Elk County Forum

http://mashable.com/2011/10/17/herman-cain-singing-imagine/

;D Herman Cain for President!
Lisa

I don't understand this herman cain thing.

You all hate democrats because they want to repeal a 3% tax cut on the top 10% of income earners, yet you support a different person who's tax plan is to more than double taxes on the majority of americans.  What are you people smoking and where can i get some?

I have never said anything about hating any Democrat. If you support someone other than Mr. Cain that's fine. BTW, I don't smoke.
Lisa

well ok.  Can you, or any other Cain supporter explain to me why you are supporting a candidate that wants to more than double your taxes.?

Quote from: Anmar on October 21, 2011, 06:37:03 PM
well ok.  Can you, or any other Cain supporter explain to me why you are supporting a candidate that wants to more than double your taxes.?

Double?  Verification, please.

verification?  have you taken 5 minutes to think about his tax plan?  have you been watching the republican debates?

It doesn't take a genius to figure it out.  Whats the avg income out there in Elk County?  Lets assume $30k.  With the earned income tax credit, and tax credits for kids, that family probably pays 7-10% in income tax.  Under the Cain plan, that family will have to pay 18%, plus another 9% on anything that family buys.  Last I checked, the average american spends almost everything, so really, you're looking at a 27% tax rate.  Meanwhile the rich drop down to a 9% tax rate, plus another 9% on purchases.  Now the rich don't spend as much of their income (as a percentage)  So lets assume the rich spend 1/3 on buying new things.  That makes their effective tax rate around 12%.  So you've got a broke family in Kansas paying 27% and a super rich family with homes all over paying 12%.  Thats the guy you all are supporting. 

Good job on doing your homework.  Next time don't be so lazy and take a few minutes to use your noggin and think about something before you post.  I haven't even started on his involvement with the federal reserve, big corporate lobbyists, and the koch bros

Herman Cain does have a sense of humor.  The joke is on the republican party.  The fact that he's doing so well in the polls shows how far our country (and the republican party) has fallen from greatness.


http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-10-18/politics/30292711_1_income-tax-consumption-tax-tax-rate

http://danshaviro.blogspot.com/2011/10/herman-cains-9-9-9-tax-plan.html

Quote from: Anmar on October 21, 2011, 09:17:47 PM

Good job on doing your homework.  Next time don't be so lazy and take a few minutes to use your noggin and think about something before you post.  I haven't even started on his involvement with the federal reserve, big corporate lobbyists, and the koch bros

I doubt his plan is so set in konkrete as you think.  Cain's plan might just be open to some modification.  Further, if the employer contributions to medicare and SS are reduced to zero, there's an instant savings of over 7% to the average wage earner right off the top.  If those folks are in the 15% tax bracket that makes their basic government participation fees about 22%.  Compared to 9% consumption and 9% income tax, seems the new plan number is smaller.  Or are you using Kalifornia Mathematiks?  Further, I believe his plan has a mechanism that prevents taxation of income up to the poverty levels, thus making the effective tax rates even lower.  If he is smart enough to get the 16th Amendment repealed, he may be on to something.  Not to mention, it might, via the consumption tax, collect revenues from all your illegal alien friends.  Try that with our current tax code.  Of course, I suspect you like the idea that about half our population pays NO income taxes at all.  Personally, I like the idea of 'sharing the wealth' when it comes to the tax burden in this country.

While I personally prefer HB 25 (as a move toward equality in taxation), Cain's ideas are a start towards significant tax reform.  Damned bit better than what either side has done in recent decades.  At least he's willing to start a real dialogue.

"Double" our taxes?  Please.  Stop with the off the cuff liberal fear mongering.  Your pretense at conservatism is shallow, at best and offers little other than to support the current wealth transfer/confiscation schemes. 

Oh, speaking of doing homework, the per capita avg income in this county is $32,000,  Census figures you should have found. 

Quote from: Patriot on October 22, 2011, 09:07:12 AM
I doubt his plan is so set in konkrete as you think.  Cain's plan might just be open to some modification.  Further, if the employer contributions to medicare and SS are reduced to zero, there's an instant savings of over 7% to the average wage earner right off the top.  If those folks are in the 15% tax bracket that makes their basic government participation fees about 22%.  Compared to 9% consumption and 9% income tax, seems the new plan number is smaller.  Or are you using Kalifornia Mathematiks?  Further, I believe his plan has a mechanism that prevents taxation of income up to the poverty levels, thus making the effective tax rates even lower.  If he is smart enough to get the 16th Amendment repealed, he may be on to something.  Not to mention, it might, via the consumption tax, collect revenues from all your illegal alien friends.  Try that with our current tax code.  Of course, I suspect you like the idea that about half our population pays NO income taxes at all.  Personally, I like the idea of 'sharing the wealth' when it comes to the tax burden in this country.

While I personally prefer HB 25 (as a move toward equality in taxation), Cain's ideas are a start towards significant tax reform.  Damned bit better than what either side has done in recent decades.  At least he's willing to start a real dialogue.

"Double" our taxes?  Please.  Stop with the off the cuff liberal fear mongering.  Your pretense at conservatism is shallow, at best and offers little other than to support the current wealth transfer/confiscation schemes. 

Oh, speaking of doing homework, the per capita avg income in this county is $32,000,  Census figures you should have found. 

oo i Love when you get offended and try to prove you're intelligence.  In fact, you're only showing how ignorant you really are.  The second link I posted explains what happens to the SS and medicare tax.  Also, you're making several errors in your argument.

First:

QuoteFurther, if the employer contributions to medicare and SS are reduced to zero, there's an instant savings of over 7% to the average wage earner right off the top.

If the taxes are paid by the employer, then the savings goes to the employer.  The wage earner doesn't pays a share of SS and medicare taxes, and then the employer matches it.  If you had just read the article, you'd have seen that although the employer no longer pays it's share or the matching taxes, the wage earner is still on the hook.  In fact, the wage earner's taxes actually go up.  Thats the fourth 9 thats not mentioned. which leads to your next false assumption:

QuoteIf those folks are in the 15% tax bracket that makes their basic government participation fees about 22%.  Compared to 9% consumption and 9% income tax, seems the new plan number is smaller.

You ignored the whole part about tax deductions being eliminated.  someone in the 15% tax bracket doesnt actually pay 15%.  They usually pay much less because of tax credits and deductions.  You didn't read the links, and you must have just scanned through my post, so you don't understand that people who go out and earn a wage will be paying 27% tax. 

QuoteOr are you using Kalifornia Mathematiks?

Tell me,  what was your effective tax % last year?  I paid around 18%  What do you think is lower,  18% or 27%?  I have an MBA, what about you?

QuoteIf he is smart enough to get the 16th Amendment repealed, he may be on to something.

Why the hell would he repeal the 16th amendment?  Do you even know what the 16th amendment is?  It gives the government the power to collect an income tax.  Did you miss the part about this plan having a 9% income tax?  Do you realize now why I think you aren't as intelligent as you think you are?  Why would anyone go out and make part of their plan illegal?

QuotePersonally, I like the idea of 'sharing the wealth' when it comes to the tax burden in this country.

So you're in favor of the poor having a huge tax increase while the rich get a huge tax cut?  The poor already pay a higher % as it is...

Quote"Double" our taxes?  Please.  Stop with the off the cuff liberal fear mongering.  Your pretense at conservatism is shallow, at best and offers little other than to support the current wealth transfer/confiscation schemes. 

Its more than double for most families.  Thats not a stat from liberals.  This is being said by CONSERVATIVES.  You need to go out and inform yourself a little more.

QuoteOh, speaking of doing homework, the per capita avg income in this county is $32,000,  Census figures you should have found. 

this matters because?  Typical Patriot post.  You totally missed the whole point of the argument because you were too lazy to read the articles.  Instead you spent your time trying to prove me wrong instead of actually educating yourself on the subject.  I remember herman cain in one debate starting a sentence with the phrase "I don't have the facts to back this up, but...."  Your post reminds me of that. 

here,  another article for you to ignore.
http://news.yahoo.com/cain-tweaks-9-9-9-tax-plan-allow-151322301.html

QuoteBut the plan seems to be unraveling. Cain's shift on zero exemptions comes after an independent analysis showed his tax plan would raise taxes on 84 percent of U.S. households. The Tax Policy Center, a Washington think tank, said low- and middle-income families would be hit hardest, with households making between $10,000 and $20,000 seeing their taxes increase by nearly 950 percent.

Just my personal opinion, but I think Herman Cain is a plant and I will not support him.

Holy Moley Sarge, for the first time you'n me agree on something. I do not support Cain. Don't know about him being a plant though. You mean a plant like a tree or weed ? I suppose he might be like a Black Jack tree.

Newt in 2012.

You know what is the problem with implementing the linder/boortz fair tax plan.  I don't know why they keep dancing around this plan

Quote from: Sarge on October 28, 2011, 09:16:12 AM
Just my personal opinion, but I think Herman Cain is a plant and I will not support him.

Hmmmm....who do ya think "planted" him Sarge? I'm just wondering what you mean by that.
Lisa

How about this to start Ross off on something else as he is so negative about Howard and Elk County. Obama planted Cain?????????

I don't think it's negativity that Ross is displaying on this forum. I believe it's his right to know how his tax dollars are being spent and why his taxpayer dollars are being spent the way they are. It's actually a very good civics lession if you ask me! I applaud Ross and Patriot and everyone else who are trying to get people to open their eyes and not act like sheep!----Jennifer

Well said ,Jen

I just have this feeling that he is a plant from the democratic party. I have nothing to justify that, just a feeling.

Oh, he's a plant alright.  One hundred percent pure Koch Brothers lackey!

Charlie, is that just a feeling you have or do you have info to cause you to think that way?

As the group Boston would say - "It's More Than A Feeling"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/long-ties-to-koch-brothers-key-to-cains-campaign/2011/10/16/gIQAKTLPoL_story.html

Ah,ok I see why you made that statement.  It seems like every politician has some connection with big business honchos somewhere.

The Koch brothers want lower taxes---less Govt. regulations---less Govt. spending---and Cain is a "lackey" for the brothers ??? Why hells bells, maybe I better rethink my position on Cain because I want the same things.

Jar---I once read a funny little item on the Koch brothers where someone asked the question: Why Do Liberals Hate the Koch Brothers?
Here is one of the responses:
"Because the Koch Brothers hire thousands and thousands of people and pay them Good Wages.

Liberals HATE Employers and Employees.

Liberals lay around and wait for their Welfare Checks..........."


I guess this would be the reason the Occupy group of idiots were marching to their homes and screaming things like "Kill the Rich" and chanting how they are going to shoot these rich people, because they are RICH! (God forbid they went out and made something of their life and have money to show for it!)  Then you have these stupid people who actually believe Roseanne Barr would make a WONDERFUL President since she's running in 2012 for the Green Tea Party. Yes, wouldn't she be wonderful?

The comedienne and self-proclaimed presidential candidate appeared on the RT television program "Keiser Report" and said if she were president, she would bring back the guillotine as a form of capital punishment for the "worst of the worst of the guilty."

"I, first, would allow the guilty bankers to pay back anything over $100 million (in) personal wealth, because I believe in the maximum wealth of $100 million," Barr said. "If they're unable to live on that amount, they should go to re-education camps. And if that doesn't work, they should be beheaded." http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/politics&id=8375387

God help us all with morons like this running around!----Jennifer

You are correct Jennifer, but does it have to be entry after entry about the same thing???

Quote from: Jane on October 30, 2011, 08:04:36 AM
You are correct Jennifer, but does it have to be entry after entry about the same thing???

Some people (liberal progressives come to mind) are so thick headed they only learn by repetition.  Even today there are some who don't see Ross' point.  Of course, class attendance is, after all, voluntary. 

If you have a problem with Ross' postings, you're probably be more liberal than you think.
Republicanism is laced with liberalism and socialism.  Republicanism is not American conservatism.

Elk County is very Republican.  Ross stay right in there. 

I'd say most republicans and conservatives haven't the first clue about what it means to be a republican or a conservative.

How else could you explain Cain's jump in the polls despite his: support for higher taxes, more free trade, pro-choice, lobbying career, corporate backing, and his relationship with the federal reserve...


Will one of you Cain supporters please explain.....

Here's some if the reasons why I support Mr. Cain.

http://www.hermancain.com/the-issues

Lisa

Quote from: farmgal67357 on October 31, 2011, 08:05:32 PM
Here's some if the reasons why I support Mr. Cain.

http://www.hermancain.com/the-issues

Lisa

Those positions are no different from any other republican candidate....

Less regulation, drill for oil, privatize social security.  All silly ideas.

He keeps talking about Chile and their social security model.  Do you know what a joke the chilean social security system has become?  Again, please answer the question:

Why do you support a candidate who wants to double your taxes?

If you thing they are silly ideas, don't vote for Cain. As for the tax thing, IF there is a problem with the 999 deal, I believe Mr. Cain would have no problem working with others to straighten it out. I believe he want's to do what's right for the American people. You may believe what you want.
Lisa

The problem with the 999 is that they double tax corps.  i think 9% is for capital gains and 9% is for corps and the other 9 is for everyday wages.  It would work if you only taxed 9 wages, and 9 on corp and leave the capital gains out of it.  That would be a true 9%.  The addition of capital gains moves it to a 18% tax on corps and those who invest.  Those who do not invest would only get 9% tax. Not very fair in tax status.

As for privitization of social security.  That would be the smartest move.  I know i would have jumped on that like a chicken on a june bug if it had been available for me. I would have turned my 180k of ss payments into enough to support me in a decent lifestyle for the rest of my life and leave some for my kids when i do die.  After all its our money shouldn't we be able to grow it and leave what is left to our heirs?   I personally am very tired of supporting losers with the tax money i have paid in to support losers like that 30 year old idiot that is on disability because he can't man up and grow some stones and quit acting like a baby and shitting all over himself.  Personally cut his ass off, make him go out and earn a living. He's 30 years old for crying out loud and not a damn thing wrong with him physically.

Quote from: srkruzich on November 01, 2011, 10:17:27 AM
The problem with the 999 is that they double tax corps.  i think 9% is for capital gains and 9% is for corps and the other 9 is for everyday wages.  It would work if you only taxed 9 wages, and 9 on corp and leave the capital gains out of it.  That would be a true 9%.  The addition of capital gains moves it to a 18% tax on corps and those who invest.  Those who do not invest would only get 9% tax. Not very fair in tax status.

Please read the links i posted earlier.  As Herman Cain would say "you don't have the facts to back this up"

Please republicans, nominate a real candidate for president.

Quote from: Anmar on October 31, 2011, 04:44:22 PM
I'd say most republicans and conservatives haven't the first clue about what it means to be a republican or a conservative.

How else could you explain Cain's jump in the polls despite his: support for higher taxes, more free trade, pro-choice, lobbying career, corporate backing, and his relationship with the federal reserve...


Will one of you Cain supporters please explain.....

Herman Cain is NOT pro-choice.
http://www.newser.com/story/132165/herman-cain-no-abortion-no-exceptions.html
Lisa

That 3rd Koch Brother
Posted on November 6, 2011 by Lew Rockwell
Writes a friend:

"For some anecdotal evidence that Cain is the third Koch brother, look no further than the CNN-Tea Party Express Debate on September 12, 2011, where like usual Ron was ignored on his trademark issues.

"A quirky thing happened in the debate about half way through.  Wolf Blitzer went to a question in Phoenix which was actually from a person located at the Goldwater Institute, with the think-tank insignia prominently displayed.  It was a softball question about energy regulations harming the economy.  Wolf went right to Herman Cain for an answer, which he handled easily.  Immediately, Wolf went on to another question and did not ask anyone else other than Cain to respond to the Goldwater issued question.  I thought this was weird because there had been no other one candidate questions up to that point.

"For those who don't know, Goldwater is a Kochtopus operation, and one that Cain has spoken at in the past.  To have a question which came from a Kochtopus think-tank and have Wolf direct it only to Herman Cain seems a little more than coincidental."

http://www.lewrockwell.com/politicaltheatre/2011/11/that-3rd-koch-brother/

You forget that the right wing crazies will gladly bend to their masters' will.  They're proud to serve the likes of the koch brothers and the other mega wealthy parasites.

Tell me Cain supporters, how would you feel if your daughter was one of the victims of Cain's sexual harassment?

Quote from: Anmar on November 08, 2011, 09:01:57 PM
You forget that the right wing crazies will gladly bend to their masters' will.  They're proud to serve the likes of the koch brothers
Tell me Cain supporters, how would you feel if your daughter was one of the victims of Cain's sexual harassment?

If the allegations are true and the law won't do anything then thats what they make trees and ropes for

What kind of woman who is describing the things that Cain allegedly did, waits 14 years before ever saying anything about it? Who would wait that long? No report of it 14 YEARS ago when he supposedly did this? Also, why are all of these reports coming out about alleged sexual harrassment now that he's high in the polls? Where were these "women" when he was at 2%, 4% or 6%? I call bullshit on it all! I say Obama and the DemoRats and a handful of Republicans didn't like the fact that he was doing so well, so it's time for him to take a fall...He's not a yes man that could be controlled like some of the others. I have a feeling they thought he was getting too uppity...Can't have that now can we?----Jennifer

And by the way, there were reports of Bill Clintons' sexual escapades when he was running for the White House and a string of them while he was President. He was impeached and still finished out his second term as President. FDR's mistress lived in the White House. And what about the sexcapades of John F. Kennedy? Woodrow Wilson had a mistress. Somehow, when a DemoRat does something it's ok, but if anyone else does (or is accused of) anything, they should be tarred and feathered. 

WOW!  Where do I get some of that mind-control ultra right Kool-aid that some of ya'll been drinkin?  Oh, wait I forgot.  It's not called Kool-Aid; it's called Kocha-Cola.

I don't drink Kool-aid or Kocha-Cola. I just have an opinion and last I knew, that isn't illegal, YET!---Jennifer

To Steve:  Sexual harrassment isn't a felony.  Its a civil matter.  Its up to the accusers to settle their issues with Cain in court or through mediation, which leads me to Jennifer...

They didn't wait 14 years, you are ignorant of the facts it would appear.  The first two accusers filed claims immediately against their employer and a settlement was reached.  Furthermore, some of the accusers may have not come forward previously because it wasn't relevant.  Now that the guy is running for president, the information becomes relevant because its a reflection of his lack of moral fiber.  Thats why its in the news now....  14 years ago, the media and voters didn't care if some douchebag lobbyist sexually harassed his staffers.  

And if you want to talk about Clinton, and all the others and their mistresses, thats well and good.  They cheated on their wives with willing participants.  So did Newt Gingrich, Larry Craig (with a man?) and Mark Sanford.  The difference between them and Cain is that Cain's incidents involve UNWILLING VICTIMS.  See steve's outrage in his comments?  Steve understands that sexual harassment isn't a big leap away from rape...  Thats not quite the same thing as cheating on your wife.

Finally, going back to clinton, you're showing once again the hypocritical mentality of the crazy right.  Clinton was unfit to be president because he lied, and he disgraced the office by cheating.  So why are there two republican candidates in the field who have done exactly those two things?  One of them, a serial sexual harasser, you are defending.  What is wrong with you people?

I'm a football fan, and I've been watching the story of the Penn state allegations.  For those of you who don't know, an assistant coach was caught raping a 10 year old boy, and it turns out he's been doing that sort of thing on campus for at least 14 years.  He was able to get away with it for so long because people who knew about it did nothing.  In fact they helped hide his crimes.  By covering those despicable actions, they became an accomplice by enabling the predator.  You people who would support this sexual predator because you believe in his political ideology is akin to participating in his crimes against his victims.  You should be ashamed of yourselves...  All of you who still support him despite his obvious guilt.

On that note, Steve, thanks for being willing to speak your own mind, despite the fact that your opinion may be unpopular.  welcome to the club.

No Anmar, I'm not ignorant of any facts...I said, "what kind of woman waits 14 years" speaking of this idiot Bialek that came out yesterday. I'm not a moron and heard in the news just like you did about the other women who have crawled out of the woodwork.
I, unlike you, cannot speak of Cain's "obvious" guilt. I was not there. I am not defending him as a Republican. I'm pissed about the whole thing in general. I also don't like your comment about the accusers not coming out before because it wasn't relevant. IF these things happen to a woman, it's usually pretty relevant to her, her family, her boyfriend, somebody and they are going to scream it from the rooftop THEN and not wait 14 YEARS when they think they can get something for their 15 minutes of fame!

Quote from: kshillbillys on November 08, 2011, 10:05:26 PM
What kind of woman who is describing the things that Cain allegedly did, waits 14 years before ever saying anything about it? Who would wait that long? No report of it 14 YEARS ago when he supposedly did this?

Simple fact is they wouldn't. This is a common weapon used by the left to affect the outcome of elections.  Herman cain is a threat to obama if he gets the nomination so they will do whatever it takes to discredit him so he won't be running against obama.  Its so classic i am surprised folks even still fall for this tactic.
simple fact is Cain came off the plantation and the massa's are upset.

Quote from: Anmar on November 08, 2011, 10:37:14 PM
To Steve:  Sexual harrassment isn't a felony.  Its a civil matter.  Its up to the accusers to settle their issues with Cain in court or through mediation, which leads me to Jennifer...

Civil my ass, its highly uncivil using ones power to essentially force someone to do sexual favors.  Thats rape.  Just because one doesn't hold the person down and by force take them doesn't mean using ones power over the other persons life to get the same thing isn't the same crime. 

But i do not know if cain did so and there is no proof at all that he did. IF these women did not take it to court, then i have to go with innocent.  Sorry but thats the way it is.  No reason to slander and demonize someone  who hasn't been proven and faced their accusers.
As far as Settlements, i have seen it happen enough in business that i am highly skepticle of anyone in  a company when they claim sexual harrassment these days.  It is and has been a lottery for certain people that make these allegations.  THe destruction they can cause just by a allegation will result in a fast payoff and a confidentiality agreement that keeps them silent.   

QuoteOn that note, Steve, thanks for being willing to speak your own mind, despite the fact that your opinion may be unpopular.  welcome to the club.

I have always said what I think and don't care who doesn't like it.   Shrug.  :)

Steve, I couldn't agree with you more on this.  If a woman is assaulted, she should immediately report it.  It is interesting what is showing up in the histories of these women.  Also, a settlement does not indicate guilt.  It just indicates that the company didn't want to go through a lot of hassle with it.  And weren't the women terminated as part of the deals?

All sides can and will use unsavory tactics when they think it will get them something.That goes back a very long time, when votes were bought right out in the open and all sorts of "favors" were done. It's sad, but none of it is new.

listen to both video's...

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2011/11/08/video-herman-cain-holds-news-conference-to-address-sharon-bialek%E2%80%99s-sexual-harassment-allegations-says-it-simply-didn%E2%80%99t-happen/

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=47438


Herman Cain​ has spent his life living and working all over the country -- Indiana, Georgia, Minnesota, Nebraska, Kansas, Washington, D.C. -- but never in Chicago.

So it's curious that all the sexual harassment allegations against Cain emanate from Chicago: home of the Daley machine and Obama consigliere David Axelrod​.

Suspicions had already fallen on Sheila O'Grady, who is close with David Axelrod and went straight from being former Chicago mayor Richard M. Daley's chief of staff to president of the Illinois Restaurant Association (IRA), as being the person who dug up Herman Cain's personnel records from the National Restaurant Association (NRA).

The Daley-controlled IRA works hand-in-glove with the NRA. And strangely enough, Cain's short, three-year tenure at the NRA is evidently the only period in his decades-long career during which he's alleged to have been a sexual predator.

After O'Grady's name surfaced in connection with the miraculous appearance of Cain's personnel files from the NRA, she issued a Clintonesque denial of any involvement in producing them -- by vigorously denying that she knew Cain when he was at the NRA. (Duh.)

And now, after a week of conservative eye-rolling over unspecified, anonymous accusations against Cain, we've suddenly got very specific sexual assault allegations from an all-new accuser out of ... Chicago.

Herman Cain has never lived in Chicago. But you know who has? David Axelrod! And guess who lived in Axelrod's very building? Right again: Cain's latest accuser, Sharon Bialek.

Bialek's accusations were certainly specific. But they also demonstrated why anonymous accusations are worthless.

Within 24 hours of Bialek's press conference, friends and acquaintances of hers stepped forward to say that she's a "gold-digger," that she was constantly in financial trouble -- having filed for personal bankruptcy twice -- and, of course, that she had lived in Axelrod's apartment building at 505 North Lake Shore Drive, where, she admits, she knew the man The New York Times calls Obama's "hired muscle."

Throw in some federal tax evasion, and she's Obama's next Cabinet pick.

The reason all this is relevant is that both Axelrod and Daley have a history of smearing political opponents by digging up claims of sexual misconduct against them.

John Brooks, Chicago's former fire commissioner, filed a lawsuit against Daley six months ago claiming Daley threatened to smear him with sexual harassment accusations if Brooks didn't resign. He resigned -- and the sexual harassment allegations were later found to be completely false.

Meanwhile, as extensively detailed in my book Guilty: Liberal 'Victims' and Their Assault on America, the only reason Obama became a U.S. senator -- allowing him to run for president -- is that David Axelrod pulled sealed divorce records out of a hat, first, against Obama's Democratic primary opponent, and then against Obama's Republican opponent.

One month before the 2004 Democratic primary for the U.S. Senate, Obama was way down in the polls, about to lose to Blair Hull, a multimillionaire securities trader.

But then The Chicago Tribune -- where Axelrod used to work -- began publishing claims that Hull's second ex-wife, Brenda Sexton, had sought an order of protection against him during their 1998 divorce proceedings.

From then until Election Day, Hull was embroiled in fighting the allegation that he was a "wife beater." He and his ex-wife eventually agreed to release their sealed divorce records. His first ex-wife, daughters and nanny defended him at a press conference, swearing he was never violent. During a Democratic debate, Hull was forced to explain that his wife kicked him and he had merely kicked her back.

Hull's substantial lead just a month before the primary collapsed with the nonstop media attention to his divorce records. Obama sailed to the front of the pack and won the primary. Hull finished third with 10 percent of the vote.

Luckily for Axelrod, Obama's opponent in the general election had also been divorced.

The Republican nominee was Jack Ryan, a graduate of Dartmouth and Harvard law and business schools, who had left his lucrative partnership at Goldman Sachs​ to teach at an inner-city school on the South Side of Chicago.

But in a child custody dispute some years earlier, Ryan's ex-wife, Hollywood sex kitten Jeri Lynn Ryan​, had alleged that, while the couple was married, Jack had taken her to swingers clubs in Paris and New York.

Jack Ryan adamantly denied the allegations. In the interest of protecting their son, he also requested that the records be put permanently under seal.

Axelrod's courthouse moles obtained the "sealed" records and, in no time, they were in the hands of every political operative in Chicago. Knowing perfectly well what was in the records, Chicago Tribune attorneys flew to California and requested that the court officially "unseal" them -- over the objections of both Jack and Jeri Ryan​.

Your honor, who knows what could be in these records!

A California judge ordered them unsealed, which allowed newspapers to publish the salacious allegations, and four days later, Ryan dropped out of the race under pressure from idiot Republicans (who should be tracked down and shot).

With a last-minute replacement of Alan Keyes as Obama's Republican opponent, Obama was able to set an all-time record in an Illinois Senate election, winning with a 43 percent margin.

And that's how Obama became a senator four years after losing a congressional race to Bobby Rush​. (In a disastrous turn of events, Rush was not divorced.)

Axelrod destroyed the only two men who stood between Obama and the Senate with illicitly obtained, lurid allegations from their pasts.

In 2007, long after Obama was safely ensconced in the U.S. Senate, The New York Times reported: "The Tribune reporter who wrote the original piece (on Hull's sealed divorce records) later acknowledged in print that the Obama camp had 'worked aggressively behind the scenes' to push the story."

Some had suggested, the Times article continued, that Axelrod had "an even more significant role -- that he leaked the initial story."

This time, Obama's little helpers have not only thrown a bomb into the Republican primary, but are hoping to destroy the man who deprives the Democrats of their only argument in 2012: If you oppose Obama, you must be a racist.

RULE 1: "Power is not only what I have, but what the enemy thinks I have."  Power is derived from two main sources -- money and people.   "Have-Nots" must build power from flesh and blood.

(These are two things of which there is a plentiful supply.  Government and corporations always have a difficult time appealing to people, and usually do so almost exclusively with economic arguments.)

RULE 2: "I never go outside the expertise of 'my people'."  It results in confusion, fear and retreat.  Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone.

(Organizations under attack wonder why radicals don't address the "real" issues.  This is why.  They avoid things with which they have no knowledge.)

RULE 3: "Whenever possible, I go outside the expertise of the enemy."  I look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty.

(This happens all the time.  Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)

RULE 4: "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules."  If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, I send 30,000 letters.  I can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules.

(This is a serious rule.  The besieged entity's very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)

RULE 5: "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon."  There is no defense.  It's irrational.  It's infuriating.  It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.

(Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh?  He wants to create anger and fear.)

RULE 6: "A good tactic is one 'my people' enjoy."  They'll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more.  They're doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones.

(Radical activists, in this sense, are no different than any other human being.  We all avoid "un-fun" activities, and but we revel at and enjoy the ones that work and bring results.)

RULE 7: "A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag."  Don't let it become old news.

(Even radical activists get bored.  So to keep them excited and involved, organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.)

RULE 8: "Keep the pressure on. Never let up."  I keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance.  As the opposition masters one approach, I hit them from the flank with something new.

(Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover and re-strategize.)

RULE 9: "The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself."  Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist.

(Perception is reality.  Large organizations always prepare a worst-case scenario, something that may be furthest from the activists' minds.  The upshot is that the organization will expend enormous time and energy, creating in its own collective mind the direst of conclusions.  The possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.)

RULE 10: "If I push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive."  Violence from the other side can win the public to my side because the public sympathizes with the underdog.

(Unions used this tactic.  Peaceful [albeit loud] demonstrations during the heyday of unions in the early to mid-20th Century incurred management's wrath, often in the form of violence that eventually brought public sympathy to their side.)

RULE 11: "The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative."  I never let the enemy score points because I'd be caught without a solution to the problem.

(Old saw: If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.  Activist organizations have an agenda, and their strategy is to hold a place at the table, to be given a forum to wield their power.  So, they have to have a compromise solution.)

RULE 12: "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."  I cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy.  I go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.

(This is cruel, but very effective.  Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)

According to Alinsky, the main job of the organizer is to bait an opponent into reacting.  "The enemy properly goaded and guided in his reaction will be your major strength."

Ah yes! At long last, the tactics against EK in print. ;) 8)

Quote from: Diane Amberg on November 10, 2011, 11:51:55 AM
Ah yes! At long last, the tactics against EK in print. ;) 8)

RULE 12: "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."  I cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy.  I go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.


Seems to me that EK is the institution.  The people (and true targets) are those who question... and those who question are often attacked on this issue.  Now, who's using Alinsky's radical formulas?

RULE 6: "A good tactic is one 'my people' enjoy."  They'll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more.  They're doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones.

And who are the 'tools'?

and the rest of rule 12, in (  ) ? "  Direct, personalized criticism works." Having been on the end of this ,I know just how it feels! I'll be directing many to this list as needed. Rule 5 and 8 are especially telling. We who have been labeled your enemy thank you for giving this to us to study. ::) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D :angel:

Quote from: Diane Amberg on November 10, 2011, 01:09:15 PM
...Having been on the end of this.

And on the 'end' you are, to be sure.  And we're not talking the front end.

#12 again ;D

The last question was who would you vote for between Newt or Romney if it came down to them. The Ron Paul people answer "Ron Paul." Here are some other answers they give: Paper or plastic? Ron Paul. How old are you? Ron Paul. How would you like your steak prepared? Ron Paul. Where are you going on vacation? Ron Paul. What kind of car do you drive? Ron Paul. What religion are you? Ron Paul. Sheesh....

This is from a page on Facebook...Just kind of amused me...Ron Paul voters don't listen to the questions, they just say Ron Paul.

I'm saying Go Newt, Go as he rises through the polls!

But---don't you know Newt divorced his 1st wife when she was in the hospital on her death bed, back in 1980 ? What a worm huh ? At least that is some of the trash the libs throw out there. Trouble is his first wife is still alive and she is the one who filed for divorce and was in the hospital to have a benign tumor removed. That "low life worm" took their two kids to visit their mother in the hospital---nothing to do with a divorce. Anyway she was some kind of math teacher so I bet ol Newt just got tired of doing additions and subtractions every night !!!

Quote from: jarhead on November 15, 2011, 08:42:41 PM
But---don't you know Newt divorced his 1st wife when she was in the hospital on her death bed, back in 1980 ? What a worm huh ? At least that is some of the trash the libs throw out there. Trouble is his first wife is still alive and she is the one who filed for divorce and was in the hospital to have a benign tumor removed. That "low life worm" took their two kids to visit their mother in the hospital---nothing to do with a divorce. Anyway she was some kind of math teacher so I bet ol Newt just got tired of doing additions and subtractions every night !!!

That is true, he didn't dump his first wife.   He may suck at relationships but he's no cold hearted bastard either.

 Those stories are never trustworthy. They did get divorced and he was fooling around. The rest is just fodder. 
  Got to look deeper to chose a viable candidate....much too soon as far as I'm concerned..
  I want to hear about foreign policy, dealing with heavy handed lobbyists and graft, tax reform, rebuilding infrastructure, watch dogging the rating agencies, keeping an eye on wall street, dumping cheater subsidies etc.  Gimme some real issues!

 
All subsidies are "cheater subsidies".  Gov't is not supposed to give anybody assistance.  Is that too difficult to understand?

You want real issues?  Then take a look at Ron Paul.   

Democrats and Republicans are entertaining us with the same ole stuff.  Nothing new happening there.

Quote from: Diane Amberg on November 16, 2011, 07:59:46 AM
I want to hear about foreign policy, dealing with heavy handed lobbyists and graft, tax reform, rebuilding infrastructure, watch dogging the rating agencies, keeping an eye on wall street, dumping cheater subsidies etc.  Gimme some real issues!

No problem!  Read the Elk County Forum on local issues.  Everything you seek is here:  heavy handed lobbyists, graft, tax reform, rebuilding infrastructure, cheater subsidies.  Though maybe not so much on foreign policy & Wall Street.  Of course there are discussions of foreigners (outsiders & non-Elk Countians), big money and wealth redistribution issues.

But then these issues at the local level aren't nearly as thrilling as they are at the national and international levels, are they?

:)

Red, I have no idea how old you are, but many people aren't interested in a 77 year old president who would be 80 before his first term is up. Too many young people  think that is just too old. Even President Reagan was younger than that. Sometimes the perception over shadows the reality.

Quote from: Diane Amberg on November 16, 2011, 06:23:04 PM
Red, I have no idea how old you are, but many people aren't interested in a 77 year old president who would be 80 before his first term is up. Too many young people  think that is just too old. Even President Reagan was younger than that. Sometimes the perception over shadows the reality.

Quite frankly none of the ones that are under 45 including obama are worth 2 shakes either. 

Diane, I'm not interested in the Democrat candidate or the socialist Republicans who are running.

When it gets to election time, you'll probably be right there for one of 'em, instead of someone more like Ron Paul.

Yes, I'll vote for or against someone....We deserve what what we get. :P

One or the other...........same ole soup, just warmed over.

I think Ron Paul would be an interesting choice, but he'll never get it for the reasons stated earlier. Besides, the Presidency is rapidly becoming a figure head, with Congress steering our Ship of State in circles. I'm still more interested in states rights. We'll see what happens later on.