Moreluck is right. You have no credibility.
That settles it then. MORELUCK is the final decision maker on credibility.
Peace.
Moreluck is right. You have no credibility.
Moreluck is right. You have no credibility.
I wouldn't say she is the final decision maker, but when it comes to you she hit the nail on the head.
Why Cain Can’t
Posted by Christopher Manion on October 17, 2011 01:57 PM
Our family met Herman Cain several years ago, and I subsequently had several business contacts with him. I’d love to have him as a neighbor — he’s genuine, a family man (he even played with our baby daughter), and a great motivational speaker. However, politically, as Howard Baker used to say, “deep down, he’s shallow.”
Surprisingly, Herman admits it — witness his promise to rely on “the experts,” since he knows nothing about foreign policy. But that candor, combined with his admission that he’s “not familiar with the neoconservative movement,” disqualifies him. He not only knows nothing about foreign policy, but he's not prepared to confront the perverse ideology that has informed it for the past ten years.
Herman tells debate audiences that he knows how to identify the problem and solve it. Well, the one problem our company had with his organization was easily identified, but he wouldn’t solve it: He was unwilling to overrule one of his incompetent subordinates. He apologized to me for it, which is more than I can say for most politicians — perhaps that's why Herman insists that he is not a politician. And I repeat that he is indeed a gentleman.
Herman’s disappointing reliance on “experts” reminds me of the startling testimony of a witness we had at a senate hearing some thirty years ago. He told the shocked panel something along these lines: “Never trust the experts, senators. They will always advocate more funding of their area of expertise. Without that funding, they will have to find work elsewhere. Without that funding, many of them would probably wind up having to drive a truck.” (Of course the panel ignored him).
So: Herman Cain — a great guy and a good neighbor. But when confronted with the Leviathan’s “experts,” he’ll flinch. And eventually, as they say in the pizza business, they’ll eat him for lunch.
Sucks to have opposing views on this board without you running them off, eh?
Peace.
I don't mind opposing viewpoints. I mind those who cannot defend their side without posting outright lies in order to do so.
An electrified fence on the US-Mexico border? The border is estimated at about 1933 miles long so for starters, could Mr. Cain tell us how much this wall would cost within his economic plan? Is this his own "shovel ready" project? How does he plan to pay for it? And where will the electricity come from and how much will that cost? How many new federal jobs will be required to make this all happen?
No wonder his 999 plan has to be revenue neutral because it appears to me he's going to spend as much money as the last gang of thieves so again, so much for change!
Funny how some Americans cheered when Reagan told Gorbachev to "tear down this wall" implying the notorious iron wall that is used to keep people in should go and now they cheer for the construction of their own wall that is more than capable of doing the same thing.
If you think the so-called iron curtain was to only keep people in, you should read more. Our own wall can and will work just as easily in the same way. Funny how we become more Stalinesque led by the Pied Pipers of the republican and democrat party and the booboisie dance down the "Road to Serfdom".
Wave that flag and sing about "Land of the free and home of the brave"!
I never took the moat with alligators seriously either.
What I have a hard time understanding is why anyone would take that statement by Cain serious. When I heard that I took it as a tongue in cheek response. I bet there are many anti-illegal immigration people that have had the same thought from time to time, but never seriously advocated the actual installation of an electric fence.
A border fence between USA and Mexico wouldn't compare to the "iron curtain", as you said that fence was to keep people hostage, the fence here would be to keep people out. Our citizens would still be allowed to come and go as they do now.
First off, how can you at this moment guarantee in the future that the powers that be would let us "come and go as we do now?" BTW, it's not a come and go either. If I erect a fence and have limited gates through that fence, it's not much to begin to control who and when people go through that gate. Even now some people wrongly placed on a "no fly" list can't leave because that same name is given to border authorities so in effect, you already have the framework and it's just a matter of expanding the people covered. And let's not forget that the President at his discretion can place any of us on a "shoot to kill" list and there's not a damn thing we can do about it.
So his comments were tongue and cheek? OK, that's possible but then I question his seriousness on the subject to begin with to just joke about it. Baba pointed out a fence would "cure the problem" and from a certain POV that is true but again how much would something like this cost?
With all the talk of cutting the cost of gov't, removing needless economic burdens to stimulate economic growth and limiting the scope of gov't, seems to me this type of stuff, even tongue and cheek goes counter to that ideal if one truly believes in it!
China has their Great Wall and nobody complains.
Why can't we do the same ?
It would be the perfect public works job creator of this century.