He shouldn’t say it outright. What he should say is: I won’t nominate true muslim judges. Because real muslims acknowledge no greater law than that of Allah as consecrated in the Koran. Let’s not forget, that islam is more than simply a crazy superstition; it’s a system of laws as well.

Muslims are the new nlggers.

Hmm. On the one hand I hate small minded, bigoted, xeonphobic hatred. On the other hand, I do like pizza.

*xenophobic

I’m actually quite fond of Intel processors

Does the Koran (i.e. the infallible word of god) leave much wiggle room for disagreement? The US Constitution is a SECULAR document, and I’m unaware of any render-unto-Ceasar’s in the Koran. Enlighten me.

No worries Herman. I can say with absolute conviction, that the Conservatives in the south will not vote for you.

P.S.
I feel pretty confident that Mike Huckabee won’t be appointing any Mormons to those positions.

Sean68 said:
Does the Koran (i.e. the infallible word of god) leave much wiggle room for disagreement? The US Constitution is a SECULAR document, and I’m unaware of any render-unto-Ceasar’s in the Koran. Enlighten me.

LOL. Three hit-and-run thumbs dumb, yet no substantive responses.

same2u said:
No worries Herman. I can say with absolute conviction, that the Conservatives in the south will not vote for you.

Stereotyping Muslims– bad.

Southern conservatives– not so much…

same2u said:
No worries Herman. I can say with absolute conviction, that the Conservatives in the south will not vote for you.

P.S.
I feel pretty confident that Mike Huckabee won’t be appointing any Mormons to those positions.

really? The south is the only place with racists? I’m so sick (as a southerner) to keep hearing this nonsense. I have no problem with Herman Cain. In fact, I think he might have my vote. Oh and I’m white.

jdubbleu said:
we will know you are biased towards leftie douchebags

Huh,. All the righties on here already say that. If a blog doesn’t read like the FoxNation it is branded as being leftist.

Mediaite now has the internet’s most annoying advertising strategy.

What about Mormons, Catholics, Anglicans, Methodists, Baptists, Zoroastrians, Atheists, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Crooks and Liars or are we just singling out Muslims Mr Freaking Cain?

skyfet said:
just singling out Muslims Mr Freaking Cain

As you know it sells well with the base.

well that was stupid and bigoted

This is whats going to make the GOP candidates fun to watch.

Sure, most everybody can agree on economic issues, and that’s what got these people in the spot light. Now we get to hear their nut job views on everything else.

skyfet said:
What about Mormons, Catholics, Anglicans, Methodists, Baptists, Zoroastrians, Atheists, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Crooks and Liars or are we just singling out Muslims Mr Freaking Cain?

They single themselves out. Let’s not draw any false equivalencies here. What planet have you been on? Islam is final, infallible Word of God.

Why stop at Muslims, I don’t think he should hire blacks either…

XD

Looks like Mr. Cain is trying to ensure that no one takes him seriously as a candidate.

…then again, he couldn’t win a US Senate primary in his own home state….

Snowspot said:
Why stop at Muslims, I don’t think he should hire blacks either… XD

“Black” isn’t a belief system that stands in stark contrast to the requirements of a judge who by oath must uphold a system of laws that contradicts the word of Allah. Though I could be wrong: maybe black is a belief system.

Cecelia said:
Mediaite now has the internet’s most annoying advertising strategy.

Arrrrgggghhhhhh!! You mean the rollovers? I can’t stand those. They are not the only ones that do it but they are so annoying. Just drag your mouse across one corner and they pop up and start playing.

Sean68 said:
Does the Koran (i.e. the infallible word of god) leave much wiggle room for disagreement?

Many fundamental Christians believe that about the Bible as well.

Herman Cain’s declaration, if enacted, would violate Article VI of the Constitution. I’m glad he’s so up on the document that — if he won, which is looking increasingly unlikely — he’d swear to uphold.

Cain is just pissed his falafel pizza never took off.

CosmosDan said:
Many fundamental Christians believe that about the Bible as well.

Perhaps, but they’re mistaken. There is a ton of room for interpretation in the bible; not so the koran.

Sean68 said:
Perhaps, but they’re mistaken. There is a ton of room for interpretation in the bible; not so the koran.

I tend to agree with Richard Dawkins, who expresses my views well:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhYus6TiGEE

A candidate who has zero chance of getting elected says something insensitive. And it results in a banner headline story? But if Mitt Romney or another legitimate candidate raises a real issue, challenging the Democrat’s out-of-control spending policies — borrowing another $4 BILLION PER DAY!!! — you won’t read about it in the mainstream media. They respond to minutiae, meanwhile avoiding discussion of the key issues that will determine the result of the 2012 election. It won’t work, and the Democrats will get hammered if they (and their media flunkies) continue to play this game of evasion and misdirection.

jdubbleu said:
ive seen posters here banned for less. mediaite if you let this scumbag get away with it we will know you are biased towards leftie douchebags…

Oh it’s a lot different if I had said n***********s instead. As though you don’t say the word in your head anyway. Grow the fvck up. “Look he said a naughty word!!!” Substitute Jew/white Christian for Muslim in all this anti-Islam bigotry spewed nowadays and try to argue it isn’t outrageous. Go ahead. I’m curious to see what that argument would look like.

felixw said:
A candidate who has zero chance of getting elected says something insensitive. And it results in a banner headline story? But if Mitt Romney or another legitimate candidate raises a real issue, challenging the Democrat’s out-of-control spending policies — borrowing another $4 BILLION PER DAY!!! — you won’t read about it in the mainstream media. They respond to minutiae, meanwhile avoiding discussion of the key issues that will determine the result of the 2012 election. It won’t work, and the Democrats will get hammered if they (and their media flunkies) continue to play this game of evasion and misdirection.

Yep.

felixw said:
But if Mitt Romney or another legitimate candidate raises a real issue, challenging the Democrat’s out-of-control spending policies — borrowing another $4 BILLION PER DAY!!! — you won’t read about it in the mainstream media. They respond to minutiae, meanwhile avoiding discussion of the key issues that will determine the result of the 2012 election.

Of course! The MSM is much more interested in damaging any potential Obama challenger than actually reporting the news. Just wait until we get closer to 2012….

felixw said:
A candidate who has zero chance of getting elected says something insensitive. And it results in a banner headline story? But if Mitt Romney or another legitimate candidate raises a real issue, challenging the Democrat’s out-of-control spending policies — borrowing another $4 BILLION PER DAY!!! — you won’t read about it in the mainstream media. They respond to minutiae, meanwhile avoiding discussion of the key issues that will determine the result of the 2012 election. It won’t work, and the Democrats will get hammered if they (and their media flunkies) continue to play this game of evasion and misdirection.

Like all the talk about light bulbs and not how Social Security is really bankrupting us. I agree.

Publius219 said:
Oh it’s a lot different if I had said n***********s instead. As though you don’t say the word in your head anyway. Grow the fvck up. “Look he said a naughty word!!!” Substitute Jew/white Christian for Muslim in all this anti-Islam bigotry spewed nowadays and try to argue it isn’t outrageous. Go ahead. I’m curious to see what that argument would look like.

It’s also okay to imply that incest is a disproportionately common occurrence among rual lower class whites.

Sean68 said:
Perhaps, but they’re mistaken. There is a ton of room for interpretation in the bible; not so the koran.

Two people gave this comment a thumbs down. I want to know which idiots you are. Let”s hear an actual argument.

Publius219 said:
Muslims are the new nlggers.

It would take totally irresponsible and irrational person to say that.

Skin color is optional, religion is not.

skyfet said:
What about Mormons, Catholics, Anglicans, Methodists, Baptists, Zoroastrians, Atheists, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Crooks and Liars or are we just singling out Muslims Mr Freaking Cain?

How many plains did they fly into buildings, shouting and screaming that their god is great?

Yukon Jack said:

Skin color is optional, religion is not.

Only if you can afford the whole Michael Jackson skin-bleaching program.

Well, if elected, I will cancel the White House Showtime subscription and issue an executive order barring them all federal installations until they take down these intrusive pop-ups.

skyfet said:
What about Mormons, Catholics, Anglicans, Methodists, Baptists, Zoroastrians, Atheists, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Crooks and Liars or are we just singling out Muslims Mr Freaking Cain?

Hey, what about Satanists? And the Jooooooooos?

To all the Islamophiles:

Are you Muslim?

If not, would be willing to become one?

How would you like to be stoned and/or whipped for something that you almost certainly did in your life, sex outside of marriage?

Would you honor kill your daughter if she dated someone you don’t like?

Would you like to see someone in the SCOTUS who would?

Pablo said:
And the Jooooooooos?

We already have the media and the banks. Let the goyim have the politics. BWAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!

Yukon Jack said:
To all the Islamophiles:

Are you Muslim?

If not, would be willing to become one?

How would you like to be stoned and/or whipped for something that you almost certainly did in your life, sex outside of marriage?

Would you honor kill your daughter if she dated someone you don’t like?

Would you like to see someone in the SCOTUS who would?

This is, of course, the fallacy of assuming that all Muslims follow the Koran literally, like their Christian counterparts do with the Bible. Hahahahahaha. I’ll even concede it says and means those things in the exact context you say, which I don’t necessarily agree with/care about. No, I wouldn’t be willing to become Muslim, because all religions are equally stupid and equally based on fairytale horseshit. But, equally.

I said, tongue in cheek:

“Skin color is optional, religion is not.”

To which Publius219, displaying his sadly missing sense of humor replied:

Publius219 said:
Only if you can afford the whole Michael Jackson skin-bleaching program.

I like Herman Cain, he is a good solid Republican.

Much to the chagrin of liberal sycophants, we know more about Herman Cain than Hussein Obama.

Oh yea, awaiting the typical liberal response: Your comment is so hurtful, spiteful and racist so says the liberal butt boy.

Sean68 said:
“Black” isn’t a belief system that stands in stark contrast to the requirements of a judge who by oath must uphold a system of laws that contradicts the word of Allah. Though I could be wrong: maybe black is a belief system.

I didn’t say it was a belief system, it’s a group of people, and to say “No Muslims in my cabinet” is hilarious coming from someone, that 50 years ago would have the same statements made about him.

Forgive me if I don’t entirely trust Yukon Jack’s and Sean68′s skills at religious exegesis.

Shariah Law is real and it’s already in America, or did you not hear of the Judge who ruled it was ok for a Muslim husband to rape his Muslim wife?

It’s people like Herman Cain who have the courage to expose Islam for what it is.

America is not a Muslim nation, it was not founded on Muslim principles.

EXAMPLES OF SHARIAH LAW IN AMERICA.
http://libertarians4freedom.blogspot.com/2011/03/sharia-law-explodes-in-america.html

Herman, Republicans will never elect you as a Presidential candidate. We all know why because you are…. crazy?

God I love this! The 2012 election is going to be so much fun! The crazies (Trump, Bachmann, Cain….) are going to drag the semi-crazies so far down down with this nonsense it will be decades before the GOP wins another national election. Sure, you’ll keep winning your share of off-year statewide races, but at a national level you’re going to be a joke…… Why you ask? Because the country isn’t getting anymore white or Christian, and the GOP’s current message can’t compete with the changing demographics nationally.

Example… In ten years, anti-immigrant Arizona will be all blue and the McCain’s and Brewer’s will be a distant memory.

Vidiot said:
Forgive me if I don’t entirely trust Yukon Jack’s and Sean68’s skills at religious exegesis.

Forgive me if I don’t entirely trust that your handle should include the leading “V”.

HERMAN FOR PRESIDENT!!

But seriously, if I would vote for this guy, could we then throw out the “Your a racist” baby bullshit? And why would he apologize? He is very right and it’s a breath of fresh air to finally see someone who seems aware of whats going on.

Snowspot said:
I didn’t say it was a belief system, it’s a group of people, and to say “No Muslims in my cabinet” is hilarious coming from someone, that 50 years ago would have the same statements made about him.

The current President would say the same thing about Cain and those like him right now.

Lou Sarah said:
Example… In ten years, anti-immigrant Arizona will be all blue and the McCain’s and Brewer’s will be a distant memory.

If you idiots win, in ten years Arizona will be frickin’ Mexico.

Finally an honest, sincere, intelligent politician with tried and true successes. Tells it like it is – knows the real problems and he will face them head on – no nonsense – no stupid little notes on the palm of his hand that is for sure. A man we could be proud to call President of the United States and he would take barry boy and mop up the floor with him. Can’t wait to see him in a debate with barry.

Steve_27 said:
HERMAN FOR PRESIDENT!! But seriously, if I would vote for this guy, could we then throw out the “Your a racist” baby bullshit? And why would he apologize? He is very right and it’s a breath of fresh air to finally see someone who seems aware of whats going on.

All one has to do is look at Europe to witness in stark clarity the Muslimification of unwitting societies. This is what Democrats want (or are to stupid to realize) here.

Sean68 said:
Perhaps, but they’re mistaken. There is a ton of room for interpretation in the bible; not so the koran.

I disagree. {not that they’re mistaken} so called Holy writings are subject to interpretation. That is demonstrated in the many variations of detail in Christian doctrine, and the different interpretations of Islam. Since not all Muslim schools or scholars , or Imams, teach the same interpretation, it seems clear there is room.

Personally I think we’d all be much better off if people realized these books were written by men and ultimately we must make our own choices and be responsible for them. The whole idea that one group of people are more the chosen ones of a creator deity that created everything is ….a tragic interpretation that serves only to divide us.

Yukon Jack said:
Forgive me if I don’t entirely trust that your handle should include the leading “V”.

oh-HO! You certainly brought the superior logic and well-focused rational argument there! I just don’t know what I’m going to do now that you’ve made fun of my username! I don’t know how I’m going to get out of this pickle!

Good for Herman. Now lets include Christians, Jews, Mormons, etc etc…… to prevent sharia law and any other religious based law.

navyvet50 said:
Good for Herman. Now lets include Christians, Jews, Mormons, etc etc…… to prevent sharia law and any other religious based law.

When people claim this country was founded on Christian principles I sometimes ask, “what principles are those?”

I can’t think of any principles that are uniquely Christian and that weren’t around in other teachings before Christianity existed.

CosmosDan said:
When people claim this country was founded on Christian principles I sometimes ask, “what principles are those?”

I can’t think of any principles that are uniquely Christian and that weren’t around in other teachings before Christianity existed.

Indeed. I’m a Christian, and have no idea what “Christian principles” is supposed to mean. Agreement with Jesus’s moral teachings? Acceptance of his divinity? Belief in the Trinity? Rejection of the Albigensian heresy? Clearly, the framers believed lots of different things, and while this country (like all of ‘em) was founded on philosophies, I’ve never found one that was uniquely Xian.

Vidiot said:
Indeed. I’m a Christian, and have no idea what “Christian principles” is supposed to mean. Agreement with Jesus’s moral teachings? Acceptance of his divinity? Belief in the Trinity? Rejection of the Albigensian heresy? Clearly, the framers believed lots of different things, and while this country (like all of ‘em) was founded on philosophies, I’ve never found one that was uniquely Xian.

IMHO, doctrinal beliefs are not principles. Belief in a Supreme being, Jesus as divine, and so on, are doctrine rather than principles of conduct. Principles, such as honesty, compassion, equality, justice, etc. are not uniquely Christian, or owned by any religion or philosophy. We can frame a dialogue about principles without letting doctrinal differences separate us, if we are wise enough and determined enough to see how necessary it is.

LOL

WHO EXACTLY is forcing Sharia Law in the USA?

I will never elect any Jewish, Mormon, or Scientologists!!!!!

Herman Cain spoke eloquently for 40 minutes last week without the aid of notes or teleprompters, so naturally it’s time for the leftists to fix bayonets on him.

Publius219 said:
Muslims are the new nlggers.

Dear Mediaite, Please apply the BANHAMMER to this A-hole. NOW.

Publius219 said:
Muslims are the new nlggers.

9 “people” voted this up? WOW!Gotta love the new “civil” era Obama brought us. Just unbelievable Mediaite allows this.

Bill Huggins said:
LOL

WHO EXACTLY is forcing Sharia Law in the USA?

I will never elect any Jewish, Mormon, or Scientologists!!!!!

Actually, I did a little reading about Sharia law in the UK. They have allowed Sharia law to handle civil cases in Muslim communities. IMO, a bad precedent to set. Part of the problem with Islam is that is has long been connected to politics. We’ve gotten used to the separation of church and state, but for some Muslim immigrants that’s not what they are used to. We do have to establish that in the USA, we have a body of laws that apply to everyone, {except the very wealthy and politically connected} and religious beliefs and tradition can in no way supersede the law. After 200+ years we’ve maintained the separation of church and state so I don’t consider Sharia law any kind of serious threat at all, however, it does need to be made clear. If someone chooses to live here, they are subject to the law and religious belief or tradition is no exception. I think a generation of Muslims growing up in America will help.

Bill Huggins said:
LOL

WHO EXACTLY is forcing Sharia Law in the USA?

I will never elect any Jewish, Mormon, or Scientologists!!!!!

Did you help elect the Muslim in 08?

I’d love to see Cain win. Not only does he make a whole hell of a lot of sense, I’d love and cherish the opportunity to shove the racist tag on all the leftist moonbats as payback for the last few years.

errxn said:
Dear Mediaite, Please apply the BANHAMMER to this A-hole. NOW.

Why do you hate the 1st amendment with such passion? Why do you hate America? I’d say there’s a big difference between using the word nlgger the way I used and saying, oh, I don’t know, “No nlggers allowed!”. Would you argue to have my freedom of speech censored if I had said n****r? Or if I had said “Nasteriskasteriskasteriskasteriskr?” Can adults not use adult language? Why do you wipe your ass with the Constitution?

Robert Stephenson Hearts Mark Schultz said:
9 “people” voted this up? WOW!Gotta love the new “civil” era Obama brought us. Just unbelievable Mediaite allows this.

I thought political correctness was killing this country?

If you think Obama is a Muslim, then you, like Mr. Cain, are a cosmic fool.

Publius219 said:
Why do you hate the 1st amendment with such passion? Why do you hate America? I’d say there’s a big difference between using the word nlgger the way I used and saying, oh, I don’t know, “No nlggers allowed!”. Would you argue to have my freedom of speech censored if I had said n****r? Or if I had said “Nasteriskasteriskasteriskasteriskr?” Can adults not use adult language? Why do you wipe your ass with the Constitution?

Now, let me ask you a question. How is it possible that you can be such a brain-addled moron and still manage to breathe?

Publius219 said:
Why do you hate the 1st amendment with such passion? Why do you hate America? I’d say there’s a big difference between using the word nlgger the way I used and saying, oh, I don’t know, “No nlggers allowed!”. Would you argue to have my freedom of speech censored if I had said n****r? Or if I had said “Nasteriskasteriskasteriskasteriskr?” Can adults not use adult language? Why do you wipe your ass with the Constitution?

I would argue you need your ass kicked and good. Now, go back to thinkprogress where you belong, loser.

i have found the black sean hannity

Larkinvos said:
If you think Obama is a Muslim, then you, like Mr. Cain, are a cosmic fool.

Yeah…why would anyone ever get that crazy idea?:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCAffMSWSzY

This is a sound position.

Islam is an uncivilized evil world view inconsistent with western civilization and the United States Constitution.

For one of many informative items on this subject, see Geert Wilder’s speech to the Magna Carta Society, http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/03/geert-wilders-the-failure-of-multiculturalism-and-how-to-turn-the-tide.html.

It goes against the grain of American toleration, to be sure, but we can’t tolerate fanatical intolerance as holy writ. Not can we tolerate the intolerable. Hence unremitting hostility to all things Islamic is vital to the preservation of civilization.

The Comintern strategy is to ally with Islam to destroy the United States, abusing our own virtues to impose an insufferable totalitarian regime. See the pieces on Olavo de Carvalho and Immanuel Wallerstein at https://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#inbox/12e493...

Concurrently the communist powers will be pitting Islamic factions against one another, so weakening the Islamic world that the communist powers will take them over and wreak upon Muslims a richly deserved holocaust that will make the shoa look like a picnic in terms of the number of victims, and wipe Islam from the face of the earth. Billions of the followers of Islam will be without ceremony of white wrappings plowed under for fertilizer, figuratively if not literally. In the long run, intolerance and rejection of Islam will be the more humane course for Muslims.

The current pretender to the Office of President is probably a Comintern agent implementing this strategy. Exhaustive investigation will also show that he has dishonestly claimed the distinction of being the son of a Muslim Luo tribesman, and paid off Islamic interests at America’s to conceal evidence of his Indonesian citizenship.

To correct errors in comment just posted:
This is a sound position.
Islam is an uncivilized evil world view inconsistent with western civilization and the United States Constitution.
For one of many informative items on this subject, see Geert Wilder’s speech to the Magna Carta Society, http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/03/geert-wilders-the-failure-of-multiculturalism-and-how-to-turn-the-tide.html.
It goes against the grain of American toleration, to be sure, but we can’t tolerate fanatical intolerance as holy writ. Nor can we tolerate the intolerable. Hence unremitting hostility to all things Islamic is vital to the preservation of civilization and the Constitution.
The Comintern strategy is to ally with Islam to destroy the United States, abusing our own virtues to impose an insufferable totalitarian regime. See the pieces on Olavo de Carvalho and Immanuel Wallerstein at https://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#inbox/12e493...
Concurrently the communist powers will be pitting Islamic factions against one another, so weakening the Islamic world that the communist powers will take them over and wreak upon Muslims a richly deserved holocaust that will make the shoa look like a picnic in terms of the number of victims, and wipe Islam from the face of the earth. Billions of the followers of Islam will be without ceremony of white wrappings plowed under for fertilizer, figuratively if not literally. In the long run, intolerance and rejection of Islam will be the more humane course for Muslims.
The current pretender to the Office of President is probably a Comintern agent implementing this strategy. Exhaustive investigation will also show that he has dishonestly claimed the distinction of being the son of a Muslim Luo tribesman, and paid off Islamic interests at America’s expense to conceal evidence of his Indonesian citizenship.

Robert Stephenson Hearts Mark Schultz said:
I would argue you need your ass kicked and good. Now, go back to thinkprogress where you belong, loser.

Advocating violence against those you disagree with. Why do you hate America and the 1st amendment? Why can’t you answer reasonable questions without resorting to violence? Why don’t you come kick my ass yourself?

Publius219 said:
Advocating violence against those you disagree with. Why do you hate America and the 1st amendment? Why can’t you answer reasonable questions without resorting to violence? Why don’t you come kick my ass yourself?

I happen to like Herman Cain , but , I agree that violence is a poor substitute for debate . in the United States all should have to live according to the United States law . if that is not what they are looking for then they have a right to their opinion , but , i have the same right also . you want to change the United States law then use debate and take violence back to the third world .

What else do you expect from a teabagging bigot? BTW, what he’s proposing is against the law.

With bowed head I ask leave for further correction of my initial comment.

Regarding my citation https://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#inbox/12e493…, you can’t get there from here, or if you can I don’t know how. The highly significant items mentioned are from a New Zeal email; I’ve pasted them below.

In light of Obama’s recent trip to Brazil to coordinate with communist government leaders there, I’ve added an item on Brazil’s communist government.

“All in the Family” – Obama to “Lula” – A Very Few Degrees of Separation
Posted: 20 Feb 2011 07:10 PM PST
Life long Marxist Luis Ignacio Lula da Silva , or “Lula”, was president of Brazil until he was “term limited” out in 2010. He then handed his “crown” to former Marxist-Leninist urban terrorist Dilma Rousseff.

Rousseff and “Lula”, Communist Party of Brazil conference

Fidel Castro, “Lula”

In the early 1990s “Lula” and Fidel Castro established the Sao Paolo Forum, a regular gathering of Latin American communist, terrorist, socialist and leftist political parties. This alliance laid the groundwork for the almost total conquest of Latin America by the left since that time.

Incredibly, rather than being treated as the hardcore revolutionary that he is, “Lula” has been courted by the U.S. as an ally against the “extremist” Hugo Chavez of Venezuela!

Hugo Chavez, “Lula”

“Lula”, Obama, Rousseff

Since at least the early 1980s, “Lula” was courted and coached by forces within the U.S. left.

Stanley Gacek

Stanley Gacek is a labor attorney and AFL-CIO official , responsible for the Federation’s relations with Latin America and the Caribbean.

Since 1981, he has served as a special advisor on North American affairs to the Brazilian Workers Party and has been a friend and adviser to “Lula” for the entire period.

Gacek is a long time member of the U.S.’s largest Marxist organization, Democratic Socialists of America and has represented that organization at the 2003 gathering of the Socialist International in Sao Paolo, Brazil

Since August 1, 2006, Stanley Gacek has been the Associate Director of the newly restored International Department of the AFL-CIO, the largest national trade union central in the United States.

From 1997 until 2005, Gacek was Assistant Director for International Affairs. Prior to his position at the AFL-CIO, Gacek was Assistant General Counsel to the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union.

Barack Obama, John Sweeney

Gacek was brought into the AFL-CIO in 1997 by then president John Sweeney, coincidentally another member of Democratic Socialists of America.

John Sweeney has been a long time supporter of Barack Obama, who has an almost 30 year history with Democratic Socialists of America.

On February 15, Barack Obama awarded comrade John Sweeney the Medal of Freedom in a special ceremony at the White House.

Revolutionaries are an incestuous bunch – they have to be. Their vision will never win the majority in the West, so they work to infiltrate the system – feeding off each other, promoting each other, a “Marxist Mafia” gradually consolidating power, while the world blithely goes about its business.

Must Read: Russia, China, Radical Islam and the Latin American Threat to US Survival
Posted: 20 Feb 2011 05:38 PM PST
Brazilian philosopher, Olavo de Carvalho is an expert on the Latin American Left and its ties to Islam, Russia and China.

Olavo de Carvahlo
In this interview, with Jeff Nyquist, de Carvahlo eloquently and forcefully states a theme I’ve long promoted on this blog – that Russia, China, Cuba, Iran radical Islam and the Latin American Left, co-ordinated by Cuba and Brazil through the Sao Paolo Forum, are working together to destroy the the United States of America.

I emphasize – not to weaken, to marginalize, to impoverish – but to DESTROY the USA.

As Carvalho explained, “The Russian-Chinese influence has been growing more and more in Latin America. The U.S. Government has missed this because it still sees Russia and China as allies, in spite of the fact that they are the two largest weapons suppliers to terrorism around the world. One must remember that the Putin government’s foreign policy is today guided by the so-called ‘Eurasian’ strategy, invented by Russian philosopher Alexander Dugin, who proposes that Russia, China, and Islam ally with all the anti-American forces in Western Europe, Africa and Latin America, for the purpose of laying final siege to the United States. This strategy already has strong military support in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, a kind of eastern version of NATO, which brings together Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan.”

I asked Carvalho about recent reports of a deal between Islamic Iran and communist Venezuela to build a strategic missile base aimed at the United States. I asked if the Marxists of South America were allied with al Qaeda and Tehran. “Yes, they are,” he replied. “They are also allied with the ETA, which is a Basque terrorist organization. There are lots of agents of these organizations in Hugo Chavez’s entourage. This fact is not unknown to many Latin American governments, but most of them are committed to remaining silent about it because of the agreements they signed as members of the Sao Paulo Forum, the spearhead of the communist movement in Latin America…”

I then asked Carvalho to name the countries working with the terrorists worldwide for the destruction of the United States. He replied as follows: “Iran, Syria, North Korea, Cuba, Russia, and especially China are the main ones. In Latin America, Venezuela is the most obvious example, but Venezuela would be nothing without the support it gets from all the governments of the Sao Paulo Forum, the leader of which is Brazil…”

According to Carvalho, the Left continues to consolidate its position in Latin America. “It has been following a strategy explicitly presented in a Chinese communist congress a few years ago: to take power by means of legal elections and then erode the democratic system from the inside to prevent the opposition from ever coming back to power in future elections,” he explained. “This is to say: they win a first match and then proceed to change the rules of the game. In Brazil this strategy has led to spectacular results. First, the idea was to limit the political field to only two contestants: radical Left and moderate Left. All other forces were dismantled by means of targeted tax audits and corruption charges which did not even need to be proved, since they destroyed reputations once and for all as soon as they were trumpeted by the media…”

Could America’s traditional ally in South America be under the control of a totalitarian movement? How could we miss such an astonishing development? “American opinion-makers have a wrong view of Brazil,” said Carvalho, “because the Brazilian government has always acted in a two-faced and camouflaged way. On the one hand, it has been courting American investors to strengthen the Brazilian economy, but on the other, it has been taking advantage of economic success in order to consolidate the Leftist sway at home, to make impossible any political opposition which is not that of the moderate left, and to give effective support to the rise of the Left in neighboring countries, while protecting openly terrorist organizations like the FARC and the Chilean MIR, which thus have ended up controlling the local criminal organization and getting the monopoly of the drug market in Brazil. In Venezuela, Hugo Chavez has also dismantled the opposition, but using more blatant methods…”

Since Brazil harbors the core of the communist movement in Latin America, how is the anti-American campaign progressing? According to Carvalho the Left is not always able to move forward. “It follows an alternating rhythm,” he explained, “according to whether the important thing at the moment is to flatter foreign investors or to unify and strengthen the Latin American Left…”

“For more than ten years,” Carvalho noted, “I have been warning that the Worker’s Party [in Brazil] is not an organization like the others; that is, willing to alternate with the opposition in power. The Worker’s Party is a revolutionary organization committed to reshaping the state and the entire society after its image and likeness, by using, for this purpose, the vilest and most corrupt resources. Since no one has ever believed any of this, everyone has kindly disarmed himself in the face of this rising party, and now that it controls everything, no one can do anything against it. Brazil is governed by a single party which has several names. I see no prospect of changing this situation in the short or medium term…”

And what is the most important thing Americans should know about the present political situation in South America? “The most important thing,” said Carvalho, “is the deep and solid unity of the local Leftist movements across national borders, the unity of the revolutionary strategy that lies behind seeming and misleading differences of national character. There are no ‘two Lefts’ in Latin America. There is only one Left, which has so much solidarity with itself that it never loses control of the two faces it employs to fool American observers.”
It is worth noting that the Brazilian Workers Party came to power on the back of an alliance of Trotskyists, communists, black radicals, environmental activists, Christian socialists, youth activists and the poor – sound familiar America?

Such alliances were promoted across the world in the early 1990s, by the Trotskyite 4th International and allied groups.

In Western nations, the New Zealand Alliance Party, the Australian Socialist Alliance and the US Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism, all attempted to follow this strategy, with varying degrees of success.

Barack Obama was very much part of this movement, through his ties to Committees of Correspondence, Democratic Socialists of America and the Chicago New Party.

The idea was to cobble together an big enough alliance to gain power ONCE. Then it became a matter of marginalizing and destroying your opposition, until your power could no longer be challenged.

America is in this stage now.

If the Obama Alliance is not decisively defeated in 2012, America will almost certainly go the way of Brazil and Venezuela – as will the rest of us eventually.

Wallerstein on Egypt and World Revolution
Posted: 20 Feb 2011 04:25 PM PST

Immanuel Wallerstein
One of the U.S.’s leading academic Marxists, Immanuel Wallerstein, was one of 60-100,000 people attending the the communist organized World Social Forum in Dakar, Senegal from Feb. 6-11, 2011.

Other notable attendees included Latin American Marxists former Brazilian President Luis Ignacio Lula da Silva and Bolivian President Evo Morales.

Wallerstein wrote “The World Social Forum, Egypt, and Transformation”, for Commentary No. 299 15 February 2011;
By unforeseen coincidence, this was the week of the Egyptian people’s successful dethroning of Hosni Mubarak, which finally succeeded just as the WSF was in its closing session. The WSF spent the week cheering the Egyptians on – and discussing the meaning of the Tunisian/Egyptian revolutions for their program of transformation, for achieving another world that is possible – possible, not certain.”

To hold such an event, the WSF requires strong local social movements (which exist in Senegal) and a government that at least tolerates the holding of the Forum. The Senegalese government of Abdoulaye Wade was ready to “tolerate” the holding of the WSF, although already a few months ago it reneged on its promised financial assistance by three-quarters.”

But then came the Tunisian and Egyptian uprisings, and the government got cold feet. What if the presence of the WSF inspired a similar uprising in Senegal? The government couldn’t cancel the affair, not with Lula of Brazil, Morales of Bolivia, and numerous African presidents coming…

Was the Senegalese government right to be so frightened of the WSF? The WSF itself debated how relevant it was to popular uprisings in the Arab world and elsewhere, undertaken by people who had probably never heard of the WSF? The answer given by those in attendance reflected the long-standing division in its ranks. There were those who felt that ten years of WSF meetings had contributed significantly to the undermining of the legitimacy of neoliberal globalization, and that the message had seeped down everywhere…

There was nonetheless one underlying complaint among those in attendance. People said correctly we all know what we’re against, but we should be laying out more clearly what it is we are for. This is what we can contribute to the Egyptian revolution and to the others that are going to come everywhere…

For the moment, all eyes are on the Arab world and the degree to which the heroic efforts of the Egyptian people will transform politics throughout the Arab world. But the tinder for such uprisings exists everywhere, even in the wealthier regions of the world. As of the moment, we are justified in being semi-optimistic.
The “semi-optimistic” revolutionary Immanuel Wallerstein should be taken seriously. Wallerstein is very well connected internationally. he was once even affiliated to the Soviet era U.S.S.R. Academy of Sciences.

In 2008, Wallerstein was one of several Marxists to support Progressives for Obama. In 2007 , Wallerstein served on the board of P.F.O.’s parent body Movement for a Democratic Society – an alliance of former Weather Underground terrorist leaders, Communist Party USA supporters, Democratic Socialists of America and Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism leaders and independent Marxists.

In M.D.S. Wallerstein was allied with with Obama associates Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn, Carl Davidson, Rashid Khalidi and Cornel West, as well as internationally known revolutionaries such as Tariq Ali, Noam Chomsky, Angela Davis, Tom Hayden, and the late Howard Zinn.

International revolution, is just that ‘international’. It reaches from Brasilia to Cairo, to Dakar, to Moscow and to Washington DC.

We are entering a tumultuous era.

Robert Stephenson Hearts Mark Schultz said:
I would argue you need your ass kicked and good.

Isn’t your nickname–Robert Stephenson Hearts Mark Schultz — another one of the many troll identities in this forum related to the obsession with The Real Royal King or am I confused?

If so, you are the one who deserves an ass kicking.

A new Pew poll of Middle Eastern Muslims shows strong support for Sharia Law . (Taken around December of last year)

About eight-in-ten Muslims in Egypt and Pakistan (82% each) endorse the stoning of people who commit adultery; 70% of Muslims in Jordan and 56% of Nigerian Muslims share this view. Muslims in Pakistan and Egypt are also the most supportive of whippings and cutting off of hands for crimes like theft and robbery; 82% in Pakistan and 77% in Egypt favor making this type of punishment the law in their countries, as do 65% of Muslims in Nigeria and 58% in Jordan. When asked about the death penalty for those who leave the Muslim religion, at least three-quarters of Muslims in Jordan (86%), Egypt (84%) and Pakistan (76%) say they would favor making it the law.

1) I believe that the Muslim religion is evil.. I’m not saying this polls would get the same results from Muslims in this country but I can not see how anyone can say that this religion is tolerant. And I don’ t see how the left in this country can defend it. Especially how they treat their women. Only 69% of people in this country support the death penalty in only same murder cases . I can not conceive of killing someone for changing their religion or stoning people who commit adultery especially when most of these people are women who can’t defend themselves. No one wants to talked about these evil views for the sake of being PC.

2) I do agree as of now that Herman Cain doesn’t have much of a chance to win the Republican nomination. But I would listen to what he has to say before I would make my decision on him. What he said about not appointing Muslims is fine with me. I know, probably not PC. I’m more interested in his fiscal policy. We are broke and we need our politicians to fix it.

By the way.. I don’t consider myself very religious. I do believe in God but I don’t have a chosen religion. I have no problem with most religions nor the people who follow them. As long as they or not oppressive and their practices do not go against the Constitution or violate federal,state or local laws. Sharia law is not compatible with our countries laws. Sharia law is a horror show!

Liberty_Hound said:
I believe that the Muslim religion is evil..

That is okay. I believe the application of Christianity by social conservatives is also evil.

Albert Moore said:
With bowed head I ask leave for further correction of my initial comment.

Regarding my citation https://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#inbox/12e493…, you can’t get there from here, or if you can I don’t know how. The highly significant items mentioned are from a New Zeal email; I’ve pasted them below.

In light of Obama’s recent trip to Brazil to coordinate with communist government leaders there, I’ve added an item on Brazil’s communist government.

“All in the Family” – Obama to “Lula” – A Very Few Degrees of Separation
Posted: 20 Feb 2011 07:10 PM PST
Life long Marxist Luis Ignacio Lula da Silva , or “Lula”, was president of Brazil until he was “term limited” out in 2010. He then handed his “crown” to former Marxist-Leninist urban terrorist Dilma Rousseff.

Rousseff and “Lula”, Communist Party of Brazil conference

Fidel Castro, “Lula”

In the early 1990s “Lula” and Fidel Castro established the Sao Paolo Forum, a regular gathering of Latin American communist, terrorist, socialist and leftist political parties. This alliance laid the groundwork for the almost total conquest of Latin America by the left since that time.

Incredibly, rather than being treated as the hardcore revolutionary that he is, “Lula” has been courted by the U.S. as an ally against the “extremist” Hugo Chavez of Venezuela!

Hugo Chavez, “Lula”

“Lula”, Obama, Rousseff

Since at least the early 1980s, “Lula” was courted and coached by forces within the U.S. left.

Stanley Gacek

Stanley Gacek is a labor attorney and AFL-CIO official , responsible for the Federation’s relations with Latin America and the Caribbean.

Since 1981, he has served as a special advisor on North American affairs to the Brazilian Workers Party and has been a friend and adviser to “Lula” for the entire period.

Gacek is a long time member of the U.S.’s largest Marxist organization, Democratic Socialists of America and has represented that organization at the 2003 gathering of the Socialist International in Sao Paolo, Brazil

Since August 1, 2006, Stanley Gacek has been the Associate Director of the newly restored International Department of the AFL-CIO, the largest national trade union central in the United States.

From 1997 until 2005, Gacek was Assistant Director for International Affairs. Prior to his position at the AFL-CIO, Gacek was Assistant General Counsel to the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union.

Barack Obama, John Sweeney

Gacek was brought into the AFL-CIO in 1997 by then president John Sweeney, coincidentally another member of Democratic Socialists of America.

John Sweeney has been a long time supporter of Barack Obama, who has an almost 30 year history with Democratic Socialists of America.

On February 15, Barack Obama awarded comrade John Sweeney the Medal of Freedom in a special ceremony at the White House.

Revolutionaries are an incestuous bunch – they have to be. Their vision will never win the majority in the West, so they work to infiltrate the system – feeding off each other, promoting each other, a “Marxist Mafia” gradually consolidating power, while the world blithely goes about its business.

Must Read: Russia, China, Radical Islam and the Latin American Threat to US Survival
Posted: 20 Feb 2011 05:38 PM PST
Brazilian philosopher, Olavo de Carvalho is an expert on the Latin American Left and its ties to Islam, Russia and China.

Olavo de Carvahlo
In this interview, with Jeff Nyquist, de Carvahlo eloquently and forcefully states a theme I’ve long promoted on this blog – that Russia, China, Cuba, Iran radical Islam and the Latin American Left, co-ordinated by Cuba and Brazil through the Sao Paolo Forum, are working together to destroy the the United States of America.

I emphasize – not to weaken, to marginalize, to impoverish – but to DESTROY the USA.

As Carvalho explained, “The Russian-Chinese influence has been growing more and more in Latin America. The U.S. Government has missed this because it still sees Russia and China as allies, in spite of the fact that they are the two largest weapons suppliers to terrorism around the world. One must remember that the Putin government’s foreign policy is today guided by the so-called ‘Eurasian’ strategy, invented by Russian philosopher Alexander Dugin, who proposes that Russia, China, and Islam ally with all the anti-American forces in Western Europe, Africa and Latin America, for the purpose of laying final siege to the United States. This strategy already has strong military support in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, a kind of eastern version of NATO, which brings together Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan.”

I asked Carvalho about recent reports of a deal between Islamic Iran and communist Venezuela to build a strategic missile base aimed at the United States. I asked if the Marxists of South America were allied with al Qaeda and Tehran. “Yes, they are,” he replied. “They are also allied with the ETA, which is a Basque terrorist organization. There are lots of agents of these organizations in Hugo Chavez’s entourage. This fact is not unknown to many Latin American governments, but most of them are committed to remaining silent about it because of the agreements they signed as members of the Sao Paulo Forum, the spearhead of the communist movement in Latin America…”

I then asked Carvalho to name the countries working with the terrorists worldwide for the destruction of the United States. He replied as follows: “Iran, Syria, North Korea, Cuba, Russia, and especially China are the main ones. In Latin America, Venezuela is the most obvious example, but Venezuela would be nothing without the support it gets from all the governments of the Sao Paulo Forum, the leader of which is Brazil…”

According to Carvalho, the Left continues to consolidate its position in Latin America. “It has been following a strategy explicitly presented in a Chinese communist congress a few years ago: to take power by means of legal elections and then erode the democratic system from the inside to prevent the opposition from ever coming back to power in future elections,” he explained. “This is to say: they win a first match and then proceed to change the rules of the game. In Brazil this strategy has led to spectacular results. First, the idea was to limit the political field to only two contestants: radical Left and moderate Left. All other forces were dismantled by means of targeted tax audits and corruption charges which did not even need to be proved, since they destroyed reputations once and for all as soon as they were trumpeted by the media…”

Could America’s traditional ally in South America be under the control of a totalitarian movement? How could we miss such an astonishing development? “American opinion-makers have a wrong view of Brazil,” said Carvalho, “because the Brazilian government has always acted in a two-faced and camouflaged way. On the one hand, it has been courting American investors to strengthen the Brazilian economy, but on the other, it has been taking advantage of economic success in order to consolidate the Leftist sway at home, to make impossible any political opposition which is not that of the moderate left, and to give effective support to the rise of the Left in neighboring countries, while protecting openly terrorist organizations like the FARC and the Chilean MIR, which thus have ended up controlling the local criminal organization and getting the monopoly of the drug market in Brazil. In Venezuela, Hugo Chavez has also dismantled the opposition, but using more blatant methods…”

Since Brazil harbors the core of the communist movement in Latin America, how is the anti-American campaign progressing? According to Carvalho the Left is not always able to move forward. “It follows an alternating rhythm,” he explained, “according to whether the important thing at the moment is to flatter foreign investors or to unify and strengthen the Latin American Left…”

“For more than ten years,” Carvalho noted, “I have been warning that the Worker’s Party [in Brazil] is not an organization like the others; that is, willing to alternate with the opposition in power. The Worker’s Party is a revolutionary organization committed to reshaping the state and the entire society after its image and likeness, by using, for this purpose, the vilest and most corrupt resources. Since no one has ever believed any of this, everyone has kindly disarmed himself in the face of this rising party, and now that it controls everything, no one can do anything against it. Brazil is governed by a single party which has several names. I see no prospect of changing this situation in the short or medium term…”

And what is the most important thing Americans should know about the present political situation in South America? “The most important thing,” said Carvalho, “is the deep and solid unity of the local Leftist movements across national borders, the unity of the revolutionary strategy that lies behind seeming and misleading differences of national character. There are no ‘two Lefts’ in Latin America. There is only one Left, which has so much solidarity with itself that it never loses control of the two faces it employs to fool American observers.”
It is worth noting that the Brazilian Workers Party came to power on the back of an alliance of Trotskyists, communists, black radicals, environmental activists, Christian socialists, youth activists and the poor – sound familiar America?

Such alliances were promoted across the world in the early 1990s, by the Trotskyite 4th International and allied groups.

In Western nations, the New Zealand Alliance Party, the Australian Socialist Alliance and the US Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism, all attempted to follow this strategy, with varying degrees of success.

Barack Obama was very much part of this movement, through his ties to Committees of Correspondence, Democratic Socialists of America and the Chicago New Party.

The idea was to cobble together an big enough alliance to gain power ONCE. Then it became a matter of marginalizing and destroying your opposition, until your power could no longer be challenged.

America is in this stage now.

If the Obama Alliance is not decisively defeated in 2012, America will almost certainly go the way of Brazil and Venezuela – as will the rest of us eventually.

Wallerstein on Egypt and World Revolution
Posted: 20 Feb 2011 04:25 PM PST

Immanuel Wallerstein
One of the U.S.’s leading academic Marxists, Immanuel Wallerstein, was one of 60-100,000 people attending the the communist organized World Social Forum in Dakar, Senegal from Feb. 6-11, 2011.

Other notable attendees included Latin American Marxists former Brazilian President Luis Ignacio Lula da Silva and Bolivian President Evo Morales.

Wallerstein wrote “The World Social Forum, Egypt, and Transformation”, for Commentary No. 299 15 February 2011;
By unforeseen coincidence, this was the week of the Egyptian people’s successful dethroning of Hosni Mubarak, which finally succeeded just as the WSF was in its closing session. The WSF spent the week cheering the Egyptians on – and discussing the meaning of the Tunisian/Egyptian revolutions for their program of transformation, for achieving another world that is possible – possible, not certain.”

To hold such an event, the WSF requires strong local social movements (which exist in Senegal) and a government that at least tolerates the holding of the Forum. The Senegalese government of Abdoulaye Wade was ready to “tolerate” the holding of the WSF, although already a few months ago it reneged on its promised financial assistance by three-quarters.”

But then came the Tunisian and Egyptian uprisings, and the government got cold feet. What if the presence of the WSF inspired a similar uprising in Senegal? The government couldn’t cancel the affair, not with Lula of Brazil, Morales of Bolivia, and numerous African presidents coming…

Was the Senegalese government right to be so frightened of the WSF? The WSF itself debated how relevant it was to popular uprisings in the Arab world and elsewhere, undertaken by people who had probably never heard of the WSF? The answer given by those in attendance reflected the long-standing division in its ranks. There were those who felt that ten years of WSF meetings had contributed significantly to the undermining of the legitimacy of neoliberal globalization, and that the message had seeped down everywhere…

There was nonetheless one underlying complaint among those in attendance. People said correctly we all know what we’re against, but we should be laying out more clearly what it is we are for. This is what we can contribute to the Egyptian revolution and to the others that are going to come everywhere…

For the moment, all eyes are on the Arab world and the degree to which the heroic efforts of the Egyptian people will transform politics throughout the Arab world. But the tinder for such uprisings exists everywhere, even in the wealthier regions of the world. As of the moment, we are justified in being semi-optimistic.
The “semi-optimistic” revolutionary Immanuel Wallerstein should be taken seriously. Wallerstein is very well connected internationally. he was once even affiliated to the Soviet era U.S.S.R. Academy of Sciences.

In 2008, Wallerstein was one of several Marxists to support Progressives for Obama. In 2007 , Wallerstein served on the board of P.F.O.’s parent body Movement for a Democratic Society – an alliance of former Weather Underground terrorist leaders, Communist Party USA supporters, Democratic Socialists of America and Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism leaders and independent Marxists.

In M.D.S. Wallerstein was allied with with Obama associates Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn, Carl Davidson, Rashid Khalidi and Cornel West, as well as internationally known revolutionaries such as Tariq Ali, Noam Chomsky, Angela Davis, Tom Hayden, and the late Howard Zinn.

International revolution, is just that ‘international’. It reaches from Brasilia to Cairo, to Dakar, to Moscow and to Washington DC.

We are entering a tumultuous era.

Hahahaha. AKA you linked to a chain letter. Really credible. Nice work. Are you going to get the new Dr. Dre 8 track on 4/20? Or are you just going to wait for the VHS?

check this link out related to this story:

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/03/28/herman-cain-muslims-walkback/

Due to criticism he is now walking his comment:

“Mr. Cain would consider any person for a position based on merit, as anybody else would, as is the law.”

Now GFY righites because we will hold you accountable for your racist, bigoted behavior whether you like it or not.

Gasket said:
What else do you expect from a teabagging bigot? BTW, what he’s proposing is against the law.

No, it isn’t.

same2u says:

Reported as spam.

same2u said:
Isn’t your nickname–Robert Stephenson Hearts Mark Schultz — another one of the many troll identities in this forum related to the obsession with The Real Royal King or am I confused?

If so, you are the one who deserves an ass kicking.

As you follow it around agreeing with it and vice versa…Oh, the irony.

same2u said:
That is okay. I believe the application of Christianity by social conservatives is also evil.

I listed specific reasons why I believe the Muslim religion/Sharia law are evil. And you didn’t state your opinion
on the Muslim religion? Do have any specifics to support your opinion on Christians? What evil application of Christianity have Christians imposed? Just asking.

Some Christians don’t believe in gay marriages…Sharia laws want Gays dead.

Re: Homosexuals
“If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.” (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)

According to Jewish and Christian tradition, God dictated the Book of Leviticus to Moses.

P.S. The point is Jews and Christians ignore violent aspects of their Holy books as do many Muslims.

U.S. Constitution; Article VI:

The senators and representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and political Officers, bot of the United States and the several States, shall be bound by Oath or
Affirmation, to support this Constitution, but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

So, Mr. Cain is promising to violate the Constitution he is running to uphold. Let the legal gymnastics commence.

Liberty_Hound said:
1) I believe that the Muslim religion is evil.. I’m not saying this polls would get the same results from Muslims in this country but I can not see how anyone can say that this religion is tolerant.

I think people are confusing culture with religion. It’s easy to do since in many predominantly Muslim nations religion and politics are mixed. Religions change and evolve as efforts are made to change society. Christianity supported slavery and oppression for most of this country’s history. Do we now claim such moral superiority because the confrontation was forced a generation or two sooner here in the states. I guess that’s one approach.

Not all Muslims believe the same or want the same things out of their religion. I think we can draw a line and stand by our system of laws. We can enforce and teach separation of church and state, and new generations of Muslims will aide in the change within Islam just as new generations of Christians fought against other Christians who still supported slavery and later segregation and oppression. We can extend the hand of welcome and religious freedom and teach the concept of separation of church, mosque, temple, and state. I think in the new generations now rising up in the ME, you’ll see that trend continue.

same2u said:
Re: Homosexuals
“If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.” (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)

According to Jewish and Christian tradition, God dictated the Book of Leviticus to Moses.

P.S. The point is Jews and Christians ignore violent aspects of their Holy books as do many Muslims.

I don’t know of one Christian who would support the killing of Gays and it would be illegal to kill Gays because they are Gay in this country. (maybe I living a sheltered life). The poll a mentioned was that the majority of currently Middle Eastern Muslims support those evil laws. So if they end up having a pure democracy unlike us they can imposed these evil laws taken from the poll. They already do in some places.

The scripture you cite can and is interrupted that God would strike them down. I don’t know that’s completely true, but I don’t see Jews or Christians killing Gays or asking laws be made to do so. So in this case Christians are not imposing these views or these views as law. There is a huge difference. Just watch what happens when Sharia Law takes hold in the Middle East. Tell me then which you think is much more tolerant. There is a huge difference in believing something and imposing that as law.

So I do make a judgment. Since I believe the vast majority of Christians do not impose nor want to impose evil
laws on us but seemingly the Middle Eastern Muslims have no problem with imposing what we here in the US would consider horribly evil laws I deem it an evil religion. I admit nothing created by man “religion” being one of them is perfect. But I do believe that Christianity has much more good in it than bad and that may be true in the Muslims religion but the bad is really really bad in Sharia law.

Robert Stephenson Hearts Mark Schultz said:
No, it isn’t.

Yes, it IS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Six_of_the_United_States_Constitution
You teabaggers are STUPID!

Liberty_Hound said:
I listed specific reasons why I believe the Muslim religion/Sharia law are evil. And you didn’t state your opinion
on the Muslim religion? Do have any specifics to support your opinion on Christians? What evil application of Christianity have Christians imposed? Just asking.

Some Christians don’t believe in gay marriages…Sharia laws want Gays dead.

You are dumb. In Uganda, Christians there want to enact laws that would criminalize homosexuality. Actually, the punishment was supposed to be the death sentence until they got serious pushback back from the US State dept. That is the Christian government there which has had great support from US evangelical Christians.

BTW, Islam is an Abrahamic religion just like Christianity. Stoning is found in the Bible too. Have you actually read the Bible? The killing of homosexuals is endorsed in the Bible. There’s nowhere in the Quran where stoning of women is endorsed. That is rhetoric spouted by radical Imams via generations. Even the sentence of adultery requires a very high threshold of proof for the sentence/punishment to be carried out. You want another “evil” about Christianity? How about slavery? The Bible was used to justify slavery of blacks in the USA. All religions have flaws and insane dogma.

It’s just one of those unsolved mysteries of life, like why does MSNBC ban all Black men from their employ ( the emploees we see anyway ) ?

“This is what happened in Europe. And little by little, to try and be politically correct, they made this little change, they made this little change. And now they’ve got a social problem that they don’t know what to do with hardly.”

No Nobel Prize for him.

His remarks were taken totally out of context.

CosmosDan said:
I disagree. {not that they’re mistaken} so called Holy writings are subject to interpretation. That is demonstrated in the many variations of detail in Christian doctrine, and the different interpretations of Islam. Since not all Muslim schools or scholars , or Imams, teach the same interpretation, it seems clear there is room. Personally I think we’d all be much better off if people realized these books were written by men and ultimately we must make our own choices and be responsible for them. The whole idea that one group of people are more the chosen ones of a creator deity that created everything is ….a tragic interpretation that serves only to divide us.

You’ve ignored the fundamental distinction that makes christianity/judaism christianity/judaism and that which makes islam islam. And therein lies all the distinction. The failure of Westerners to appreciate this distinction will, in decades to come, spell our doom. I don’t think I’m being melodramatic here.

Sean68 said:
You’ve ignored the fundamental distinction that makes christianity/judaism christianity/judaism and that which makes islam islam. And therein lies all the distinction. The failure of Westerners to appreciate this distinction will, in decades to come, spell our doom. I don’t think I’m being melodramatic here.

I’ve been drinking and I recognize that this is a little vague for anyone who hasn’t read my earlier post: islam differs from its predecessors by virtue of the highly salient fact that islam is regarded by muslims as the infallible word of god.

same2u said:
No worries Herman. I can say with absolute conviction, that the Conservatives in the south will not vote for you.

No worries same2u, I can say with absolute conviction, that you are wrong again. I am a Conservative in the South and I would vote for Cain for Pres. tomorrow.

Sean68 said:
I’ve been drinking and I recognize that this is a little vague for anyone who hasn’t read my earlier post: islam differs from its predecessors by virtue of the highly salient fact that islam is regarded by muslims as the infallible word of god.

Try stepping into a Southern Baptist Convention and telling them that the Bible is NOT the “Infallible Word of God.”
Walk into a Hassidic neighborhood in Brooklyn and tell them the Torah is NOT God’s Word.
Then run like hell, if you want to survive.

Hey tea-baggers – this is your guy!!

Sean68 said:
I’ve been drinking and I recognize that this is a little vague for anyone who hasn’t read my earlier post: islam differs from its predecessors by virtue of the highly salient fact that islam is regarded by muslims as the infallible word of god.

LOL! Step into any US evangelical church and tell the parishoners that the Bible is not in fact the infallible word of God. Christians are as dogmatic as Muslims.

Joseph Glackin said:
U.S. Constitution; Article VI:

The senators and representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and political Officers, bot of the United States and the several States, shall be bound by Oath or
Affirmation, to support this Constitution, but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

So, Mr. Cain is promising to violate the Constitution he is running to uphold. Let the legal gymnastics commence.

A president can appoint (or nominate, as the case may be) anyone to his cabinet and to the federal judiciary that he chooses.

Judge Mental said:
A president can appoint (or nominate, as the case may be) anyone to his cabinet and to the federal judiciary that he chooses.

Yes, he can. However, he can not use religion as a metric for his choice like Cain proposes. What about that don’t you understand? Geez…you people amaze me.

Gasket said:
Yes, he can. However, he can not use religion as a metric for his choice like Cain proposes. What about that don’t you understand? Geez…you people amaze me.

So he’ll find some other reason not to choose someone who happens to be Muslim. What about that don’t you understand?

Garth said:
Hey tea-baggers – this is your guy!!

So what your really saying, in a way only you can, and as you so ineloquently stated ” Cain is to tea – baggers, what Obama is / was to scum – baggers.

Judge Mental said:
So he’ll find some other reason not to choose someone who happens to be Muslim. What about that don’t you understand?

You people are usually dumb enough not to obfuscate your reasons. Did you see what happened to the Texas state house race for speaker last year? LOL
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/141706
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/12/09/christian-conservative-replace-jewish-speaker-texan-pols-say/
PLUS, that was not the crux of the debate. Your fellow idiot thought that a religious test was not illegal. Look at the context of the discussion before opining.

Gasket said:
You people are usually dumb enough not to obfuscate your reasons. Did you see what happened to the Texas state house race for speaker last year? LOL

PLUS, that was not the crux of the debate. Your fellow idiot thought that a religious test was not illegal. Look at the context of the discussion before opining.

The assertion you (and Glackin, if that’s a different person) made was that it would be illegal for Cain to not appoint any Muslims to his cabinet or the judiciary. And you cited article VI to support that position. My response was he can appoint anyone he wants. No one can force him to appoint someone he doesn’t want on his cabinet or in the judiciary. He undoubtedly would appoint someone who shares his political viewpoint and decline to appoint anyone who doesn’t.

Whatever happened in the Texas state house race for speaker last year is totally irrelevant.

Judge Mental said:
The assertion you (and Glackin, if that’s a different person) made was that it would be illegal for Cain to not appoint any Muslims to his cabinet or the judiciary. And you cited article VI to support that position. My response was he can appoint anyone he wants. No one can force him to appoint someone he doesn’t want on his cabinet or in the judiciary.

Now, go back and READ what Cain said. He REPEATED it and defended it to Hannity later.
He SAID he would NOT appoint a person is Muslim to a judgeship or his cabinet. He made it CLEAR that the faith of a person he did not know proposed for the judicial bench would be judged by him based on their religion. THAT is against Article VI.
I am, as far as I know, the only Joseph Glackin to post here. It is my name. It is the only name I post under. I own what I say, do you? Who the “F” are you? (Apologies to Pete Townshend).

OK morons, listen up!

GBR (whom the family lovingly refers to as “Goober-Brained Retard) put our son, BOMBSHELL JR. on a bus to Thule, Greenland. He told our boy there would be a kitten waiting for him when he got to Greenland, and you know how our son is ALWAYS asking everyone he meets to buy him a kitten.

Well, the kid is sort of dimwitted just like his ol’ man, and so I’m stepping in until we get him back to provide moral support for my ol’ man, and you’d danged well better NOT mess with me! Just know that I am GBR’s ol’ lady, and give me the respect I demand.

same2u said:
That is okay. I believe the application of Christianity by social conservatives is also evil.

Nothing personal, but this remark is profoundly erroneous and evil.

Judge Mental said:
The assertion you (and Glackin, if that’s a different person) made was that it would be illegal for Cain to not appoint any Muslims to his cabinet or the judiciary. And you cited article VI to support that position. My response was he can appoint anyone he wants. No one can force him to appoint someone he doesn’t want on his cabinet or in the judiciary. He undoubtedly would appoint someone who shares his political viewpoint and decline to appoint anyone who doesn’t.

Whatever happened in the Texas state house race for speaker last year is totally irrelevant.

Jesus, dude, you have that backwards. His NOT appointing a Muslim is not the illegal part. It is the reasoning being given for that decision. (Like I said, you missed the context of the discussion)

My point with the TX state house had nothing to do with this topic directly, but, tangentially, related to a point YOU brought up about politicians hiding their real intentions for religious discrimination. I used it to show that, it’s rarely done in obscurity. They (politicians) have to make it public so they can demagogue the issue to get credit for it . That’s exactly what Cain is doing!

Albert Moore said:
Nothing personal, but this remark is profoundly erroneous and evil.

Nothing personal, but if you believe that, you are so far into denial you should be in Timbuctu any minute now.

Joseph Glackin said:
Now, go back and READ what Cain said. He REPEATED it and defended it to Hannity later.
He SAID he would NOT appoint a person is Muslim to a judgeship or his cabinet. He made it CLEAR that the faith of a person he did not know proposed for the judicial bench would be judged by him based on their religion. THAT is against Article VI.
I am, as far as I know, the only Joseph Glackin to post here. It is my name. It is the only name I post under. I own what I say, do you? Who the “F” are you? (Apologies to Pete Townshend).

Gasket said:
Jesus, dude, you have that backwards. His NOT appointing a Muslim is not the illegal part. It is the reasoning being given for that decision. (Like I said, you missed the context of the discussion)

My point with the TX state house had nothing to do with this topic directly, but, tangentially, related to a point YOU brought up about politicians hiding their real intentions for religious discrimination. I used it to show that, it’s rarely done in obscurity. They (politicians) have to make it public so they can demagogue the issue to get credit for it . That’s exactly what Cain is doing!

Cain was answering a question. Call if demagoguery if you will, but he isn’t the one who brought it up.

I disagree with both of you that not appointing a Muslim to the cabinet or judiciary would violate the constitution. Obviously, you think otherwise. And you’ve said nothing to convince me of your position.

Who am I? Doesn’t matter, and it’s none of your business. I’m not Gordon Bloyer. But, of course, I stand by my words.

Keep the hate alive! If your not white or crazy……”need not apply”!

After obama, I doubt we will have another black president of either party for decades.

Sean68 said:
I’ve been drinking and I recognize that this is a little vague for anyone who hasn’t read my earlier post: islam differs from its predecessors by virtue of the highly salient fact that islam is regarded by muslims as the infallible word of god.

Except you’re wrong in claiming this is the distinction. Obviously and demonstrably so to anyone who has done a cursory study of religion. There are many Christians who consider the Bible the infallible word of God, or will refer to it as written by God. All so called Holy writings are subject to interpretation and heavily influenced by culture. Look at any major religion’s history you’ll see how they have evolved and changed as people and society have changed. Islam is no different than any other world religion except that is behind the times, and possibly because it has been tied to closely to politics.

hunter10 said:
After obama, I doubt we will have another black president of either party for decades.

We’ll see. I think once the barrier is shattered more people will be able to run. I think the country no longer trusts or relies on the rich white male stereotype for president, but I think more people are sick of the superficial political BS as well.

Judge Mental said:
I disagree with both of you that not appointing a Muslim to the cabinet or judiciary would violate the constitution.

That’s not what we are saying. SIGH. Re-read my post below.

Gasket said:
His NOT appointing a Muslim is not the illegal part. It is the reasoning being given for that decision.

If the only reason for that Muslim not getting that job is because of his religious identity, it IS illegal. This is not a debatable point. Cain also seems to be doing the backtrack since what he said was so stupid and ignorant.

hunter10 said:
After obama, I doubt we will have another black president of either party for decades.

Are you a Republican?

a fact is that he won’t be our next president 

The First Amendment guarantees religious freedom. If you can be turned down for a government job because of your religion, there is no religious freedom. We cannot elect a President who would discriminate on the basis of religion. Any Religion!