Herman Cain: Planned Parenthood is Plotting Genocide Against 'Black Babies'

[doodle]

I felt little bad for him when Herman Cain was called Uncle Tom by libs ( LINK (http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2011/02/12/black-history-month-is-herman-cain-playing-the-race-minstrel-for-cpac/) ) but after reading his bigoted statement about not appointing any jews muslims in his hallucinated Presidential cabinet after winning GOP nomination and the Presidency ( lolz ), googled his name and came across some interesting stuff.


Herman Cain: Planned Parenthood is Plotting Genocide Against 'Black Babies'

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/audio/images/hermancainpamelageller.jpg
Herman Cain poses with hate monger Pamela Geller

LINK (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/38252_Herman_Cain-_Planned_Parenthood_is_Plotting_Genocide_Against_B lack_Babies)

After a quick look he comes across as an opportunist bigot. Am I'm mistaken and this guy actually believes in basic human liberty principles?


If there are any supporters of this buy here, can someone explain what do these comments mean?

Quick CPAC thoughts Thursday morning
February 11, 2011

When Newt Gringrich came into the room the MSM waved around him, When Herman Cain came into the room the bloggers waved around him, that tell you an awful lot.

There are an inordinate amount of charming young women here that I would like to introduce to my sons.

http://datechguy.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/last-thurs-014.jpg?w=614&h=460

If you want to be noticed by the media, dress in colonial garb.


http://datechguy.wordpress.com/2011/02/11/quick-cpac-thoughts-thursday-morning/

[FrankRep]

Herman Cain: Planned Parenthood is Plotting Genocide Against 'Black Babies'

Maafa 21: Black Genocide In the 21st Century


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOPDptFI_1Q


MAAFA 21 is a very carefully reasoned, well-produced exposé of the abortion industry, racism and eugenics. It proves through innumerable sources that many founders of Planned Parenthood and other parts of the abortion movement were interested in killing off the black race in America and elsewhere.



2010 - "Maafa 21" Exposes Black Genocide (http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/reviews/movies/2718-maafa-21-exposes-black-genocide)

Mark Crutcher of Life Dynamics is producer of the documentary Maafa 21: Black Genocide in 21st Century America, an explosive exposé of the racist eugenics agenda of the abortion industry in the United States. By Rebecca Terrell

2010 - Pro-Life Billboards Highlight Eugenics (http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/culture/family/2959-pro-life-billboards-highlight-eugenics)

A new pro-life billboard campaign by the Radiance Foundation called Too Many Aborted (http://www.toomanyaborted.com/) is drawing attention by linking black abortions to eugenics promoter and Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger. by Alex Newman


http://www.thenewamerican.com/images/stories/Culture_9-2009/endangered-billboard.jpg

[Sola_Fide]

I agree with him.

But Ron has been making better arguments against abortion for decades.

[doodle]

So this guy is pro life and believes in saving babies?

Was he for or against Iraq, Libya bombing?

In some of his comments, Herman Cain comes across as a racist bigot.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?285219-Herman-Cain-says-he-%E2%80%98I-Would-Not%E2%80%99-Appoint-A-Muslim-In-My-Administration&p=3178793&viewfull=1#post3178793

[FrankRep]

In some of his comments, Herman Cain comes across as a racist bigot.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?285219-Herman-Cain-says-he-%E2%80%98I-Would-Not%E2%80%99-Appoint-A-Muslim-In-My-Administration&p=3178793&viewfull=1#post3178793

Again: Muslims are followers of Islam; they are not a racial group.

[doodle]

Again: Muslims are followers of Islam; they are not a racial group.

Depends on the context; I think unlike Jesus believers, muslims and jews can be races too depending on the blood connection of father or mother.

[acptulsa]

Arabs and Hebrews are races. So are Persians.

Quick quiz: Which was Mohammed Ali?

[BlackTerrel]

So this guy is pro life and believes in saving babies?

Was he for or against Iraq, Libya bombing?

I don't even know where to start.

[doodle]

I don't even know where to start.

I would recommend starting with his views on elective bloodshed in Iraq and then moving on to his views on bombing of Libya. Or in different order. Gaza, can fit in anywhere.

[doodle]

If there are any supporters of this buy here, can someone explain what do these comments mean?

Quick CPAC thoughts Thursday morning
February 11, 2011

When Newt Gringrich came into the room the MSM waved around him, When Herman Cain came into the room the bloggers waved around him, that tell you an awful lot.

There are an inordinate amount of charming young women here that I would like to introduce to my sons.

If you want to be noticed by the media, dress in colonial garb.


http://datechguy.wordpress.com/2011/02/11/quick-cpac-thoughts-thursday-morning/

Still do not understamd the gist of above comments but there is an interesting Politico piece on Herman Cain's take on race and segregation and drinking the "white" water:

Political Insider
Herman Cain on drinking the ‘white’ water in a segregated Atlanta

March 24, 2011

A nicely done Herman Cain video, explaining – in a phone interview with a reporter from the Daily Caller – what it was like to grow up in segregated Atlanta:

Said Cain, while on the road in Iowa:

“We were at the bargain basement at the department store one day, and my Mom was looking on a rack to get some stuff for us. We asked her if we could go get some water. She said yes. And Mom specifically said, ‘Now, y’all make sure y’all drink out of the “colored” fountain.’

“Being typical young boys, we got over there and looked at those two water fountains, and we kind of looked around. And we kind of went, hmm, nobody’s looking.

“So my brother went first, while I stayed on the look-out, to sip the ‘white’ water. Then he was on the look-out while I sipped the ‘white’ water. Then we both sipped the colored water. We looked at each other [and said], ‘The water tastes the same. What’s the big deal?’”

http://blogs.ajc.com/political-insider-jim-galloway/2011/03/24/herman-cain-on-drinking-the-white-water-in-a-segregated-atlanta/?cxntfid=blogs_political_insider_jim_galloway

[FrankRep]

Still do not understamd the gist of above comments but there is an interesting Politico piece on Herman Cain's take on race and segregation and drinking the "white" water:

Your point?

[doodle]

You're point?

Herman Cain will be in better position to say but it appears he was against separate water coolers of colonial days.

I'm trying to understand "If you want to be noticed by the media, dress in colonial garb." comment in CPAC story.

[erowe1]

I felt little bad for him when Herman Cain was called Uncle Tom by libs ( LINK (http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2011/02/12/black-history-month-is-herman-cain-playing-the-race-minstrel-for-cpac/) ) but after reading his bigoted statement about not appointing any jews muslims in his hallucinated Presidential cabinet after winning GOP nomination and the Presidency ( lolz ), googled his name and came across some interesting stuff.


Herman Cain: Planned Parenthood is Plotting Genocide Against 'Black Babies'

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/audio/images/hermancainpamelageller.jpg
Herman Cain poses with hate monger Pamela Geller

LINK (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/38252_Herman_Cain-_Planned_Parenthood_is_Plotting_Genocide_Against_B lack_Babies)

After a quick look he comes across as an opportunist bigot. Am I'm mistaken and this guy actually believes in basic human liberty principles?


If there are any supporters of this buy here, can someone explain what do these comments mean?

Quick CPAC thoughts Thursday morning
February 11, 2011

When Newt Gringrich came into the room the MSM waved around him, When Herman Cain came into the room the bloggers waved around him, that tell you an awful lot.

There are an inordinate amount of charming young women here that I would like to introduce to my sons.

http://datechguy.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/last-thurs-014.jpg?w=614&h=460

If you want to be noticed by the media, dress in colonial garb.


http://datechguy.wordpress.com/2011/02/11/quick-cpac-thoughts-thursday-morning/

1) What's wrong with not wanting any Muslims in his cabinet?
2) I think we better be careful about using as an argument against a candidate that he once posed for a picture with a bigot.
3) What's wrong with charging Planned Parenthood with genocide against black babies?

[doodle]

1) What's wrong with not wanting any Muslims in his cabinet?
2) I think we better be careful about using as an argument against a candidate that he once posed for a picture with a bigot.
3) What's wrong with charging Planned Parenthood with genocide against black babies?

1- His view suggests mind of a bigot or racist. In reality it's probably "abused child" syndrome or "separate water cooler" syndrome or trying to please his audience.
Would this even be a question if he said he won't have a Jew or Catholic in his cabinet?

2- One bigot in a picture can be non story, two bigots in a pictire can be another matter

3- What about "white babies" , they are not being genocided? His claim creates the impression that abortions are targeted at genocide of "black"babies as some sort of race war, do you agree with that? Have not found his views on bombing of Iraq/Libya/Iran yet, if he supports such elective bloodshed, he could be accused of hypocrisy too.

[Sola_Fide]

1- His view suggests mind of a bigot or racist. In reality it's probably "abused child" syndrome or "separate water cooler" syndrome or trying to please his audience.
Would this even be a question if he said he won't have a Jew or Catholic in his cabinet?

2- One bigot in a picture can be non story, two bigots in a pictire can be another matter

3- What about "white babies" , they are not being genocided? His claim creates the impression that abortions are targeted at genocide of "black"babies as some sort of race war, do you agree with that? Have not found his views on bombing of Iraq/Libya/Iran yet, if he supports such elective bloodshed, he could be accused of hypocrisy too.

Black people were specifically targeted by Margaret Sanger and Planned Parenthood. He is right on this.

[FrankRep]

1- His view suggests mind of a bigot or racist. In reality it's probably "abused child" syndrome or "separate water cooler" syndrome or trying to please his audience.
Would this even be a question if he said he won't have a Jew or Catholic in his cabinet?

2- One bigot in a picture can be non story, two bigots in a pictire can be another matter

3- What about "white babies" , they are not being genocided? His claim creates the impression that abortions are targeted at genocide of "black"babies as some sort of race war, do you agree with that? Have not found his views on bombing of Iraq/Libya/Iran yet, if he supports such elective bloodshed, he could be accused of hypocrisy too.

1.) Herman Cain is not a Racist.

2.) Silly name calling.

3.) Research Margaret Sanger (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger#Eugenics_and_euthanasia), the First President and Founder of Planned Parenthood (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood). She was a Racist and supported Eugenics.


Watch Maafa 21 when you get a chance.

[acptulsa]

1) What's wrong with not wanting any Muslims in his cabinet?

What's right with it?

The Constitution, article VI, section three: ...no religious test shall ever be required as qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

Is a cabinet position a public trust?

[FrankRep]

What's right with it?

The Constitution, article VI, section three: ...no religious test shall ever be required as qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

Is a cabinet position a public trust?

Is Herman Cain not allowed to choose his cabinet members?

[acptulsa]

Is Herman Cain not allowed to choose his cabinet members?

Of course not. He isn't president. All he's free to choose is what to put in his cabinets.

If you're asking if a president-elect is free to disregard and even trample on the Constitution when he selects his Cabinet, the answer is yes. He can even disregard and trample on it when he decides to kick the ass of some Mediterranean nonentity. Doesn't mean I have to support it or like it.

[FrankRep]

Of course not. He isn't president. All he's free to choose is what to put in his cabinets.

If you're asking if a president-elect is free to disregard and even trample on the Constitution when he selects his Cabinet, the answer is yes. He can even disregard and trample on it when he decides to kick the ass of some Mediterranean nonentity. Doesn't mean I have to support it or like it.


You're warping the Constitution.

Herman Cain is allowed to choose his cabinet members.

[specsaregood]

3- What about "white babies" , they are not being genocided? His claim creates the impression that abortions are targeted at genocide of "black"babies as some sort of race war, do you agree with that?

FWIW: Blacks account for around 14% of the US population, yet account for over 30% of the abortions.

[erowe1]

1- His view suggests mind of a bigot or racist. In reality it's probably "abused child" syndrome or "separate water cooler" syndrome or trying to please his audience.
Would this even be a question if he said he won't have a Jew or Catholic in his cabinet?


It shows that he's prejudiced against certain religious views. We all are. I don't see anything wrong with that. How does that equate to racism?

[RabbitMan]

FWIW: Blacks account for around 14% of the US population, yet account for over 30% of the abortions.

I would blame that on a cultural difference, just like the higher ratio of young black men(1-in-9) in prison due to drug-related activities(read:War on Drugs) is a cultural issue. I don't think the War on Drugs was a deliberate attempt to incarcerate a race because a lot of assumptions were made. Also, who the heck WAS NOT into Eugenics in the early 20th century? Before you mark someone for that kind of thinking, put it into perspective at least.

[specsaregood]

//

[RabbitMan]

And the war on drugs has been very much a race war.

I think you are simply misinterpreting the data. I would argue that almost anyone involved in Planned Parenthood does not hold a malicious intent to suppress minorities. The same with those in the DEA or otherwise. What I see is a culture of poverty utilizing the resources it has for the circumstances it faces, and a crusade against mind-altering substances letting those who are more wealthy/influential get off more easily. What results is obvious, but I don't see where you can find the conclusions regarding intent.

[JCLibertarian]

Though I am sure he and the media would be in an uproar if someone refused to appoint blacks. I guess demonizing an entire group of people(1 billion and growing) is ok as long as it fits the agenda of fueling propaganda and paranoia for perpetual war. This just proves Muslims are second class citizens in America. I am not even saying that their is a Muslim qualified for a cabinet level position, but this notion that someone should be denied a job based on religious beliefs, or race for that matter, as oppose to merit is absurd, and should be scolded in a society predicated on meritocracy. If someone replaced Muslim for Jew(the ADL would demand an apology and a donation to the Holocaust Museum), or Muslim for Black, or Muslim for Latino, the guy would be blackballed(besmirched by the Media and the SPLc would put him and his supporters on a hate group watch list), especially if he was right. This just exposes the evident group favoritism practiced by the State and by the society at large. Groups are pitted and divided against each other, some groups are put above others, to strengthen the overall power of the state. The State, through this divisiveness and group favoritism, just distracts us from the real issues. It is kind of like a prison, we are all prisoners, and as of right now we are split into gangs fighting over the crumbs, when are goal should be to work together to break out of the prison.

[JCLibertarian]

Black people were specifically targeted by Margaret Sanger and Planned Parenthood. He is right on this.

They aren't giving forced abortions, and no fetus has the right to the body of another person, at least if you accept the principle of self ownership. I don't see how women voluntarily aborting fetuses constitutes genocide. Black women are not "killing" black babies, or trying to eliminate blacks from the population, they are just ending their pregnancy.

[erowe1]

no fetus has the right to the body of another person, at least if you accept the principle of self ownership.
I don't accept that principle, and neither should anyone else. All parents have the God given obligation to take care of their children, which, if you insist on looking at everything in terms of property rights, is another way of saying that children own property in their parents. This is true of the pre-born just as it is of the born.

[erowe1]

I guess demonizing an entire group of people(1 billion and growing) is ok

You mean judging a person by what that person believes? Of course that's ok. Why wouldn't it be?

[specsaregood]

I think you are simply misinterpreting the data. I would argue that almost anyone involved in Planned Parenthood does not hold a malicious intent to suppress minorities. The same with those in the DEA or otherwise. What I see is a culture of poverty utilizing the resources it has for the circumstances it faces, and a crusade against mind-altering substances letting those who are more wealthy/influential get off more easily. What results is obvious, but I don't see where you can find the conclusions regarding intent.

You see, I never mentioned "intent"; I usually avoid that because who can know the true intent of anothers' actions except themselves -- and sometimes not even then. I'd rather look at the results or how this stuff works in practice. And what I see is a drug war that has laws that end up giving harsher punishments to minorities than whites and abortion laws/culture that ends up performing 2x as many abortions on blacks as other groups. Both the drug war and the abortion laws look like genocide or a race war when you look at its net effects.

[ExPatPaki]

Though I am sure he and the media would be in an uproar if someone refused to appoint blacks. I guess demonizing an entire group of people(1 billion and growing) is ok as long as it fits the agenda of fueling propaganda and paranoia for perpetual war. This just proves Muslims are second class citizens in America. I am not even saying that their is a Muslim qualified for a cabinet level position, but this notion that someone should be denied a job based on religious beliefs, or race for that matter, as oppose to merit is absurd, and should be scolded in a society predicated on meritocracy. If someone replaced Muslim for Jew(the ADL would demand an apology and a donation to the Holocaust Museum), or Muslim for Black, or Muslim for Latino, the guy would be blackballed(besmirched by the Media and the SPLc would put him and his supporters on a hate group watch list), especially if he was right. This just exposes the evident group favoritism practiced by the State and by the society at large. Groups are pitted and divided against each other, some groups are put above others, to strengthen the overall power of the state. The State, through this divisiveness and group favoritism, just distracts us from the real issues. It is kind of like a prison, we are all prisoners, and as of right now we are split into gangs fighting over the crumbs, when are goal should be to work together to break out of the prison.

Right, there is a double standard, but he does have the choice of who he wants to pick. He can always go for the uncle tom brown sahib type Muslims to serve in his cabinet.

[JCLibertarian]

I don't accept that principle, and neither should anyone else. All parents have the God given obligation to take care of their children, which, if you insist on looking at everything in terms of property rights, is another way of saying that children own property in their parents. This is true of the pre-born just as it is of the born.

I don't believe in a God, so a set of "shoulds" or "oughts", predicated on a belief in a creator that defies the laws of science and implementing that violates the self ownership principle(predicated on the natural free state of man separate from any state apparatus) violates the condition of human freedom. I don't think that a legal system based on subjective moral values should be created arbitrarily and forced onto people. And they are fetuses, not children, a fetus is just a potential child. Saying that a child owns the parent is a violation of the self ownership principle, no person has a right to the services or body of another person unless said person consents.

[RabbitMan]

I'd rather look at the results or how this stuff works in practice....Both the drug war and the abortion laws look like genocide or a race war when you look at its net effects.

Emphasis mine.

I'm glad you didn't explicitly mention intent, but that still doesn't help your argument. You can draw conclusions from any data when you just look at the results and make an assumption. I'd put money on that if you took these statistics and controlled for poverty, the rations between whites, blacks, and anyone else would end up being MUCH more similar than different. For instance, a 2008 study I can reference showed that women below the poverty line had a twice as high abortion rate than those of women in general. Even then, Black married women were 25% less likely to have abortions than White married women. If you looked at net effects of the American Civil War, and how many whites died because of it in comparison to minorities, it looks like the war was an attempt by Abraham Lincoln and Jefferson Davis to destroy the white population.

I'm not trying to demean you or anything, I just don't agree with the logic being used in this thread.

Sources: http://www.abortionfacts.com/statistics/us_stats_race.asp
http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparebar.jsp?ind=468&cat=10

[JCLibertarian]

You mean judging a person by what that person believes? Of course that's ok. Why wouldn't it be?

I think prejudgement is totally natural. You can most certainly prejudge a religious philosophy, and prejudge a person who supposedly adheres to a certain phislophy. But no one can for certain know what one believes until they ask them. So denying someone a position without personally consulting them on their beliefs, or not taking into account their merits, is ridiculous in my mind. Not saying it shouldn't be allowed, I believe in free association and thereby believe individuals have the right to discriminate. I just think his attitudes reflects the hypocritical attitude of the media and political establishment, if he said this about Jews, or Christians(to a lesser extent), their would be outrage.

[erowe1]

I don't believe in ...a set of "shoulds" or "oughts"
From the rest of your post, obviously you do. You just don't want to face the consequences of that knowledge, such as that this set of "shoulds" and "oughts" must come from a transcendent law giver.

[erowe1]

But no one can for certain know what one believes until they ask them.

Obviously.

So if Herman Cain wants to hire only people who do not believe in Islam, he first has to find out if they do or not. And?

[JCLibertarian]

From the rest of your post, obviously you do. You just don't want to face the consequences of that knowledge, such as that this set of "shoulds" and "oughts" must come from a transcendent law giver.

You are not citing my entire quote, you are slicing a dicing it, which is dishonest. Of course I have a personal set of "shoulds" and "oughts", but they are my own, and are entirely subjective, and I wouldn't impose them on others. What I said is that your entirely subjective, and in my opinion destructive and short sighted opinion on abortion, shouldn't be issued arbitrarily into law, because it violates the principle of self ownership and restricts individual freedom. My morals don't come from a man made omniscient and all knowing deity, they come from the environment I grew up in and were formulated based on my interaction with others over time. To presume you know where my morals came from is arrogant.

[Sola_Fide]

I think prejudgement is totally natural. You can most certainly prejudge a religious philosophy, and prejudge a person who supposedly adheres to a certain phislophy. But no one can for certain know what one believes until they ask them. So denying someone a position without personally consulting them on their beliefs, or not taking into account their merits, is ridiculous in my mind. Not saying it shouldn't be allowed, I believe in free association and thereby believe individuals have the right to discriminate. I just think his attitudes reflects the hypocritical attitude of the media and political establishment, if he said this about Jews, or Christians(to a lesser extent), their would be outrage.

Excuse me. Why are you arguing for your own brand of subjective values when, by your own admission, you think every brand has equal justification?

If you are arguing that freedom is good, but since everything is subjective, tyranny is also true and valid, I want no part of your philosophy.

[JCLibertarian]

Obviously.

So if Herman Cain wants to hire only people who do not believe in Islam, he first has to find out if they do or not. And?

You don't understand what I am saying. What I am saying is that one may proclaim to be a Muslim, but you might not know their personal moral beliefs until you ask them. Not everyone who is Muslim shares the same moral precepts or thinks exactly the same.

And I am not saying he has to do anything. I am just saying he is stupid for painting Muslims with a broad brush and not judging people based on merit, political philosophy, or even personal moral views

[JCLibertarian]

Excuse me. Why are you arguing for your own brand of subjective values when, by your own admission, you think every brand has equal justification?

If you are arguing that freedom is good, but since everything is subjective, tyranny is also true and valid, I want no part of your philosophy.
Where did I say all values sets are equal? Please cite where I said such a thing. I personally think some values sets are superior to others, but their is no universal moral code, that morality is subjective from person to person and culture to culture and that their is no universal truth, only perceptions.

I don't know what you mean by saying tyranny is true and valid. Tyranny is a real thing, that violates the condition of human freedom and the self ownership principle, which is the natural state of man.

[ExPatPaki]

I am just saying he is stupid for painting Muslims with a broad brush and not judging people based on merit, political philosophy, or even personal moral views

Yes, but he has the right to those views and to hire cabinet members based on those views. But yes, there is a double standard, he would not say the same thing about Jews, blacks, Catholics, Latinos, etc. But he can say that because America bombs Muslim men, women and children.

[BlackTerrel]

Herman Cain will be in better position to say but it appears he was against separate water coolers of colonial days.

I'm trying to understand "If you want to be noticed by the media, dress in colonial garb." comment in CPAC story.

Is there anyone who is FOR separate water fountains? Other than Max?

[JohnEngland]

Herman Cain: Planned Parenthood is Plotting Genocide Against 'Black Babies'

This is true. From its inception with the evil Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood has been about killing "black" children - as well as other children, such as the disabled, the dumb, the unwanted etc.

As for the comment about Muslims, I wonder if that even matters for over 51% of the American electorate.