certainly affect MY choice. That he has that attitude speaks volumes about him as a person, and to me it's the equivalent of a candidate saying he wouldn't appoint a Black person to his cabinet or as a judge, isn't it? Yeah, American's are scared to death of Muslims and Islam. But not long ago, they were afraid of Blacks. It's the SAME THING, precisely, to me.

Quote:
It means he's telling you in no uncertain terms that he absolutely WILL NOT give them a fair shake.

That's it--he's very up front about it...I don't think that's such a good thing. That the two choices are either someone who's up front about their racism or they're quiet about it; there's a third choice: not being a racist.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 9, 2011 4:48 PM

Right... cause Hitler's only flaw was refusing to appoint Jewish cabinet, and not oppressive socialist agenda aimed at taking the lives and liberties of other people...

That's the all or nothing BS attitude I'm arguing against. There's a few folks on RWED who hate Christians, but they aren't out to oppress them. Well, not to my knowledge anyway, but I'm not assuming the worst.

Every politicians bound to have a less than positive side and it is kinda nice to know his and how far it goes ahead of time. Doesn't mean I'd vote for him or approve of his prejudice, but there are other important issues to consider besides how he thinks of Islam.

I guess it doesn't bother me as much because I am at the receiving end of a similar attitude often enough. Much of my college circle of friends do not think fondly of Christianity. A fair number are down right hostile (I think they forget I'm Christian most of the time), and I never let my potential employer know what my faith is before I have the job. This anti-Christian behavior ain't exactly attractive to me, but there is more to their character than what I see as an irrational hatred of a religion.

It's looking like there is not anyone on this board that is even interested in more than Herman Cain's perceived prejudice.

So in hopes of addressing other aspects of the man that haven't already been hashed out here before, what do y'all think of his 'fair tax' idea?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 9, 2011 5:14 PM

Quote:
Uh, Mike; I think that was a snark? Or are you snarking back? Sometimes I can't tell here...

Of course I was, silly. Same with the Hitler comparison (because what CAN'T you compare to Hitler these days?)

If by "fair tax", HT, you mean the idea that everyone pays the same percentage as a sales tax or income tax, I'm kinda-sorta okay with that, *IF* (and here's the part no Republican will ever touch) you expand it to include capital gains, bonuses, payroll taxes... you know, *ALL* income, the way they want to tax ALL income for the middle class and the poor.

They'll never agree to that, because so much of their income isn't listed as "income" - it's "capital gains", or "stock options", or "performance bonuses" and the like.

So show me a "fair tax" that's actually FAIR, and we'll have a conversation.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 9, 2011 5:33 PM

Yeah I'm also curious as to exactly how the 'fair tax' works. I heard it talked about briefly on the news in a waiting room and it sounded like his aim was to eliminate all taxes save a sales tax (23% maybe?) that was supposed to be 'fair' because rich folk who don't have income to be taxed (cause they already have all their money) will get taxed more because they buy more.

If it is really that simple, my worry with this is poor single parent families. 1 breadwinner trying to provide for their children which in effect means they are paying (1+no. of kids)x taxes.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 9, 2011 5:59 PM

See, that's my main issue with the flat tax idea, too. Everyone pays 10%, which sounds great - but someone making $20,000 a year probably needs that 10% to make the difference between eating 5 nights a week and eating 7 nights a week. Meanwhile, someone making $1,000,000 a year isn't going to miss a meal on $900,000.

But again, once all parties will agree that the taxes will be paid on ALL income, we can have the conversation. I'm told (repeatedly) that "the rich" pay more taxes, which is true... depending on how you define "taxes" and "more". They pay more income taxes... but income taxes are less than 20% of all taxes paid. One figure I heard cited was that the top 2% pay, on average, less than 16% of their earnings in actual taxes, while the middle class generally pays more like 20% or more of their earnings in taxes.

So any "fair tax" has to be all-encompassing, and we already know for a certified, 100% proven fact that the GOP will never stand for such a thing. Hell, they're already whining that the poor don't pay enough, and that the rich pay too much. Who is going to support a leveling of the field that would actually give the poor a break and raise taxes on the rich by 4 to 5%? Hell, they threw a full-on hissy fit when it was suggested they pay TWO PERCENT more!

This "the rich pay too much" BS is just that: BS. It's as phony as the idea that America's too-high corporate taxes are behind the loss of jobs here. ON PAPER, America has high corporate taxes; ON PAPER, the rich pay high income taxes. IN REALITY, neither of those two things actually occurs. If you're a hedge-fun manager who makes $6 billion on credit-default swaps, it's entirely likely you'll pay as little as 15% in taxes on that $6 billion payday. How? Easy - you get $100,000 in "salary", and $5,999,900,000 in "capital gains". So you'll pay around 32% on the hundie, and 15% on the 5.9 billion.

Not to mention, you'll only pay payroll and social security taxes on the first $108,600 of that pile-o-loot.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 9, 2011 6:02 PM

By the way, does anyone remember how upset some folks were when that "liberal" Gwen Ifill was tapped to moderate one of the Presidential debates in 2008?

Here we have a network with an admitted right-wing bias putting on the debate, keeping other networks and media sources from covering it, having their own pundits host the thing, and then they're telling us who won.

I'm sure it's all on the up and up, though. Right?

Sure.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 9, 2011 8:53 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Maybe I'm not understanding this properly. Isn't it illegal to discriminate on the basis of religion?

BTW Not all Muslims are extremists and want to introduce widespread sharia. There are liberal Muslims. But then I guess whats a Republican candidate going to want with a liberal anything, heh

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 9, 2011 10:13 PM

HKCAVALIER

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Maybe I'm not understanding this properly. Isn't it illegal to discriminate on the basis of religion?

No M'sD you're understanding this perfectly. This is just how utterly broken our American discourse has gotten. People now advocate blatantly illegal b.s. to court votes. Makes 'em feel tough.

It all started when we decided to redefine torture further on down the scale than it actually is, down around grievous bodily harm--oh, 'scuse me, intentional grievous bodily harm--whoops, wrong again: verifiably intentional grievous bodily harm--who am I kidding...we massage the labia of 6 year olds to find out if they're concealing WMD's. So, torture? What torture? Or, perhaps it began when we decided that a first strike against a non-imminent threat was something a sane government just might go ahead and do.

Thought they'd be done by now, but they're still at it like there's no tomorrow, 'cause guess what? Half of 'em don't think there is gonna be a tomorrow! Armageddon the Beautiful & the Rapture's Red Glare!

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 10, 2011 12:19 AM

Just to play devil's advocate, it could be argued that the fair tax is fair because it ties tax to purchases. Poor people (in theory) will be taxed less because they would not spend as much money on unnecessary purchases. Everyone's got to eat but everyone does not have to eat at red lobster, or buy a big screen, or a Cadillac, etc... The hypothetical single parent scenario could be 'justified' (not that I would) because parents would utilize more public services provided by tax revenue, such as schools.

I could only get behind this if something was done to make things a little easier on parents. Perhaps lowering the tax on food not sold in restaurants or something and the tax on some child related purchases such as diapers.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 10, 2011 1:39 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by TheHappyTrader:
Just to play devil's advocate, it could be argued that the fair tax is fair because it ties tax to purchases. Poor people (in theory) will be taxed less because they would not spend as much money on unnecessary purchases. Everyone's got to eat but everyone does not have to eat at red lobster, or buy a big screen, or a Cadillac, etc... The hypothetical single parent scenario could be 'justified' (not that I would) because parents would utilize more public services provided by tax revenue, such as schools.

I could only get behind this if something was done to make things a little easier on parents. Perhaps lowering the tax on food not sold in restaurants or something and the tax on some child related purchases such as diapers.

The counter-argument being that the poor spend literally every penny, just trying to get to the next month. Conversely, the rich don't exactly live paycheck-to-paycheck, spending all their wealth on necessities just to get by. So again, the poor and the middle class end up paying a larger proportion of their income in taxes.

And that gets us into *WHAT* is taxed. Food? What food? Bread at the bakery thrift store, or Kobe beef at the deli?

If you ever said "Support the Troops!", you are a socialist. You've taken money from me, by force and at gunpoint, and you've given it to people who are on a mission I don't support, and are murdering others in my name, and I am given no choice in the matter.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 10, 2011 1:41 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
By the way, does anyone remember how upset some folks were when that "liberal" Gwen Ifill was tapped to moderate one of the Presidential debates in 2008?

Here we have a network with an admitted right-wing bias putting on the debate, keeping other networks and media sources from covering it, having their own pundits host the thing, and then they're telling us who won.

I'm sure it's all on the up and up, though. Right?

Sure.

And do you remember WHY there was an issue over Gwen Ifill being moderator ?

Was it simply because she was a " liberal " ?

No.

It's because she had written a pro Obama book, entitled "The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama,", and here she was, supposedly being the voice of objectivity for a Presidential debate.

Right.

And as for FOX's " admitted " right wing basis, where is that ever stated ? They come out and give a far more balanced view than does the MSM. In how the the other networks cover the news, FOX may appear to lean more towards the right, but that's only because everyone is so far to the Left.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 10, 2011 4:36 PM

Quote:
And as for FOX's " admitted " right wing basis, where is that ever stated ? They come out and give a far more balanced view than does the MSM. In how the the other networks cover the news, FOX may appear to lean more towards the right, but that's only because everyone is so far to the Left.

Riiiiiiiiiight. By their own admission, I mean - FAR to the right.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/press/leaked-memos-cast-doubt-
on-fox-news-claim-of-neutrality-2162660.html

http://mediamatters.org/research/200407140002

http://digg.com/news/politics/FOX_News_Internal_Memo_Leak_Find_quotes_
of_insurgents_thrilled_at_Dems_Win

I could, of course, keep going, but you have no interest in reality, as you've so clearly shown. Fox doesn't even try to hide their right-wing agenda anymore. And only the truly stupid among their viewers are under any delusion that they really are "fair and balanced".

Guess we know where your head's at (as if we didn't already know!)

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 11, 2011 12:05 AM

America loves a winner!

Again, it's not a "right wing " agenda, it's merely an appetite for the truth.

Something which is completely foreign to you, it seems.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 11, 2011 1:19 AM

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

Quote:
Again, it's not a "right wing " agenda, it's merely an appetite for the truth.

Until you can find me a left-wing or centrist person who says that, we can assume it's a right-wing version of truth.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 11, 2011 1:52 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Again, it's not a "right wing " agenda, it's merely an appetite for the truth.

Something which is completely foreign to you, it seems.

You mean like the "truth" of your alleged Teddy Roosevelt quote? I sought out the truth on that one, and you ran away, because that's what you do. And you were lying every bit as much as Kevin Spacey, whom YOU accused of lying when he repeated an unsourced Churchill quotes. That's just the truth of it.

Claiming that FauxNews has an "appetite for the truth" is truly laughable, given how many times they've been caught outright lying and making shit up. And 193% of their viewers agree! ;)

But then again, you likely believed John Kyl when he made his ludicrous claims about Planned Parenthood, so you wouldn't know the truth from a lie even if you went to war on it.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 11, 2011 3:34 AM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!

Cain is employed by the private "FEDERAL" RESERVE BANK, that counterfeits all so-called "US dollar bills" ("Federal" Reserve Debt Notes), and steals 100% of all federal income taxes.
http://www.infowars.com/post-debate-gop-buzz-surrounds-herman-cain-for
mer-federal-reserve-insider/

Cain, former Chairman and Member of the Board of Directors for the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, flippantly denies the need to Audit the Federal Reserve (Ron Paul's bill) while hosting the Jew Neil Boortz Radio Show For Killing All Muslims Justified By False Flag Mossad Attacks on 12/29/10:

Faux News claims Cain is a Tea Party member, yet the Tea Party's mission statement is to overthrow the private "Federal" Reserve Bank.

Faux News only "polled" the 29 hand-picked loyal Republicons invited to this "debate", while Ron Paul won $1-million in donations that same day, and was named by CNN as the only GOP canddiate who can beat Al Qaeda Dictator Hussein Obama Soetoro.

Ron Paul drew heavy applause for most of his answers, including a call to bring the troops home from Afghanistan.

Faux News has been owned by Communist China since 1999, when Rupert Murdoch married Deng Wen Di.

Jewish SNL Military Industrial Complex censored Ron Paul to protect the jewish "Federal" Reserve Bank.

Cain murdered his brother Able.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 11, 2011 5:44 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

You mean like the "truth" of your alleged Teddy Roosevelt quote? I sought out the truth on that one, and you ran away, because that's what you do. And you were lying every bit as much as Kevin Spacey, whom YOU accused of lying when he repeated an unsourced Churchill quotes. That's just the truth of it.

Claiming that FOXNews has an "appetite for the truth" is truly laughable, given how many times they've been caught outright lying and making shit up. And 193% of their viewers agree! ;)

But then again, you likely believed John Kyl when he made his ludicrous claims about Planned Parenthood, so you wouldn't know the truth from a lie even if you went to war on it.

If the Teddy Roosevelt quote is mis cited , then so be it. ( Doesn't make it any less true) I'll admit I was wrong when Kevin Spacey does the same.

Fox news makes up stuff ? You mean like Dan Rather's 'fake but accurate' hit piece on Bush, right before the 2004 election ?

Or NBC's phonied up Dateline report on exploding GM gas tanks ?

Or what about the plagiarism case of Jayson Blair and the NYT ?

When it comes to fabricating the news, FOX has a long way to go to get to the level as the 'main stream' Left wing organizations.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 11, 2011 7:11 AM

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

Quote:
Originally posted by TheHappyTrader:
Well yeah, he's got a prejudice, I ain't disputing that. I certainly hope you didn't think I was approving or promoting that kind of behavior. I'm more disputing the interpreted severity of it. There's more than a fair chance any or every potential candidate on both sides of the aisle are prejudiced in some respect. Herman Cain straight up stating his prejudice and how far it goes makes him seem less a danger to Muslims than other candidates who won't admit their prejudice. 'Better the snake you know than the snake you don't.'

I do not believe Herman Cain is out to oppress Muslims. It's his choice not to want Muslims on his cabinet. I don't think it's wise to reject them immediately. I'd rather they were chosen purely based on their skills... but it's not my choice. I can choose not to vote for him, but that choice will be based on more than him not appointing a Muslim cabinet member or judge.

Herman Cain has since backtracked on the answer about appointing Muslims - he said in a cosy Fox News interview that he would in fact consider Muslims. And I'm prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt on this; I see him as a basically good person.

But so far as voting for him, for me that little Islamophobic streak that was on display is a deal-breaker. I guess that's one of the things that makes me a liberal. If Cain were president he would have to be president for ALL Americans - and what kind of message has it sent to young Muslim Americans if they've heard from the mouth of their president that they have no place in government? The times being what they are, an Islamophobe in the White House is not what we need.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 11, 2011 7:14 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
Here we have a network with an admitted right-wing bias putting on the debate, keeping other networks and media sources from covering it, having their own pundits host the thing, and then they're telling us who won.

Exactly why I didn’t waste my time watching it.

Quote:
Here we have a network with an admitted right-wing bias putting on the debate, keeping other networks and media sources from covering it, having their own pundits host the thing, and then they're telling us who won.

Amen. To the rest of the post, too.

It IS illegal, and the fact that GOP candidates GET votes for pandering to other people’s fear and hatred (and racism), instead of being brought up short that it IS illegal, is exactly what Cav described. Nobody even notices, nobody says a word. Our morals have undergone an unconscionable lowering of standards, and I don’t expect to see it reverse any time soon.

As for not voting for him because of an expressed prejudice, it’s up to each person to decide what’s important about a candidate. For me, that’s so overtly wrong that I have to question the rest of his beliefs; either he’s just pandering, which eliminates him for me, or he really IS that twisted, which also eliminates him. His explanation shows he’s either totally taken in by this Sharia Law crap, or he’s using it to pander. Neither one makes an acceptable candidate for me.

Quote:
The times being what they are, an Islamophobe in the White House is not what we need.

Bang on, KPO.

Oh, gawd, Raptor’s off on Faux News’ “impartiality” again.

Quote:
And as for FOX's " admitted " right wing basis, where is that ever stated ?

As if it has to be “stated”?? Anyone with half a brain who watches them can figure it out easily. Just for one thing; a goodly number of those running as right-wingers either have their own show on Fox Noise or had their own show or are commentators. They’d die before they did that for ANY liberal, or even anyone in the middle of the road!

Quote:
They come out and give a far more balanced view than does the MSM.

Again, it's not a "right wing " agenda, it's merely an appetite for the truth.

When it comes to fabricating the news, FOX has a long way to go to get to the level as the 'main stream' Left wing organizations.

Hysterical. Absolutely hysterical.

That’s all you’re good for, Raptor: mocking. Beyond that, I wouldn't spend two seconds on your silliness, any more than I'd spend it on Faux News.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 11, 2011 8:21 AM