Herman Cain

[Catatonic]

1188

The Democrats are scared of Herman because if he is the nominee, they can't play the race card like they always do.

Simple as that.

 

[Babagounj]

1188

The Democrats are scared of Herman because if he is the nominee, they can't play the race card like they always do.

Simple as that.

Not as simple as that, hoaxster.
First off the dems never play the race card, they always leave that up to the MSM .
Secondly as I have earlier explained H.C. would really be this country's first all black president.

 

[klein]

Who's been playing the race card lately ? Herman Cain himself, along with Fox and Coulter and the other fox news group, even Rush Limbaugh.
I don't think the dems are afraid of Cain at all. They would want to run against him ! Their wish list !

Lets see next weeks polling numbers... but I do believe Cain will take a big hit.

 

[toonertoo]

Then why not wait til next week to shoot off your oversized Canadian piehole?
the democrats want Cain to fail because he will beat the snot out of Obama. Not that any of the others couldnt do it with one hand and half their brain tied behind their back. (LOL) But they are most afraid of Cain as he is charismatic, like some of the brain damaged left thought Obama was. And he is genuine, a word never associated with the messiah. Lets see. Lets just wait and see.

 

[Babagounj]

let's have a poll of our own .......

All those in favor of klein's useless comments , please raise your left hand.

 

[klein]

Romney is truely the wisest of the bunch. He lays low, doesn't talk his mouth off, doesn't offend anyone, and doesn't want a new tax that will make the top rich richer, and the rest poorer.

The dems are afraid of him the most, and even Perry would be greater threat to Obama than Cain.
Cain has opened his mouth too many times.... he has too much dirt on himself now.

 

[Lue C Fur]

He lays low, doesn't talk his mouth off, doesn't offend anyone

You should give it a try...

 

[klein]

You should give it a try...

That comming from you !!!!! YOU ! Seriously YOU !

 

[trplnkl]

I dont answer to YOU hacks! You dominate this board with moderators who pull the plug at the dumbest things, and name call and post half truths and mis information daily, yet, when challenged, you all gather around and name call and try to "pick fights".

I used to answer these calls, but not anymore.

You think you have it all figured out, gang up on posters and run them out of town, sorry Bub, aint falling for it.

If you dont like what I post, or believe it to be untrue, POST THE FACTS to support your claims.

If you cant, then leave the subject alone. None of YOU can answer when challenged, you all deflect and try to change the subject with the exception of Island Fox.

So give me a break... youre bullying days are over!

Peace.

Oh look, who's calling people hacks, the masterhack himself.

TOS this is pretty simple and something you can only try to deny. In a thread you said Laura Bush killed someone in an accident while drunk. Is this a true statement, you did say that right? I then challenged you to support your claim with proof, a post or two after you wanted me to tell you all about why I didn't like Michelle 0bama, supposedly to prove I was/wasn't the racist you accused me of being. Is this correct? I told you (since I had requested your proof first) I would answer you when you did so. Since then, you have dodged my question and have yet admitted that you were, in fact, lying about Mrs Bush( would have even accepted " I was wrong"). BTW, I still have my response to your baseless accusation, ready to post when you come clean.

Give me an exact example of me posting a lie and then calling you any name when you challenged me. More than once I have admitted that my info was incorrect or incomplete when reliable opposing evidence was provided by other posters. Have you ever done so? Not that I have seen.

You're right, no one can make you answer the calls for you to prove what you post, but until you do you have no grounds to ask/demand anyone else to do so. I don't remember you posting proof of much of anything. When others do provide where they get their info, you go on attack mode to demean not only that poster but the source. Seems no one's source is good enough if it opposes your stance, but yet you get your panties in a wad when we ask for your sources. Misinformed, misled,uneducated, stupid, maroon, and a laundry list of other demeaning adjectives are your trade marks but then you whine when someone uses them on you along with proof you refuse to accept.

I have never advocated that you leave this site, nor have I tried to run you off. The fact is, if your approach to other posters was more gentlemanly I would value your opinions. You try to force everyone to fall to your self imposed superior intelligence. Guess what bub, that aint gonna happen.
Bullies huh? Do you really want to go there? Although I can think of better things to do with my time, I could go back through the various threads and show who the real bully is.

I realize that I have just wasted my time with this post and I don't expect a coherent or detailed response but what he hell I it's my time to waste.

 

[MrFedEx]

This is NOT a criticism of the Mods, disrespectful, or a public discussion of staff decisions, but if you only want a Right Wing viewpoint on issues, why not re-name Current Events something like "Right Wing World"? I thought that the whole point of a discussion board was "discussions", which often involve diametrically opposing viewpoints. Current Events has largely become the province of the Right-leaning members of the BC, who apparently "own" the forum.

I have no problem if someone wants to have Conservative views.That's your right. But shouldn't there also be an equal opportunity for the Liberal argument on issues? Apparently you want to have an exclusive take on current events from a Conservative perspective. I guess I'm glad to be part of the 1% too.

 

[UPS Lifer]

Tom Woods is right, Cain is just another Empty Suit!

I am going to keep asking you for a direct answer on who YOU are leaning toward to fix the mess this country is in. Every post is critical of government, the candidates and the system, but I have not read anything from you that shows who you would like to see in the White House and why they might have a positive impact on this country?
How about it? Are you going to ignore this post also?

 

[moreluck]

This is NOT a criticism of the Mods, disrespectful, or a public discussion of staff decisions, but if you only want a Right Wing viewpoint on issues, why not re-name Current Events something like "Right Wing World"? I thought that the whole point of a discussion board was "discussions", which often involve diametrically opposing viewpoints. Current Events has largely become the province of the Right-leaning members of the BC, who apparently "own" the forum.

I have no problem if someone wants to have Conservative views.That's your right. But shouldn't there also be an equal opportunity for the Liberal argument on issues? Apparently you want to have an exclusive take on current events from a Conservative perspective. I guess I'm glad to be part of the 1% too.

The problem we run into is not an opposite opinion.......instead it's something like "you're too old and stupid to get it!" That, to me is not an acceptable comment from the opposition. Just the facts is a better response!!

 

[UPS Lifer]

This is NOT a criticism of the Mods, disrespectful, or a public discussion of staff decisions, but if you only want a Right Wing viewpoint on issues, why not re-name Current Events something like "Right Wing World"? I thought that the whole point of a discussion board was "discussions", which often involve diametrically opposing viewpoints. Current Events has largely become the province of the Right-leaning members of the BC, who apparently "own" the forum.

I have no problem if someone wants to have Conservative views.That's your right. But shouldn't there also be an equal opportunity for the Liberal argument on issues? Apparently you want to have an exclusive take on current events from a Conservative perspective. I guess I'm glad to be part of the 1% too.

It sure sounds like you are critcizing the mods to me! BTW, Please go start a thread and name it left-wing opinion. Let's see how many right wing folks go on it. You will not find me there. Just like you won't find me tuning into MSNBC. Start another thread called - Opinion on Canadian Politics. ...another thread you won't find me on!!

 

[trplnkl]

This is NOT a criticism of the Mods, disrespectful, or a public discussion of staff decisions, but if you only want a Right Wing viewpoint on issues, why not re-name Current Events something like "Right Wing World"? I thought that the whole point of a discussion board was "discussions", which often involve diametrically opposing viewpoints. Current Events has largely become the province of the Right-leaning members of the BC, who apparently "own" the forum.

I have no problem if someone wants to have Conservative views.That's your right. But shouldn't there also be an equal opportunity for the Liberal argument on issues? Apparently you want to have an exclusive take on current events from a Conservative perspective. I guess I'm glad to be part of the 1% too.

I think you are misunderstanding what Cheryl posted. I didn't read that into her post.

Whether you want to admit it out not, the harsh replies all started with the other side. The proof is scattered all over this forum. No one likes being called stupid regardless of the actual words used to disguise it. It is the harsh dialogue that (with a few exceptions) everyone would like to see go away. It's easy to go back and retrace where all that started on this part of the forum and I can assure you it wasn't me or you that did so.

There sure seems to be more right wingers on here than left wingers but that is hardly any indication that civil discussions are not what Cheryl wants on the site. No one can control the number of conservatives, liberals, etc etc that express their opinions. I have never thought that anyone considered these pages to be controlled by either side. No one has ever suggested that an opposing view was not welcome, other than those coming from outside our country.

No one expects only a conservative view point, but no one wants strictly a liberal view either. It's the name calling, however disguised that offends.

 

[cheryl]

This is NOT a criticism of the Mods, disrespectful, or a public discussion of staff decisions, but if you only want a Right Wing viewpoint on issues, why not re-name Current Events something like "Right Wing World"? I thought that the whole point of a discussion board was "discussions", which often involve diametrically opposing viewpoints. Current Events has largely become the province of the Right-leaning members of the BC, who apparently "own" the forum.

I have no problem if someone wants to have Conservative views.That's your right. But shouldn't there also be an equal opportunity for the Liberal argument on issues? Apparently you want to have an exclusive take on current events from a Conservative perspective. I guess I'm glad to be part of the 1% too.

Mr FedEx, Did you forget that I asked you to be a moderator on the FedEx forum a couple of years ago? Yes, that's right, you yourself are evidence that I'm not stacking the deck of mods with only right wingers.

If you recall I demoted you for repeatedly making personal attacks on other members. Yes, even back then when you were a mod you were one of the 1% of members that has proven that they cannot discuss some topics without becoming too aggressive and making derogatory personal remarks.

We all have significant (and valid) feelings about some of this subject matter. Telling someone they’re stupid or that they are old and their point of view is invalid is not ever part of an intelligent discussion... I hope that you understand this and agree with me, at least on that point.

 

[klein]

Mr FedEx, Did you forget that I asked you to be a moderator on the FedEx forum a couple of years ago? Yes, that's right, you yourself are evidence that I'm not stacking the deck of mods with only right wingers.

If you recall I demoted you for repeatedly making personal attacks on other members. Yes, even back then when you were a mod you were one of the 1% of members that has proven that they cannot discuss some topics without becoming too aggressive and making derogatory personal remarks.

We all have significant (and valid) feelings about some of this subject matter. Telling someone they’re stupid or that they are old and their point of view is invalid is not ever part of an intelligent discussion... I hope that you understand this and agree with me, at least on that point.

Wow, looks like MR Fedex went just like Cain is going, from fame to shame !

(sorry fedex, just couldn't resist the close comparison)

 

[MrFedEx]

Mr FedEx, Did you forget that I asked you to be a moderator on the FedEx forum a couple of years ago? Yes, that's right, you yourself are evidence that I'm not stacking the deck of mods with only right wingers.

If you recall I demoted you for repeatedly making personal attacks on other members. Yes, even back then when you were a mod you were one of the 1% of members that has proven that they cannot discuss some topics without becoming too aggressive and making derogatory personal remarks.

We all have significant (and valid) feelings about some of this subject matter. Telling someone they’re stupid or that they are old and their point of view is invalid is not ever part of an intelligent discussion... I hope that you understand this and agree with me, at least on that point.

True, but I was asked to be a moderator before I even knew anything about this site. The FedEx Forums were invented, and "boom", you're a moderator. I didn't understand the job, much less the site, or how it really worked. If you recall, when FedEx gained a presence on the BC, I was getting attacked daily by UPSer's who felt that the site had been compromised by having a Purple component. Tieguy (and others) kept it going for a long time. Now, there's only the occasional comment or nasty PM.

I'll agree with you about the name-calling, but I don't remember ever calling anyone "old". I'm no youngster myself. Debate should remain civil, but that's difficult when the topic is in and of itself controversial and passionate. I will do my best to keep the discussion appropriate and within the bounds of civility.

 

[MrFedEx]

Wow, looks like MR Fedex went just like Cain is going, from fame to shame !

(sorry fedex, just couldn't resist the close comparison)

Hey, I can take it as well as give it. I don't feel shamed at all, and I've explained why making me a moderator wasn't a good idea without an opportunity to fully understand the site. I wasn't qualified, just like Cain isn't qualified to be President. But I can keep my weenie under control, and Herman can't.



I

 

[moreluck]

Hey, I can take it as well as give it. I don't feel shamed at all, and I've explained why making me a moderator wasn't a good idea without an opportunity to fully understand the site. I wasn't qualified, just like Cain isn't qualified to be President. But I can keep my weenie under control, and Herman can't.


I

From the things that have been said over the past few days, "no touching was involved, the door was open and the secretry was just out side the door". I think it's all a big 'to-do' to make Cain look bad. He's still in the lead and his contributions are increasing , so the people aren't buying it!
I'd love to find out who fed the story to Politico. I hope somone is focused on following that!

 

[klein]

Herman along with Coulter and Limbaugh first blamed the "racist" democrats.
Then he blamed Perry,
and now he thinks of sueing politico !

He is blaming everyone, but himself !

Btw, it's normal for those that stand 100% behind a poltician to donate even more when their beloved candidate is in trouble.
But, the polls next week will tell us all more, besides one woman is suppose to make a statement today, too.