Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

OT..... Who would you vote for?

2 views
Skip to first unread message

Hank

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 5:24:10 AM10/13/11
to
As we all know, things will change within the next year, but....
Giving the facts of today, who would you vote for today and why?

Hank

Thats Me

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 6:39:14 AM10/13/11
to
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 02:24:10 -0700 (PDT), Hank <nineb...@aol.com>
wrote:

>As we all know, things will change within the next year, but....
>Giving the facts of today, who would you vote for today and why?
>

None of the above, they are all jerks and charlatans.

Happy Camping. ldp...@NOPANTS.juno.com
Remove NOPANTS To reply by direct E-Mail;

2003 Dodge 1500 QC SB Hemi, A/T, Tow Package, 3.92 gears (11 mpg Towing)
2001 Aerolite 21RDB 21ft TT (Scales 2900 dry)

Linux/Unix is user-friendly.
It's just very selective with who its friends are.

LonVanOstran

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 8:19:56 AM10/13/11
to


I would vote for ANYBODY running against Obama.

We couldn't do worse.

Lon

richard

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 9:33:39 AM10/13/11
to

Neither Obama nor Cain.

will sill

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 9:47:28 AM10/13/11
to

"LonVanOstran" <Lvano...@gmail.com> wrote

> I would vote for ANYBODY running against Obama.
>
> We couldn't do worse.

You have a lot of company. I would even (ugh!) vote for 0bamacare-lite
Romney if he succeeds in buying the GOP nomination. But my pick this week
is Herman.

Will


Bob Hatch

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 10:17:01 AM10/13/11
to

You first, then I'll answer.


--
I respect that you have an opinion. Don't confuse that
respect with really giving a crap what it is.
"Anon"
http://www.bobhatch.com
http://www.tdsrvresort.com

Mike Hendrix at dot

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 10:37:08 AM10/13/11
to
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 02:24:10 -0700 (PDT), Hank <nineb...@aol.com>
wrote:

>As we all know, things will change within the next year, but....
>Giving the facts of today, who would you vote for today and why?
>
>Hank

--------------------------------------

#1 Ron Paul

#2 Herman Cain

I also liked Chris Christie before he bowed out.

mike
--

Pensacola, FL
http://www.travellogs.us/

Janet Wilder

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 11:07:43 AM10/13/11
to
On 10/13/2011 9:37 AM, Mike Hendrix wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 02:24:10 -0700 (PDT), Hank<nineb...@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
>> As we all know, things will change within the next year, but....
>> Giving the facts of today, who would you vote for today and why?
>>
>> Hank
> --------------------------------------
>
> #1 Ron Paul
>
> #2 Herman Cain
>
> I also liked Chris Christie before he bowed out.
>
> mike


ditto

--
Janet Wilder
Way-the-heck-south Texas
Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.

Bruce S

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 1:17:48 PM10/13/11
to
On 10/13/2011 2:24 AM, Hank wrote:

Be more specific - are you asking who we would vote for if the general
election was held today, or are you asking who we would vote for in a
primary election to run against 0bama (or is it an all inclusive
question about both elections)?

If we are talking about the General election, any Conservative or
Libertarian running against 0bama. Hell, if my cat was on the ballot, I
would chose her over 0bama (and even for a cat, she's not very smart,
but still smarter than 0bama).

If we are talking about the Primary election, Rick Santorum and Newt
Gingrich are the best qualified candidates, but don't stand a snowball's
chance in Hell; Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman have made statements that
demonstrate that they are not qualified for the position; nobody
outside of New Mexico has heard of Gary Johnson, so his qualifications
are meaningless; Bachmann is sinking faster than the Titanic; and that
leaves us with Cain, Perry and Romney. I like Cain, but he is not
politician enough to get elected. Perry might have a chance, but needs
to improve his performance in the debates or he will watch the general
election as just another voter. With that in mind, I will probably be
left with a meaningless vote for Romney, although if I still lived in
Nevada, and was registered as Republican rather than Libertarian, I
would vote for Santorum.

--
Bruce

Max

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 5:01:22 PM10/13/11
to
"Hank" <nineb...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:38c610ef-8524-420c...@f5g2000vbz.googlegroups.com...

> As we all know, things will change within the next year, but....
> Giving the facts of today, who would you vote for today and why?
>
> Hank


He/She hasn't announced yet.

Max

Hank

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 5:23:45 PM10/13/11
to
On Oct 13, 1:17 pm, Bruce S <bruce.sn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Be more specific - are you asking who we would vote for if the general
> election was held today, or are you asking who we would vote for in a
> primary election to run against 0bama (or is it an all inclusive
> question about both elections)?
>
> If we are talking about the General election, any Conservative or
> Libertarian running against 0bama.  Hell, if my cat was on the ballot, I
> would chose her over 0bama (and even for a cat, she's not very smart,
> but still smarter than 0bama).
>
> If we are talking about the Primary election, Rick Santorum and Newt
> Gingrich are the best qualified candidates, but don't stand a snowball's
> chance in Hell;  Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman have made statements that
> demonstrate that they are not qualified for the position;  nobody
> outside of New Mexico has heard of Gary Johnson, so his qualifications
> are meaningless; Bachmann is sinking faster than the Titanic; and that
> leaves us with Cain, Perry and Romney.  I like Cain, but he is not
> politician enough to get elected.  Perry might have a chance, but needs
> to improve his performance in the debates or he will watch the general
> election as just another voter.  With that in mind, I will probably be
> left with a meaningless vote for Romney, although if I still lived in
> Nevada, and was registered as Republican rather than Libertarian, I
> would vote for Santorum.
>
> --
> Bruce

Fair enough. At least you answered both parts of the general question.

Hank

Hank

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 5:24:47 PM10/13/11
to
On Oct 13, 5:01 pm, "Max" <thesameol...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> "Hank" <ninebal...@aol.com> wrote in message

LOL

Hank

cj

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 7:20:39 PM10/13/11
to
On 10/13/2011 8:19 AM, LonVanOstran wrote:
> We couldn't do worse.
yes we could, shrub. he got us into this mess

cj

JerryD(upstateNY)

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 7:52:38 PM10/13/11
to
"cj" wrote in message news: yes we could, shrub. he got us into this mess

I didn't know Bush ORDERED banks to lend money to people who couldn't
possibly pay it back.
All the time, I thought Clinton did that. (Community Reinvestment Act)
And I thought it was Todd and Frank who said Fannie and Freddie were in good
shape.
I guess that was Bush too, huh ?

--
JerryD(upstateNY)

RonB

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 7:55:53 PM10/13/11
to

Cain seems to be the only one in the crowd who has a lick of business
sense.

Dean

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 8:02:15 PM10/13/11
to
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 02:24:10 -0700 (PDT), Hank <nineb...@aol.com>
wrote:

>As we all know, things will change within the next year, but....


>Giving the facts of today, who would you vote for today and why?
>
>Hank

Cain.
--

When you have been in a swamp all your life,
you may have trouble seeing the mainstream!

LonVanOstran

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 8:02:58 PM10/13/11
to

Your view of history is distorted.

Lon

Dean

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 8:03:35 PM10/13/11
to
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 09:33:39 -0400, richard <mem...@newsguy.com>
wrote:

Hey fool, he didn't ask who you wouldn't vote for!

Lone Haranguer

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 8:03:40 PM10/13/11
to

I wish he and Cheney were back in power.
LZ

Dean

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 8:06:15 PM10/13/11
to
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 09:37:08 -0500, Mike Hendrix <mike (at) travellogs
(dot) us> wrote:

>On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 02:24:10 -0700 (PDT), Hank <nineb...@aol.com>
>wrote:
>
>>As we all know, things will change within the next year, but....
>>Giving the facts of today, who would you vote for today and why?
>>
>>Hank
>--------------------------------------
>
>#1 Ron Paul
>
>#2 Herman Cain
>
>I also liked Chris Christie before he bowed out.
>
>mike

Paul is an idealist and believes our enemies would/will play fair. In
that regard, his willingness to eliminate our military is both foolish
and dangerous.

Bruce S

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 8:34:00 PM10/13/11
to

You seem to forget that Romney was CEO of Bain and Company, then Bain
Capitol before getting into politics. He was also the CEO of the 2002
Winter Olympics. I'm not really a fan of him (more bland that vanilla
pudding), but he has very good business experience.

And as for Cain, he has a good personality for the campaign (sparks
enthusiasm in other people), but an absolute lack of political
experience could be a handicap. And I really don't like his 9-9-9 plan
- the last thing we need is a federal sales tax on top of the federal
income tax.

--
Bruce

Max

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 8:49:09 PM10/13/11
to
"JerryD(upstateNY)" <jer...@nowhere.rr.com> wrote in message
news:j77tk8$q4p$1...@jerryd.eternal-september.org...


You are right Jerry, especially alluding to the fact that the whole damn
mess was started by the Democrats. But having said that you might have
added:

"The authority of the U.S. Treasury to advance funds for the purpose of
stabilizing Fannie Mae, or Freddie Mac is limited only by the amount of debt
that the entire federal government is permitted by law to commit to. The
July 30, 2008 law enabling expanded regulatory authority over Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac increased the national debt ceiling from US$ 800 billion, to a
total of US$ 10.7 Trillion in anticipation of the potential need for the
Treasury to have the flexibility to support the federal home loan banks. "

(From a bill that was passed by yours and my congresscritters and signed by
President Bush)

Max

Jenny6833A

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 9:46:13 PM10/13/11
to

Obama, with a sigh, if he runs. (Although Obama has his faults, every
one of the Republican wannabees is nuts.) Hillary, with enthusiasm,
if he doesn't.

:-)

Jenny

Lone Haranguer

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 11:45:11 PM10/13/11
to
Why aren't you sleeping in the park with your pals?
LZ

nothermark

unread,
Oct 13, 2011, 11:59:01 PM10/13/11
to

he is the lesser of many weevils. ;-)

Bob Hatch

unread,
Oct 14, 2011, 12:10:21 AM10/14/11
to

I don't suppose it's ever occurred to you that you might be the one who
is nuts while they are closest to sane. (no grin)

Jenny6833A

unread,
Oct 14, 2011, 1:31:22 AM10/14/11
to
On Oct 13, 9:10 pm, Bob Hatch <bob.ha...@ymail.com> wrote:
> On 10/13/2011 6:46 PM, Jenny6833A wrote:
>
> > On Oct 13, 2:24 am, Hank<ninebal...@aol.com>  wrote:
> >> As we all know, things will change within the next year, but....
> >> Giving the facts of today, who would you vote for today and why?
>
> >> Hank
>
> > Obama, with a sigh, if he runs.  (Although Obama has his faults, every
> > one of the Republican wannabees is nuts.)  Hillary, with enthusiasm,
> > if he doesn't.
>
> > :-)
>
> > Jenny
>
> I don't suppose it's ever occurred to you that you might be the one who
> is nuts while they are closest to sane. (no grin)

You suppose incorrectly. But the facts speak for themselves. However
nutty I may be, that group of crazies is nuttier.

No smile

Jenny

Bob Hatch

unread,
Oct 14, 2011, 10:26:44 AM10/14/11
to

That group might be classified as banana nut bread light. You are
Holiday Fruit Cake, heavy duty.

Bob Hatch

unread,
Oct 14, 2011, 10:28:26 AM10/14/11
to
On 10/13/2011 2:24 AM, Hank wrote:
> As we all know, things will change within the next year, but....
> Giving the facts of today, who would you vote for today and why?
>
> Hank

Has anyone noticed that Hank has stayed in the background, safe and silent?

Lone Haranguer

unread,
Oct 14, 2011, 10:38:35 AM10/14/11
to
Jenny6833A wrote:
> On Oct 13, 9:10 pm, Bob Hatch<bob.ha...@ymail.com> wrote:
>> On 10/13/2011 6:46 PM, Jenny6833A wrote:
>>
>>> On Oct 13, 2:24 am, Hank<ninebal...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> As we all know, things will change within the next year, but....
>>>> Giving the facts of today, who would you vote for today and why?
>>
>>>> Hank
>>
>>> Obama, with a sigh, if he runs. (Although Obama has his faults, every
>>> one of the Republican wannabees is nuts.) Hillary, with enthusiasm,
>>> if he doesn't.
>>
>>> :-)
>>
>>> Jenny
>>
>> I don't suppose it's ever occurred to you that you might be the one who
>> is nuts while they are closest to sane. (no grin)
>
> You suppose incorrectly. But the facts speak for themselves.

What facts?

However
> nutty I may be, that group of crazies is nuttier.

An independent evaluation may prove differently. So far none of them have
been pushing universal nudity and a hostility to "textiles" on Usenet.
LZ
>
> No smile
>
> Jenny

will sill

unread,
Oct 14, 2011, 10:58:40 AM10/14/11
to

"Bob Hatch" <bob....@ymail.com> wrote

> Has anyone noticed that Hank has stayed in the background, safe and
> silent?

Sorry, I did not notice. Unlike bh, I am not willing to spend my time even
glancing at posts from Hank, Mark, et al.
Whether he is safe, silent or busy marching with his fellow morons, his
thoughts don't interest me any more than the ravings of Jenny & Max.

On the topic: it matters little who we might favor today. What matters is
whether, in 2012, we vote for a Conservative American who genuinely believes
in the Constitution - or (Heaven forbid) a RINO. IMO, a repeat by 0bama is
no longer a possibiity, so it is VERY important that the GOP candidate have
integrity and ability.

Hank's ideas are as irrelevant as an NBC poll.

Will
--
The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool.
It is less likely
to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president."
(Unk)


Mike Hendrix at dot

unread,
Oct 14, 2011, 11:04:26 AM10/14/11
to
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 17:06:15 -0700, Dean <roa...@k7no.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 09:37:08 -0500, Mike Hendrix <mike (at) travellogs
>(dot) us> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 02:24:10 -0700 (PDT), Hank <nineb...@aol.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>As we all know, things will change within the next year, but....
>>>Giving the facts of today, who would you vote for today and why?
>>>
>>>Hank
>>--------------------------------------
>>
>>#1 Ron Paul
>>
>>#2 Herman Cain
>>
>>I also liked Chris Christie before he bowed out.
>>
>>mike
>
>Paul is an idealist and believes our enemies would/will play fair. In
>that regard, his willingness to eliminate our military is both foolish
>and dangerous.

-----------------------------------

"Eliminate our military".............. I think you spout BS.

Provide proof or source.

Lone Haranguer

unread,
Oct 14, 2011, 11:14:43 AM10/14/11
to

He wouldn't "eliminate" the military but under his rule, it wouldn't be much
of a fighting force.

He's an expert on the military ya know, since he spent a couple of years on
active duty as a doctor.

His few good ideas are far outweighed by his kooky ones.
LZ

K Miller

unread,
Oct 14, 2011, 12:13:14 PM10/14/11
to
Bob Hatch wrote:
> On 10/13/2011 10:31 PM, Jenny6833A wrote:
>>
>> You suppose incorrectly. But the facts speak for themselves. However
>> nutty I may be, that group of crazies is nuttier.
>>
>> No smile
>>
>> Jenny
>
> That group might be classified as banana nut bread light. You are
> Holiday Fruit Cake, heavy duty.

Now that's funny.


Bruce S

unread,
Oct 14, 2011, 12:13:54 PM10/14/11
to
On 10/14/2011 7:28 AM, Bob Hatch wrote:
> On 10/13/2011 2:24 AM, Hank wrote:
>> As we all know, things will change within the next year, but....
>> Giving the facts of today, who would you vote for today and why?
>>
>> Hank
>
> Has anyone noticed that Hank has stayed in the background, safe and silent?
>
I think everyone noticed - Hank is trolling.

Four years ago there was a website (University of Wisconsin I think)
that provided questions about the reader's views on many issues. They
would ask a question, then give you quotes from every candidate and let
you choose the one that is closest to your own. When you complete the
survey, they match your choices against the candidates and tell you
which one most closely matched you.

I wish I could find a similar site this year.

--
Bruce

cj

unread,
Oct 14, 2011, 5:46:50 PM10/14/11
to
how much of the current financial mess is due to two unfunded wars and
tax cuts for the wealthy...how much? and what did the current repugs
running in last years election run on? JOBS JOBS JOBS. and what are they
more concerend with? not jobs but pushing through a socially
conservative agenda that does squat for the unemployed...its clear to
everyone that the repugs number one mission is to tank the economy so
that obama does not get reelected. why is that important? replacing the
old geezers on the supreme court that are sure to retire during the next
administrations term. thats what its all about, not jobs but supreme
court nominees.do you really think boener, or cantor give a shit about
unemployed people? WHERE ARE THE JOBS LON?? TRICKLE DOWN DOESNT WORK!!!
30 years of reganomics is a failure

cj

cj

unread,
Oct 14, 2011, 5:48:46 PM10/14/11
to
cain bought godfathers pizza from pilsbury...he did not start it

cj

cj

unread,
Oct 14, 2011, 5:52:47 PM10/14/11
to

Frank Howell

unread,
Oct 14, 2011, 6:18:23 PM10/14/11
to
Agreed, but don't forget that Romney was architect of the Massachusetts
health care plan. We'll see how good of a politician he is if he can spin
that.
As far as Cain goes I agree, if you examine the 9-9-9 plan how do you get
low income people who don't pay Federal tax now to get onboard. Since both
you and I don't pay sales tax, why would we get on board for a Federal sales
tax, also if the Democrats get a majority in both houses it could be a
9-9-10 or more tax. That said I still see him as the dark horse, but as you
alluded to his lack of political experience it just might be a plus as the
others have a lot of political baggage. Also it would drive democrats nuts
with two blacks vying for president.

Since there is a lot of time until the primaries, who knows where this will
go, but it's possible the even Gary Johnson could have a shot if the rest of
the field self destructs.


--
Frank Howell


Lone Haranguer

unread,
Oct 14, 2011, 7:42:36 PM10/14/11
to
cj wrote:

WHERE ARE THE JOBS LON??

El Bobo killed them with Obamacare.
LZ

Bruce S

unread,
Oct 14, 2011, 7:44:46 PM10/14/11
to
On 10/14/2011 3:18 PM, Frank Howell wrote:
> Bruce S wrote:
>> On 10/13/2011 4:55 PM, RonB wrote:
>>> On Oct 13, 4:24 am, Hank<ninebal...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> As we all know, things will change within the next year, but....
>>>> Giving the facts of today, who would you vote for today and why?
>>>>
>>>> Hank
>>>
>>> Cain seems to be the only one in the crowd who has a lick of business
>>> sense.
>>
>> You seem to forget that Romney was CEO of Bain and Company, then Bain
>> Capitol before getting into politics. He was also the CEO of the 2002
>> Winter Olympics. I'm not really a fan of him (more bland that vanilla
>> pudding), but he has very good business experience.
>>
>> And as for Cain, he has a good personality for the campaign (sparks
>> enthusiasm in other people), but an absolute lack of political
>> experience could be a handicap. And I really don't like his 9-9-9
>> plan - the last thing we need is a federal sales tax on top of the
>> federal income tax.
>
> Agreed, but don't forget that Romney was architect of the Massachusetts
> health care plan. We'll see how good of a politician he is if he can spin
> that.

So far he has spun Romneycare as a 10th Amendment issue - saying that it
is appropriate for states to try out new programs that would be
completely inappropriate for the feds (he is mostly right). I would be
happier if he said it sounded good at the time, but in hindsight he can
see it was a mistake - and he never says that. I also don't like that
he felt a government mandate was a good thing then - even if he rejects
it now - he has given us no reason to believe that his change of heart
is anything but political posturing. As I said, if he is the Republican
candidate, I will support him, but with the same lack of enthusiasm I
had for McCain last time.

> As far as Cain goes I agree, if you examine the 9-9-9 plan how do you get
> low income people who don't pay Federal tax now to get onboard. Since both
> you and I don't pay sales tax, why would we get on board for a Federal sales
> tax, also if the Democrats get a majority in both houses it could be a
> 9-9-10 or more tax. That said I still see him as the dark horse, but as you
> alluded to his lack of political experience it just might be a plus as the
> others have a lot of political baggage. Also it would drive democrats nuts
> with two blacks vying for president.

This is a perfect instance of Cain's lack of political savvy. No
experienced conservative candidate would support adding a whole new
layer of taxes on top of the existing system. He would have done better
supporting a truly flat tax with no deductions. Make it the same 15% as
the capital gains tax, and promote it with 0bama's words that the very
wealthy should pay the same tax rate as plumbers and school teachers.
BTW, here is a nice web site for designing your own flat tax.

http://politicalcalculations.blogspot.com/2011/09/design-your-own-flat-income-tax.html

But you are right that a black conservative candidate running against
0bama would drive the left nuts - it would be fun to watch the Democrat
racism in action as they cal him an Oreo.

> Since there is a lot of time until the primaries, who knows where this will
> go, but it's possible the even Gary Johnson could have a shot if the rest of
> the field self destructs.

In my opinion there is no where near enough time till the primaries
start. With the first one coming on Jan 3, that is only 2.5 months
away. I think that before 2016 the Republicans need to change their
rules so that no state can hold a primary before April 1. That would
provide plenty of time to really sort out the candidates and get the
best one.

--
Bruce

Lone Haranguer

unread,
Oct 14, 2011, 7:44:49 PM10/14/11
to
Did he run it successfully? Has El Bobo EVER run anything but his mouth?
LZ

Lone Haranguer

unread,
Oct 14, 2011, 7:46:50 PM10/14/11
to
cj wrote:
> On 10/13/2011 11:45 PM, Lone Haranguer wrote:
>
>> Why aren't you sleeping in the park with your pals?
>> LZ
>>
> cause the cops might beat your ass?
>
Isn't that exactly what the protesters want? Why disappoint them?
LZ

LonVanOstran

unread,
Oct 14, 2011, 7:58:07 PM10/14/11
to
You seem unaware that the economy and unemployment has/have grown worse
under Obamanomics, and there is no sign of it getting better unless
Obama leaves office.

Lon

JerryD(upstateNY)

unread,
Oct 14, 2011, 8:26:29 PM10/14/11
to
"cj" wrote in message news:...........The same rant about Bush he has
posted many
times before................how much of the current financial mess is due to
two
unfunded wars and tax cuts for the wealthy...how much ?

Two facts cj never admits too.
1. Obama spent more in his 1st year as president than Bush did in 8 years of
"unfunded wars" and Obama hasn't done a thing about stopping either war.
2. Bush's economy was doing just fine until 2007, which was (purely
coincidental, I'm sure)
the same year the Democrats took over congress.
Both of these 2 statements are 100% FACT, that can be verified in any number
of ways, yet cj will deny both statements.
That's called being a "mind numbed robot".

--
JerryD(upstateNY)

LonVanOstran

unread,
Oct 14, 2011, 9:01:17 PM10/14/11
to
But, Jerry. CJ has seen the proof of all this. Why would he accept
reality this time after repeatedly proving that he rejects it?
If he was capable of thinking he would already be doing it.

Lon

Bob Hatch

unread,
Oct 15, 2011, 3:41:49 AM10/15/11
to
How do you think he got the money to buy it?

cj

unread,
Oct 15, 2011, 4:35:05 AM10/15/11
to
On 10/15/2011 3:41 AM, Bob Hatch wrote:
> On 10/14/2011 2:48 PM, cj wrote:
>> On 10/13/2011 7:55 PM, RonB wrote:
>>> On Oct 13, 4:24 am, Hank<ninebal...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> As we all know, things will change within the next year, but....
>>>> Giving the facts of today, who would you vote for today and why?
>>>>
>>>> Hank
>>>
>>> Cain seems to be the only one in the crowd who has a lick of business
>>> sense.
>> cain bought godfathers pizza from pilsbury...he did not start it
>>
>> cj
>
> How do you think he got the money to buy it?
>
>
partners

cj

unread,
Oct 15, 2011, 4:38:41 AM10/15/11
to
On 10/14/2011 7:58 PM, LonVanOstran wrote:
> its clear to
> everyone that the repugs number one mission is to tank the economy so
> that obama does not get reelected
cj

nothermark

unread,
Oct 15, 2011, 8:30:01 AM10/15/11
to
INteresting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herman_Cain#Business_career

He's smart. His problem is he is part of the upper strata of business
management that wants all us serfs back in our place.

LonVanOstran

unread,
Oct 15, 2011, 8:36:03 AM10/15/11
to
If the guy is so smart that he can get people to become his partners to
buy a business as big as Godfather's Pizza, while not using any of his
own money, yet he's considered to be the owner of the company, then I
want that man to run the USA. I like the sound of that.

Lon