On second thought, I wouldn’t appoint a woman to my cabinet because she’d be too emotional. I’d have to make sure she was thoroughly committed to this country as opposed to just letting her emotions get the better of her.
I also wouldn’t appoint a black person because most of them are on crack cocaine and I don’t accept druggies trying to run the government and make drugs legal. *lightbulb moment* Oh wait, I’m black and I’m not on crack and I’m not walking my five kids by five different moms down to the welfare office, maybe all black people aren’t so bad afterall!
Anyway, I also wouldn’t appoint a Christian because they only support God’s Law and not the law of these United States. Theocracy is not acceptable… except when it comes to marriage, then it is perfectly acceptable to make a law based on a definition rooted in religion.
Similarly, I wouldn’t appoint a Canadian because they’re just a bunch of socialists. And no Jews because…. well, you know…..
*bangs head on table*
Honestly, where DO we dig these people up to run for government? Can’t we have a litmus test for racism please?
Oh, and Mr. Cain, ‘Muslim’ is not a synonym for ‘terrorist’ as you seem to be implying. ‘Terrorism’ is a particular form of strategical tactics. Everyone uses terrorism, including the United States government. ‘Muslim’ is also not a synonym for ‘those brown people over there who hate us that have also seemingly infiltrated our country and are demanding sharia law.’ Since having another form of law would be unconstitutional anyway, and it’s not like 3/4 of states would ratify an amendment to change that, why are you making such a fuss?