• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Lawrence O'Donnell interviews Herman Cain

mbig -
There was still plenty of Civil Rights activity during that period. (ie, Mississippi civil rights workers murders - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). But he apparently chose not to participate.
His response was disjointed, who knows what.
Instead of saying ie, 'I still felt that reluctance even in college', he went out the window. It was mind-blowing. Like watching a child caught lying or an unmedicated street person.
Click to expand...

Ah, I see.. Hmmm. Do you know the Cain "Story", mbig? Do you know how his Dad worked 3 jobs to support his family, did you know about Cain working very young and when he started his family the same thing.. Perhaps, and this is really just a guess, perhaps Cain was a little miffed at O'Donnel's questions. I would be too, and maybe he was a little rattled. Cain isn't a career politician (A quality I admire) he's a regular guy, self made, and for guys like him, and me, it really, really irks us when people begin to question our integrity, and our devotion. Maybe Cain didn't have time for the civil rights movement, maybe his Dad instilled in him a strong work ethic, honor, pride, and a commitment to family and friends! Maybe Cain learned very early on that the only way he was ever going to be someone was of his own doing, his own hard work, and his own lessons of failure, and success! You seem to find value in O'Donnel's questions in this area? How so? How is it relevant what Cain was doing during the civil rights movement? If Cain marched instead of worked would it matter to O'Donnel? Would it matter to you?

When it was pointed out 9/9/9 was a Giant tax increase for the Middle/LowMiddle/Poor, who would have a new rate of 18% since they spend all their money to live and that it was a large tax cut for the Rich/very Rich.. he couldn't answer. He mentioned his economic team. Who that was he couldn't say. (Steve Forbes IV?)
Click to expand...

Well, I didn't see this part, could you link to it? I admittedly haven't yet looked into his 9/9/9 plan, but even if we take the premise at face value, isn't the mantra of the left to have people pay their fair share? How fair is it to continue on the path that 47% of American's pay no income tax at all? Isn't our current problem the collective result of 50 years of entitlement spending, big banking, financial corruption, and big government? The premise of equal responsibility when no one can clearly identify who is responsible seems like an even-handed approach to me?

"stave off criticism of my loyalties"?
[Again] I explained my preference, both with Christie and Powers, (AND Buchanan and immigration) were with the Intellectually stronger candidates. (and too bad for you, posters too).
Though I said it was "predominantly Liberal".
And you make this Goofy accusation "loyalties" As If McCarthy having outed a commie. oooh.
I'm obviously closer to the center/more evenhanded/Impartial than You who claim Fox is (!)
Click to expand...

Question. Where is the center of American politics exactly? As for Christie (I love him) you would rather his answer to O'Donnel be F-You Asswipe, who the hell are you to ask me about my patriotism instead of Cain's retort? Seems awfully suspect preferring one hypothetically heated exchange over that of Cain's?

MSNBC, btw, came into purpose/prominence
Click to expand...

LOL ^^^ Now that's comedy right there folks.. "Prominence/purpose" :) Good one!

BTW, just checked the networks.... MSNBC's, Chris Matthews just had a friendly, even softball interview, with Staunch Conservative GOP Prez candiate Rick Santorum, Near Promo. And regularly has paleo-conservative Buchanan on as guest commentator. O'Reilly has Huckabee on talking about Cain.
Click to expand...

The same Matthews that got tingles up his leg? Yeah, so? Does he want a cookie?

I will be delighted to Continue to let everyone see who can debate On Topic and who is more evenhanded.
Click to expand...

When fairness is warranted, I'll deliver. It isn't and wasn't here, and it certainly doesn't apply to MSNBC, and if you think MSNBC is unbiased, or even if you deny that MSNBC isn't completely and totally in the Obama camp since day one, I'll continue to view your posts with a great deal of puzzlement!


Tim-
 
Necessarily for Hicup, you can see alot of Dishonest 'Short-quoting' above. Leaving off Important, even bolded sections of my reply, which show who Is more evenhanded, and who is a baiting Clown.
ie. Dishonestly truncating My "MSNBC, btw, came into purpose/prominence as the 'anti-Fox'. AFTER the fact/other Pole has been in biz"
into just it's First Six words:: "MSNBC, btw, came into purpose/prominence - - - - - - - - -- - -
Leaving off the rest/context/Point re 'anti-Fox'
Anyone think that's a Fair quote?
For just one example of his many abuses.
Such as my citing of conservative sources like the WSJ.

Hicup now on my 'reply-only-to-further-embarrass' list.


EDIT: More Trolling below and no excuse for his continued Dishonest posting
 
Last edited:
mbig said:
Dishonestly, but Necessarily for Hicup, you can see alot of 'Short-quoting' above. Leaving off Important, even bolded sections of my reply, which show who Is more evenhanded, and who is a baiting Clown.
(ie. Dishonestly truncating "MSNBC, btw, came into purpose/prominence as the 'anti-Fox'. AFTER the fact/other Pole has been in biz" into it's First Six words, leaving off the rest/context)
You're now on my 'reply-only-to-further-embarrass' list.
Click to expand...

Oh you mean leaving out this:

You Can't even acknowledge Fox IS at one pole.
you don't what impartial is. Your posts, utter partisan hackery
Click to expand...

Ok.. I see your point. Hmmm.. Well my answer is, "No they're not" -and- "No they're not"..

Were you seriously expecting me to address this part of your post? And you speak of evenhandedness...

You seem like a smart fella which is why I am puzzled you'd watch MSNBC with any great degree of regularity? I usually don't mate the two concepts together in the same context.. You know, intelligence and MSNBC.. Oh, and throw in fairness while you're at it..


Tim-
 
1Perry said:
O'Donnell was a coward here. Hiding behind "viewer questions". If you want to know something, ask it.
Click to expand...

"Coward" is O'Donnell's guiding trait. He's a self avowed socialist using a sympathetic MSNBC as a platform to undercut those that do not agree with his philosophy and ideology. In other words, just another one of many talking head opinion sheeple bleating his message to sympathetic ears.
 
Herman Cain is a typical republican presidential candidate, not saying they are any different than the democrats. He is asked by O'Donnell why he didn't participate in the civil rights movement in the 1960s. Cain says he was in high school at the time. Unfortunately, Cain didn't think his answer through very well, as O'Donnell then shows that in actuality Cain was in college during the time of many of the civil rights marches. Cain then deflects the entire line of questioning by mentioning how we need to focus on our nation's real problems, and not his past. His answer brought up memories of Vice President Cheney's reasons about why he didn't go to Viet Nam.
 
In all fairness, later in the interview, O'Donnell shows his true colors and implies that Cain's not going to Viet Nam was because of his lack of patriotism. Cain then hands O'Donnell his ass by showing not only was he not drafted, but during this time he worked for the Department of the Navy as a mathematician.

I'm not a Herman Cain supporter, but I am certainly not a Lawrence O'Donnell fan either.
 
Ockham said:
"Coward" is O'Donnell's guiding trait. He's a self avowed socialist using a sympathetic MSNBC as a platform to undercut those that do not agree with his philosophy and ideology. In other words, just another one of many talking head opinion sheeple bleating his message to sympathetic ears.
Click to expand...
Um, this section of DP was created to discuss the 2012 race for the White House, NOT to discuss specifics of anchors or networks. If you have a problem with O'Donnell's interview of Herman Cain that is fair game. Otherwise take this discussion elsewhere on DP.
 
I think Romney/Cain would be a smart ticket. Most people on the right are going to vote for whoever runs against Obama. Having Cain there will help persuade the tea party right to feel more comfortable voting for Romney and independents would be more comfortable with Romney than Obama (in my humble opinion). Plus, I've heard some Democrats say that Romney would be the only GOP candidate they would vote for. So they could get Republican, tea party, independents and Democrat votes.

Obama would just get the far left and those who refuse to vote for a Republican.

Sounds like a win to me.
 
pbrauer said:
Um, this section of DP was created to discuss the 2012 race for the White House, NOT to discuss specifics of anchors or networks. If you have a problem with O'Donnell's interview of Herman Cain that is fair game. Otherwise take this discussion elsewhere on DP.
Click to expand...

I commented on a statement by Perry1. I'd ask you to leave the moderation of DP to the moderators.
 
Mellie said:
I think Romney/Cain would be a smart ticket. Most people on the right are going to vote for whoever runs against Obama. Having Cain there will help persuade the tea party right to feel more comfortable voting for Romney and independents would be more comfortable with Romney than Obama (in my humble opinion). Plus, I've heard some Democrats say that Romney would be the only GOP candidate they would vote for. So they could get Republican, tea party, independents and Democrat votes.

Obama would just get the far left and those who refuse to vote for a Republican.

Sounds like a win to me.
Click to expand...
I have serious doubts as to whether you'll see either Romney or Cain on the ticket. Both are businessmen, the country doesn't need to be run like a business. Romney was the head and made much of his fortune with Bain Capitol, a company the doesn't create jobs but eliminates them through leveraged buyouts. Romney is a phony who has advocated both sides of many issues.
 
Texmex said:
In all fairness, later in the interview, O'Donnell shows his true colors and implies that Cain's not going to Viet Nam was because of his lack of patriotism. Cain then hands O'Donnell his ass by showing not only was he not drafted, but during this time he worked for the Department of the Navy as a mathematician.

I'm not a Herman Cain supporter, but I am certainly not a Lawrence O'Donnell fan either.
Click to expand...

I thought it was quite evident when the last question was his 9/9/9 plan :-D. I didn't enjoy the interview at all. You should see how bad his interview was with Peter Schiff. All he did was talk, talk, talk.
 
Last edited:
Texmex said:
In all fairness, later in the interview, O'Donnell shows his true colors and implies that Cain's not going to Viet Nam was because of his lack of patriotism. Cain then hands O'Donnell his ass by showing not only was he not drafted, but during this time he worked for the Department of the Navy as a mathematician.

I'm not a Herman Cain supporter, but I am certainly not a Lawrence O'Donnell fan either.
Click to expand...
The Selective Service doesn't know what a person's civilian job is, they know the persons age if they registered for the draft. Cain just diverted, which is what he does through most of the interview.
 
Texmex said:
In all fairness, later in the interview, O'Donnell shows his true colors and implies that Cain's not going to Viet Nam was because of his lack of patriotism.
Click to expand...
It was actually worse that that... O'Donnell called Cain a coward for not going down and volunteering for Vietnam.
 
Ockham said:
I commented on a statement by Perry1. I'd ask you to leave the moderation of DP to the moderators.
Click to expand...

So would I. This thread's subject is the O'Donnell interview with Cain. O'Donnell is a commentator, so why is discussing what he does and who he works for a problem on a thread about what he did during an interview?
 
Texmex said:
Herman Cain is a typical republican presidential candidate, not saying they are any different than the democrats. He is asked by O'Donnell why he didn't participate in the civil rights movement in the 1960s. Cain says he was in high school at the time. Unfortunately, Cain didn't think his answer through very well, as O'Donnell then shows that in actuality Cain was in college during the time of many of the civil rights marches. Cain then deflects the entire line of questioning by mentioning how we need to focus on our nation's real problems, and not his past. His answer brought up memories of Vice President Cheney's reasons about why he didn't go to Viet Nam.
Click to expand...

O'Donnel basically accused Cain of milking off the tit that someone else provided, all the while he sat back and did nothing to contribute to the civil rights movement. He stopped just short of calling Cain a race traitor. There were millions of blacks that didn't physically participate in the so called civil rights movement. Are they all race traitors and cowards, as well?

This interview is as intellectually lacking--on O'Donnell's part--as Katie Couric's interview of Sarah Palin during the 2008 campaign, if not moreso.
 
nota bene said:
So would I. This thread's subject is the O'Donnell interview with Cain. O'Donnell is a commentator, so why is discussing what he does and who he works for a problem on a thread about what he did during an interview?
Click to expand...

Because it's getting too hot for some Libbos to handle.
 
nota bene said:
So would I. This thread's subject is the O'Donnell interview with Cain. O'Donnell is a commentator, so why is discussing what he does and who he works for a problem on a thread about what he did during an interview?
Click to expand...

I'm not discussing it, replied to one person with a comment about a comment they made. Period. You however seem to be doing the same thing... discussing me, instead of the subject of the thread.
 
Ockham said:
"Coward" is O'Donnell's guiding trait. He's a self avowed socialist using a sympathetic MSNBC as a platform to undercut those that do not agree with his philosophy and ideology. In other words, just another one of many talking head opinion sheeple bleating his message to sympathetic ears.
Click to expand...

O.K. I've not seen very much of him. Now thinking back I do recall seeing some odd rant of his before.......Now I remember......Citizen United. It was almost a sexual experience watching MSNBC that day.

Anyway, the debate over whether or not you needed to serve your country was debated with Clinton and the side that said it wasn't important won that one. If I'm not mistaken I read where O'Donnell got a college deferment and didn't go either.

So I really need to amend my descriptive. He's a cowardly weasel.
 
Ockham said:
I'm not discussing it, replied to one person with a comment about a comment they made. Period. You however seem to be doing the same thing... discussing me, instead of the subject of the thread.
Click to expand...

I believe you've misunderstood me. I was agreeing with you in my post.
 
Texmex said:
In all fairness, later in the interview, O'Donnell shows his true colors and implies that Cain's not going to Viet Nam was because of his lack of patriotism. Cain then hands O'Donnell his ass by showing not only was he not drafted, but during this time he worked for the Department of the Navy as a mathematician.

I'm not a Herman Cain supporter, but I am certainly not a Lawrence O'Donnell fan either.
Click to expand...

what this tells us is that ole raisin not only sat out the effort to gain equal rights he also sat out the viet nam war. no indication he supported it, or opposed it
to me, and others like me, that reeks of an apathetic coward
so, why is it now that he wants to take a political stand?
i am guessing - only because it is now safe to do so

so, go for it republicans. nominate another coward, like cheney
 
Hahaha, it seems you are only a viable candidate if you marched in some protest now. LOL Please.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom