Herman Cain wins Florida straw poll


Off-Topic Discussions

1 to 50 of 520 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

This is cool for me as Herman Cain and Ron Paul are the only GOP candidates I'm interested in, I just wanted to hear other paizonian thoughts on this.

It would certainly make for an exciting election, two black men, no one able to make claims of racism. but I know the media is trying to act like this doesn't change the race. I for one sure hope it does.

The Exchange

Someone recently put Herman Cain on my radar. I for one couldn't care less for Ron Paul. I would be interested in getting Cain's positions on foreign relations and a few other subjects but so far he seems the only candidate I would personally vote for. While it would be interesting for the leading candidates to be two black men, I think it would be better when we get to the point that no one notices if it is a man or a woman, and whether they are black, white, red, yellow, brown or Martian-born.

Silver Crusade

Well I realy don't care for Ron Paul, or Rick Parry.

I realy like Herman Cain tax plan, and his views on repealing Obama care. Cuting/Reforming the fed. education dep. and the EPA are top of my list as well.

Dark Archive

calagnar wrote:

Well I realy don't care for Ron Paul, or Rick Parry.

I realy like Herman Cain tax plan, and his views on repealing Obama care. Cuting/Reforming the fed. education dep. and the EPA are top of my list as well.

You don't like Ron Paul? I think he is awesome. Wish more like him in the Senate/House. I like the way Herman Cain talks, especially when he says stuff like"That Dog Won't Hunt." 9/9/9 tax plan is kinda cool, wonder what people would say if it was 666 plan though.


Herman Cain has no chance of winning the Republican Presidential nomination for reasons I cannot spell out for you. More than likely it will be Mitt Romney, but not Cain.


Crimson Jester wrote:
Someone recently put Herman Cain on my radar. I for one couldn't care less for Ron Paul. I would be interested in getting Cain's positions on foreign relations and a few other subjects but so far he seems the only candidate I would personally vote for. While it would be interesting for the leading candidates to be two black men, I think it would be better when we get to the point that no one notices if it is a man or a woman, and whether they are black, white, red, yellow, brown or Martian-born.

Martian-born would not be allowed to run for president of the United States- they are not born here.

That said, I don't see Cain winning.

The Exchange

Freehold DM wrote:
Crimson Jester wrote:
Someone recently put Herman Cain on my radar. I for one couldn't care less for Ron Paul. I would be interested in getting Cain's positions on foreign relations and a few other subjects but so far he seems the only candidate I would personally vote for. While it would be interesting for the leading candidates to be two black men, I think it would be better when we get to the point that no one notices if it is a man or a woman, and whether they are black, white, red, yellow, brown or Martian-born.

Martian-born would not be allowed to run for president of the United States- they are not born here.

That said, I don't see Cain winning.

We do not yet have a colony, that doesn't mean we wont.

Why do you think Cain would not win?


Crimson Jester wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
Crimson Jester wrote:
Someone recently put Herman Cain on my radar. I for one couldn't care less for Ron Paul. I would be interested in getting Cain's positions on foreign relations and a few other subjects but so far he seems the only candidate I would personally vote for. While it would be interesting for the leading candidates to be two black men, I think it would be better when we get to the point that no one notices if it is a man or a woman, and whether they are black, white, red, yellow, brown or Martian-born.

Martian-born would not be allowed to run for president of the United States- they are not born here.

That said, I don't see Cain winning.

We do not yet have a colony, that doesn't mean we wont.

Why do you think Cain would not win?

Just don't see it. Same reason I didn't see Colin Powell winning if he ran for president. I do think the only way we'd see either of them on a ticket is as a VP.

My wife is chiming in, saying he is very sensationalist and will not make it. She feels that his presence would encourage someone else to run.


Don't get too excited by Cain's winning this poll. All it really means is that the shine is wearing off of Perry and the base still doesn't really like Romney, so they're casting around for someone, anyone, else.

Racism is less of a factor in Florida than in quite a few other Republican electorates. There are plenty of states where Cain doesn't have a chance at the nomination from that alone.

Sovereign Court

6 people marked this as a favorite.

Wow, so there is a portion of people who believe Herman Cain can't win because to many republicans are racist. You know, I believe there are racists in the republican party, I also believe there are racists in the democratic party. I don't believe either parties racists hold sway over the party.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, I do. There are racists everywhere, but the Republican Party has been courting them since the Nixon years. See the "Southern Strategy"
Essentially, LBJ's support of the Civil Rights movement drove many open racists out of the Democratic party and the Republicans capitalized on that.

To some extent they've been trying to dial back on that, but it's hard when they've actively pushing it for so long.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

You must live in some alternate universe where straw polls have meaning.

What's the usual format? a couple of hundred folks sit in a room listen to some speechs and poll themselves? Straw polls are so removed from reality it ain't funny. Let me correct myself, they're so funny, they're a laugh riot.


I'm also not certain how the Florida Straw Poll works, but in the Iowa one didn't the candidates basically say "Hey folks, I know that it costs money to vote here, buuuuut if you do us the lil' ol' favor of, yanno, promising to vote for us ~wink wink~ we'll pay that fee for you. LOOK BALLOON ANIMALS THAT CAN SING THE NATIONAL ANTHEM!!" which basically amounts to...

A) Buying votes.
B) Getting the one with the most entertaining tent being the winner.

Which translates to a whole lot of nonsense as far as import in the political process beyond sensational media time. Which, I suppose, does have some benefits to it in name recognition.

Sovereign Court

LazarX wrote:

You must live in some alternate universe where straw polls have meaning.

What's the usual format? a couple of hundred folks sit in a room listen to some speechs and poll themselves? Straw polls are so removed from reality it ain't funny. Let me correct myself, they're so funny, they're a laugh riot.

considering how many times the winner of the FL straw poll has gone on to win the candidacy yeah I give it some credence. Not to mention how important FL is in the general election. Sorry, but even if you don't like it cause my state is crazy, what we have to say matters.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
lastknightleft wrote:
LazarX wrote:

You must live in some alternate universe where straw polls have meaning.

What's the usual format? a couple of hundred folks sit in a room listen to some speechs and poll themselves? Straw polls are so removed from reality it ain't funny. Let me correct myself, they're so funny, they're a laugh riot.

considering how many times the winner of the FL straw poll has gone on to win the candidacy yeah I give it some credence. Not to mention how important FL is in the general election. Sorry, but even if you don't like it cause my state is crazy, what we have to say matters.

It's rather premature to call it for Hermann Cain, especially in light of the national poll which puts him at the bottom of an increasingly volatile list. Is Florida important, yes. No one is going to win the Presidency without it. But given the way straw polls are being run this year, that means you take them all with grains of salt.

The establishment is still calling for the idiot governor of my state of NJ to "ride in to save the day."


Here's hoping that conservatives registered as Republicans will ignore establisment Republicans when they vote.
Not voting for a canidate because "he can't win" is a self fulfilling prophecy.

Dark Archive

I've been a huge Cain fan since Feb. Love what the guy has to say and love me some Godfather's Pizza too! :)

And yes, though the straw poll means nothing, it's doing one important thing that he's been lacking: getting his name out.

To Kryzbyn: agree 100%. After the fact surveys found Ross Perot would have won an extra 10-20% of the popular vote if people hadn't thought they'd be "throwing their vote away."


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Fox news, MSNBC, CNN, and World news have allready decided that Republican candidate is going to be Mitt Romney or Rick Perry. No other potential Republican candidates will have a chance without those news networks backing.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Jenner2057 wrote:

I've been a huge Cain fan since Feb. Love what the guy has to say and love me some Godfather's Pizza too! :)

And yes, though the straw poll means nothing, it's doing one important thing that he's been lacking: getting his name out.

As Rachael Maddows said. "That is the purpose of Straw Polls, publicity and raising funding."

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
It was wrote:
Fox news and CNN have allready decided that Republican candidate is going to be Mitt Romney or Rick Perry. No other potential Republican candidates will have a chance without those news networks backing.

Narrowed it down to the only two stations that good proper Tea Partiers watch.

Sovereign Court

LazarX wrote:
It was wrote:
Fox news and CNN have allready decided that Republican candidate is going to be Mitt Romney or Rick Perry. No other potential Republican candidates will have a chance without those news networks backing.
Narrowed it down to the only two stations that good proper Tea Partiers watch.

Hey, tea partiers also watch the channel that hosts my little pony for its fair and balanced coverage of the election.


It's not just Tea partiers. Nobody watches MSNBC anymore.
More people watch Cartoon Network than MSNBC.
You can get a better balanced view on the Daily Show than MSNBC.


Kryzbyn wrote:

It's not just Tea partiers. Nobody watches MSNBC anymore.

More people watch Cartoon Network than MSNBC.
You can get a better balanced view on the Daily Show than MSNBC.

As opposed to Fox, which is "Fair and Balanced"(TM)?


thejeff wrote:
Kryzbyn wrote:

It's not just Tea partiers. Nobody watches MSNBC anymore.

More people watch Cartoon Network than MSNBC.
You can get a better balanced view on the Daily Show than MSNBC.
As opposed to Fox, which is "Fair and Balanced"(TM)?

I didn't claim they were. Ratings a channel gets just shows viewership, not the character of the content.

The last statement was just a personal observation, as John Stewart is likely to call BS on both parties...


I can't but notice that the people that tend to scream the loudest that, "Bachmann won't get elected because she is a woman", "Cain won't get elected because he is black", and "Romney won't get elected because he is Mormon" tend to be Dem supports.


Kryzbyn wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Kryzbyn wrote:

It's not just Tea partiers. Nobody watches MSNBC anymore.

More people watch Cartoon Network than MSNBC.
You can get a better balanced view on the Daily Show than MSNBC.
As opposed to Fox, which is "Fair and Balanced"(TM)?
I didn't claim they were. Ratings a channel gets just shows viewership, not the character of the content.

I assumed "You can get a better balanced view on the Daily Show than MSNBC" was a comment on MSNBC being unbalanced. Perhaps I misunderstood.

Fox does certainly have higher ratings.


Bachmann won't get the primary because she's Palin-lite.
Mitt Romney won't get the primary because he's not conservative.
Herman Cain should get the primary because he actually is a conservative.

Just my opinion.


Missed my edit :P


pres man wrote:
I can't but notice that the people that tend to scream the loudest that, "Bachmann won't get elected because she is a woman", "Cain won't get elected because he is black", and "Romney won't get elected because he is Mormon" tend to be Dem supports.

That may be because we have a jaundiced view of the Republican primary electorate.

If Romney gets nominated, he has the best chance of beating Obama. That he's a Mormon hurts him with the right-wing evangelical crowd, but that's a much smaller part of the electorate as a whole than of Republican primary voters.

Bachmann's already past her peak and wouldn't stand a chance in the general, not because she's a woman, but because she's so far outside the mainstream and makes no effort to hide it.


I don't understand this mentality.
Elections aren't the Price is Right.
Democrats and Republicans have almost directly opposing views on alot of fronts.
Why, as a conservative, would I want to vote for a guy who's most like Obama, without going over?
This is whats being told to us, that Romney is that canidate. Only a canidate like that can win. I don't want that canidate. I do not accept this premise.
Obama has done such a meh job, anyone has a chance.
I want a conservative canidate that will get out there and share his views (ones that don't change every election cycle) with the American people, and let them decide who they want via the election.

Sovereign Court

thejeff wrote:
pres man wrote:
I can't but notice that the people that tend to scream the loudest that, "Bachmann won't get elected because she is a woman", "Cain won't get elected because he is black", and "Romney won't get elected because he is Mormon" tend to be Dem supports.

That may be because we have a jaundiced view of the Republican primary electorate.

If Romney gets nominated, he has the best chance of beating Obama. That he's a Mormon hurts him with the right-wing evangelical crowd, but that's a much smaller part of the electorate as a whole than of Republican primary voters.

Bachmann's already past her peak and wouldn't stand a chance in the general, not because she's a woman, but because she's so far outside the mainstream and makes no effort to hide it.

As someone who has never voted for either a democrat or a Republican in any presidential election to date. I can guarantee that she would never have gotten my vote. I've listened to Herman Cain lots of times when he subbed for Neil Bohrtz on his radio show, and I have always liked what he had to say and so I was excited when he ran, but also was in the "he doesn't stand a chance" category. Now however, I have a lot of hope for him and if he gets the nomination I will vote for him. When Michelle Bachmann announced her running, I did the same, I listened to some of the things she's said, and I have the exact opposite opinion of her, she's a nutjob.


Kryzbyn wrote:

I don't understand this mentality.

Elections aren't the Price is Right.
Democrats and Republicans have almost directly opposing views on alot of fronts.
Why, as a conservative, would I want to vote for a guy who's most like Obama, without going over?
This is whats being told to us, that Romney is that canidate. Only a canidate like that can win. I don't want that canidate. I do not accept this premise.
Obama has done such a meh job, anyone has a chance.
I want a conservative canidate that will get out there and share his views (ones that don't change every election cycle) with the American people, and let them decide who they want via the election.

Because you need votes from people other than hard-core conservatives to win the general election. You don't want the most like Obama, you want the most conservative who can beat him. If you think anyone can, then back the most hard-core you can find.

Most Americans aren't ideological about government. A candidate needs to appeal to them, not just the extremes.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kryzbyn wrote:

I don't understand this mentality.

Elections aren't the Price is Right.
Democrats and Republicans have almost directly opposing views on alot of fronts.
Why, as a conservative, would I want to vote for a guy who's most like Obama, without going over?
This is whats being told to us, that Romney is that canidate. Only a canidate like that can win. I don't want that canidate. I do not accept this premise.
Obama has done such a meh job, anyone has a chance.
I want a conservative canidate that will get out there and share his views (ones that don't change every election cycle) with the American people, and let them decide who they want via the election.

Its not complicated.

Nominations are determined by the party base. General elections are determined by everyone.

Anyone whose political views are to the left of your preferred candidate (and Cain is pretty far right indeed) are going to split between your candidate, Obama and not voting at all.


lastknightleft wrote:
thejeff wrote:
pres man wrote:
I can't but notice that the people that tend to scream the loudest that, "Bachmann won't get elected because she is a woman", "Cain won't get elected because he is black", and "Romney won't get elected because he is Mormon" tend to be Dem supports.

That may be because we have a jaundiced view of the Republican primary electorate.

If Romney gets nominated, he has the best chance of beating Obama. That he's a Mormon hurts him with the right-wing evangelical crowd, but that's a much smaller part of the electorate as a whole than of Republican primary voters.

Bachmann's already past her peak and wouldn't stand a chance in the general, not because she's a woman, but because she's so far outside the mainstream and makes no effort to hide it.

As someone who has never voted for either a democrat or a Republican in any presidential election to date. I can guarantee that she would never have gotten my vote. I've listened to Herman Cain lots of times when he subbed for Neil Bohrtz on his radio show, and I have always liked what he had to say and so I was excited when he ran, but also was in the "he doesn't stand a chance" category. Now however, I have a lot of hope for him and if he gets the nomination I will vote for him. When Michelle Bachmann announced her running, I did the same, I listened to some of the things she's said, and I have the exact opposite opinion of her, she's a nutjob.

What do you think of his statements that muslims aren't fit for public office or need to swear special loyalty oaths?


lastknightleft wrote:
As someone who has never voted for either a democrat or a Republican in any presidential election to date. I can guarantee that she would never have gotten my vote. I've listened to Herman Cain lots of times when he subbed for Neil Bohrtz on his radio show, and I have always liked what he had to say and so I was excited when he ran, but also was in the "he doesn't stand a chance" category. Now however, I have a lot of hope for him and if he gets the nomination I will vote for him. When Michelle Bachmann announced her running, I did the same, I listened to some of the things she's said, and I have the exact opposite opinion of her, she's a nutjob.

Just by that, I'd guess you're a fiscal conservative or libertarian, not a social conservative. She's a social conservative with little coherent economic views so she sounds crazy to you.

Cain's economic ideas sound just as crazy to me as Bachmann does.

Still doesn't matter. While it would make for an interesting general election in some ways, he won't get the nomination.


thejeff wrote:
pres man wrote:
I can't but notice that the people that tend to scream the loudest that, "Bachmann won't get elected because she is a woman", "Cain won't get elected because he is black", and "Romney won't get elected because he is Mormon" tend to be Dem supports.

That may be because we have a jaundiced view of the Republican primary electorate.

I've seen a lot of truth in thejeff's observations about the Republicans, but I have a jaundiced view of American voters in general, so I can't help but point out that the Obama campaign really had to work their union-top accessories hard in order to get the nomination. Hoffa of the Teamsters and, I think, Trumka of the AFL-CIO had to go on the stump to get union votes for Obama.

I've spent most of my adult life in Massachusetts--believe me, there's plenty of rank-and-file racists in the Democrats.

Sovereign Court

Dan E wrote:
lastknightleft wrote:
thejeff wrote:
pres man wrote:
I can't but notice that the people that tend to scream the loudest that, "Bachmann won't get elected because she is a woman", "Cain won't get elected because he is black", and "Romney won't get elected because he is Mormon" tend to be Dem supports.

That may be because we have a jaundiced view of the Republican primary electorate.

If Romney gets nominated, he has the best chance of beating Obama. That he's a Mormon hurts him with the right-wing evangelical crowd, but that's a much smaller part of the electorate as a whole than of Republican primary voters.

Bachmann's already past her peak and wouldn't stand a chance in the general, not because she's a woman, but because she's so far outside the mainstream and makes no effort to hide it.

As someone who has never voted for either a democrat or a Republican in any presidential election to date. I can guarantee that she would never have gotten my vote. I've listened to Herman Cain lots of times when he subbed for Neil Bohrtz on his radio show, and I have always liked what he had to say and so I was excited when he ran, but also was in the "he doesn't stand a chance" category. Now however, I have a lot of hope for him and if he gets the nomination I will vote for him. When Michelle Bachmann announced her running, I did the same, I listened to some of the things she's said, and I have the exact opposite opinion of her, she's a nutjob.
What do you think of his statements that muslims aren't fit for public office or need to swear special loyalty oaths?

can you link that, I've never heard anything of the sort.

Liberty's Edge

Dan E wrote:
lastknightleft wrote:
thejeff wrote:
pres man wrote:
I can't but notice that the people that tend to scream the loudest that, "Bachmann won't get elected because she is a woman", "Cain won't get elected because he is black", and "Romney won't get elected because he is Mormon" tend to be Dem supports.

That may be because we have a jaundiced view of the Republican primary electorate.

If Romney gets nominated, he has the best chance of beating Obama. That he's a Mormon hurts him with the right-wing evangelical crowd, but that's a much smaller part of the electorate as a whole than of Republican primary voters.

Bachmann's already past her peak and wouldn't stand a chance in the general, not because she's a woman, but because she's so far outside the mainstream and makes no effort to hide it.

As someone who has never voted for either a democrat or a Republican in any presidential election to date. I can guarantee that she would never have gotten my vote. I've listened to Herman Cain lots of times when he subbed for Neil Bohrtz on his radio show, and I have always liked what he had to say and so I was excited when he ran, but also was in the "he doesn't stand a chance" category. Now however, I have a lot of hope for him and if he gets the nomination I will vote for him. When Michelle Bachmann announced her running, I did the same, I listened to some of the things she's said, and I have the exact opposite opinion of her, she's a nutjob.
What do you think of his statements that muslims aren't fit for public office or need to swear special loyalty oaths?

I don't think I saw that one but I did see he thought it should be legal for a city for forbid the building of Mosques in that city. To me no matter what I think of the rest of his platform I can't vote for someone who thinks like this.

Right to ban mosques

Sovereign Court

thejeff wrote:
lastknightleft wrote:
As someone who has never voted for either a democrat or a Republican in any presidential election to date. I can guarantee that she would never have gotten my vote. I've listened to Herman Cain lots of times when he subbed for Neil Bohrtz on his radio show, and I have always liked what he had to say and so I was excited when he ran, but also was in the "he doesn't stand a chance" category. Now however, I have a lot of hope for him and if he gets the nomination I will vote for him. When Michelle Bachmann announced her running, I did the same, I listened to some of the things she's said, and I have the exact opposite opinion of her, she's a nutjob.

Just by that, I'd guess you're a fiscal conservative or libertarian, not a social conservative. She's a social conservative with little coherent economic views so she sounds crazy to you.

Cain's economic ideas sound just as crazy to me as Bachmann does.

Still doesn't matter. While it would make for an interesting general election in some ways, he won't get the nomination.

you pegged me, although I'm also a bit more centrist, I do think the government has a larger role to play and I'm not a %100 free market guy, but I am by no means a social conservative as my transgendered best friend/former roomate can tell you. I do however believe in limited government, and greater state/local power.

Liberty's Edge

Link for loyality oath

Oath

Grand Lodge

I can honestly say that I have voted for Herman Cain. Several years ago he ran for the US Senate seat in Georgia. He did well, but not enough to defeat Johnny Isakson. I routinely listened to his radio talk show out of Atlanta. He is the real deal folks! He is solid and principled. He will get my vote again. There is absolutely no reason he could not rise to the level to take the nomination. If there is a weakness, it would be foreign policy. He just does not have a lot of background in foreign affairs. But he could overcome that with a solid VP choice and a quality Secretary of State. He is a no-nonsense kind of guy.

Later,

Mazra

Dark Archive

Martin Sheaffer wrote:

Link for loyality oath

Oath

And "Think Progress" strikes again.

Nowhere in there did he use the term Loyalty Oath. He said he would want some proof that they would be willing to put upholding the Constitution above upholding Sharia Law. Never specified what that "proof" might be.
Bit of a difference.

And to Dan E: Cain has never said that Muslims weren't fit to hold public office. That's just not true.
First he said he (personally) wouldn't appoint a Muslim.
Then he backstepped a bit and brought up the loyalty thing.

Let's at least get the facts straight.


As far as cabinet appointees, who cares? It's his cabinet, he can appoint who he wants. I'm sure if he has a person in mind for a cabinet post he knows personaly, he won't have to take a test.
As far as the mosques, he's correct about Islam being both a religion and a set of laws. The conlusion he comes to may be off, a bit, but it's not a big enough deal to not vote for the guy. Not for me anyway.


Jenner2057 wrote:
Martin Sheaffer wrote:

Link for loyality oath

Oath

And "Think Progress" strikes again.

Nowhere in there did he use the term Loyalty Oath. He said he would want some proof that they would be willing to put upholding the Constitution above upholding Sharia Law. Never specified what that "proof" might be.
Bit of a difference.

And to Dan E: Cain has never said that Muslims weren't fit to hold public office. That's just not true.
First he said he (personally) wouldn't appoint a Muslim.
Then he backstepped a bit and brought up the loyalty thing.

Let's at least get the facts straight.

You don't get to complain about the source when its simply citing things on the record from elsewhere (to Beck of all people).

Whether he said loyalty oath or not what do you think about the idea he expressed?

Sovereign Court

Martin Sheaffer wrote:

Link for loyality oath

Oath

My opinion is that it's sobering and puts a damper on my views of him. Unfortunately he's swept up in anti-muslim hysteria, but I honestly don't think you'll find a right wing candidate that isn't. However, while i disagree with his stance, I don't know how much it would affect his presidency. He's not calling for all public servants who are muslim to take loyalty oaths. He's expressing a discomfort with muslims that is based on ignorance. At least he is honest and up front with it. Hopefully what will happen is that those peace loving muslims will make themselves known to him and show him the error of his ways. I still think he's a candidate worth giving a chance.


Jenner2057 wrote:

And "Think Progress" strikes again.

Nowhere in there did he use the term Loyalty Oath. He said he would want some proof that they would be willing to put upholding the Constitution above upholding Sharia Law. Never specified what that "proof" might be.
Bit of a difference.

And to Dan E: Cain has never said that Muslims weren't fit to hold public office. That's just not true.
First he said he (personally) wouldn't appoint a Muslim.
Then he backstepped a bit and brought up the loyalty thing.

Let's at least get the facts straight.

This guy wants to treat applicants differently based on religious belief. Some of them would be required to prove their allegiance, while others would not. Website spin aside, how is anyone OK with this?

Edit: And he wants to allow communities to ban mosques. How is that in keeping with the conservative view of property rights?

Dark Archive

Dan E wrote:

You don't get to complain about the source when its simply citing things on the record from elsewhere (to Beck of all people).

Whether he said loyalty oath or not what do you think about the idea he expressed?

Oh I DO get to complain about the source. Especially when you have the source right on the page and then make up some garbage about a Loyalty Oath that wasn't mentioned.

That makes it NOT "cited" at all.

As for his ideas, I think he's a bit off base. But that's just my own opinion as well.

Grand Lodge

lastknightleft wrote:

Hopefully what will happen is that those peace loving muslims will make themselves known to him.

It is too bad that these "peace loving muslims" don't make themselves known to the Jewish people. But then that would go against their holy book.

Later,

Mazra


Bugely, I suppose its as ok as this is...

1 to 50 of 520 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / Herman Cain wins Florida straw poll All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.