Can't speak for the Christian Right because I'm not one, but my issue with Clinton wasn't the infedelity. While I think its incredibly beneficial and preferable to have a President that shows a good example (even if its just outwardly) of morality, its not a large basis for my likes or dislikes of a politician.
My issue with Clinton was far more the use of his position of power with someone that was a subordinant. Its similar to how I wouldn't expect my boss to be fired if he had an affair with a chick from a bar, but if he got the receptionist to get him a hummer under his desk while at work I'd expect him to get canned. My issues with Clinton and Monica was less about the blowjob itself and more about the who, where, and when the blowjob took place.
And then you have the whole perjury thing, but that's a seperate issue.
Admittedly, for the religious right, it likely was much more based around the cheating. But just wanted to give a different veiw point of it from the right.
Barb, Im of the opinion there isnt as many teaparty votes as you think. I may very well be wrong but I believe most republican voters are more moderate and its just the teaparty is making the most noise. Alot of the teaparty initial support <babyboomers> are no longer on board.
Only the left would read anything else into it.
I do not think that the inner details of the Daniels marriage have a thing to do with if he would make a good president. I strongly suspect that Mrs. Daniels does NOT want anybody looking into the specific details of her past and feels that it would not be the best of things should those details come out. If Daniels is indeed the protective husband that some feel he is, I also suspect that is one reason why he would not run for president.
Yeah, see. Will, you know better than that. What did they teach you about absolutes v generalities in college?
I do not think that the inner details of the Daniels marriage have a thing to do with if he would make a good president. I strongly suspect that Mrs. Daniels does NOT want anybody looking into the specific details of her past and feels that it would not be the best of things should those details come out.
good point. the vast majority of people couldn't care less about his race. in the meantime, democrats in general care far more about his race than republicans in general.
Can't speak for the Christian Right because I'm not one, but my issue with Clinton wasn't the infedelity. While I think its incredibly beneficial and preferable to have a President that shows a good example (even if its just outwardly) of morality, its not a large basis for my likes or dislikes of a politician.
My issue with Clinton was far more the use of his position of power with someone that was a subordinant. Its similar to how I wouldn't expect my boss to be fired if he had an affair with a chick from a bar, but if he got the receptionist to get him a hummer under his desk while at work I'd expect him to get canned. My issues with Clinton and Monica was less about the blowjob itself and more about the who, where, and when the blowjob took place.
And then you have the whole perjury thing, but that's a seperate issue.
Admittedly, for the religious right, it likely was much more based around the cheating. But just wanted to give a different veiw point of it from the right.
Yeah, see. Will, you know better than that. What did they teach you about absolutes v generalities in college?
so i stand by my claim - overall the left cares more about race than the right does.
I'm all for Herman Cain. Who else am I going to support? Romney is just boring and he isn't very right-wing either. I rather have Obama for another 4 years, so he can feel the effect of his policies. We need someone that people can feel proud about. Ron Paul won't win because he is too old and too idealistic. Tim Pawlenty is also boring and looks like another classical politicians. For instance they interviewed him about the presidential race and he started talking about crisis management. Donald Trump is a joke candidate and Sarah Palin has too much baggage.
That must explain why the GOP conventions are so woefully lacking in African American participants - they just don't care.
And it further explains why so few GOP office holders are African Americans - they just don't care.
And it further explains why so few African Americans are attracted to the GOP ideology and platform - they just don't care.
And what they do not care about is simple. Whites who run the GOP simply do not care to do anything to make themselves more accessible, more friendly or more acceptable to African Americans.
:shrug: perhaps so. we expect our people to be conservatives, we couldn't care less if they are indian, or black, or white, or asian.
Many Democrats, however,as you point out, care very deeply about these things. which is why I suppose such a larger percentage of them made a racist decision when polled.
yup. we don't care what the color of your skin is. Allan West is awesome because he's an incredibly intelligent man who dedicated decades to defending the nation, can speak inspirationally, and is determined along with the rest of us to save the country from the fiscally suicidal status quo. the "omg we got a nice clean black guy and he doesn't speak negro unless he wants to" factor isn't there for us like it was for Harry Reid and friends.
yup. race-baiting, like demagoguery, works.
not any more or less so than whites, asians, or anyone else.Content of their Character, I believe, is the phrase for how we look at ourselves and others. but have a good time continuing to group and address people off of the color of their skin.
I see it as small potatoes compared to committing a country to an indefinite war in Iraq under false pretenses.]
He has to say that. Mitch Daniels is his guy.
This should be a fun competition once he gets in the race. (if he does) I think Cain's going to surprise everyone. ( well, not everyone) Some of us will just say "told ya so" LOL
Almost no one knows who Herman Cain is, he's never run for public office. If you ask people who was the CEO of Godfather's Pizza almost no one could answer the question correctly. Recently, he's said he would not have a Muslim in his administration, so he's someshat a bigot.
Really don't know about the lack of public office experience. I do like his reply to that question with “Everyone in Washington has held public office before. How’s that working out for you?” But then we can't gage how he is in public office as far as dealing with lobbyists and cronies.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?