PDA

View Full Version : Cain is Anti-Abortion, Yet Pro-Choice?



Qtec
10-20-2011, 03:15 AM
WTF!!!


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Morgan, moving on to the next point of discussion, then asked Cain about his thoughts on contraception and abortion. Cain believes, evidently, that life begins at conception and is personally against abortion, no matter the circumstances surrounding that choice (including, say, a child conceived through rape and/or incest). There followed some hugger-mugger over whether Cain would still be against abortion if his daughter or granddaughter happened to be raped — which is silly, of course. If you’re against something as a matter of principle, it means you’re firm enough in your conviction to have it hold in all cases. To do otherwise, to make special allowances for one’s kin or close friends, would be hypocritical, and hypocrisy is something no candidate is going to readily admit to, ever.

And yet, interestingly, here’s what Cain said to Morgan concerning abortion for people who are not his family members:

No, it comes down to is, <span style='font-size: 14pt'>it’s not the government’s role — or anybody else’s role — to make that decision.</span> Secondly, if you look at the statistical incidents, you’re not talking about that big a number. So what <span style='font-size: 14pt'>I’m saying is, it <span style='font-size: 17pt'><u>ultimately gets down to a choice that that family or that mother has to make.</u></span> Not me as president. Not some politician. Not a bureaucrat. It gets down to that family. And whatever they decide, they decide. I shouldn’t try to tell them what decision to make for such a sensitive decision.</span>

Morgan then said that Cain cannot hide behind the “mask of the pizza guy,” and that, as a person who may potentially become president, his views on issues like abortion become “a directive to the nation.” Cain’s response?

No, they don’t. I can have an opinion on an issue without it being a directive on the nation. The government shouldn’t be trying to tell people everything to do, especially when it comes to a social decision that they need to make.

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>So, there you have it: Herman Cain is against abortion, personally, but is firmly pro-choice, as he believes the government should not intervene in social decisions.</span> And that extends to same-sex marriage, by the way. As you may recall, Cain said recently, during an appearance on Meet The Press, that “I wouldn’t seek a constitutional ban for same-sex marriage, but I am pro-traditional marriage.” </div></div>

watch it (http://www.mediaite.com/tv/herman-cain-tells-piers-morgan-that-he-is-anti-abortion-yet-pro-choice/)

I guess he must have misspoke again!

Q

LWW
10-20-2011, 03:40 AM
That's pretty much identical to dear leader's stated position ... and your point is what, other than to act as a hyper-partisan pit poodle?

Qtec
10-20-2011, 04:20 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That's pretty much identical to dear leader's stated position .. </div></div>

Is Obama reaching out to the fanatical anti-abortion Rel RW? Anyway, this about Cain's views, not Obama's.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">and your point is what, </div></div>

Thanks for once again proving what a cretin you are.


Cain says he is against abortion under ANY circumstances.
Now he says its the mother's choice.

You can hold both views honestly <span style='font-size: 14pt'>but Cain has been promoting himself with the Rel.Right as a staunch anti-abortionist!

Now he takes a different view.</span>

You see no conflict of interest here? You must be blind as well as dumb.

Q

eg8r
10-20-2011, 07:33 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I guess he must have misspoke again!
</div></div>Why do you guess that? I personally wish he had a stronger opinion on banning it.

eg8r

eg8r
10-20-2011, 07:38 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Is Obama reaching out to the fanatical anti-abortion Rel RW?</div></div>He absolutely did. He reached out to anyone willing to donate money. All politicians do.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Cain says he is against abortion under ANY circumstances.
Now he says its the mother's choice.</div></div>Why don't you ask sofla to explain this to you this you are having a language barrier. He is saying in his personal belief and life it is wrong no matter the circumstance. However he also believes it is not his place to tell another person what they can or cannot do. Drop your partisanship and desire to "catch him" in a flip and you might actually learn something.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
10-20-2011, 10:52 AM
<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">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That's pretty much identical to dear leader's stated position .. </div></div>

Is Obama reaching out to the fanatical anti-abortion Rel RW? Anyway, this about Cain's views, not Obama's.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">and your point is what, </div></div>

Thanks for once again proving what a cretin you are.


Cain says he is against abortion under ANY circumstances.
Now he says its the mother's choice.

You can hold both views honestly <span style='font-size: 14pt'>but Cain has been promoting himself with the Rel.Right as a staunch anti-abortionist!

Now he takes a different view.</span>

You see no conflict of interest here? You must be blind as well as dumb.

Q






</div></div>

Won't matter what he's for or against. He'll never be elected Predsident anyway.
Neither will Perry, or Romney.

They're all rich liars and thieves, just what Americans are protesting gagainst all over this country, in the unprecedentedly growing, never before seen, grass roots, GLOBAL demonstration, the people against the rich thieves, OWS!

Go! Go! Go! OWS!

g.
G.

Qtec
10-20-2011, 05:12 PM
Let me explain it to you dillhole.


You cannot hold two opposing views at the same time.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Campaigning in New Hampshire on Thursday, <u>Santorum accused Cain of misleading voters about his conservative credentials.</u>

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>"It's basically the position that just about every pro-choice politician has in America,"</span><span style="color: #990000">Get that dillhole?</span> <u>Santorum told The Associated Press.</u><span style='font-size: 26pt'> "I don't know too many pro-choice politicians who are for abortion, who want more abortions ... but they say the decision is a choice the government shouldn't be involved in."</span>

Santorum added: <u>"That</u> is Herman Cain's position, which does not make him pro-life.<span style='font-size: 26pt'> That is the quintessential pro-choice position on abortion."</span> </div></div>

Q

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Drop your partisanship and desire to <u>"catch him" in a flip </u> </div></div>

Its ALL over the web.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Updated 2:42 p.m. ET

GOP presidential hopeful Herman Cain is <u>trying to tamp down controversy over his comments about abortion.</u>

"I'm 100% pro-life. End of story," he tweeted. </div></div>

......but its a woman's choice. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

eg8r
10-20-2011, 06:40 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You cannot hold two opposing views at the same time.</div></div>LOL, which is a direction reflection of your inability to comprehend what he is saying. You are prove you are the village idiot over and over.

eg8r

Qtec
10-20-2011, 07:24 PM
No comment then?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"I don't know too many pro-choice politicians who are for abortion, who want more abortions ... but they say the decision is a choice the government shouldn't be involved in." </div></div>

Cain is pro-choice. He has NO chance of the nomination. That's why he is busy enriching himself.

Q


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">According to reports published this week,<u> Herman Cain’s presidential campaign funneled over $100,000 to a company owned by Cain called T.H.E. New Voice.</u> Cain told Bloomberg News that his campaign is simply buying the candidate’s books, despite <u>earlier Federal Election Commission (FEC) reports that claimed the money was for “lodging” (an amended report changed the payments to “books.”)</u><span style="color: #990000"> when he got found out.</span>

ThinkProgress has reviewed additional disclosure reports, and found that <span style='font-size: 14pt'>T.H.E. New Voice pays Cain a direct salary. </span>Essentially, it appears Cain’s campaign is using contributor money to buy Cain’s own books, and that Cain could be reaping at least part of the profits. At the CNN debate in Las Vegas, ThinkProgress spoke to Cain spokesman J.D. Gordon about the arrangement:

FANG: On the last campaign disclosure for Mr. Cain, it showed that the T.H.E. New Voice, the company owned by Cain, pays a salary to Mr. Cain. And there’s a revelation this week that the Herman Cain campaign committee has given over one hundred thousand dollars to this private company that’s paying Cain. Does this company still provide a salary to Mr. Cain?

GORDON: Well, I would say T.H.E. New Voice handles the book. And so the whole book enterprise and the campaign are distinct entities. Clearly there’s a synergy between the book, the book tour, and the campaign. But they are separate entities. </div></div>

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>So, he takes campaign donations and uses that money to buy his own books from a company that pays him a salary. </span>

Some would call that fraud.

Q

Qtec
10-20-2011, 08:05 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> WASHINGTON -- The first signs of real damage to Herman Cain's campaign emerged Thursday as his position on abortion -- that he is personally anti-abortion but believes it's "not the government's role ... to make that decision" -- began to register with conservative Iowa activists.

"That is a pro-choice position," Bob Vander Plaats, a social conservative leader in Iowa, told The Huffington Post. "It's not where we're at on the issue and it's not where a lot of caucus-goers are at on the life issue. They believe Roe v. Wade should be overturned."</div></div>

Q

Sev
10-20-2011, 08:36 PM
So?

An individual cant differentiate between what may be correct for ones self and what may be correct for others?

Qtec
10-21-2011, 04:56 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So?

An individual cant differentiate between what may be correct for ones self and what may be correct for others? </div></div>

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>Tell that to the anti-abortion crowd who want to FORCE others to comply with their own PERSONAL beliefs..</span>

Cain is pro-choice and rightly so. The result is the death of his campaign for POTUS. The R Right will 'lynch' him for telling the truth. Just watch.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">WASHINGTON -- The first signs of real damage to Herman Cain's campaign emerged Thursday as his position on abortion -- <u>that he is personally anti-abortion but believes it's "not the government's role ... to make that decision"</u> -- began to register with conservative Iowa activists.

"<span style='font-size: 20pt'>That is a pro-choice position,</span>" Bob Vander Plaats, a social conservative leader in Iowa, told The Huffington Post.<span style='font-size: 20pt'> "It's not where we're at on the issue and it's not where a lot of caucus-goers are at on the life issue. They believe<u> Roe v. Wade should be overturned.</u>" </span></div></div>
</div></div>

Bazinga.

Q

eg8r
10-21-2011, 06:51 AM
Nope, qtip cannot think that far. His little itty bitty brain is in a serious malfunction. What is screwing this up for him is that it becomes a subject he cannot attack Cain on because Cain is basically saying he would not change the policy that is already in place. Cain has their hands tied on this issue.

eg8r

eg8r
10-21-2011, 06:52 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Tell that to the anti-abortion crowd who want to FORCE others to comply with their own PERSONAL beliefs..</div></div>He did in effect by your copy/pasting it right here. I am part of that anti-abortion crowd. I don't agree with him at all though. That is how this is supposed to work. He tells us what he believes in and how he will run the country and then we decide if we want to vote for him. Why is common sense so tough for you to grasp?

eg8r

Sev
10-21-2011, 06:54 AM
I dont have a problem with it.

Time will tell.

eg8r
10-21-2011, 06:55 AM
This is exactly how politics is supposed to work. None of the attacking from fellow candidates, none from opposing candidates. Let a man state his beliefs, state how he will govern and then allow the people to make up their minds.

eg8r

Sev
10-21-2011, 06:55 AM
His bigger problem will be selling the 999 plan.

eg8r
10-21-2011, 06:58 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No comment then?</div></div>How many more times do you want me to tell you that you are inept or incapable of using common sense, incapable of taking off your partisan blinders, unwilling to actually think before you run your mouth? Do you want more, well then keep acting like the village idiot and I will keep reminding you of the good job you are doing.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So, he takes campaign donations and uses that money to buy his own books from a company that pays him a salary.

Some would call that fraud.</div></div>Wow, now you are getting into something that is worth discussing albeit a completely different subject matter. Why not move this to its own thread.

eg8r

Qtec
10-22-2011, 01:09 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This is exactly how politics is supposed to work. None of the attacking from fellow candidates, none from opposing candidates. Let a man state his beliefs, state how he will govern and then allow the people to make up their minds.

eg8r </div></div>

I agree but Cain hasn't done that and I'm not the only one who thinks he is pro-choice. Watch the interview. link (http://www.mediaite.com/tv/herman-cain-im-not-pro-choice-im-pro-choice-on-getting-an-illegal-abortion/)


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Herman Cain: I’m Not Pro-Choice, I’m Pro-Choice On Getting An <u>Illegal Abortion</u>

You’ll likely recall that, earlier this week, Herman Cain had an interesting, rather revealing discussion with CNN’s Piers Morgan about, among other issues, his stance on abortion. Cain told Morgan that, even though he is personally against abortion in all circumstances, (and I’m going to quote him directly, now, for comparison purposes), he believes that “I can have an opinion on an issue without it being a directive on the nation. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>The government shouldn’t be trying to tell people everything to do, especially when it comes to a social decision that they need to make.”</span> </div></div>

Well that's pretty clear. Govt should not force a woman to have a baby she doesn't want. Its her choice.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">But now, two days after our post about that interview, Cain is telling Fox News that this is not quite what he meant, and that Morgan had conflated two separate issues into one question. So. <u>Is Herman Cain a pro-choice candidate? Or what?</u> </div></div>

Cain.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Look, let’s go back. See, he was asking me two questions. My position on abortion has been the same — on pro-life — has been the same throughout this campaign. And that is, I am pro-life from conception and I don’t believe in abortion. When he then tried to pigeon-hole me on my granddaughter being there as a victim of rape, then what would I do? The only point I was trying to make: <u>A lot of families will be in that position and they are not going to be thinking, “Well, what does the government want me to do?”</u><span style="color: #990000">That's utter BS.</span> My position is no abortion. My position is no abortion. But all I was trying to point out was take the typical family in this country and you don’t know what they might do in the heat of the moment. </div></div>

WTF is he talking about. The guy doesn't make sense.
"..what does the government want me to do?" ????????????

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 14pt'>When asked directly about whether he believes abortion should be legal in the United States, <u>Cain said that he does not</u></span></div></div>

So, now he is saying <span style='font-size: 14pt'>it isn't the woman's choice</span> and he <span style='font-size: 17pt'>DOES think Govt should be telling her what to do!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!</span>


Santorum hit the nail on the head.[ amazing but true!]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"I don't know too many pro-choice politicians who are for abortion, who want more abortions ... <u>but they say the decision is a choice the government shouldn't be involved in.</u>" </div></div>

You see? You can't be be pro-choice and anti-choice at the same time.
You make the mistake of calling the issue pro-abortion or anti-abortion. Nobody wants abortions, that's why we progressives think contraception is a good idea. The issue is about Govt making decisions for you, against your will, that can change your whole life or cost you your life.

That's too much power don't you think?

Q

Q

Qtec
10-22-2011, 03:27 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wow, now you are getting into something that is worth discussing albeit a completely different subject matter. Why not move this to its own thread.

eg8r </div></div>

Done.

Q

Gayle in MD
10-24-2011, 02:39 AM
<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: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This is exactly how politics is supposed to work. None of the attacking from fellow candidates, none from opposing candidates. Let a man state his beliefs, state how he will govern and then allow the people to make up their minds.

eg8r </div></div>

I agree but Cain hasn't done that and I'm not the only one who thinks he is pro-choice. Watch the interview. link (http://www.mediaite.com/tv/herman-cain-im-not-pro-choice-im-pro-choice-on-getting-an-illegal-abortion/)


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Herman Cain: I’m Not Pro-Choice, I’m Pro-Choice On Getting An <u>Illegal Abortion</u>

You’ll likely recall that, earlier this week, Herman Cain had an interesting, rather revealing discussion with CNN’s Piers Morgan about, among other issues, his stance on abortion. Cain told Morgan that, even though he is personally against abortion in all circumstances, (and I’m going to quote him directly, now, for comparison purposes), he believes that “I can have an opinion on an issue without it being a directive on the nation. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>The government shouldn’t be trying to tell people everything to do, especially when it comes to a social decision that they need to make.”</span> </div></div>

Well that's pretty clear. Govt should not force a woman to have a baby she doesn't want. Its her choice.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">But now, two days after our post about that interview, Cain is telling Fox News that this is not quite what he meant, and that Morgan had conflated two separate issues into one question. So. <u>Is Herman Cain a pro-choice candidate? Or what?</u> </div></div>

Cain.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Look, let’s go back. See, he was asking me two questions. My position on abortion has been the same — on pro-life — has been the same throughout this campaign. And that is, I am pro-life from conception and I don’t believe in abortion. When he then tried to pigeon-hole me on my granddaughter being there as a victim of rape, then what would I do? The only point I was trying to make: <u>A lot of families will be in that position and they are not going to be thinking, “Well, what does the government want me to do?”</u><span style="color: #990000">That's utter BS.</span> My position is no abortion. My position is no abortion. But all I was trying to point out was take the typical family in this country and you don’t know what they might do in the heat of the moment. </div></div>

WTF is he talking about. The guy doesn't make sense.
"..what does the government want me to do?" ????????????

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 14pt'>When asked directly about whether he believes abortion should be legal in the United States, <u>Cain said that he does not</u></span></div></div>

So, now he is saying <span style='font-size: 14pt'>it isn't the woman's choice</span> and he <span style='font-size: 17pt'>DOES think Govt should be telling her what to do!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!</span>


Santorum hit the nail on the head.[ amazing but true!]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"I don't know too many pro-choice politicians who are for abortion, who want more abortions ... <u>but they say the decision is a choice the government shouldn't be involved in.</u>" </div></div>

You see? You can't be be pro-choice and anti-choice at the same time.
You make the mistake of calling the issue pro-abortion or anti-abortion. Nobody wants abortions, that's why we progressives think contraception is a good idea. The issue is about Govt making decisions for you, against your will, that can change your whole life or cost you your life.

That's too much power don't you think?

Q

Q





</div></div>

He can't get beyond his natural religious misogynistic training.

Women can't be priests.

Can't have control of their own bodies.

And should be paid at the same rate of men, for doing the same job.

Ed is all about denying the personal, private rights of others, and forcing everyone to live as he says....
And if they don't agree with him, then they're all liars, LMAO!
G.

Qtec
10-24-2011, 03:14 AM
I don't know about all that G. I think its more a case of whatever I post he takes the opposite view, even if he knows he is patently wrong.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> [ Women] Can't have control of their own bodies. </div></div>

Like I said, egor sees it as pro-or anti abortion, whereas WE see it as a matter of choice. Does the Govt have control over your body or do you?

The less Govt people like Ed show their hypocrisy every time when they say less Govt interference in people's lives, <span style='font-size: 14pt'>and then want Govt to force women to have babies they don't want.</span>

Q

Gayle in MD
10-24-2011, 03:24 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I don't know about all that G. I think its more a case of whatever I post he takes the opposite view, even if he knows he is patently wrong.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> [ Women] Can't have control of their own bodies. </div></div>

Like I said, egor sees it as pro-or anti abortion, whereas WE see it as a matter of choice. Does the Govt have control over your body or do you?

The less Govt people like Ed show their hypocrisy every time when they say less Govt interference in people's lives, <span style='font-size: 14pt'>and then want Govt to force women to have babies they don't want.</span>

Q

</div></div>

True. And yet, it's always their own hypocritical and conflicted words that they will never address, while they are calling everyone else a hypocrite.


The ultimate, is Repigs approving of spending taxes for Viagra, while at the same time, destroying the rights of women.

I wonder if it ever crosses their minds to ask themselves if God meant for men to have four hour long erections! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

Did God mean for GW Bush to have children? According to the way they think, hell no!

They don't mind using any of the medical strides we have made, as long as no women are advantaged by them.

Eg. is very hypocritical about this, since it is a FACT, that both the birth control pill, AND the IUD, include the possibility of destroying fertilized eggs, and he has used both methods, according to what he writes here.

The right is known for moving their (hypocritical) line around.

G.

Qtec
10-24-2011, 03:46 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The ultimate, is Repigs approving of spending taxes for Viagra, </div></div>

You might be on to something there G. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif <span style='font-size: 17pt'>How many of these Viagra prescriptions have <u>fathered babies that have been aborted</u>???????????</span>

Surely the RW GOP must be against Viagra because it must/could increase the number of abortions!

Q

Soflasnapper
10-24-2011, 09:58 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So?

An individual cant differentiate between what may be correct for ones self and what may be correct for others? </div></div>

The line of tolerance is breached when ones opinion is that abortion is always the murder of a human being.

If that is a sincerely held belief, as it is among the pro-life/anti-abortion crowd, they are not going to allow others to hold a differing opinion in peace. The topic of murder doesn't lend itself to a live-and-let-live allowance of the contrary position, as it appears a live-and-let-murder alternative. Which is a moral abomination to those who believe these things.

eg8r
10-24-2011, 01:23 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The line of tolerance is breached when ones opinion is that abortion is always the murder of a human being.

If that is a sincerely held belief, as it is among the pro-life/anti-abortion crowd, they are not going to allow others to hold a differing opinion in peace. </div></div>You are building and propping up your strawman. We are not talking about what the pro-life/anti-abortion crowd believes. The discussion is based on whether Cain is able to say, for himself, abortion is wrong no matter what, however he does not believe he can tell others what to do.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
10-24-2011, 07:08 PM
You have a point there, I agree.

However, the topic is whether Cain's stated position will satisfy the pro-life movement, as essentially a pro-choice position he claims is totally pro-life.

It will not.

It's nuanced, and many people on many issues do not tolerate nuance. This one, especially.

eg8r
10-24-2011, 07:46 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">However, the topic is whether Cain's stated position will satisfy the pro-life movement, as essentially a pro-choice position he claims is totally pro-life.
</div></div>Actually qtip is completely caught up in the idea that he somehow "caught" Cain in a slip up when that is not the case at all. I agree though, with the position Cain has taken to this point he will not be pleasing the pro-life group very much. This is what I like about politics when it is done without all the partisanship. Let the guy get out there and state honestly what he thinks and then allow the voters to go to the polls and show him what they think. Instead of all the negativity that happens year in and year out.

You would think with this statement Cain would have already done enough damage let alone have some partisan weenies like qtip look for every perceived miscue.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
10-24-2011, 07:58 PM
Cain is catching himself in slip ups.

It's a measure of his inexperience that he shoots his mouth off, only to have to retract, or explain, why what he said wasn't what he meant. When you're explaining that kind of thing, you are losing.

He's done it 5 or 6 times now (cf: his revision of 9-9-9 to 9-0-9 for lower income persons, or his walking back his 'no Moslems need apply' first position on staffing up his future prospective administration), and there is a limit to how much this can go on without severely damaging his brand, in my view.

Manifestly unready, unseasoned, and ill-equipped to do the job of president. Frankly, manifestly unready and ill-equipped to RUN for president (and win the nomination).

Qtec
10-25-2011, 01:20 AM
From my link.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This wasn’t about two separate situations, or about a different standard between your personal beliefs for your family and your belief about whether you think abortion should or should not be legal, and it is wasting people’s time for you to make that excuse. You said something, whether you believed it or not, and people had an issue with it, so now you’re backtracking. If that’s not what you meant to say, do the American public a favor and admit that you misspoke. <u>But don’t try to paint this as you being the victim of some sort of complicated web of abortion and lies deftly woven by Piers Morgan.</u> </div></div> ...or Q!

Q

Qtec
10-25-2011, 01:34 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Cain is catching himself in slip ups.
</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">From the beginning of his race for president, Herman Cain had gone to great lengths to portray himself as an <u>ally of Israel.</u> Then, in an interview, he said he supported negotiations for the <u>"right of return" for Palestinians: "They should have a right to come back if that is a decision that Israel wants to make…. I don't think they have a big problem with people returning."</u>

Cain had unwittingly stepped on a landmine -- one of the most controversial issues in the Middle East conflict. It doesn't matter at all what your views on Israel or the Palestinians are -- here was a candidate who had no clue what he was talking about, not even enough to spout the right talking points for the side he meant to support. </div></div>

Q

Qtec
10-25-2011, 01:52 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You have a point there,</div></div>

I don't think he does. If you watch the video link I posted, Cain says that abortion "<u>should be illegal</u>." This fly s in the face of his 'belief' that it <u>should be the woman's choice</u>.

Q

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The civil rights leader then returned to the subject of Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain, who recently said that he “left the Democrat plantation a long time ago.” Cain has also claimed that African Americans “have been brainwashed into not being open-minded” and that he doesn’t believe “racism in this country today holds anybody back.”

“Laughing about Herman Cain,” he said. “Herman Cain is having a good time though, I’ll tell you that. He’s having a ball. He ain’t helping us much but he’s having a ball. And he’s not helping white folks because he won’t tell white folks what they need to hear. He’s telling them what they want to hear.” </div></div>

Qtec
10-25-2011, 01:53 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Herman Cain said Social Security was racist in 2008 radio ad </div></div> telling them what they want to hear (http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/10/24/herman-cain-said-social-security-was-racist-in-2008-radio-ad/)

Q

Qtec
10-25-2011, 02:13 AM
link (http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/10/25/maddow-herman-cains-campaign-basically-is-the-koch-brothers/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">On her show Monday night, MSNBC host Rachel Maddow noted that Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain is an avid numerologist who is obsessed with the number 45. She also pointed out numerous links between Cain and the conservative billionaire Koch brothers. For instance, before running for president, he worked for the Koch-funded conservative group Americans for Prosperity. </div></div>

She also makes the same point as I do on abortion.
Q

eg8r
10-25-2011, 09:50 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Cain says that abortion "should be illegal." This fly s in the face of his 'belief' that it should be the woman's choice.
</div></div>Talking to you is like talking to a brick wall.

eg8r

Qtec
10-25-2011, 04:38 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Cain says that abortion "should be illegal." This fly s in the face of his 'belief' that it should be the woman's choice.
</div></div>Talking to you is like talking to a brick wall.

eg8r </div></div>

Ditto. Once again you have proved that no amount of logic can penetrate that granite-like skull of yours.

According to you, Herman is pro-choice, ie Govt should keep out of it.,,,,,,but if abortion was made illegal,like he says he's all for, wouldn't that mean Govt dictating to the woman?


You can't be pro-choice and still advocate for the illegalizing of abortion.

Q

Soflasnapper
10-25-2011, 05:06 PM
That's the contradiction in what he has said, true.

It cannot be 'the family's/mother's choice' very much if it has been made illegal, unless he's now saying people ought to be free to disobey laws about murder/abortion without consequence.

BTW, Cain also showed no understanding of the US system when he said if the Congress passes a pro-life amendment to the Constitution and puts it on his desk, he would sign it.

No, he wouldn't sign it, as the POTUS doesn't have the job of signing (or vetoing) amendments to the Constitution.

I think most immigrants who are getting their citizenship would have a better understanding of that one than Cain has exhibited.

Qtec
10-25-2011, 05:30 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> That's the contradiction in what he has said, true.</div></div>

Don't ever expect egor to accept that. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">BTW, Cain also showed no understanding of the US system when he said if the Congress passes a pro-life amendment to the Constitution and puts it on his desk, he would sign it. </div></div>

LOL Yeah, that was a good one.

Herman is smart enough to know he could never be POYUS. This is all about Herman cashing in, getting a job on Fox, selling his book, etc etc etc

Q

eg8r
10-25-2011, 08:42 PM
Do you think the author ever had someone question what they had said and have a need to offer clarification? He did not back track on anything because he has stood firm on the decision that for him abortion is still wrong in every case. He has not wavered that stance at all. His clarification is that he also meant to say that his personal convictions are separate from how he believes the government should govern the people.

eg8r

eg8r
10-25-2011, 08:44 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You can't be pro-choice and still advocate for the illegalizing of abortion.</div></div>Who has the granite skull now moron. He is not advocating the government make it illegal. He was quite clear in stating that is not the roll of government. Common sense really is your weakest point.

eg8r

eg8r
10-25-2011, 08:46 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It cannot be 'the family's/mother's choice' very much if it has been made illegal, unless he's now saying people ought to be free to disobey laws about murder/abortion without consequence.</div></div>How can you disobey a law that is not there? It currently is not illegal and he is saying as President he would not try to make it illegal. You guys are throwing out your strawman arguments now and not even bothering to pay attention to what he is saying anymore.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">BTW, Cain also showed no understanding of the US system when he said if the Congress passes a pro-life amendment to the Constitution and puts it on his desk, he would sign it.

</div></div>In your attempt to nit pick his knowledge of the job of President you fail to recognize the entire point of all of this. If Congress decided to ammend the Constitution he would not go along with it. Whether he stop it or block it in any way is not the issue. He is telling you that it would not be his choice for that to happen. Is your partisanship so deep that you cannot at least accept such a simple observation. Quit looking for a way to attack and just listen to what he is saying. Quit adding your own dialogue and just think for a minute before you speak and try to understand what he is saying.

eg8r

eg8r
10-25-2011, 08:50 PM
You are right. I will not accept the fact that you are lying about what he said and the intent of the words he has said. He offered clarification and what is astounding is that his clarification actually agrees with your preposterous position and you still attack him. He is basically he is on your side with respect to Government intervention into a woman's own personal actions and you attack him for it. Are you really that stupid?

eg8r

Gayle in MD
10-25-2011, 09:19 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Cain is catching himself in slip ups.

It's a measure of his inexperience that he shoots his mouth off, only to have to retract, or explain, why what he said wasn't what he meant. When you're explaining that kind of thing, you are losing.

He's done it 5 or 6 times now (cf: his revision of 9-9-9 to 9-0-9 for lower income persons, or his walking back his 'no Moslems need apply' first position on staffing up his future prospective administration), and there is a limit to how much this can go on without severely damaging his brand, in my view.

Manifestly unready, unseasoned, and ill-equipped to do the job of president. Frankly, manifestly unready and ill-equipped to RUN for president (and win the nomination).

</div></div>

Cain, Romney, Perry, each have a treasure trove of flip-flops, on a whole range of Issues, AND each has proven himself totally ignorant on tghe subject of foreign affairs.

Three completely irrational hypocrites, who spend most of their time, lying.

Now, Perry, is even reigniting the whole birther issue, which is proof of his desperation.

Cain has proven himself to be completely unqualified on evey level, from foreign affairs, to the economy.

Romney, well, let us just say, if whatever he stands for at eight in the morning, could change by six in the evening.

Three clowns.

G.

Sid_Vicious
10-25-2011, 11:23 PM
You really have to wonder how the rest of the intelligent world sees this circus. Seriously...sid

Qtec
10-26-2011, 03:56 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You can't be pro-choice and still advocate for the illegalizing of abortion.</div></div>Who has the granite skull now moron. He is not advocating the government make it illegal.

eg8r </div></div>

Yes he is.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Cain: I’m pro-life from conception, yes.
Stossel: Any cases where it should be legal?
Cain: I don’t think government should make that decision.
Stossel: People should be free to abort a baby?
Cain: I support life from conception. No, people shouldn’t just be free to abort because if we don’t protect the sanctity of life from conception, we will also start to play God relative to life at the end of life.
Stossel: So I’m confused on what your position is.
Cain: My position is I’m pro-life. Period.
Stossel: If a woman is raped, she should not be allowed to end the pregnancy?
Cain: That’s her choice. That is not government’s choice. I support life from conception.
Stossel: <span style='font-size: 14pt'>So abortion should be legal?</span>
<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Cain: No, abortion should not be legal.</span> I believe in the sanctity of life.
Stossel: I’m not getting it. I’m not understanding it. If it’s her choice, that means it’s legal.
Cain: No. I don’t believe a woman should have an abortion. Does that help to clear it up?
Stossel: Even if she is raped?
Cain: Even if she is raped or the victim of incest because there are other options. We must protect the sanctity of life and I have always believed that.</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">At this point, if you have a clear idea of when and under what circumstances Herman Cain believes abortion should be legal, then you are smarter than both me and Herman Cain </div></div>

Q

eg8r
10-26-2011, 07:10 AM
You did my work for me by bolding the important parts...He says very clearly that government should not make abortion illegal. He says that he personally does not feel it should be legal but he recognizes that government should not make it illegal.

What is it about this gap between you and common sense, it is pathetic.

eg8r

Qtec
10-26-2011, 07:38 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Cain: No, <u>abortion should not be legal </u></div></div>

ie, no choice!

Many pro-choice people are actually against abortion, but they think its the woman's decision. For the woman to have that right, abortion has to be legal and available.

To say that abortion should be illegal, therefore banned, he is advocating no choice. ie he is <u>not pro-choice and he does think </u>the Govt should get between a woman her doctor and what she can do with her own body/life.

Herman is playing you.

another herman walkback at 1.30 (http://www.mediaite.com/tv/jon-stewart-pat-robertsons-call-for-gop-to-tone-it-down-is-just-an-election-ploy/)

Watch it all. Its good for you.

Q

Qtec
10-26-2011, 08:10 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Look, abortion should not be legal. That is clear. But <span style='font-size: 14pt'>if that family makes the decision to break the law, that’s that family’s decision. That’s all I’m trying to say. </span></div></div>

Now the GOP Pres candidate is saying that women should break the law to have an abortion...and if they get caught run the risk of going to prison for murder. Some choice.

Q

Qtec
10-26-2011, 08:16 AM
watch the guys face at the 0.50 sec mark (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSGLBAinETc&feature=player_embedded)

Q

Gayle in MD
10-26-2011, 08:47 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sid_Vicious</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You really have to wonder how the rest of the intelligent world sees this circus. Seriously...sid </div></div>

Repiglicans are STILL trying to find an acceptable candidate! They are still contacting every Repig they can think of, to apeal to their Party Loyalty...and only these crazy few are willing to go up against President Obama....lol.

LMAO....just like I and a few others here pedicted, the Repiglicans have painted themselves into a cornor, by refusing rationality.

They allowed the RW radical crazies, largely consisting of the radical religious right, to take over the Party, and now, they realize that "Crazy doesn't win"....hilarious to watch all of their candidates try to lean far enough center to even have a shot at winning, while still accomodating their crazy radical RW religious idiots!....

Some of us saw this coming.... /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

Soflasnapper
10-26-2011, 09:02 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In your attempt to nit pick his knowledge of the job of President you fail to recognize the entire point of all of this. If Congress decided to ammend the Constitution he would not go along with it. Whether he stop it or block it in any way is not the issue. He is telling you that it would not be his choice for that to happen. Is your partisanship so deep that you cannot at least accept such a simple observation.</div></div>

You are complaining that I know how to understand the spoken English language, and that I'm complaining about what he has actually said.

He said, contrary to what you say, that if the Congress passed a Right to Life Constitutional Amendment, he would indeed support that (he said he would sign it, misunderstanding the role of the POTUS in that action). He did not say he 'would not go along with it,' but that he WOULD go along with it (sign it, although there isn't a signature allowed by the POTUS).

This isn't partisanship, and it isn't nit-picking, it's English 101. You are willfully blinding yourself to this man's contradictions. He can't be against abortion personally, but willing to let people make their own judgment about it and do it if they wish, IF he wants it made illegal, and would also support (although he cannot sign or veto) a Pro-Life amendment.

Making (or keeping) it illegal, by statute or by amending the Constitution, takes away any legal right to make that decision (if the decision is to abort). So WHAT is he really saying according to you? Hint: NOT what you've said so far.

eg8r
10-26-2011, 10:03 AM
Wow, you absolutely refuse to embrace just a tiny little bit of common sense. Oh well, you always have been a waste of time.

eg8r

eg8r
10-26-2011, 10:07 AM
The man has very clearly stated it is not the government's role. If you want to read into that more than what is there it is your own fault.This is the part of Enlish 101 that you missed, out sick or skipped I don't know but you did miss that lesson.

Here it is again, my goodness qtip even bolded it and still did not comprehend it. <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No, it comes down to is, it’s not the government’s role — or anybody else’s role — to make that decision. Secondly, if you look at the statistical incidents, you’re not talking about that big a number. So what I’m saying is, it ultimately gets down to a choice that that family or that mother has to make. Not me as president. Not some politician. Not a bureaucrat. It gets down to that family. And whatever they decide, they decide. I shouldn’t try to tell them what decision to make for such a sensitive decision.
</div></div>

eg8r

Soflasnapper
10-26-2011, 02:00 PM
If it's not the government's role to interfere, there should not be a law against it. If there is a law against it (and there are such laws), then nobody has a free choice, and the government IS interfering.

Which does Cain support? Both, evidently.

Despite being fairly clear that the choice should be made at a family level without government interference, Cain not only supports such laws, but would support an amendment to the Constitution, that would make such things against the Constitution itself.

He's on both sides of the issue. QED. Isn't that right?

Gayle in MD
10-27-2011, 08:49 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The man has very clearly stated it is not the government's role. If you want to read into that more than what is there it is your own fault.This is the part of Enlish 101 that you missed, out sick or skipped I don't know but you did miss that lesson.

<span style="color: #990000">Another of your usual failed attempts to cover up your own ignorance...IOW, a total Crock of BULL. </span>

Here it is again, my goodness qtip even bolded it and still did not comprehend it. <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No, it comes down to is, it’s not the government’s role — or anybody else’s role — to make that decision. Secondly, if you look at the statistical incidents, you’re not talking about that big a number. So what I’m saying is, it ultimately gets down to a choice that that family or that mother has to make. Not me as president. Not some politician. Not a bureaucrat. It gets down to that family. And whatever they decide, they decide. I shouldn’t try to tell them what decision to make for such a sensitive decision.
</div></div>

eg8r </div></div>



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This is the part of Enlish 101 </div></div>

<span style="color: #990000">LMAO! If I had the time I could bring up some of your attack posts where you were bashing others, myself, for one, for their misspellings, while in the act of accusing others of ignorance.

Again, Eg. has one standard for all others, and quite another for himeslf, even when he's aborting fetuses.

Of course, you'd only spin it as far from reality as you could.

Cain proved he doesn't even understand how government works, and you are trying to cover up that fact, by again, distracting from the point, and lying about what is easily readable, and clear.

He's an ignorant, hypocritical, money mongering LIAR, another Palin style, JOKE!</span>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you want to read into that more than what is there it is your own fault.This is the part of Enlish 101 that you missed, out sick or skipped I don't know but you did miss that lesson.

</div></div>

<span style="color: #990000">That does not describe Sofla, nor Q.

Want to guess who does fit the description?

Nah, didn't think so. </span>

eg8r
10-27-2011, 10:24 AM
In plain english the guy said it is not the Governments role to make abortion illegal. What is it about comprehension and common sense that you lack?

I am really surprised at the gross stupidity of your posts lately. You have migrated from a passionate member, to a ranting member, to now nothing more than a troll looking to stir up crap. If you have nothing of value to add then please take your own advice and shut up.

eg8r

eg8r
10-27-2011, 10:34 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If it's not the government's role to interfere, there should not be a law against it. If there is a law against it (and there are such laws), then nobody has a free choice, and the government IS interfering. </div></div>The only laws against are the ones when the mother is too far along in the cycle. There are laws against you murdering your neighbor so the government is interfering there and equally right they are interfering in the mother's option to murder her child. I agree that Cain is in support of both, allowing abortion up to a certain point as allowed by law, and not allowing abortion after that point as stated in the law. Are you against both? Should the mother be allowed to abort her baby at 7 months? 8 months? 9 months?

He is on both sides of the issue and that is exactly what he said in the beginning. As an individual he says he is against it 100%. However looking at it from Government perspective while still against it he does not believe they can make it illegal.

Also he is not lobbying for abortion to become illegal but if a miracle happened and this Congress actually did ammend the Constitution, as you have already stated, he wouldn't get a voice anyways. So yes, as an individual he would be please and support it, knowing full well Congress was overstepping their boundaries.

You guys are just looking for something to attack and the funny thing is that this man might not even have to face down Obama. Why don't you save your lies and twisting of the truth about him until it actually counts. I mean seriously, with the poor performance of our current President it would make a lot more sense for you guys to root on the weaker Rep candidate than try to shoot down every perceived mis-step along the way.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
10-27-2011, 04:18 PM
LOL!

It's REPUBLICANS who are attacking Cain, and on this exact issue.

Karl Rove, sure a vicious scumbag but a talented political operative (unfortunately for the country, but that's a different story), has called out Cain as muddling up, screwing up, putting his foot in his mouth and having to retract, er... explain that what he said wasn't what he meant, on a half dozen or more issues.

As Rove has said, rookies at this get some deserved mulligans, but Cain has gotten more than most are allowed, and is quickly running out of future mulligans. He's got to get it closer to right to be credible, and meantime his Potemkin Village campaign is peaking WAY too early, without any visible structure or support in most of the early primary states.

Hooked your wagon to the wrong horse here, it seems.

I'm sorry your taste in candidates is faulty, but really, just admit the guy is in trouble for good reasons, and hope he'll do better, rather than attack the messengers who report all his manifest campaign troubles accurately.

The primary voters who will determine his eventual fate as a nominee hopeful are NOT listening to liberal criticisms. But they will hear an earful of CONSERVATIVE and GOP criticisms.

eg8r
10-27-2011, 09:13 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It's REPUBLICANS who are attacking Cain, and on this exact issue.</div></div>I am referring to those here on the board.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm sorry your taste in candidates is faulty,</div></div>Why would you make such a statement? Have I said I was voting for him, or he was my man? If you remember correctly I said Perry would be my choice out of those currently running but there is still a long time to go. Don't start acting like the nutty lefties on this board. Just because I defend an action against your ill-attacks doesn't mean I am voting for the guy.

eg8r

Qtec
10-28-2011, 12:37 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 17pt'>If it's not the government's role to interfere, there should not be a law against it. If there is a law against it (and there are such laws), then nobody has a free choice, and the government IS interfering.</span>

</div></div>The only laws against are the ones when the mother is too far along in the cycle. There are laws against you murdering your neighbor so the government is interfering there and equally right they are interfering in the mother's option to murder her child. I agree that Cain is in support of both, allowing abortion up to a certain point as allowed by law, and not allowing abortion after that point as stated in the law. Are you against both? Should the mother be allowed to abort her baby at 7 months? 8 months? 9 months?

He is on both sides of the issue and that is exactly what he said in the beginning. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>As an individual he says he is against it 100%. However looking at it from Government perspective while still against it he does not believe they can make it illegal.

Also he is not lobbying for abortion to become illegal</span>
eg8r </div></div>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">On Thursday, Cain tweeted that he was "100% pro-life." He also issued a statement in which he said that he was trying to convey that as president, he had "no constitutional authority" to order someone not to seek an abortion. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>Cain went on to say that the would oppose government funding for abortion procedures, veto legislation that contains funds for Planned Parenthood and <u>appoint judges who felt the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision was unconstitutional. But Cain did not explicitly say that he thought abortion should be illegal.</u></span>

<u>He was pressed on this point</u> Friday by Martha MacCallum on Fox, <span style='font-size: 14pt'>at which point he said that abortion should be illegal,</span> and that a woman impregnated during rape <u>would be breaking the law</u> if she sought an abortion under his ideal set of laws.

"<span style='font-size: 17pt'>It would be an illegal abortion. Look, abortion should not be legal — that is clear</span> — but if that family made a decision to break the law, that's their decision," Cain said. </div></div>


Again,

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Cain went on to say that the would <span style='font-size: 14pt'>oppose government funding for abortion procedures, veto legislation that contains funds for Planned Parenthood and <u>appoint judges who felt the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision was unconstitutional.</u></span> </div></div>

Look, you made a good post and I understand where you are coming from, but Cain is playing games here.
You are right, he does seem to hold both positions but that's impossible.

If Cain is pro-choice, why would he want to overturn Roe vs Wade?..and therefore make abortion illegal? eg, taking away the woman's choice.
Also, making it as difficult as possible to get an abortion is hardly in line with a pro-choice stance.

Q

eg8r
10-28-2011, 08:42 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If Cain is pro-choice, why would he want to overturn Roe vs Wade?..and therefore make abortion illegal? eg, taking away the woman's choice.
</div></div>I don't see where he is advocating to overturn Roe vs Wade though. What I did see was if Congress tried then he would not get in their way (allowing his personal convictions to take over) but I did not see him advocate to overturn it.

Judges, on their own do not change law. They can decide if it is unconstitutional but that has to go to the Supreme Court. With all the work on the SC's desk something like this would not get to see the light of day any time soon and many things can change during that time.

eg8r

Qtec
10-29-2011, 07:19 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I don't see where he is advocating <u>to overturn Roe vs Wade though.</u> </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Cain went on to say that the would oppose government funding for abortion procedures, veto legislation that contains funds for Planned Parenthood<span style='font-size: 17pt'> <u>and appoint judges who felt the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision was unconstitutional.</u></span></div></div>

So he does.



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> But Cain did not explicitly say that he thought abortion should be illegal. </div></div>


...and then he did!


Q

eg8r
10-29-2011, 07:59 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So he does.</div></div>He is not advocating it. What he is saying is that he will appoint judgest who think the way he does but he is not saying that he will be picking judges and then requesting they vote to overturn Roe vs. Wade. In the thread about regulations you had a comment in which you are making fun of me for talking about what Obama is going to do yet here you are doing the same thing. The difference is that Obama's increased regulation legislation is on the books to be enacted and in this instance Cain has not done a thing yet. Quit the hypocrite bit, it gets old.

eg8r

Qtec
10-30-2011, 04:46 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">He is not advocating it. What he is saying is that he will appoint judges who think the way he does but he is not saying that he will be picking judges <u>and then requesting</u> they vote to overturn Roe vs. Wade. </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> and then requesting</div></div>

That's a ridiculous argument. This is what you are saying,

Herman believes that life begins at the moment of conception.
He is against abortion under any circumstances.
He believes abortion should be illegal and as POTUS he will defund PP and appoint judges to the SC who would overturn Roe v Wade...but he is pro-choice!

Just admit you are wrong on this and we can move on.

BTW, seems Herman has done another U-turn.

Q

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">(CNN) -- The campaign of Herman Cain again worked to clarify his stance on abortion Thursday night after the GOP presidential candidate raised new questions at a Texas campaign stop when he said he was "pro-life, no exceptions."

The "no exceptions" phrase seemed to contradict statements Cain recently made, suggesting abortion rights should be a family's decision when it came to cases of rape, incest or when the life of the mother was in danger.

The campaign attempted to spell out his views Thursday in a statement obtained by CNN, but did not address any exceptions.

"I am pro-life, and believe in advancing the culture of life. My record as a pro-life candidate speaks for itself," Cain said in a statement. "Anyone who says differently is simply not telling the truth. Next question."

When pressed by CNN on his position, however, <span style='font-size: 14pt'>a campaign adviser said Cain follows the same policy used by the George W. Bush administration, which said abortions should be allowed in the instances of rape, incest and when the life of the mother is at stake.</span>

"He has learned more about the issue," including the number of women affected in those instances, the adviser told CNN, explaining Cain,s view. </div></div>

Gayle in MD
10-30-2011, 05:54 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In plain english the guy said it is not the Governments role to make abortion illegal. What is it about comprehension and common sense that you lack?

I am really surprised at the gross stupidity of your posts lately. You have migrated from a passionate member, to a ranting member, to now nothing more than a troll looking to stir up crap. If you have nothing of value to add then please take your own advice and shut up.

eg8r </div></div>

Pretty funny, given that this is yet another thread where you prove that your mission is to pick apart, twist, and if necessary, reverse the spoken words of a Repiglican, yet again, in your relentless effort to deny their own gross ignorance and double speak.

As Q., and Sofla, have TRIED to get through your partisan head, Cain is a walking, talking contradiction. The fact that you refuse to acknowledge that very simple, obvious FACT, doesn't change it.

The fact that Repiglicans across this country are practicing obstructionism against the Constitutional rights of a woman to even access birth control, cannot be denied.

The fact that you have called me a murderer, because I support a woman's right to control her own life, her own body, and her own choices in life, yet you have used birth control that absolutely does abort fertilized fetuses, while at the same time claiming that a fetus is a person at the moment of conception, is also proof of your own hypocrisy.

As usual, you insult and trash others because you can't accept your own faulty thinking, proven hypocrisy, and lack of critical thinking skills.

Nothing new there....

G....

Qtec
10-30-2011, 06:05 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Cain is a walking, talking contradiction. </div></div>

LOL. Spot on G.



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As usual, you insult and trash others because you can't accept your own faulty thinking, proven hypocrisy, and lack of critical thinking skills.

Nothing new there....

G.... </div></div>

Spot on again. you're on a roll! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif


Q /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/cool.gif

Gayle in MD
10-30-2011, 12:31 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Cain says that abortion "should be illegal." This fly s in the face of his 'belief' that it should be the woman's choice.
</div></div>Talking to you is like talking to a brick wall.

eg8r </div></div>



quotes from genius eg8r:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why don't you ask sofla to explain <span style='font-size: 11pt'>this to you this you </span>are having a language barrier.

<span style="color: #990000"> <span style='font-size: 11pt'>LMAO! </span> </span>

<span style='font-size: 11pt'>You are prove you are </span>the village idiot over and over.

<span style="color: #990000"> <span style='font-size: 11pt'> BWA HA HA HA HA HA....and you're so concise, and educated....LOL, can't write a correct sentence, while you're being your usual condescending self, toward others....like Q, who you couldn't match up with intellectually on your best day! </span> </span>

</div></div>


<span style="color: #990000"> <span style='font-size: 11pt'>Here is the bottom line. As Cain's own former advisor stated, give him enough time, and he'll end up arguing with himself and disproving his own position.

Now, he's saying (On Face The Nation today...) he is Pro Life, that life begins at conception, and he's also against abortion even in the case of rape, incest, or even to save the life of the mother.

IOW, he is an evil dictator, male misogynist pig, just like you are.

So Eg., if your wife's life was in danger, and she was three months pregnant, and couldn't be saved unless they aborted the fetus, I suppose you would prefer to see your other two children live their lives out with no mother, and lose your wife, just let her die, and all to save a three month un born fetus?

Can't wait to here this one! Bet he doesn't even answer it.

Oh, and try to use a rational form of the language, will ya? I know it's hard for you, but give it a shot!

G.</span> </span> /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

Sid_Vicious
10-30-2011, 05:05 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In plain english the guy said it is not the Governments role to make abortion illegal. What is it about comprehension and common sense that you lack?

I am really surprised at the gross stupidity of your posts lately. You have migrated from a passionate member, to a ranting member, to now nothing more than a troll looking to stir up crap. If you have nothing of value to add then please take your own advice and shut up.

eg8r </div></div>

Pretty funny, given that this is yet another thread where you prove that your mission is to pick apart, twist, and if necessary, reverse the spoken words of a Repiglican, yet again, in your relentless effort to deny their own gross ignorance and double speak.

As Q., and Sofla, have TRIED to get through your partisan head, Cain is a walking, talking contradiction. The fact that you refuse to acknowledge that very simple, obvious FACT, doesn't change it.

The fact that Repiglicans across this country are practicing obstructionism against the Constitutional rights of a woman to even access birth control, cannot be denied.

The fact that you have called me a murderer, because I support a woman's right to control her own life, her own body, and her own choices in life, yet you have used birth control that absolutely does abort fertilized fetuses, while at the same time claiming that a fetus is a person at the moment of conception, is also proof of your own hypocrisy.

As usual, you insult and trash others because you can't accept your own faulty thinking, proven hypocrisy, and lack of critical thinking skills.

Nothing new there....

G.... </div></div>

"yet you have used birth control that absolutely does abort fertilized fetuses, while at the same time claiming that a fetus is a person at the moment of conception, is also proof of your own hypocrisy."

Would you like to 'splain this Ed? sid

eg8r
10-30-2011, 08:55 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As Q., and Sofla, have TRIED to get through your partisan head, Cain is a walking, talking contradiction. </div></div>Actually he is not. And the quotes here have already proven that. Again, comprehension and common sense are your weakness.

eg8r

Qtec
10-31-2011, 01:50 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As Q., and Sofla, have TRIED to get through your partisan head, <u>Cain is a walking, talking contradiction. </u></div></div><span style='font-size: 14pt'>Actually he is not. </span> And the quotes here have already proven that. Again, comprehension and common sense are your weakness.

eg8r </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Cain: <span style='font-size: 14pt'>I'm "pro-life from conception, period</span>"- and that he does not support exceptions even for victims of rape and incest. </div></div>



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The Personhood Amendment: <span style='font-size: 14pt'>Rights for eggs but not for women</span>


The famous Monty Python song Every Sperm is Sacred is about to become a sad reality in Mississippi. Amendment 26, also known as the Personhood Amendment, is simple on its face:

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>The term 'person' or 'persons' shall include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning or the functional equivalent thereof.</span>

That means a fertilized egg, like the one pictured to the right, would be recognized as a person under this new law, supposedly with all the same rights and protections as the woman who carries it.

The sponsors of this amendment, which will appear on the Nov. 8 ballot this year, and which is expected to pass, <u>are not shy about stating their reasoning for such an amendment:</u> <span style='font-size: 14pt'><u>the amendment sets up a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade in the hopes of seeing it overturned.</u> If a fertilized egg is legally recognized as a person, the thinking goes, then the destruction of a fertilized egg—whether through abortion or even use of certain types of contraception like the IUD and the morning-after pill, which prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in a woman's uterus—<span style='font-size: 14pt'>could be recognized as murder, and therefore prosecuted as such.</span></span> </div></div>

If you think murder is wrong, you can't be for it.

Q link (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/10/30/1031302/-The-Personhood-Amendment:-Rights-for-eggs-but-not-for-women?via=blog_1)


BTW,

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Other ethicists, lawyers and medical professionals are also at a loss for how to make sense of<u> what fertility specialist Dr. Randall S. Hines describes as "biological ignorance": </u>

<span style="color: #660000">Most fertilized eggs, he said, do not implant in the uterus or develop further.

“Once you recognize that the majority of fertilized eggs don’t become people, then you recognize how absurd this amendment is,” Dr. Hines said.</span> </div></div>

Qtec
10-31-2011, 02:02 AM
snake oil salesman (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-3460_162-20127613/cain-im-pro-life-from-conception-period/)



Q

Gayle in MD
10-31-2011, 04:55 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">However, the topic is whether Cain's stated position will satisfy the pro-life movement, as essentially a pro-choice position he claims is totally pro-life.
</div></div>Actually qtip is completely caught up in the idea that he somehow "caught" Cain in a slip up when that is not the case at all. I agree though, with the position Cain has taken to this point he will not be pleasing the pro-life group very much. This is what I like about politics when it is done without all the partisanship. Let the guy get out there and state honestly what he thinks and then allow the voters to go to the polls and show him what they think. Instead of all the negativity that happens year in and year out.

You would think with this statement Cain would have already done enough damage let alone have some partisan weenies like qtip look for every perceived miscue.

eg8r </div></div>



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">However, the topic is whether Cain's stated position will satisfy the pro-life movement, as essentially a pro-choice position he claims is totally pro-life.

It will not.

It's nuanced, and many people on many issues do not tolerate nuance. This one, especially. </div></div>




<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
You would think with this statement Cain would have already done enough damage let alone have some partisan weenies like qtip look for every perceived miscue.

</div></div>


LMAO, you criticise Q., while admitting Q is right, Cain has damaged his own credibility. So you think it's OK for you to say it, but if Q says it, you start up with your childish names....

This is why you lose every argument, because your penchant for attacking and degrading others, is never relevant to the points of the discussion...just pure childishness, and nit picking.


/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

Gayle in MD
10-31-2011, 05:00 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> snake oil salesman (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-3460_162-20127613/cain-im-pro-life-from-conception-period/)



Q </div></div>

Yep, and everything he says ends up being total lies or gross contradictions, as your link in this post, proves.....

He's done, anyway. The rest of this campaign will be nothing but Romney, and his own record breaking lies and filp-flops, LMAO!

G.

eg8r
10-31-2011, 11:41 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you think murder is wrong, you can't be for it. </div></div>Cain is not contradicting himself at all and your quotes have proved this is true. He does believe abortion is wrong but he does not believe it is the government's place to tell the mother what to do. You guys can go back and forth on this all you want but your lies about Cain are wasted.

eg8r

Qtec
10-31-2011, 06:28 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you think murder is wrong, you can't be for it. </div></div>Cain is not contradicting himself at all and your quotes have proved this is true. He does believe abortion is wrong <span style='font-size: 14pt'>but he does not believe it is the government's place to tell the mother what to do. </span> You guys can go back and forth on this all you want but your lies about Cain are wasted.

eg8r </div></div>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> After an <u>exhausting number of flip-flops on the issue</u>, GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain once again <u>changed his position on a woman’s right to choose</u>. Asked at the National Press Club under what circumstances abortions should be allowed, Cain reiterated, “I am pro-life, from conception. End of story.” This is what he’s held all along. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>However, when asked whether he’d back legislation that bans abortions without exceptions, he said, <span style="color: #990000">“Yes I would</span>.” </span></div></div>

Can you explain how, <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">backing legislation that bans abortions without exceptions, </div></div>
..is pro-choice?

Q

Gayle in MD
10-31-2011, 11:56 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As Q., and Sofla, have TRIED to get through your partisan head, Cain is a walking, talking contradiction. </div></div>Actually he is not. And the quotes here have already proven that. Again, comprehension and common sense are your weakness.

eg8r </div></div>

Actually, you describe yourself, because clearly, you are the one with comprehension problems, and without common sense.

Piers Morgan, in last night's program, stated that:

"Candidate Cain has had some striking things to say about this show. I interviewed him about a week and a half ago in Las Vegas, and when his comments about abortion made headlines, Mr. Cain accused this show of taking his remarks out of context.

Well, that didn't happen, and to prove it, I want to replay what Herman Cain said in that interview about abortion."

Then, the clip was played:


Morgan: "What's your view of abortion?"

Cain: "I believe that life begins at conception, and abortion under no circumstances, and here's why..."

Morgan: "No circumstances?"

Cain: "NO cricumstances!"

Morgan: "Because many of your fellow candidates, certain... some of them,..."
Cain: "Yes"
Morgan: "Qualify that."
Cain: "They qualify, but..."
Morgan: "Rape and incest, and so on..."
Cain: "Rape and incest, but..."
Morgan: "Yeah you want a... see...(garbeled) get it....a tricky question, I know...."
Cain: "Ask the tricky question."
Morgan: "You've had children, grand children...if one of your female children, grand children was raped, you would honestly want her to bring up that baby as her own?"
Cain: "You're mixing two things here Pierce."
Morgan: "Why?"
Cain: "You're mixing two things."
Morgan: "Well that's what it comes down to."
Cain: "No, it comes down to it's not the government's role, or anybody's else's role to make that decision. Secondly, if you look at the statistical incidents, you're not talking about that big a number, so what I'm saying is it ultimately gets down to a choice that that family or that mother has to make, not me as president, not some politician, not a bureaucrat, it gets down to that family, and whatever they decide, they decide, I shouldn't try to tell them what decision to make...."



<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Morgan: "So there you have it, Herman Cain, in his own words, Pro life, AND Pro Choice....

And Mr. Cain, you're welcome to come back on this show, anytime, to address this rather confusing issue, or an other issue for that matter, just don't say that we have edited you unfairly, when we haven't."</span>

So there you have it, Eg., <span style='font-size: 14pt'>Pro life, AND pro Choice,</span> according to Q, myself, and the interviewer, Piers Morgan, along with a slew of other journalists ho have made fun of Cain for saying he was both pro life AND pro choice....so just don't say that we are weak in comprehension, and common sense, when clearly, YOU are the one with those weaknesses....

G.

Qtec
11-01-2011, 01:48 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Pro life, AND pro Choice, </div></div>

Well, that's what he seems to be saying but I don't believe it. He is definitely NOT pro-choice because "when asked whether he’d back legislation that bans abortions without exceptions, he said, “Yes I would.”
That's not a pro-choice stance. That's Govt telling pregnant women what they can and can't do.

Q

Gayle in MD
11-01-2011, 07:24 AM
<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">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Pro life, AND pro Choice, </div></div>

Well, that's what he seems to be saying but I don't believe it. He is definitely NOT pro-choice because "when asked whether he’d back legislation that bans abortions without exceptions, he said, “Yes I would.”
That's not a pro-choice stance. That's Govt telling pregnant women what they can and can't do.

Q </div></div>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That's Govt telling pregnant women what they can and can't do.

</div></div>

Yes, and even if they die in the process, or their emotional lives will be devastated for the rest of their lives. How much more misogynistic can they get!!!

A thimble full of dividing cells, is more worthy of saving, than the life of an existing woman! Wife! Mother!

Barbarians at the gate! The similarities between the Taliban, and Repiglicans, is astounding!

The religious right in this country, do not know their proper place.

The "Small, non interfering Federal Government" the Repiglican Party says they want to keep our of "OUR" lives, and their wannabe dictators, supporters, provide us a living example of colossal hypocrisy.

G.

Qtec
11-01-2011, 07:33 AM
They are quite willing to force black women to have more babies and then chastise them for it. Also they are quite willing to execute same babies when it suits them.

Q

Gayle in MD
11-01-2011, 04:26 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">However, the topic is whether Cain's stated position will satisfy the pro-life movement, as essentially a pro-choice position he claims is totally pro-life.
</div></div>Actually qtip is completely caught up in the idea that he somehow "caught" Cain in a slip up when that is not the case at all. I agree though, with the position Cain has taken to this point he will not be pleasing the pro-life group very much. This is what I like about politics when it is done without all the partisanship. Let the guy get out there and state honestly what he thinks and then allow the voters to go to the polls and show him what they think. Instead of all the negativity that happens year in and year out.

You would think with this statement Cain would have already done enough damage let alone have some partisan weenies like qtip look for every perceived miscue.

eg8r </div></div>

It's such a shame, isn't it. So hard for you to grasp the fact that you don't get to dictate what we wish to write, and what we do write.

Cain wants it both ways, just like you.

You want to call women like myself, who defend women's rights, murderers, while in fact, you use birth control that does abort fertilized fetuses.

You really should be working for the double-talking, hypocritical GOP, Eg.

It comes so naturally to you.

G.

Gayle in MD
11-01-2011, 04:31 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They are quite willing to force black women to have more babies and then chastise them for it. Also they are quite willing to execute same babies when it suits them.

Q </div></div>

The have no honor. None!

After all of their irrational, uncchecked spending, they have the colossal nerve to be bashing President Obama, for his efforts to get this country back on her feet, after the disastrous results of Bush, and the blank check spendoholic Repiglicans.

It's really disgusting.

My post today about the Repiglican Porkers, includes their own letters where they prove they have no problem spending like they've always done, like pigs, while at the same time, they're out there bashing any spending that President Obama wants, they're fighing over who is going to get the most of it.

I can't stand the SOB's.

G.

Gayle in MD
11-01-2011, 04:40 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">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Pro life, AND pro Choice, </div></div>

Well, that's what he seems to be saying but I don't believe it. He is definitely NOT pro-choice because "when asked whether he’d back legislation that bans abortions without exceptions, he said, “Yes I would.”
That's not a pro-choice stance. That's Govt telling pregnant women what they can and can't do.

Q </div></div>

You're right, that's not a pro-life stance either, which means that Hermann Cain, doesn't STAND for a damn thing. He's just a double talking RW moron, IOW another Romney!

Another Backmann!

Another Palin!

Another Newt, Boehner, McConnell, Cantor, Paul...father and son, Christie, shake them all up in a bag, and dump it, and a double talking spendoholic, lying moron, with an on the dole history, and plendy of skeletons in their closets, comes out, no matter which one is closest to the edge. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

G.

eg8r
11-03-2011, 01:55 PM
Over and over you will argue till you give up claiming someone is always wrong and you will never read their posts again. I really just wish you would make up your mind.

This has been discussed ad nauseum in this thread and you are basically the only one without a clue.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
11-03-2011, 02:46 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Actually, you describe yourself, because clearly, you are the one with comprehension problems, and without common sense.

Piers Morgan, in last night's program, stated that:

"Candidate Cain has had some striking things to say about this show. I interviewed him about a week and a half ago in Las Vegas, and when his comments about abortion made headlines, Mr. Cain accused this show of taking his remarks out of context.

Well, that didn't happen, and to prove it, I want to replay what Herman Cain said in that interview about abortion."

Then, the clip was played:


Morgan: "What's your view of abortion?"

Cain: "I believe that life begins at conception, and abortion under no circumstances, and here's why..."

Morgan: "No circumstances?"

Cain: "NO cricumstances!"

Morgan: "Because many of your fellow candidates, certain... some of them,..."
Cain: "Yes"
Morgan: "Qualify that."
Cain: "They qualify, but..."
Morgan: "Rape and incest, and so on..."
Cain: "Rape and incest, but..."
Morgan: "Yeah you want a... see...(garbeled) get it....a tricky question, I know...."
Cain: "Ask the tricky question."
Morgan: "You've had children, grand children...if one of your female children, grand children was raped, you would honestly want her to bring up that baby as her own?"
Cain: "You're mixing two things here Pierce."
Morgan: "Why?"
Cain: "You're mixing two things."
Morgan: "Well that's what it comes down to."
Cain: "No, it comes down to it's not the government's role, or anybody's else's role to make that decision. Secondly, if you look at the statistical incidents, you're not talking about that big a number, so what I'm saying is it ultimately gets down to a choice that that family or that mother has to make, not me as president, not some politician, not a bureaucrat, it gets down to that family, and whatever they decide, they decide, I shouldn't try to tell them what decision to make...."



Morgan: <span style='font-size: 11pt'>"So there you have it, Herman Cain, in his own words, Pro life, AND Pro Choice....</span>
</div></div>

As usual, you're wrong.

eg8r
11-03-2011, 08:46 PM
As usual you choose to ignore reality.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
11-04-2011, 10:24 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As Q., and Sofla, have TRIED to get through your partisan head, Cain is a walking, talking contradiction. </div></div>Actually he is not. And the quotes here have already proven that. Again, comprehension and common sense are your weakness.

eg8r </div></div>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So Eg., if your wife's life was in danger, and she was three months pregnant, and couldn't be saved unless they aborted the fetus, I suppose you would prefer to see your other two children live their lives out with no mother, and lose your wife, just let her die, and all to save a three month un born fetus?

Can't wait to here this one! Bet he doesn't even answer it.

Oh, and try to use a rational form of the language, will ya? I know it's hard for you, but give it a shot!

G </div></div>

Still waiting....

Gayle in MD
11-04-2011, 10:31 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Over and over you will argue till you give up claiming someone is always wrong and you will never read their posts again. I really just wish you would make up your mind.

This has been discussed ad nauseum in this thread and you <span style="color: #990000"> <span style='font-size: 14pt'>STILL DON'T GET IT! </span> </span>

eg8r </div></div>



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So Eg., if your wife's life was in danger, and she was three months pregnant, and couldn't be saved unless they aborted the fetus, I suppose you would prefer to see your other two children live their lives out with no mother, and lose your wife, just let her die, and all to save a three month un born fetus?

Can't wait to here this one! Bet he doesn't even answer it.

Oh, and try to use a rational form of the language, will ya? I know it's hard for you, but give it a shot!

G </div></div>

<span style="color: #990000"> <span style='font-size: 11pt'>STILL WAITING!

g. </span> </span>

eg8r
11-04-2011, 02:50 PM
Why should I answer a question that has nothing to do with the subject? LOL, remember when you were making fun of the fat kid and you got pissy because I made that post about you instead of joining in your laughter about the fat kid? Now you hypocritically do the same thing here. We are talking about Cain and you try and make this post about me.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
11-04-2011, 03:26 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why should I answer a question that has nothing to do with the subject? LOL, remember when you were making fun of the fat kid and you got pissy because I made that post about you instead of joining in your laughter about the fat kid? Now you hypocritically do the same thing here. We are talking about Cain and you try and make this post about me.

eg8r </div></div>

Gee, I'm really sorry for you Ed, truly.

With all the effort and determination that you have put into losing weight, you're still the fat kid.

That makes me sad.

G.