Exclusive: Two women accused Herman Cain of inappropriate behavior (Iraq, interviews, security)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Which is just like you saying you gave money to the GOP, but my money did not go to Senator Craig. or I gave to the Catholic Church but I didn't fund the pedophile priests....
If the GOP continued to support Larry Craig I probably wouldn't give money to them. Or if the Catholic Church continues to defend pedophile priests I won't support them either.
No.....the government shouldn't fund organizations that committ crimes....murder, theft, sex trafficking. Abortion is LEGAL.....it is NOT a crime.
The government shouldn't fund ANY religious organizations.....no matter what they do.
The government doesn't fund abortions.....women that have them PAY for the service 100%. They pay for the doctor, the medicines, to use the intruments, table, building......they PAY. {except cases of rape, incest, save the life of the mother}
I don't care if women that have them pay for the abortions themselves. The fact of the matter is that the government is funneling money to an organization that provides abortions.
So the government shouldn't be able to fund an organization that lobbies against gay marriage, but they can fund an organization that provides abortions? Do you think thats ethical? I personally wouldn't support either.
If the GOP continued to support Larry Craig I probably wouldn't give money to them. Or if the Catholic Church continues to defend pedophile priests I won't support them either.
Common sense my friend...
So if I spend $400.00 on a car repair, I should just write it up as gas expense, right?
I don't care if women that have them pay for the abortions themselves. The fact of the matter is that the government is funneling money to an organization that provides abortions.
So the government shouldn't be able to fund an organization that lobbies against gay marriage, but they can fund an organization that provides abortions? Do you think thats ethical? I personally wouldn't support either.
The government provides lots of funding to churches that lobby against gay marriage. Halfway houses, homeless shelters, food donation networks, disaster relief, are often coordinated by churches, churches which carefully keep accounts separate so that funds for different activities are kept separate.
It's like someone who uses their car for work, and carefully tracks when the car is used for work purposes and when the car is used for personal purposes, so that they bill their company for work purposes, but not personal use. Such accounting distinctions are made ALL the time. It's not rocket science.
The government provides lots of funding to churches that lobby against gay marriage. Halfway houses, homeless shelters, food donation networks, disaster relief, are often coordinated by churches, churches which carefully keep accounts separate so that funds for different activities are kept separate.
It's like someone who uses their car for work, and carefully tracks when the car is used for work purposes and when the car is used for personal purposes, so that they bill their company for work purposes, but not personal use. Such accounting distinctions are made ALL the time. It's not rocket science.
Ah hem... NPR. You do know that that was the same argument that the right was using to try to defund NPR, right?
part of the problem is us.....we expect perfection from our candidates. That;s why Newt Gingrrich could not win...because he is divorced and cheated on his wife with the woman he is now married to. The press would never allow him to answer any other questions. Then we have Romney...who is a MORMON...so he can't be elected bcause the Christian vote would not go his way.
Now we have imperfect herman Cain who didn't hurt anyone...he just mnight have made some suggestive remarks or suggestions. But we have all of these people persecuting the man based on unsubstantiated charges by women who have 'lawyered up' for the riches that they are about to gain.
What ever happened to just getting the right man for the job? It's funny...the democrats will always say that Bill Clinton was one of the best presidents ever because when he left office there was a surplus of $$. Well...Bill Clinton is also one of the most notorious womanizers that politics has ever seen, and that is a proven FACT..despite the fact that he lied to congress about it.
The point is this...Clinton didn't assault anyone, but he did cheat on his wife, and he did make unwanted sexual advances to Paula Jones and at least one other woman....and he was able to function very well as the POTUS. Yet it is the democrats who are the ones pursuing Cain over this and suggesting that he fold up his tent and go home, even though there is no proof that he is guilty of anything..only his word agains hers. Why? So that a threat to the Obama socialization of the American Government can be eliminated?
Of course the dems see that Cain is a threat...that is why they want him gone...and that is why they will continue to attack Cain until that happens. Doesn't matter that they still think Clinton was the greatest thing since sliced bread...despite all of his dalliances. This isn't about morality...this is about eliminating a 'threat'...and taking the focus OFF of Obama and his pathetic record.
Cain is not qualified to be POTUS point blank! Hell, the man did not know that China had nukes!!!!
He's done nothing morally wrong, either. He says he didn't do it. Unless you believe the women over him.
As for the rest of your statement, the same could be said for Obama. Except for 999. Because Obama has NO plan.
I really can care less about the women, the fact remains the man is not even school principal ready neverless white house ready! If you are afraid the china might get nuclear weapons in 2011 you are not ready to be POTUS!
If you use a quote from a children's cartoon for your closing statement in a nationwide debate....You are not ready to be POTUS!
If you cannot fully explain an economic plan that you are pushing or why does it resembles a computer game (that failed) you are not ready to be POTUS!
Not here to defend the President but actually he does have a plan but it is pretty hard to get anything through if the republicans are going to say "no" to everything that he proposes.
This Cain Scandal stinks. I think it would be believable if there was one woman who accused him but there are like what...? 3 or 4 or more now?
Seems like someone is just up to get Cain for personal reasons. And I am not being biased here but I do not think it is a Democrat.
No, no, no. Polling indicates that the most viable threat against Obama would be Romney.
If the Republicans want a candidate that has a chance of winning, it would be Mitt.
The Democrats would much rather face off with Cain, who has not a chance in the final election.
What gets me is that the Tea Party makes all this claim about being the movement to restore morality to the country, and is supposed to be the family values segment of the Republican Party, and then they unabashedly support someone who bullies women into sex. The funny thing is, that, I think the guy is a bully, lacking compassion, unfeeling but for his own boorish impulses - a very unlikable person.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
