No - the reporter mentioned in the OP brought up race.

I didn't call you a racist. I simply stated that liberals have an issue with a minority that doesn't toe their line. If you wish to put yourself in that group, thats on you.

Perhaps you can explain why it is that when you speak about people who are against Obama - you always have to point out his race when doing so then?

Would you like a couple of examples where you have to prove the point?

Not that I agree with what she said, but is there evidence that refutes her opinion?

Or maybe you are, erm, being "inaccurate".

Cause as far as I can tell until this post your only criticism of Cain in this thread has been:

So tell me Mookie, where else in this thread have you said any of that stuff you posted above?

Is there evidence that you have stopped beating your wife?

Why do I have to rehash my opinion on Herman Cain in this thread? It's easy to find in the other Herman Cain thread.


And it's still absolutely as offensive as when you said it the other time. I'm going to excuse myself from this thread as the urge to lay into you for this....."statement" is getting too strong. Suffice to say it's trash, and my opinion of you has dropped a lot because of it.

Why does he "GOT" to be thinking this? All your doing is pigeonholing the man. Who are you to say he isn't serious about his candidacy? Jack up his speaking fees? The man doesn't need to work another day in his life! As I said - somehow or another you have to belittle him or attack him. You just proved my point.

Because it's exactly how Obama got elected and I'm sure exactly what he was thinking at the time.

And yes, I'm going to criticize Herman Cain. I don't think he's as great as you obviously do. Deal with it.

Nor would I want you to. But...

Nobody gets banned for ticking off anybody, including the Moderators and the Site Owner. And especially not for ticking off me, because in spite of post count and reputation, I'm really pretty much nobody as far at authority goes.

There are hard-core right-wingers here, and hard-core left-wingers. There are members of both sides who are not quite so rough around the edges. And there are some of us who truly are in the middle, taking one side or the other depending solely on the issue under discussion, and not supporting either actual "side". The biggest thing I take exception to is actually flaming. As do the Moderators and Neal. Discussions can and do get heated, and all of us have crossed the line more than once, and most of us are gracious enough to apologize when we do (or at least when we're called on it).

When I said I thought some of your comments deserved a reply, I was referring to the more-than-occasional flaming by yourself - not of other members here, but of people you disagree with in general ("Obammy", "Caucas-African", "Camilla the Ugly"). That kind of childish namd-calling serves no purpose, is not conducive to good debate, and we try to keep these forums above that level. Standing up for what you believe in is fine, even important, but if what you believe in is ridiculing people then you might want to take a look at yourself first.

So if someone does flame you for real, as does sometimes happen, we try to take care of it, no matter what "side" it comes from.

I did appreciate your admission of "self-hating", mainly because I have less respect for myself than I have for pretty much anyone else. I feel this keeps me from being condescending or dismissive, as I can't be an "ist" of any kind if I can't find someone more deserving of my scorn. So it that statement was true, you're in good company (or bad, depending on how you want to take it).

I will be honest.

I was with Cain, until he started smashing the working man.

Obama is a no go..(expletive) disaster. I wished I would have gotten drunk instead of voting for him.

Unless Hilary runs I am voting for Robert Plant, with Lady Gaga as his VP.

Thats pretty liberal eh?:D

The GOP as it is now is a joke. Except it isn't funny to me...Too bad Ron Paul is a whacko, I can actually get behind some of his ideals.

If a halfway mediocre Dem challenged Obama he would win by landslide..

The more Perry and Romney beat on each other..The more points Obama goes up.

The more we fight amongst each other over these millionaires, the less attention we pay to them screwing us.

OP sir. Stop watching MSNBC if you know it's going to enrage you. I am a left swinger and don't watch that crap man.:D They don't report news, they report what they think people want to hear. That is both channels as well. (skewed accordingly)

It all comes down to "are you watching the commercials between breaks" that advertisers pay big bucks for?


Happy sailing.:salute:

Edit: Thank you Mr. Steve. I will be more mindful of how I refer to folks in the future. I try to be funny at times, and it is only funny to me.:-?

I never said you did Mookie. The title of this thread is about a remark made by a MSNBC reporter. You're the one who decided to go on the defensive just because I commented on the fact liberals stock response when one of their own goes over the line is to just comment on how someone else at some other time also went over the line too.

Why can't MSNBC suck independently of Fox's degree of suckage?
Are criticisms of Obama any less valid because Bush can be criticized too?

If you really believe this then my opinion of you has not only dropped but dropped through the floor and is currently boring a hole in the basement foundation because Haplo is spot on in his observation.

Liberals often make racist comments when their target is a republican of color just as they turn on the sexism when it comes to Palin or Bachmann and if one calls them on it their only response is to drag up some example of someone else having done it at some point. Sorry but that just won't cut it in my book.

You're overgeneralizing and making a blanket statement about an entire group of people, saying they make racist remarks. Do you not see the irony here?

Actually yes there is. :D

This surprises you? MSNBC is perhaps the most dishonest organization (I won't even give them the moniker of news) of all time, far worse than Fox News on a bad day. It's like if the Onion took itself seriously and expected everyone else to do the same.

Excuse me, but did I say "all" liberals? I've seen you make similar generalizations about conservatives too so why is it so ironic?

I like to compare both to WWE (wrestling)

Except instead of sports entertainment, it is news entertainment.
You have your heels (boooooo!)
Your faces(Yayyyyyy!)
Your works (news skewed to fit the viewers leaning/ persistent stories)

They should just go all the way and let the Undertaker Tombstone Piledrive Chris Matthews and Megyn Kelly on camera.

(you know you would watch)

Edit: I can go for a fight between Olbermann and Bill O'rielly..
Battle of the blowhards, our generations thrilla in manilla.