Re: Who Dropped the Dime on Cain?

The fact that you consider it an issue at all.... handled or no...
Says you need to crawl out from the slime and into the real world..

"The REAL issue here is how Cain handled -- or rather mishandled --
the matter"

On Nov 3, 7:24 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> The REAL issue here is how Cain handled -- or rather mishandled -- the matter.
> Regard$,
> --MJ
> "Any man can make mistakes, but only an idiot persists in his error. " -- Marcus Tullius CiceroAt 05:51 PM 11/3/2011, you wrote:The fact that voters would care at all about this issue makes me
> sad... and makes them really stupid. If every man (or woman for that
> matter) was held to account for their machisto(a) attitudes throughout
> their lives there would be no candidates for anything... The fact that
> a supposed "Author"/"Journalist would take time to write about this
> shit makes it even worse...GROW UP AMERICA!!!!!!!!!
> On Nov 3, 2:43 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> > November 3, 2011 3:00 P.M.Who Dropped the Dime on Cain?It could be someone in the Republican family.Fred Thompson
> > In a case of an untimely death, the first thing the cops do when they arrive at the home of the deceased is to try to determine whether the death was the result of a self-inflicted wound and, if it wasn t, whether a member of the family did it. Statistics show that these are good places to start looking. If the recent events surrounding sexual-harassment allegations against Herman Cain sink his campaign, the same postmortem may be appropriate.
> > First, Cain s self-inflicted wounds. When the allegations became public, he started defending himself with an unloaded gun. Even an admirably unconventional campaign cannot defy certain principles. One would be never to eat at a place with an Eats sign in the window. Another is that when it hits the fan, you should get your recollection and your facts as straight as you can before you start talking. You can t outwit the media at their own game if you don t know the game they re playing. Now it s not just about whether he was overly friendly with Miss Molly at the Fourth of July picnic it s also about catching him in inconsistencies.
> > There s a type of guy well known to every defense lawyer. He s a very successful man, usually a businessman, politician, or other public figure, who owes his success in large part to being a forceful communicator as well as very smart. Often you cannot persuade him that he should not go before that grand jury to just answer a few questions. He cannot believe that he can t persuade them of his innocence.
> > I seriously doubt that Cain did anything that merits the stop the presses treatment this story is getting, but that won t matter if he has to spend many more days talking about what he knew and when he knew it and the difference between an agreement and a settlement. As Herman himself might say, the situation is complex, but the solution is simple. He must get some advice from somebody who has been to a rodeo before, get it all straight, lay it out, and move on.
> > Actually, Cain has a good chance of weathering this storm for several reasons. People like him, and they want to believe him. More important, most primary voters intensely dislike the media, which they see as trying to bring him down. I m not sure Herman will appreciate the reference, but that is one of the main reasons that Bill Clinton survived.
> > To many people, not just Republicans, this is just another instance of dirty Washington politics indulging itself, obsessing over trivia while Rome burns. Cain, a very intelligent conservative, upsets the liberal paradigm of what African Americans are supposed to believe. Many Cain supporters involved in the tea-party movement have themselves been called racists in the recent past. Now, with the economy in the tank, the nation broke, the European Union on the verge of throwing the entire Western world into recession if not worse, and former Democratic senator and governor Jon Corzine s company having misplaced $200 million of investors money, our burning national issue is whether Herman Cain made some improper remarks over a decade ago.
> > Moreover, people are on to the sexual-harassment scam. In typical fashion, Congress took a situation where women had no protection for legitimate grievances and created a solution rife with unintended consequences. Now businesses are regularly making payouts for the flimsiest of reasons. It s obvious that these alleged victims and their lawyers no matter what they may say publicly are champing at the bit to come forward for their day in the limelight and the inevitable book deal. Who can pass up being the new Anita Hill, who to this day periodically receives glowing newspaper profiles?
> > Yet people today are watching the Cain story unfold, looking at the timing of it, and writing checks to the Cain campaign. Who knows what may come out before it s over, but it better be some pretty powerful stuff if it s going to fit the mood of the American people these days. People expect presidential politics to be rough and tumble, but times are different, and so are the circumstances of this campaign. Republicans are looking for someone to believe in. They won t all vote for Herman Cain, but right now, he symbolizes something they want to protect. Hisfellow Republicancandidates try to take him down at their own peril.
> > This brings us to another interesting situation. Usually inpresidential campaigns, the question of who originally leaked the story is given little consideration. The publisher protects his sources, and the rest of the media has no interest in drying up their own potential sources by publishing identities even if they know who they are. But this time, people will want to know. Also, these days, the media is so diverse that it will be very difficult to keep the identity of the people who planted the story secret. And it may not turn out to be the most likely suspect.
> > Initially, Cain lashed out at the liberal media. So did several conservative commentators. But I doubt thatPolitico, which published the story first, came up with this scoop by investigating Cain s background on its own.
> > People may think that news organizations have legions of Woodwards and Bernsteins fanned out across the country, poring through old courthouse records or public business records and talking to anyone they think may have some dirt to dish on a candidate. They don t. They don t have the money, for one thing. No, the days of Woodward and Bernstein, intrepid investigative reporters, are over. Investigative reporters have been replaced by people who keep a big basket under the transom to catch the dossiers and other materials that the various campaigns drop on opposing candidates.
> > Campaigns that can afford it often spend lots of money on opposition research. The research can be for perfectly legitimate things, such as positions candidates have taken on issues. Or it can be for personal dirt, substantiated or otherwise. If they pass it to the media, the campaign, of course, wants to keep its role secret. In this way, reporters are seldom investigators. More often they re facilitators. It s easier work.
> > Cain has now gotten off the media angle and targeted Gov. Rick Perry s campaign as the source of the story. This is based on the fact that a former consultant from Cain s Senate campaign now works for Perry. The campaign and the consultant deny it, and instead point the finger at the Romney campaign, because Cain s successor at the NationalRestaurantAssociation, where the alleged harassment took place, is a Romney supporter and contributor. Further, the names of Democratic operatives and a Democratic officeholder have been mentioned to me off the record.
> > I have no idea who originated the story. But I d say that looking inside the Republican family is probably a good bet. I speak from personal experience.
> > Days after I got into the presidential race in 2007, I was greeted with a website, PhoneyFred.org, described in the media at the time as an anti Fred Thompson smear site. You couldn t really tell who was behind it, but we learned of it from theDemocratic National Committee, which made ample use of it. We assumed that they had created it. However, a reporter at theWashington Post(of all people) decided to find out who was behind the site. After a lot of effort, she traced it to an executive of TTS Strategies, a South Carolina consulting firm run by J. Warren Tompkins, one of the most notorious hardball political operatives in the country.
> > Politicians of opposing campaigns were known to get what was called the Warren Treatment. He ran George W. Bush s 2000 campaign, in which anonymous flyers and telephone calls accused John McCain of fathering an illegitimate child with a black woman.
> > In 2007, he was running Mitt Romney s campaign in South Carolina, where Mitt was behind the rest of us in the polls. Of course, when confronted, both Tompkins and Mitt were shocked to learn that a rogue employee (who ran Tompkins s office) was running such a website (out of the office), and the site was taken down immediately. One of the more benign and amusing things the site accused me of was being a flip flopper. I kid you not.
> > This doesn t mean that Mitt is behind the Herman Cain hit piece. I d like to think that he and his extensive staff, many of them with training in the political dark arts has learned that when you hire the meanest dog in the junkyard, it s a little difficult to claim that you are surprised when he bites.
> > Most of us have long since given up on adherence toReagan s Eleventh Commandment, but Republican candidates do enough damage to each other out in the open these days. They shouldn t get away with peddling stuff they re ashamed to be associated with, and that can be used...
>
> read more »

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Dying for Nothing

Thursday, November 3, 2011
Dying for Nothing
by Jacob G. Hornberger

Yesterday I attended a funeral for a friend's mother at Arlington National Cemetery. During the service, my eyes focused on three nearby gravestones ­ a Lt. Colonel, 1st.Lieutenant, and a captain. The inscriptions on the gravestones stated that all three had served in Iraq and Afghanistan and that all three had died in 2011.

All I could think was: What a horrible waste of life. Three lives shortened, needlessly. All three, dying for nothing.

It was the captain's gravestone that hit me the hardest. Inscribed near the bottom of that gravestone were three letters: "VMI."

During my first year at VMI, I became accustomed to those times during evening meals when an upperclassman would take the microphone and make some sort of special announcement. I don't recall exactly what he would say but whatever it was, everyone knew what it meant and a hush would immediately sweep across the mess hall. He would then announce something like, "Attention to orders. 10 December 1968. Lt. Smith, J.S., VMI class of 1966, killed in action this day, Republic of Vietnam."

When I arrived at VMI in 1968, the Vietnam War was in full swing. I believed the government's pronouncements and trusted the judgments of U.S. officials. I really believed that U.S. troops were fighting to protect our rights and freedoms here at home. I really believed that without the U.S. intervention in Vietnam, the dominoes would start falling and the communists would soon be taking over our nation.

In other words, I believed all the government claptrap and propaganda that the young men and women who enter VMI today undoubtedly believe ­ that without the invasions and occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan ­ without a vast overseas military empire encompassing hundreds of military bases all over the world ­ without the U.S. Empire policing the world, al-Qaeda or some other group of terrorists would soon be taking over the United States.

I continued to believe the claptrap and propaganda until my junior year at VMI. I don't recall any particular event that caused me to break through the lies and propaganda but at some point, I realized that it was all just a bunch of bull. I realized that VMI grads and others were dying (and killing) for nothing. The dominoes weren't going to fall. Communism wasn't going to absorb the United States. Americans weren't going to lose their freedom if South Vietnam fell to the North. I realized that in fact, Americans were increasingly losing their freedom to their own government, owing to the war itself.

I wasn't the only one. I'd estimate that at least 30-40 percent of the VMI corps of cadets, and maybe even more, had achieved the same breakthrough I had by the time of the 1970-71 school year.

The VMI administration was obviously not pleased with those who were questioning the war. After all, genuine red-blooded American patriots were supposed to support America, which meant supporting the troops, the government, and the war effort. Everyone knew that people who opposed the war were nothing but a bunch of no-good leftists, socialists, or communists ­ i.e., people who needed to be spied upon and monitored by the FBI.

During my sophomore year, a group of cadets submitted a formal request to the VMI administration to attend an anti-war rally at Washington and Lee University, which was situated next door to VMI. Big anti-war leftist radicals like Jerry Rubin were scheduled to speak at the rally..

To everyone's amazement, the administration granted the petition. However, the administration prohibited cadets from wearing their uniform to the rally, which was somewhat amusing given that VMI regulations prohibited VMI cadets from wearing civilian clothes in town.

When the cadets returned from the rally, the administration hit them with a surprise inspection, at which they were determined to be guilty of having "long hair," for which they were penalized them with demerits. Of course, "long hair" was one of those subjective and relative offenses listed in the VMI Blue Book of regulations, given that everyone at VMI was required to keep his hair short all the time.

I'm sure that the VMI administration was totally befuddled and not very pleased over the fact that a large segment of the student body was turning against the war. After all, since everyone lived in the VMI barracks, they had control over us 24 hours a day. Yet, here were an increasing number of students who were arriving at conclusions about the war that were diametrically opposed to the official government position (which was the VMI administration's position) on the war. Even worse, our views on the war were aligning with those of liberals, leftists, socialists, and communists!

Unfortunately, the administration could not step back and appreciate what actually was happening: VMI was producing independent-minded students who were refusing to be taken in by government propaganda and lies ­ students who were unafraid to critically analyze government policy and take a stand against it when they concluded that it violated correct principles or individual conscience. To me, that's something that a school should be proud of.

Undoubtedly, many of the 58,178 men who died in Vietnam believed that they were dying for a noble cause. But they didn't. They died for nothing. The North Vietnamese won the war and reunited the country. The dominoes did not fall. The United States did not fall to the communists. Today, the Vietnamese people are still suffering under communism but no one is calling for a war to free them. The United States and the communist regime in Vietnam have friendly relations with each other. The result would have been the same without the deaths of all those American troops.

It's no different with Iraq and Afghanistan. There was never any danger of the United States falling to Saddam Hussein, the Taliban, al-Qaeda, the terrorists, or anyone else. All the invasions and occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan have accomplished is to make things worse, not better, for the American people.

Enough is enough. The only genuine way to support the troops is not by cheering for them in Iraq and Afghanistan but instead by pulling them out and bringing them home, just like we did with Vietnam. We don't need any more gravestones like the ones I saw yesterday in Arlington National Cemetery.

http://www.fff.org/blog/jghblog2011-11-03.asp

Ron Paul: I oppose 'In God We Trust' bill

Ron Paul: I oppose 'In God We Trust' bill
By Bob Cusack - 11/03/11 04:20 PM ET

Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) said Thursday he opposes the Republican measure that seeks to reaffirm's the country's "In God We Trust" motto.

The resolution overwhelmingly passed the House on Wednesday, attracting only nine "no" votes. Paul, who is running for president, missed the vote.

Paul said he didn't think the resolution was necessary, saying he wouldn't have brought it up.

"I would have voted 'no' not because I don't like the motto and don't think we can use it but 'no' because we were telling the states what to do," Paul told The Hill.

The GOP measure stands behind the national motto, which is used in public schools, public buildings and other government institutions.

President Obama on Wednesday mocked the House for voting on the measure instead of focusing on job creation.

The only Republican to reject the resolution was freshman Rep. Justin Amash (Mich.), who has endorsed Paul for president.


http://thehill.com/homenews/house/191711-ron-paul-i-oppose-in-god-we-trust-bill

Re: The truth about taxing millionaires

Good Evening Studio,

 

Just a quick couple of "corrections"  regarding your last post.....I know how much you cherish accuracy.

 

First,  I sent you (via the Group PF)  the  link to the "9-9-9" Plan, from the Cain campaign.  To date, you have not told us with any specificity what it is that you find "not well articulated or thought out".  All you have done is sling nasty hateful rhetoric regarding the plan.  I for one would be interested to hear what it is that you disagree with that is contained in Mr. Cain's plan.

 

Second, you are correct, there are some points in the plan that I think are troublesome, and would have to be addressed, however I have never sent you any e-mail, other than those e-mails of which I send to the Group,  and the exact words (if my recollection is correct) is that, "I haven't endorsed Mr. Cain's "9-9-9" Plan to date".  I have taken the time here in the Group to point out what I find good, as well as bad with the plan, I just don't sling nasty hateful rhetorical spew as some do here in PF.  

 

Finally,  I would hope that as a thinking,  "non-partisan"  American as you portray yourself to be,  that you have concluded that our Nation's current federal income tax system is broken, beyond repair.  That besides making drastic, I dare say even medieval cuts in federal spending, we must do away with the current federal income tax system, because (1)  It only taxes the rich and middle class, making the system totally unfair;  (2) the federal income tax system has become so politicized and now used by Congress to dole out favoritism and political paybacks, and (3)  the Internal Revenue Code;  e.g.;  Title 26 U.S.C.  is incomprehensible, nonsensical, contradictory, and cannot be understood by reasonable men. 

On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 9:19 AM, studio <tlack@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 12, 10:32 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Typical Moonbat,  Terri has no clue what the "9-9-9" plan is either, so
> (s)he resorts to the typical moonbattery of slinging out vile spew, name
> calling and in general, attacking the messenger.

It's simple Keith, 9-9-9 is not a plan at all.
It's not well articulated or thought out.

Defend it then if you dare.

Meanwhile Keith sends me an email saying how he doesn't support the
9-9-9 plan....
He just wants ignorant people who don't know any better to buy it.

That's the Republitard Party for you... mixing facts with con
artistry. No need for devilish details, just trust them.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Amazing Photos From The New York Photo League: 1936-1951

http://www.buzzfeed.com/jpmoore/amazing-photos-from-the-new-york-photo-league-193?utm_source=Triggermail&utm_medium=email&utm_term=Buzzfeed&utm_campaign=BuzzFeed%20Daily%20Email

 

 

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Fast and Furious Fallout: Feinstein Seeks National Gun Registration

New post on Fellowship of the Minds Fast and Furious Fallout: Feinstein Seeks National Gun Registration by Dave   Yeah, like who didn't see this coming? Via cnsnews.com: Feinstein Uses 'Fast and Furious' to Make Case for National Gun Registration By Fred Lucas November 1, 2011 (CNSNews.com) – Making a case for national gun registration, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said "perhaps mistakes were made" in the botched gun-walking program known as Fast and Furious, but she said trying to assign blame misses the larger problem. "This is a deep concern for me. I know others disagree, but we have very lax laws when it comes to guns," Feinstein, an advocate of gun control, said during Tuesday's hearing of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism. "My concern, Mr. Chairman, is that there's been a lot said about Fast and Furious, and perhaps mistakes were made," Feinstein said. "But I think this hunt for blame doesn't really speak about the problem. And the problem is, anybody can walk in and buy anything." In Operation Fast and Furious, a Justice Department program that began in September 2009, law enforcement knowingly allowed about 2,000 U.S. guns to flow to Mexican drug cartels, with the intent of tracking the weapons and making arrests. However, law enforcement lost track of most of the weapons. The program was halted in December 2010 after two weapons from the program were found at the murder scene of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer, head of the Justice Department's criminal division, revealed Monday that he knew about Operation Fast and Furious going back to April 2010, but did not inform Attorney General Eric Holder about the matter. You will find the rest of the article here. ____________________________ Just remember, the gun-grabbers never, ever sleep (see pic at top). And by the way, Sen. Feinstein - you freedom-hating communist bitch, I actually do have a gun you can grab. -Dave  (h/t: boortz.com) Dave | November 3, 2011 at 3:45 pm | Tags: Constitution, Dianne Feinstein, Fast and Furious, gun control, gun registration, liberals, tyranny | Categories: Constitution, Crazy Politicians, Idiot Law Makers, Idiots In General, Insanity, Liberals, Second Amendment | URL: http://wp.me/pKuKY-anQ Comment    See all comments Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions. Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2011/11/03/fast-and-furious-fallout-feinstein-seeks-national-gun-registration/

Thanks for flying with WordPress.com

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Self-abusing Tarzan Toy

http://www.boortz.com/funny/tarzan-toy/

 

 

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

City Commissioner Blocks Barbaric Muslim Sacrifice of Goats and Lambs

http://cnsnews.com/blog/susan-jones/city-commissioner-blocks-muslim-sacrifice-goats-and-lambs

 

City Commissioner Blocks Muslim Sacrifice of Goats and Lambs

 

By Susan Jones

November 3, 2011

Sunrise, Fla., Commissioner Sheila Alu single-handedly blocked a Muslim religious ceremony involving the sacrifice of goats and lambs set to take place on Sunday, the South Florida Sun Sentinel reported on Thursday. "Yes, I was trying to stop it," Alu was quoted as saying. "It's shut down. I'm trying to protect innocent animals." She called the ritual inappropriate for a city as populated as Sunrise.

The newspaper said Muslims from local mosques were planning to gather at a 45-acre farm in Sunrise to celebrate the Eid ul-Adha, the Festival of Sacrifice, which honors Abraham's willingness to sacrifice his son.

Nezar Hamze, executive director of the South Florida Council on American-Islamic Relations, called Alu's decision "very upsetting" and "very disturbing." He told the newspaper that Muslims went through "proper channels" to get permission -- "and now it's off because a commissioner has a problem with it." Hamze was quoted as saying that the meat is sacrificed in a humane way -- a "slit on the throat real quick" -- as required by state and Islamic law.

The Sun Sentinel article notes that a 1993 U.S. Supreme Court decision upheld animal sacrifices for religious purposes. "I have no ill will toward the Muslim faith," Alu told the newspaper. "I'm just an animal lover."

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Who Dropped the Dime on Cain?

The fact that voters would care at all about this issue makes me
sad... and makes them really stupid. If every man (or woman for that
matter) was held to account for their machisto(a) attitudes throughout
their lives there would be no candidates for anything... The fact that
a supposed "Author"/"Journalist would take time to write about this
shit makes it even worse...GROW UP AMERICA!!!!!!!!!

On Nov 3, 2:43 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> November 3, 2011 3:00 P.M.Who Dropped the Dime on Cain?It could be someone in the Republican family.Fred Thompson
> In a case of an untimely death, the first thing the cops do when they arrive at the home of the deceased is to try to determine whether the death was the result of a self-inflicted wound and, if it wasn't, whether a member of the family did it. Statistics show that these are good places to start looking. If the recent events surrounding sexual-harassment allegations against Herman Cain sink his campaign, the same postmortem may be appropriate.
> First, Cain's self-inflicted wounds. When the allegations became public, he started defending himself with an unloaded gun. Even an admirably unconventional campaign cannot defy certain principles. One would be never to eat at a place with an "Eats" sign in the window. Another is that when it hits the fan, you should get your recollection and your facts as straight as you can before you start talking. You can't outwit the media at their own game if you don't know the game they're playing. Now it's not just about whether he was overly friendly with Miss Molly at the Fourth of July picnic it's also about catching him in inconsistencies.
> There's a type of guy well known to every defense lawyer. He's a very successful man, usually a businessman, politician, or other public figure, who owes his success in large part to being a forceful communicator as well as very smart. Often you cannot persuade him that he should not go before that grand jury to "just answer a few questions." He cannot believe that he can't persuade them of his innocence.
> I seriously doubt that Cain did anything that merits the "stop the presses" treatment this story is getting, but that won't matter if he has to spend many more days talking about what he knew and when he knew it and the difference between an agreement and a settlement. As Herman himself might say, the situation is complex, but the solution is simple. He must get some advice from somebody who has been to a rodeo before, get it all straight, lay it out, and move on.
> Actually, Cain has a good chance of weathering this storm for several reasons. People like him, and they want to believe him. More important, most primary voters intensely dislike the media, which they see as trying to bring him down. I'm not sure Herman will appreciate the reference, but that is one of the main reasons that Bill Clinton survived.
> To many people, not just Republicans, this is just another instance of dirty Washington politics indulging itself, obsessing over trivia while Rome burns. Cain, a very intelligent conservative, upsets the liberal paradigm of what African Americans are supposed to believe. Many Cain supporters involved in the tea-party movement have themselves been called racists in the recent past. Now, with the economy in the tank, the nation broke, the European Union on the verge of throwing the entire Western world into recession if not worse, and former Democratic senator and governor Jon Corzine's company having "misplaced" $200 million of investors' money, our burning national issue is whether Herman Cain made some improper remarks over a decade ago.
> Moreover, people are on to the sexual-harassment scam. In typical fashion, Congress took a situation where women had no protection for legitimate grievances and created a solution rife with unintended consequences. Now businesses are regularly making payouts for the flimsiest of reasons. It's obvious that these alleged victims and their lawyers no matter what they may say publicly are champing at the bit to come forward for their day in the limelight and the inevitable book deal. Who can pass up being the new Anita Hill, who to this day periodically receives glowing newspaper profiles?
> Yet people today are watching the Cain story unfold, looking at the timing of it, and writing checks to the Cain campaign. Who knows what may come out before it's over, but it better be some pretty powerful stuff if it's going to fit the mood of the American people these days. People expect presidential politics to be rough and tumble, but times are different, and so are the circumstances of this campaign. Republicans are looking for someone to believe in. They won't all vote for Herman Cain, but right now, he symbolizes something they want to protect. Hisfellow Republicancandidates try to take him down at their own peril.
> This brings us to another interesting situation. Usually inpresidential campaigns, the question of who originally leaked the story is given little consideration. The publisher protects his sources, and the rest of the media has no interest in drying up their own potential sources by publishing identities even if they know who they are. But this time, people will want to know. Also, these days, the media is so diverse that it will be very difficult to keep the identity of the people who planted the story secret. And it may not turn out to be the most likely suspect.
> Initially, Cain lashed out at the liberal media. So did several conservative commentators. But I doubt thatPolitico, which published the story first, came up with this scoop by investigating Cain's background on its own.
> People may think that news organizations have legions of Woodwards and Bernsteins fanned out across the country, poring through old courthouse records or public business records and talking to anyone they think may have some dirt to dish on a candidate. They don't. They don't have the money, for one thing. No, the days of Woodward and Bernstein, intrepid investigative reporters, are over. Investigative reporters have been replaced by people who keep a big basket under the transom to catch the dossiers and other materials that the various campaigns drop on opposing candidates.
> Campaigns that can afford it often spend lots of money on "opposition research." The research can be for perfectly legitimate things, such as positions candidates have taken on issues. Or it can be for personal dirt, substantiated or otherwise. If they pass it to the media, the campaign, of course, wants to keep its role secret. In this way, reporters are seldom investigators. More often they're facilitators. It's easier work.
> Cain has now gotten off the media angle and targeted Gov. Rick Perry's campaign as the source of the story. This is based on the fact that a former consultant from Cain's Senate campaign now works for Perry. The campaign and the consultant deny it, and instead point the finger at the Romney campaign, because Cain's successor at the NationalRestaurantAssociation, where the alleged harassment took place, is a Romney supporter and contributor. Further, the names of Democratic operatives and a Democratic officeholder have been mentioned to me off the record.
> I have no idea who originated the story. But I'd say that looking inside the Republican family is probably a good bet. I speak from personal experience.
> Days after I got into the presidential race in 2007, I was greeted with a website, "PhoneyFred.org," described in the media at the time as an "anti Fred Thompson smear site." You couldn't really tell who was behind it, but we learned of it from theDemocratic National Committee, which made ample use of it. We assumed that they had created it. However, a reporter at theWashington Post(of all people) decided to find out who was behind the site. After a lot of effort, she traced it to an executive of TTS Strategies, a South Carolina consulting firm run by J. Warren Tompkins, one of the most notorious hardball political operatives in the country.
> Politicians of opposing campaigns were known to get what was called the "Warren Treatment." He ran George W. Bush's 2000 campaign, in which anonymous flyers and telephone calls accused John McCain of fathering an illegitimate child with a black woman.
> In 2007, he was running Mitt Romney's campaign in South Carolina, where Mitt was behind the rest of us in the polls. Of course, when confronted, both Tompkins and Mitt were "shocked" to learn that a rogue employee (who ran Tompkins's office) was running such a website (out of the office), and the site was taken down immediately. One of the more benign and amusing things the site accused me of was being a "flip flopper." I kid you not.
> This doesn't mean that Mitt is behind the Herman Cain hit piece. I'd like to think that he and his extensive staff, many of them with training in the "political dark arts" has learned that when you hire the meanest dog in the junkyard, it's a little difficult to claim that you are surprised when he bites.
> Most of us have long since given up on adherence toReagan's Eleventh Commandment, but Republican candidates do enough damage to each other out in the open these days. They shouldn't get away with peddling stuff they're ashamed to be associated with, and that can be used later by Democrats. Maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree. I hope so. Still, I'd like to know who dropped the dime on Herman.Fred Thompson, who represented Tennessee in the U.S. Senate from 1994 to 2003, is an actor, lawyer, and political commentator.http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/282182/who-dropped-dime-cain-fred-thompson

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Who Dropped the Dime on Cain?

November 3, 2011 3:00 P.M.
Who Dropped the Dime on Cain?
It could be someone in the Republican family.
Fred Thompson

In a case of an untimely death, the first thing the cops do when they arrive at the home of the deceased is to try to determine whether the death was the result of a self-inflicted wound and, if it wasn't, whether a member of the family did it. Statistics show that these are good places to start looking. If the recent events surrounding sexual-harassment allegations against Herman Cain sink his campaign, the same postmortem may be appropriate.

First, Cain's self-inflicted wounds. When the allegations became public, he started defending himself with an unloaded gun. Even an admirably unconventional campaign cannot defy certain principles. One would be never to eat at a place with an "Eats" sign in the window. Another is that when it hits the fan, you should get your recollection and your facts as straight as you can before you start talking. You can't outwit the media at their own game if you don't know the game they're playing. Now it's not just about whether he was overly friendly with Miss Molly at the Fourth of July picnic ­ it's also about catching him in inconsistencies.

There's a type of guy well known to every defense lawyer. He's a very successful man, usually a businessman, politician, or other public figure, who owes his success in large part to being a forceful communicator as well as very smart. Often you cannot persuade him that he should not go before that grand jury to "just answer a few questions." He cannot believe that he can't persuade them of his innocence.

I seriously doubt that Cain did anything that merits the "stop the presses" treatment this story is getting, but that won't matter if he has to spend many more days talking about what he knew and when he knew it and the difference between an agreement and a settlement. As Herman himself might say, the situation is complex, but the solution is simple. He must get some advice from somebody who has been to a rodeo before, get it all straight, lay it out, and move on.

Actually, Cain has a good chance of weathering this storm for several reasons. People like him, and they want to believe him. More important, most primary voters intensely dislike the media, which they see as trying to bring him down. I'm not sure Herman will appreciate the reference, but that is one of the main reasons that Bill Clinton survived.

To many people, not just Republicans, this is just another instance of dirty Washington politics indulging itself, obsessing over trivia while Rome burns. Cain, a very intelligent conservative, upsets the liberal paradigm of what African Americans are supposed to believe. Many Cain supporters involved in the tea-party movement have themselves been called racists in the recent past. Now, with the economy in the tank, the nation broke, the European Union on the verge of throwing the entire Western world into recession if not worse, and former Democratic senator and governor Jon Corzine's company having "misplaced" $200 million of investors' money, our burning national issue is whether Herman Cain made some improper remarks over a decade ago.

Moreover, people are on to the sexual-harassment scam. In typical fashion, Congress took a situation where women had no protection for legitimate grievances and created a solution rife with unintended consequences. Now businesses are regularly making payouts for the flimsiest of reasons. It's obvious that these alleged victims and their lawyers ­ no matter what they may say publicly ­ are champing at the bit to come forward for their day in the limelight and the inevitable book deal. Who can pass up being the new Anita Hill, who to this day periodically receives glowing newspaper profiles?

Yet people today are watching the Cain story unfold, looking at the timing of it, and writing checks to the Cain campaign. Who knows what may come out before it's over, but it better be some pretty powerful stuff if it's going to fit the mood of the American people these days. People expect presidential politics to be rough and tumble, but times are different, and so are the circumstances of this campaign. Republicans are looking for someone to believe in. They won't all vote for Herman Cain, but right now, he symbolizes something they want to protect. His fellow Republican candidates try to take him down at their own peril.

This brings us to another interesting situation. Usually in presidential campaigns, the question of who originally leaked the story is given little consideration. The publisher protects his sources, and the rest of the media has no interest in drying up their own potential sources by publishing identities even if they know who they are. But this time, people will want to know. Also, these days, the media is so diverse that it will be very difficult to keep the identity of the people who planted the story secret. And it may not turn out to be the most likely suspect.

Initially, Cain lashed out at the liberal media. So did several conservative commentators. But I doubt that Politico, which published the story first, came up with this scoop by investigating Cain's background on its own.

People may think that news organizations have legions of Woodwards and Bernsteins fanned out across the country, poring through old courthouse records or public business records and talking to anyone they think may have some dirt to dish on a candidate. They don't. They don't have the money, for one thing. No, the days of Woodward and Bernstein, intrepid investigative reporters, are over. Investigative reporters have been replaced by people who keep a big basket under the transom to catch the dossiers and other materials that the various campaigns drop on opposing candidates.

Campaigns that can afford it often spend lots of money on "opposition research." The research can be for perfectly legitimate things, such as positions candidates have taken on issues. Or it can be for personal dirt, substantiated or otherwise. If they pass it to the media, the campaign, of course, wants to keep its role secret. In this way, reporters are seldom investigators. More often they're facilitators. It's easier work.

Cain has now gotten off the media angle and targeted Gov. Rick Perry's campaign as the source of the story. This is based on the fact that a former consultant from Cain's Senate campaign now works for Perry. The campaign and the consultant deny it, and instead point the finger at the Romney campaign, because Cain's successor at the National Restaurant Association, where the alleged harassment took place, is a Romney supporter and contributor. Further, the names of Democratic operatives and a Democratic officeholder have been mentioned to me off the record.

I have no idea who originated the story. But I'd say that looking inside the Republican family is probably a good bet. I speak from personal experience.

Days after I got into the presidential race in 2007, I was greeted with a website, "PhoneyFred.org," described in the media at the time as an "anti Fred Thompson smear site." You couldn't really tell who was behind it, but we learned of it from the Democratic National Committee, which made ample use of it. We assumed that they had created it. However, a reporter at the Washington Post (of all people) decided to find out who was behind the site. After a lot of effort, she traced it to an executive of TTS Strategies, a South Carolina consulting firm run by J. Warren Tompkins, one of the most notorious hardball political operatives in the country.
Politicians of opposing campaigns were known to get what was called the "Warren Treatment." He ran George W. Bush's 2000 campaign, in which anonymous flyers and telephone calls accused John McCain of fathering an illegitimate child with a black woman.

In 2007, he was running Mitt Romney's campaign in South Carolina, where Mitt was behind the rest of us in the polls. Of course, when confronted, both Tompkins and Mitt were "shocked" to learn that a rogue employee (who ran Tompkins's office) was running such a website (out of the office), and the site was taken down immediately. One of the more benign and amusing things the site accused me of was being a "flip flopper." I kid you not.

This doesn't mean that Mitt is behind the Herman Cain hit piece. I'd like to think that he ­ and his extensive staff, many of them with training in the "political dark arts" ­ has learned that when you hire the meanest dog in the junkyard, it's a little difficult to claim that you are surprised when he bites.

Most of us have long since given up on adherence to Reagan's Eleventh Commandment, but Republican candidates do enough damage to each other out in the open these days. They shouldn't get away with peddling stuff they're ashamed to be associated with, and that can be used later by Democrats. Maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree. I hope so. Still, I'd like to know who dropped the dime on Herman.

­ Fred Thompson, who represented Tennessee in the U.S. Senate from 1994 to 2003, is an actor, lawyer, and political commentator.


http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/282182/who-dropped-dime-cain-fred-thompson

On Rebooting America

On Rebooting America
by Gary North

Niall Ferguson is my favorite Establishment analyst, because he is an historian who understands a lot about free markets. He writes for the literati. He starred in a PBS series that was worth viewing, and another is scheduled in 2012. He teaches at Harvard University and the Harvard Business School.

He thinks America is running an empire, and he thinks it will not survive much longer. As with all empires, it is going to run out of wealth to support it. So, when he wrote a piece for the Daily Beast, Newsweek, I read it.

He used the metaphor of computing to describe what has been good with the West and what is no longer good. He says the West has had six "killer apps." These are: competition, the scientific revolution, the rule of law and representative government, modern medicine, the consumer society, the work ethic. All of this is true, but are these features fundamental? Are they, in the words of Karl Marx, more substructure or superstructure? I think the latter.

He avoids the crucial questions: (1) Why the West? (2) Why beginning in 1800? Why not earlier?

He uses the metaphor of the computer. But this analogy is strained. Why? Because we can date the invention of the computer: the war years, 1943-45. We know who did it: Mauchly, Eckert, and Von Neumann. We know their motivation. We know the applications.

We do not know exactly how or why Ferguson's six killer apps came into existence. We do not know how they came together around 1800 to create a new civilization. Why not earlier? We do not know what social, ethical, and religious forces undergirded the six. They are not autonomous. They were not designed by men. Computers were.

He says that the USA and the West are no longer the centers of these six features.

Ask yourself: who's got the work ethic now? The average South Korean works about 39 percent more hours per week than the average American. The school year in South Korea is 220 days long, compared with 180 days here. And you don't have to spend too long at any major U.S. university to know which students really drive themselves: the Asians and Asian-Americans.

Fair enough. But why is there this difference? What ideas or traditions led to this? Why was Korea in 1945 not much more productive than sub-Sahara Africa? Also, what led to the decline of the work ethic in the USA? Or was there a major decline? I did not spend more than 180 days in high school in the late 1950s.

Don't tell me television did it. Television was as addictive in 1960 as it is today.

What about taxes? The top income tax brackets are lower today than in 1960, thanks to Kennedy (70%) and Reagan (28%). They went back up a little under Clinton, but nothing like Eisenhower's era (91%).

Social Security taxes are up. Inflation prior to 2007 was up. Look also at the increase in regulations. These have hampered the American economy. But Americans still work hard. If they were taxed less, they would work harder, but to think that a taxation policy change would radically re-shape people's use of leisure time is naive. Good habits are easier to break than re-learn.

A programmer can re-program a computer. No one can reprogram a society. Those who try are first called revolutionaries, then tyrants, and finally failures.


THE HEALTHY-CUSTOMER SOCIETY

Ferguson speaks of the consumer society as a killer app, and so it is. It is a good thing for people to have more options. That is what liberty is all about. It is also what economic growth is all about. The two are linked at the hip.

How do people get more choices? By being better served by producers and by serving other customers. Producers save and organize and bear enormous uncertainties in search of profit. They cannot earn a profit in a free society in any way other than by serving consumers, meaning customers. The customer is king.

It is not that we live in a consumer society. It is that we live in a customer society. We have the legal freedom to consume. We also have a legal right to save. We can make investments today that we hope will bring us even more wealth in the future.

The consumer who is future-oriented chooses to consume less than he produces. This is the key to economic growth. People defer consumption for the sake of future consumption.

But some people save in order to produce. They live to produce. Their self-esteem is based on their production. They want to leave a legacy. They do not work mainly to eat. They eat mainly to work.

The customer society places economic authority in the hands of those who produce and those who are the heirs or beneficiaries of producers. Production creates its own consumption at some market-clearing price.


MODERN MEDICINE

Modern medicine is great, but the big gains in life expectancy came before 1912. People were richer. They bought screens for their windows and screen doors. Water treatment in cities got better after 1860. In rural areas, it was usually good. Most people lived on farms.


LESS RULE OF LAW

This is disheartening news.

The rule of law? For a real eye-opener, take a look at the latest World Economic Forum (WEF) Executive Opinion Survey. On no fewer than 15 of 16 different issues relating to property rights and governance, the United States fares worse than Hong Kong. Indeed, the U.S. makes the global top 20 in only one area: investor protection. On every other count, its reputation is shockingly bad. The U.S. ranks 86th in the world for the costs imposed on business by organized crime, 50th for public trust in the ethics of politicians, 42nd for various forms of bribery, and 40th for standards of auditing and financial reporting.

Here, we are retrogressing. As Western civil governments get more intrusive, the rule of law declines. Who can keep up with 70,000 pages of the Federal Register each year? Only armies of costly lawyers.

The increase in regulation is relentless. The law books are vastly thicker today than in 1960. So are rules and regulation books, where bureaucrats interpret and apply the laws of Congress.

I am in favor of going back to 1960 in most areas of administrative law, the laws enforced by bureaucracies. The areas where there has been improvement, such as civil rights, are dwarfed by the dark shadow of the Patriot Act.


SOCIAL DISORDER

He does not exactly predict that the West will turn into Greece. Possibly we can avoid the following, but maybe not. He puts question marks at the end of each sentence.

An upsurge in civil unrest and crime, as happened in the 1970s? A loss of faith on the part of investors and a sudden Greek-style leap in government borrowing costs? How about a spike of violence in the Middle East, from Iraq to Afghanistan, as insurgents capitalize on our troop withdrawals? Or a paralyzing cyberattack from the rising Asian superpower we complacently underrate?

Our problem is that we could turn into Greece. There is no immunity. The same bad policies could easily produce similar results.

Is there anything we can do to prevent such disasters? Social scientist Charles Murray calls for a "civic great awakening" – a return to the original values of the American republic. He's got a point. Far more than in Europe, most Americans remain instinctively loyal to the killer applications of Western ascendancy, from competition all the way through to the work ethic. They know the country has the right software. They just can't understand why it's running so damn slowly.

There is a problem with this analysis. What evidence is there that any civic awakening in America ever occurred apart from a religious awakening? Civic awakenings are not autonomous. I know about the First Great Awakening (1720-60). I know of the Second Great Awakening (1801-1840). I even know of the Third Great Awakening (1858).

There is another major problem: all three led to major political changes: centralized politics in the wake of major wars.

The social disruptions of 1965-70 led to greater centralization, and not just in the United States.

What we need to do is to delete the viruses that have crept into our system: the anticompetitive quasi monopolies that blight everything from banking to public education; the politically correct pseudosciences and soft subjects that deflect good students away from hard science; the lobbyists who subvert the rule of law for the sake of the special interests they represent – to say nothing of our crazily dysfunctional system of health care, our overleveraged personal finances, and our newfound unemployment ethic.

Correct. But who are "we," and how will "we" accomplish this?

I know how: cut their budgets. Let the free market sort out winners and losers. After all, this is the consumer/customer society. But the teachers in the tax-funded schools will resist any such move.

Do most Americans have a "newfound unemployment ethic"? I doubt it. Getting a job and keeping it has been basic to the American way of life throughout history.

What we have are government regulations everywhere. We have a kind of blind, deranged central economic planning by administrative law. We have what Ludwig von Mises sixty-five years ago called "planned chaos."


THE "C" WORD

Ferguson escalates the rhetoric.

I refuse to accept that Western civilization is like some hopeless old version of Microsoft DOS, doomed to freeze, then crash. I still cling to the hope that the United States is the Mac to Europe's PC, and that if one part of the West can successfully update and reboot itself, it's America.

But the lesson of history is clear. Voters and politicians alike dare not postpone the big reboot. Decline is not so gradual that our biggest problems can simply be left to the next administration, or the one after that.

If what we are risking is not decline but downright collapse, then the time frame maybe even tighter than one election cycle.

He speaks of collapse rather than decline. I prefer to speak of decline. The division of labor still operates. The profit and loss system still operates. Where these two social institutions operate, people are given fair warning of trouble lying ahead.

The squeezing of the free market by administrative law, monetary inflation, and taxes is increasing in some areas of life. It is not increasing in others. Where we need factories to produce, the various American governments are indeed a threat to our productivity and therefore our consumption. But where digits are concerned, the free market is in the saddle.

I believe that freedom of communication is far more important than low taxes. The former can produce the latter if the defenders of liberty make their case strong.

The ability of people to circumvent the Establishment media today is unprecedented in man's history. The World Wide Web is bringing down governments. It is increasing the cost of exposing bad science and bad government.It aids price competition.

In short, the Web offers more choices: of ideas, goods, and services. This is central to the changes that are going on today in the realm of ideas. We should not discount these too heavily.

I do not think this is the USSR in 1991. The United States is not a tyranny on that scale. It is far richer. Its people are connected digitally. The government can run, it can't hide.


CONCLUSION

I have no doubt that the transition costs from the Keynesian welfare-warfare state will be high. But I don't think a collapse is likely. There is a free market. There is a private communications system.

I look at the U.S. Postal Service and see the future of the Federal government. "I have seen the future, and it is mostly junk mail."

There will be attempts by the present Establishments to resist these changes. But the reality of the digits. They are getting more influential, and the Establishments control the older institutions that are threatened by cheap communications.

Decline for a time, yes. Comparative decline, Asia vs. the West. Yes. Transition costs, yes. Trapped voting groups that relied too heavily on government promises, surely. But a collapse is unlikely. The movement is toward freer markets. The freer the market, the less likely a collapse. Profit and loss signals enable us to adjust.

For those who don't adjust in time, or don't adjust enough, there is bad news ahead. The blind men who are passing laws are a threat. So are the petty tyrants who enforce these laws.

www.garynorth.com

Nancy Pelosi is Looking Exceptionally (cough, cough) Well-rested

New post on Fellowship of the Minds Nancy Pelosi is Looking Exceptionally (cough, cough) Well-rested by Dr. Eowyn   Lately, former House Speaker, now House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is looking kinda different. She's sporting a new short hairdo, but there's something more.... For a 71-year-old woman, she sure is looking exceptionally wide-eyed and smooth-forehead. Photo credit: jacktimes.com Has the septuagenarian had some "work" done on her puss? Inquiring minds want to know. Katy Adams and Nikki Schwab of Washington Examiner ask that question, Nov. 1, 2011: Nancy Pelosi recently updated her hairdo, but if you take a closer look, you may be wondering what we are -- is that all the House-keeping she's been doing? We're no experts on cosmetic procedures, but Dr. Ayman Hakki, a board-certified celebrity plastic surgeon who has offices in both Georgetown and Waldorf, seems to agree with our suspicions. "Looking at recent pictures of Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, I believe she had Botox and fillers like Juvederm injected in her marionette lines, the lines from the side of the mouth down to her jowls. Furthermore, she definitely underwent a face-lift a few years ago. The reason she looks different now is because she used to look pulled and tight. With time the procedure looks more natural and her face is looking the way it is supposed to look," Hakki explained. So Adams and Schwab asked Pelosi's press secretary Drew Hammill. Hammill's response: You are a disgrace to journalism." As Adams notes, that's not only a tad sensitive, it also "doesn't exactly sound like a denial either now, does it?" You be the judge. Here's the septuagenarian being interviewed on Oct. 9, 2011 (I reduced the volume way down so I don't have to listen to her voice, LOL): Click here for an even more recent interview of the septuagenarian on CNBC, Oct. 28, 2011, where she's looking especially wide-eyed. This would only be Pelosi's latest cosmetic surgery, as even a year ago, there were already speculations she'd had "work" done: ~Eowyn Dr. Eowyn | November 3, 2011 at 12:01 pm | Tags: Ayman Hakki, Botox, Drew Hammill, Juvederm, plastic surgery | Categories: Humor, Idiot Law Makers, United States | URL: http://wp.me/pKuKY-ano Comment    See all comments Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions. Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2011/11/03/nancy-pelosi-is-looking-exceptionally-cough-cough-well-rested/

Thanks for flying with WordPress.com

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Toronto Muzzies Suing U.S. Based Popeyes for Not Supplying Halal Chickens

New post on Doctor Bulldog & Ronin Toronto Muzzies Suing U.S. Based Popeyes for Not Supplying Halal Chickens by doctorbulldog I'm sorry, but I fail to see where in the U.S. Constitution it says that businesses must cater to specific religions: Popeyes in fight over Halal chicken TheStar.com A group of Muslim restaurant franchisees is fighting fast-food chain Popeyes Louisiana Chicken in court over the right to sell hand-slaughtered Halal meat for religious reasons. The battle in Ontario Superior Court comes after the Atlanta-based franchise moved to replace the chicken supply with machine-killed birds in 14 Toronto restaurants. The company says it's still Halal-certified; the franchisees claim the machine method is against the beliefs of a majority of Muslims. "If I begin selling machine-slaughtered chicken, I will immediately lose an enormous segment of my customers," reads the sworn affidavit from Abdul Haffejee, who owns eight Popeyes in the GTA. Haffejee, who donates Popeyes chicken to mosques and sponsored Muslim Day at Canada's Wonderland, said between 50 and 80 per cent of his customers are Muslim. "All of the members of the Muslim community that I have worked so hard to attract will be gone instantly. They cannot be replaced," he said in his affidavit, claiming tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of dollars at stake. Halal is a term used to denote if something is lawful in the Islamic faith. There are specific requirements for killing animals: a slaughterer who is Muslim or a believer, a blessing, and certain arteries cut before the slaughter. And, where's PETA on this issue? Yeah, that's right; crickets. Read more of this post doctorbulldog | 3 November, 2011 at 11:43 am | Categories: Multiculturalism, Muslim whining, Religion | URL: http://wp.me/p1NPg-7qn Comment    See all comments Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions. Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://doctorbulldog.wordpress.com/2011/11/03/toronto-muzzies-suing-u-s-based-popeyes-for-not-supplying-halal-chickens/

Thanks for flying with WordPress.com

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.