PDA

View Full Version : Dear leader's nightmare 2012 scenario ...



LWW
05-22-2011, 07:21 AM
http://island-adv.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/herman_cain_prez-022.jpg

pooltchr
05-22-2011, 08:20 AM
I think I could get really excited about this one!

Steve

llotter
05-22-2011, 10:07 AM
I tend to like Herman Cain but he does remind me of Ross Perot, oriented toward problem solving in a '1 - 2 - 3' style without an overriding vision or philosophy. He very articulate bur I fear that, like most politicians, when push comes to shove, pragmatism and compromise will rule the day.

I would feel better if he was more specific when he talks about freedom and the Constitution because those are words that could be just buzz words like they are to most politicians. I do like the tax reform idea though I would prefer a flat tax with no exemptions over the Fair Tax that he supports. Hopefully, my doubts will prove wrong.

Stretch
05-22-2011, 10:18 AM
Are you backing Herman now? St.

llotter
05-22-2011, 10:40 AM
A really good point in his favor was his list of VP possibilities that included Bachmann and DeMent both of whom are among my favorites. Maybe Cain is more electable so that work out well.

Perky
05-22-2011, 11:22 AM
I believe Herman is far more likely to be The Weenie's wet-dream.... than President Obama's any kind of even low level day-dream. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

pooltchr
05-22-2011, 12:53 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Perky</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I believe Herman is far more likely to be The Weenie's wet-dream.... than President Obama's any kind of even low level day-dream. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif </div></div>

Care to comment on the topic (Cain), or will you just take this as another opportunity to attack your fellow members of the forum?

Steve

pooltchr
05-22-2011, 01:00 PM
Care to pull yourself out of the sewer and actually discuss issues like an adult?

=================
[0]Economic[/b]
Cain believes economic growth can be achieved by implementing policies that emphasize less legislation, less regulation, lower taxes, and business friendly policies.

[1] Taxes
Cain supports lowering the corporate tax rates from 35 to 25 percent, eliminating the capital gains tax, and suspending taxes on repatriated foreign profits.[35] He also supports elimination of the estate tax (also known as the death tax).

[2] Fair TaxCain is a strong supporter of the Fair Tax. This would replace all federal personal and corporate income taxes with a national consumption tax of 23%, while remaining revenue neutral.

[3] Bank bailouts
Cain supported the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) bank bailouts as a way to save the economy, viewing it as an investment opportunity for the taxpayers. In a 2008 editorial, Cain wrote, "Owning a part of the major banks in America is not a bad thing. We could make a profit while solving a problem.". In May 2011, regarding his TARP support, Cain said "I don’t have any regrets".... "I studied the situation. I didn’t have trouble with the idea; I had trouble with its implementation, picking winners and losers."

[4] Federal ReserveIn early 2011,
Cain stated on his radio show that there was no need for an audit of the Federal Reserve (Cain objected to auditing the Federal Reserve in 2010 while hosting the Neil Boortz show).Cain has clarified, however, that while such an audit is not a high priority for him, neither does he object to it.

[5] Gold standard
Cain announced his support of the gold standard on a radio program in late 2010:

"Yes I believe in the gold standard. We should have never gotten off the gold standard because when we got off the gold standard, that then allowed Congress to inflate our currency whenever they overspent. Now look at the mess that we have."[41]

[6] Welfare
In an interview with Christianity Today, Cain stated, "Programs today are designed to make people more dependent rather than less dependent."
[7] Social Security
Cain favors a position of reforming the current system, but not privatizing it.

[8] Religion
In an interview with Christianity Today, Cain declared he would not consider appointing an individual of Muslim faith to a presidential cabinet or to a federal court. "No, I will not," he said. "And here’s why. There is this creeping attempt, there is this attempt to gradually ease Sharia law and the Muslim faith into our government. It does not belong in our government. This is what happened in Europe. And little by little, to try and be politically correct, they made this little change, they made this little change. And now they’ve got a social problem that they don’t know what to do with hardly."

[9] Abortion
Cain is pro-life and opposes abortion. He believes that life begins at conception. He favors defunding Planned Parenthood.

[10] Education
Cain believes that education is vital to success and favors performance incentives for teachers. Cain also favors vouchers and charter school systems.

[11] Energy and the Environment
Cain favors offshore drilling and favors drilling in ANWR. He favors allowing consumers to choose alternative energy sources such as solar and wind through the private market instead of the government dictating who will be the economic winners and losers.

[12] Health Care
Cain favors repealing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Cain favors allowing the free market to play the largest role in health care.

[13] Immigration
Cain believes that the US-Mexico border must be secured. He believes in allowing illegal immigrants living in the US to go through the traditional citizenship process.

[14] Marriage
Cain believes that marriage is between a man and a woman and is against legalizing same-sex marriage. He supports the Defense of Marriage Act

[15] Supreme Court Justices
Cain favors appointed Justices that would abide by the Constitution and not make any rules. He has expressed support for Justice Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

[16] Second Amendment
He believes that any gun permit law must be dealt with at the state level.

[17] Foreign policy
Israel
He supports Israel and believes that the US should aid Israel in defending itself.[54] After President Obama said that the starting point of negotiations for peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians should be based on the 1967 borders, Cain said, "I was shocked at the president’s position, and I was equally shocked that he would unilaterally suggest that Israel would move the borders back which they acquired 44 years ago. This president threw Israel under the bus, there is no way around it. It demonstrates once again the arrogant disregard of this president for the opinion of the American people who like the relationship we have with Israel, and for Israel having the right to make its own decisions."

[18] Iran
Cain favors a diplomatic approach to nuclear disarmament. He believes that Iran is a threat to Israel.

[19] North Korea
Cain opposes any form of appeasement to the US's enemies. He believes that the number one priority for the US is to keep its citizens safe.

[20] Russia
Cain opposed the New START treaty because he believes that the US gave up too much.


Can you actually form an opinion on real issues, or is your life all about being an ankle biter?

Go ahead, give it a shot. Here's your chance to show us what you're made of.

Steve

Perky
05-22-2011, 02:43 PM
Seems pretty obvious I was speaking to Stretch not any sub-weenie... which by the way why are you still continuing to be The Weenies suck-up?? I have absolutely zero respect for The Weenie and as long as he continues to slither away to hide I'll kick his sorry butt to the curb as I choose. You??? I have no interest in so why insert yourself?? Cain at best is a wet-dream of The Weenies.

Nothing against Cain personally but I'm certain you pretty well know my opinion on such issues as I do yours. Although there are some policy issues I actually may agree with Cain... actually so does Obama.

On Major issues... You expect to be surprised.. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif NOT!!

[8] Religion ...Cain here is clearly a bigot
[9] Abortion... Everyone favours life... but I also believe women have the right to protect their own bodies and lives.
[10] Education... Cain is totally misinformed to the point of being illiterate on this subject. These policies would prove to be a miserable failure.
[12] Health Care... /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif Very bad joke... I've lived with real health care for the past 35yrs. Although the U.S. has some of the best physicians and facilities in the world... the fact that insurance companies control access... is tantamount to legitimized robbery of the American public.
[13] Immigration... Cain offers baffle-gab, Obama offers achievable substance.
[14] Marriage... Cain again being the bigot.
[17] Foreign policy Israel... Cain must have some cognitive processing deficit here as he , like many Republicans have totally misinterpreted this... they need to go back and read-read with their eyes and ears open this time.
[15] Supreme Court Justices ...warped excessively partisan baffle-gab
[16] Second Amendment... this should be the domain of the federal government, not applied willy-nilly by various states. No one but paranoid conspiracy theorists believe that any government either left or right is likely to ever take away the right for citizens to own weapons. There are some excesses by a few fanatics however, that need to be regulated more closely.

Beyond this... a total waste of time to discuss such issues with anyone who's views are at such polar opposites.

LWW
05-22-2011, 03:17 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Perky</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I believe Herman is far more likely to be The Weenie's wet-dream.... than President Obama's any kind of even low level day-dream. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif </div></div>

Care to comment on the topic (Cain), or will you just take this as another opportunity to attack your fellow members of the forum?

Steve </div></div>

Once he is spoon fed his answer, I'm sure he will.

LWW
05-22-2011, 03:20 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Care to pull yourself out of the sewer and actually discuss issues like an adult?

Steve </div></div>

Please tell me this was a rhetorical question.

Soflasnapper
05-22-2011, 04:37 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> ...no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

-- The Constitution of the United States, Article 6 (excerpt)

</div></div>

When you have a so-called Constitutional conservative whose opening platform calls for a violation of the Constitution, perhaps you should reconsider any support for such a man?

Perky
05-22-2011, 06:05 PM
<span style='font-size: 20pt'> /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/sick.gif Weenie-poop safety barrier !!! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/sick.gif </span>
Just as when coming near any obviously hazardous material it is always recommended to employ proper precautions

Perky
05-22-2011, 06:09 PM
The Weenie rarely eats with a spoon... /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/sick.gif

http://i202.photobucket.com/albums/aa134/bperkins_photo/Obamascooking.jpg

llotter
05-22-2011, 06:17 PM
You are making a good point there but I wonder if the Constitution is referring to a formal or legal test rather than a personal preference. I think is must be a misinterpretation of the Constitution if the result turns out to require affirmative action for all of the various beliefs or religions. I am inclined to favor Cain's idea even it an amendment is necessary but I don't think it is.

LWW
05-22-2011, 07:00 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> ...no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

-- The Constitution of the United States, Article 6 (excerpt)

</div></div>

When you have a so-called Constitutional conservative whose opening platform calls for a violation of the Constitution, perhaps you should reconsider any support for such a man?
</div></div>

Perhaps you should elaborate on how you came to this conclusion?

Sev
05-23-2011, 06:00 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: llotter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You are making a good point there but I wonder if the Constitution is referring to a formal or legal test rather than a personal preference. I think is must be a misinterpretation of the Constitution if the result turns out to require affirmative action for all of the various beliefs or religions. I am inclined to favor Cain's idea even it an amendment is necessary but I don't think it is. </div></div>

The term "test" has several meanings. Always remember the constitution has to be interpreted by the language and meaning of its day. Our language has evolved considerably away from the English of the 1700's
Many fail to recognize this and attempt to assign current definitions to its word structure.

Soflasnapper
05-23-2011, 07:36 PM
It's clear that they didn't mean just to bar the use of a 100 question multiple-choice test on this or that religion as a qualification (even though that would also be barred, presumably).

What they were forbidding was various sects of Protestants discriminating against other sects by keeping them out of office because they were of a different sect than they were.

The Baptists and the Unitarians and the Presbyterians didn't much care for each other in those days (and prolly Catholics need not apply at all). History shows on occasion they couldn't even agree to a prayer to open a meeting because they couldn't get a non-denominational prayer and wouldn't abide having the 'wrong' sect's prayer used.

While it was various versions of Protestant Christianity that were really most in play, and discrimination against fellow Protestants that they were prohibiting, they were smart enough to exclude the Musselmen (or Mohametans) or Jews from this protection, had they wanted to. They did not, so this prohibition of using religious status to allow or preclude holding public office applies across the board.

Then there's the small matter of the Civil Rights Act, which again prohibits using religious affiliation as a reason to preclude hiring, not just in federal office but in all jobs, and also including in federal hiring.

So, a Mr. Cain, who upon inauguration would swear an oath to protect the Constitution and faithfully execute the office (by obeying and enforcing the laws of this land), opens his bid by baldly stating he will violate the Constitution and binding law of over 40 years' standing.

That's a big DQ, and I do not refer to Dairy Queen.

pooltchr
05-23-2011, 08:41 PM
Apples and oranges. I don't think the Baptists (or Catholics, or Uniterians) have declaired war against our way of life.

Steve

Soflasnapper
05-24-2011, 02:42 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Apples and oranges. I don't think the Baptists (or Catholics, or Uniterians) have declaired war against our way of life.

Steve </div></div>

It doesn't matter under the law. Try telling a job applicant that you'll not hire him because he's a Moslem and see if your point is an adequate defense under a Civil Rights Act claim. It won't be.

And actually, Protestants of that day were of the opinion that Catholics were under a foreign influence (the Pope's), and therefore quite unreliable as to their patriotism, since they'd do the Pope's order ahead of this country's interest. (And btw, the Catholic Church was an Anti-Christ project.)

A similar point might be made about Jews, and that was probably the opinion of them at the time as well. Those Christ-Killers (tm)?

pooltchr
05-24-2011, 03:15 PM
You don't tell them that is the reason. There is a reality that exists in spite of the law. I personally have applied for jobs where I knew I was extremely well qualified, but not offered the job. They can say they found a more qualified candidate, or a "better fit", but I know that my age had a lot to do with the decision. But that is impossible to prove. Likewise, not hiring a Muslim is easy to do...you just say you found a better candidate.

Steve

Perky
05-24-2011, 06:57 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When you have a so-called Constitutional conservative whose opening platform calls for a violation of the Constitution, perhaps you should reconsider any support for such a man? </div></div>

I believe the constitution is actually quite clear about this sort of thing...

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>Bigots need not apply!</span>

LWW
05-25-2011, 02:40 AM
Again, your lack of historical knowledge betrays you.

They were arguing that the federal gubmint wouldn't ban certain religions from public office.

States could, and some did, limit political power to members of certain faiths while banning others.

Qtec
05-25-2011, 04:26 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You don't tell them that is the reason. There is a reality that exists in spite of the law. I personally have applied for jobs where I knew I was extremely well qualified, but not offered the job. They can say they found a more qualified candidate, or a "better fit", but I know that my age had a lot to do with the decision. <span style='font-size: 20pt'>But that is impossible to prove. Likewise, not hiring a Muslim is easy to do...you just say you found a better candidate.

Steve </span></div></div>

LMAO. Did you read the post? Obviously not.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

-- The Constitution of the United States, Article 6 (excerpt)

</div></div>

Your lap boy.

link (http://thinkprogress.org/2011/03/26/herman-cain-muslims/)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Cain’s apparent rationale for refusing <span style='font-size: 14pt'><u>to even consider a Muslim nominee for any position in his administration</u></span> is as simple as it is abhorrent: he believes all Muslims would try to “force their Sharia law onto the rest of us.” This type of bigotry has been promoted by conservative figures like Frank Gaffney and Brigitte Gabriel for years. Now, it appears to be seeping into the presidential race via Herman Cain. </div></div>

Imagine if he had said 'no Catholics' or 'no Jews'. The RW grind machine would be going full steam.

Hypocrites. Count yourself among them.

Q..the dickhead said it up front. "I will not hire a Moslem. " LOL ......Dumb a$$.

Soflasnapper
05-25-2011, 11:50 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Again, your lack of historical knowledge betrays you.

They were arguing that the federal gubmint wouldn't ban certain religions from public office.

States could, and some did, limit political power to members of certain faiths while banning others. </div></div>

Right, and I also must have missed that history class that explains how the POTUS is really a state office position, so that a President Cain can ignore what the Constitution requires for the federal government.

It's always such a better story when you tell it. It's possible that I may have forgotten more history than you ever knew, and maybe how the federal government's head executive is really a state position must be on that list.

Soflasnapper
05-25-2011, 11:53 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You don't tell them that is the reason. There is a reality that exists in spite of the law. I personally have applied for jobs where I knew I was extremely well qualified, but not offered the job. They can say they found a more qualified candidate, or a "better fit", but I know that my age had a lot to do with the decision. But that is impossible to prove. Likewise, not hiring a Muslim is easy to do...you just say you found a better candidate.

Steve </div></div>

I agree people get around the law this way all the time. But the key is saying it is for a different reason. If the party doing the hiring states the real reason, they are up for a federal charge.

As has been noted by Q, this guy went more than a little too far for that gambit.

Gayle in MD
05-25-2011, 01:03 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You don't tell them that is the reason. There is a reality that exists in spite of the law. I personally have applied for jobs where I knew I was extremely well qualified, but not offered the job. They can say they found a more qualified candidate, or a "better fit", but I know that my age had a lot to do with the decision. <span style='font-size: 20pt'>But that is impossible to prove. Likewise, not hiring a Muslim is easy to do...you just say you found a better candidate.

Steve </span></div></div>

LMAO. Did you read the post? Obviously not.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

-- The Constitution of the United States, Article 6 (excerpt)

</div></div>

Your lap boy.

link (http://thinkprogress.org/2011/03/26/herman-cain-muslims/)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Cain’s apparent rationale for refusing <span style='font-size: 14pt'><u>to even consider a Muslim nominee for any position in his administration</u></span> is as simple as it is abhorrent: he believes all Muslims would try to “force their Sharia law onto the rest of us.” This type of bigotry has been promoted by conservative figures like Frank Gaffney and Brigitte Gabriel for years. Now, it appears to be seeping into the presidential race via Herman Cain. </div></div>

Imagine if he had said 'no Catholics' or 'no Jews'. The RW grind machine would be going full steam.

Hypocrites. Count yourself among them.

Q..the dickhead said it up front. "I will not hire a Moslem. " LOL ......Dumb a$$. </div></div>

TAP TAP TAP!!!!

LWW
10-07-2011, 10:14 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In news sure to inject shock and awe into the Republican political primary season, a Zogby poll released Thursday showed <span style='font-size: 11pt'>Herman Cain leading the Republican field, topping former front-runner Mitt Romney by an astonishing 20 points. Cain would also narrowly edge out Obama in a general election, the poll found, by a 46-44 margin.</span> </div></div>

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>OH DEAR! (http://news.yahoo.com/poll-cain-surges-opens-20-point-lead-romney-132015440.html)</span>