Topic: Cain Self Destructs On Fox News Sunday

[trapeze]

Presidential candidate Herman Cain on Sunday defended his opposition to a new mosque in Tennessee, expressing concern about Shariah law and declaring Americans "have the right" to ban mosques in their communities.

Cain, who stirred controversy this year by saying he would be uncomfortable appointing a Muslim to his Cabinet if elected, first expressed concern Thursday about the controversial mosque in Murfreesboro, Tenn. That mosque has been the subject of demonstrations and legal challenges in the wake of the controversy over the so-called "Ground Zero mosque" in New York City.

Speaking on "Fox News Sunday," Cain said he came out against the Tennessee mosque after talking to members of that community. He said the site is "hallowed ground" to Murfreesboro residents and that they're concerned about "the intentions of trying to get Shariah law" -- the code governing conduct in Islamic societies.

"It's not just a mosque for religious purposes. This is what the people are objecting to," he said.

Asked whether any community should be able to prohibit a mosque, Cain said they should.

"They have the right to do that. That's not discriminating ... against that particular religion. That is an aspect of them building that mosque that doesn't get talked about," he said.

As many of you know, I am no muzzie fan. I find it to be an abominable religion for many reasons. Nevertheless, the Constitution is pretty specific on certain issues and one of them is this whole freedom of religion thingy.

Cain cannot stand for those parts of the Constitution that he likes and ignore those parts he doesn't like. We already have a president like that and quite frankly I am not interested in electing another one.

This pretty much dooms Cain to electoral irrelevancy in my opinion. I await the walkback on this but it won't matter. I liked Cain a lot but I will stand with the Constitution every time. As much as I dislike islam and its batsh*t crazy adherents, they do have the right as Americans to worship as they see fit as long as it doesn't violate anyone else's rights, life, liberty or property.

LINK

LINK to Cain on FNC

[Pandora]

Points in his favor, as far as I'm concerned.

"The Constitution is not a suicide pact".  That has impact because it's true.

[charlesoakwood]

Presidential candidate Herman Cain on Sunday defended his opposition to a new mosque in Tennessee, expressing concern about Shariah law and declaring Americans "have the right" to ban mosques in their communities.

 

Muslimism not a religion, it's a social construct designed for the conquest and submission of other cultures.  

ETA: Chris Wallace was a disrespectful ass of an interviewer.

[trapeze]

Points in his favor, as far as I'm concerned.

"The Constitution is not a suicide pact".  That has impact because it's true.

No it's not but we aren't there yet or anywhere even close.

I guess this is one of those points where we are going to have to agree to disagree.

Words mean things and freedom of religion is freedom for all religions. If they cross the line then that's different but until they do they have the same rights as Americans as Catholics, Jews, Christians, Mormons and every other religion that you care to think of.

[charlesoakwood]

Something's up at Fox. At the roundtable discussion today on the panel was John Podesta, he is a political operative an ex Clinton cabinettista and employee of George Soros.  Why don't they put Donald Rumsfeld on the panel?  Oh, heck no, but it's OK to put government stooges on it.
OR are they sending a message; what is it and to whom is it sent?

[charlesoakwood]

It's not a religion, they are trying to kill us and it's not a secret anymore.

The question at my house was "is Michele going to be Prez or VP?"
In other words, these two are the ticket, who's on top?

[trapeze]

There most certainly are fake, made up religions, Scientology being the most obvious. Scientology is a joke and wouldn't enjoy any Constitutional protection at all if it wasn't for Clinton accepting it in exchange for campaign contributions from Hollywood.

But islam is a real religion. I find it every bit as disgusting as satanism but it's still a real religion. And as long as its practitioners don't violate our laws (or insist that sharia law take the place of our laws) then they deserve Constitutional protection.

Allow one community to ban islam and mosques and you set a precedent for another community to ban Judaism and synagogues. Or whatever.

A community can decide where a religious group can worship and where they can't (zoning laws, for instance) but they can't ban them outright. That's anti-Constitutional and anti-American.

[trapeze]

It's not a religion, they are trying to kill us and it's not a secret anymore.

The question at my house was "is Michele going to be Prez or VP?"
In other words, these two are the ticket, who's on top?

My understanding is that it is the islamic theocracies and the wannabes that are trying to kill us.

We should be doing our best to kill them. One of our problems is that we have been going about it the wrong way. We need to return to the concept of total war in dealing with our enemies. Collateral damages should not be a bad thing in war. Ugly, yes, but total war prevents wars from dragging on forever. Obliterate the enemy and its ability to wage war and that's the end of it.

Anyway, I don't care how you slice it or dice it...coming out against the First Amendment is not a winning presidential strategy. I would say, "Ask McCain about how smart it was to come out against freedom of speech," except he's so stupid and stubborn on the issue that he wouldn't see a problem with it at all.

I will agree that islam is also a political ideology (like, say, nazism) but, sadly, it is quite well established as a religion. Perhaps a Constitutional amendment could be passed to declare islam is not a religion but barring that I am afraid we are stuck with it in our free society.

[charlesoakwood]

I don't think any Republican candidate is polling muslims.

Herman Cain on the Debt Ceiling with Chris Wallace

[trapeze]

Perhaps you can look at the issue this way:

If Cain cannot properly navigate this one itty bitty media trap successfully then it doesn't really matter what he says or believes...it's just a matter of time before the weight of cumulative gaffes such as this one crush him.

Ask yourself if Sarah Palin would have stepped in it like this. I don't think she would have.

[Alphabet Soup]

Two issues:

1. Cain should know better by now. He got spanked with his "No Moslems" in his cabinet. The correct thing to do is to offer all the platitudes and then make sure you don't hire any muzzies. With this latest gaffe I predict six weeks and he bows out.

2. Mohammedanism is a death cult that has aspirations to kill every American that they cannot subdue and subjugate. Read 'em and weep. Pretending that they're just misunderstood or haven't been given a chance is beyond foolish and ultimately suicidal.

The only was to survive them in our open society is to keep them tightly constrained, watch them like a hawk, and never ever turn your back on them.

Now, if they were to practice a little rectitude and perhaps have a reformation things might change. I don't see that happening in my lifetime.

[John Florida]

Say good bye to the man. He gave them the rope to hang him with this time.

[Pandora]

It's not a religion, they are trying to kill us and it's not a secret anymore.

The question at my house was "is Michele going to be Prez or VP?"
In other words, these two are the ticket, who's on top?

My understanding is that it is the islamic theocracies and the wannabes that are trying to kill us.

We should be doing our best to kill them. One of our problems is that we have been going about it the wrong way. We need to return to the concept of total war in dealing with our enemies. Collateral damages should not be a bad thing in war. Ugly, yes, but total war prevents wars from dragging on forever. Obliterate the enemy and its ability to wage war and that's the end of it.

Anyway, I don't care how you slice it or dice it...coming out against the First Amendment is not a winning presidential strategy. I would say, "Ask McCain about how smart it was to come out against freedom of speech," except he's so stupid and stubborn on the issue that he wouldn't see a problem with it at all.

I will agree that islam is also a political ideology (like, say, nazism) but, sadly, it is quite well established as a religion. Perhaps a Constitutional amendment could be passed to declare islam is not a religion but barring that I am afraid we are stuck with it in our free society.

No, muslims are trying to kill us.  And overwhelm us in other ways as well; killing is a last resort.

Islam is a political ideology fronted by a religion.  Say what you will about religion, but any "religion" that asserts it has a right to dominate and control all societies, indeed, the world, doesn't get Constitutional protection in my book because it aims to overthrow or subsume our government in the process, using our processes and institutions.

Neighborhoods afflicted with mosques soon find out they've been infiltrated by the enemy; they subvert the local councils/commissioners, drive residents out and then assume control through sheer numbers.  It's happening all over the country and it has to stop.

No Christian nor Jewish house of worship does the same and for that reason there is no reason to not afford them Constitutional protection.  Islam is not the same.

I'd have stopped at "agree to disagree" if you'd stopped there, but you didn't, so .......   

[Janny]

Points in his favor, as far as I'm concerned.

"The Constitution is not a suicide pact".  That has impact because it's true.

No it's not but we aren't there yet or anywhere even close.

I guess this is one of those points where we are going to have to agree to disagree.

Words mean things and freedom of religion is freedom for all religions. If they cross the line then that's different but until they do they have the same rights as Americans as Catholics, Jews, Christians, Mormons and every other religion that you care to think of.

Local communities have the right to refuse to allow all kinds of things to be built in them. Freedom of religion is not unlimited. The constitution does not apply to local communities. It only prohibits the federal government from making laws prohibiting the exercise of religion.

[Janny]

It's not a religion, they are trying to kill us and it's not a secret anymore.

The question at my house was "is Michele going to be Prez or VP?"
In other words, these two are the ticket, who's on top?

My understanding is that it is the islamic theocracies and the wannabes that are trying to kill us.

We should be doing our best to kill them. One of our problems is that we have been going about it the wrong way. We need to return to the concept of total war in dealing with our enemies. Collateral damages should not be a bad thing in war. Ugly, yes, but total war prevents wars from dragging on forever. Obliterate the enemy and its ability to wage war and that's the end of it.

Anyway, I don't care how you slice it or dice it...coming out against the First Amendment is not a winning presidential strategy. I would say, "Ask McCain about how smart it was to come out against freedom of speech," except he's so stupid and stubborn on the issue that he wouldn't see a problem with it at all.

I will agree that islam is also a political ideology (like, say, nazism) but, sadly, it is quite well established as a religion. Perhaps a Constitutional amendment could be passed to declare islam is not a religion but barring that I am afraid we are stuck with it in our free society.

No, muslims are trying to kill us.  And overwhelm us in other ways as well; killing is a last resort.

Islam is a political ideology fronted by a religion.  Say what you will about religion, but any "religion" that asserts it has a right to dominate and control all societies, indeed, the world, doesn't get Constitutional protection in my book because it aims to overthrow or subsume our government in the process, using our processes and institutions.

Neighborhoods afflicted with mosques soon find out they've been infiltrated by the enemy; they subvert the local councils/commissioners, drive residents out and then assume control through sheer numbers.  It's happening all over the country and it has to stop.

No Christian nor Jewish house of worship does the same and for that reason there is no reason to not afford them Constitutional protection.  Islam is not the same.

I'd have stopped at "agree to disagree" if you'd stopped there, but you didn't, so .......   

Amen, sistah!

[trapeze]

Say what you will about religion, but any "religion" that asserts it has a right to dominate and control all societies, indeed, the world, doesn't get Constitutional protection in my book because it aims to overthrow or subsume our government in the process, using our processes and institutions.

That will make an interesting federal lawsuit...that is, challenging islam as to its religious legitimacy. I would be pulling for whoever files it but I am afraid it wouldn't stand much of a chance. If a total fraud such as scientology can be recognized as a legitimate religion (and it has) then it's pretty much all over.

At some point though, this may become all academic and even irrelevant. If the muzzies ever do launch the kind of terror attack* in America that I have, quite frankly, been expecting for a very long time then none of this will matter.

"First Amendment? Hey, how's it going? Meet Second Amendment!"

And that will be the end of it. We aren't Europe and never will be.

*Indiscriminate murder and mayhem visited on shopping malls, subways, hospitals, schools, etc. on a nationwide scale. America is a very, very soft target in so many ways and I am continuously amazed that these morons haven't figured it out. An islamobomb via Pakistan or Iran would yield similar results.

[charlesoakwood]

Yes, Cain should know better by now, or he should know the question is coming and have a better prepared answer.  Not a different one just a slicker one for those having difficulty with blunt truth. Around this house his not dodging the sharia question and defending America was well received.

Some choose to accept the Islamist claim that there is no sharia practiced in mosques in America. I, and many others believe the Islamists claims of no sharia in American mosques are practicing taqiyya.  I believe they are faithful people to their creed and as they desire to subordinate, dominate, enslave, and if that is not possible, kill us, therefore the right I bestow upon them is to leave.

Many know the following, however this is an appropriate topic to post this information.



Islam is not a religion, but rather a totalitarian political ideology such as communism and fascism.
_ _ _ Gert Wilders

http://www.cfr.org/religion/islam-governing-under-sharia/p8034
What is Sharia?

Also meaning "path" in Arabic, sharia guides all aspects of Muslim life including daily routines, familial and religious obligations, and financial dealings. It is derived primarily from the Quran and the Sunna--the sayings, practices, and teachings of the Prophet Mohammed. Precedents and analogy applied by Muslim scholars are used to address new issues. The consensus of the Muslim community also plays a role in defining this theological manual.


http://frontpagemag.com/2010/07/30/sharia-in-a-first-amendment-society-2/
Sharia in a First Amendment Society

Steve Chapman, a columnist for the Chicago Tribune, has a piece in Human Events criticizing Sarah Palin for her opposition to building a mosque at Ground Zero. His argument seems to be that in guaranteeing freedom of religion, the First Amendment guarantees that all religions be treated identically. Therefore, argues Chapman, if you would allow evangelical Christians to build a church near Ground Zero, you must allow Muslims to build their mosque and community center—otherwise you are guilty of employing a double standard.

But the double standard only applies if you are dealing with two equivalent individuals or groups....


http://frontpagemag.com/2010/08/27/sharia-for-dummies/
Sharia for Dummies

Imam Feisal Abdel Rauf claims that the U.S. constitution is Sharia compliant. Now let us examine below a few laws of Sharia to see how truthful Imam Rauf is:

#s 1 through 34 at link

The above are clear-cut laws in Islam decided by great Imams after years of examination and interpretation of the Quran, Hadith and Mohammed’s life. Now let the learned Imam Rauf tell us: What part of the above is compliant with the U.S. Constitution?


http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2011/07/15/muslim-women-want-feds-to-end-gender-segregation-in-u-s-mosques/

[radioman]

Sorry, Islam is not a religion. Just because they claim it is doesn't make it a religion. They openly admit and push for 'their' law to over ride local laws, in this case, our constitution. No can do. This is something that we can't cave on.

Religions are about worship - it is not about replacing local laws with their own sharia laws. They give up their right to freedom of religion when they try to subjugate citizens to their set of laws.

Hey, if all they wanted to do was have a place to actually worship, I would support them. But I'm not a moron.

[trapeze]

Sorry, Islam is not a religion. Just because they claim it is doesn't make it a religion. They openly admit and push for 'their' law to over ride local laws, in this case, our constitution. No can do. This is something that we can't cave on.

Religions are about worship - it is not about replacing local laws with their own sharia laws. They give up their right to freedom of religion when they try to subjugate citizens to their set of laws.

Hey, if all they wanted to do was have a place to actually worship, I would support them. But I'm not a moron.

I'm not a moron either. But I do see the reality here in that islam is recognized as a religion. I may not like it but it is reality and until that reality changes (and sadly, as I noted above, I think it will be very bloody when it happens) we are stuck with this particular paradigm.

[Pandora]

And yet you have a problem with the guy who's willing to unstick the paradigm because he says he's willing to unstick the paradigm?