Catholic and Democrat?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nonie
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Republicans are equally part of the culture of death.

Since 2001. Republicans supported a war which was based on faulty intelligence (dare I say possible lies?), which resulted in 100,000 plus of iraq civilians killed, over 2000 of American soldiers wounded.

For an industrialized nation we have the highest infant mortality rate which studies have shown that most reason is due to lack of healthcare (insurance) available to the poor.

Poverty rate is going up and according to those butchers over at Planned Parenthood their surveys show consistently that number one reason (75%) girls and women come in for abortion is because of economic issues.

Not all Republicans are Pro-Life (BUT NOT ALL DEMOCRATS ARE PRO-ABORTION; see democratsforlife.org).

I would say the Republican party has talked about Pro-Life but hardley act like it.
War is a horrible aspect of mankind but a reality…we read about wars in scripture it has been with us since the dawn of man. However I do not see a comparison to the murder of a child through abortion. You may be right in the fact that the number of abortions may be reduced by ending poverty…but that’s a round about way of abolishing it. In fact the Democrats do nothing to help people out of poverty they intentionally keep minorities in poverty oppressed.

You should read…Uncle Tom’s Plantation by Star Parker

And also go to…

blackgenocide.org/

blackgenocide.org/sanger.html

This website explains how Planned Parenthood was started by White Supremacists…the Democrats are no friend of the minority in poverty but their worst enemy.
 
I vote on the issues too. That is why I am voting Democrat. Neither party right now is completely Pro-Life in their words and/or actions. I will take the lesser of two evils. Also there is a growing group with in the Democratic party that is growing every day. The Democrats For Life and gaining ground with in the party. I just attended a meeting in my state and very encouraged by them. Holding Life as sacred and holding to most of the Catholic Social Teachings.
The Church says that Abortion takes precedence over ALL other issues. You simply can not justify voting for a pro-abortion candidate because you like his views on the Iraq war or capital punishment or any other plethora of social issues that some naively believe the Democrat party is better on.
 
You are wrong. The Church doesnt state that. A Catholic can vote for a Democrat who is pro choice as long the Catholic isnt pro choice themself. Why with all the info about this, and people saying it over and over, certain members keep repeating the incorrect position?

I am voting Democratic this cycle and abortion isnt my mine issue. Its one of many. Life is life - whether already living or unborn. They are equal - if not then God is stating he views an unborn baby as more worthy of than someone already alive who has theirs.
 
I’m torn by this conflict but essentialy I remain Democrat in many of my views because I really believe more destruction, more death
occurs with the Republican view. Their embrace of Economic Darwinism gives me chills. Their need for ever expanding defense
expenditures drives me crazy. Star Wars and others continue the expansion of the military industrial complex. A phrase, by the way, coined not by some weak kneed bleeding heart liberal but
the former Republican President and Supreme Commander of allied forces Dwight D Eisenhower. The #1 exporter of weapons
is America. Our spending is greater than all the nations in the world combined. AND the Dept of Defense can’t pass an audit;
so pretty strictly along party lines we waived that requirement.
20% of the American population owns 80% of the wealth
This largely due to Republican “tax reform”. In 1979 we supported Saddam. Even when he invaded Iran, and slaughtered tens of
thousands of teens in human wave attacks-- we provided Intel
for this beast to handle the counter attacks.
As a % of GDP we rank around 15th in what we give to the poor in this world. But the myth promulgated by both parties is we are a generous nation. Right now there is a nasty dictator
in Equatorial Guinea. Condi Rice was shaking his hand the other day. Why? In the coming years, we will import 25% of our oil
from this creep. Past presidents all have pretty much said about
Batista in Cuba, The Shah in Iran, Marcos in The Phillipines, Somoza in Nicaragua, “They’re S.O.B.'s, but they’re our S.O.B.'s”. Up to 09/11 we we’re negotiating with the Taliban
to allow our American natural gas interests to build a pipeline
across Afghnistan out of the “Stan” states of Central Asia. Now we knew these sickos were housing Bin Laden, we knew what these sickos represented, but let’s look the other way; after all
we’re talking about energy and money. Lots of money.
So 9/11 happens. OH GOD HELP US! We buddy up
with a General who overthrew a Democratically elected government. A General who double crosses the Taliban for us
and now that he’s used us, is back in the Taliban’s camp. He may
not be totally in their camp yet, but he’s on his way back. Shareef
in Pakistan is just another devil in our dancing with the devil.
My belief is many, many good minded Christians really end up caring more about human life in the womb, than the human
life walking the face of this planet. I think we are winning the war
against abortion. I may be mistaken, but I believe fewer and fewer
are happening. If you want to follow morality in this country’s leadership–follow the money. So again, a Democrat only because
they ultimately will contribute less poison to the Devil’s Dinner.
 
You are wrong. The Church doesnt state that. A Catholic can vote for a Democrat who is pro choice as long the Catholic isnt pro choice themself. Why with all the info about this, and people saying it over and over, certain members keep repeating the incorrect position?

I am voting Democratic this cycle and abortion isnt my mine issue. Its one of many. Life is life - whether already living or unborn. They are equal - if not then God is stating he views an unborn baby as more worthy of than someone already alive who has theirs.
You are the one that is wrong. You can vote for a pro-abortion candiate ONLY if they are running against another pro-abortion canidate. We have posted the Chuch teachings on this again and again and again. The Church makes it crystal clear that abortion and euthansia take precedence over ALL other issues.
 
fewer
are happening. If you want to follow morality in this country’s leadership–follow the money. So again, a Democrat only because
they ultimately will contribute less poison to the Devil’s Dinner.
The you are going against the teachings of the Church. Ones view on Iraq, Pakistan, etc NEVER take precedence over abortion. When you vote for a pro-abortion canidate you are complict in the murder of 1.2 million children a year. Doing so because you hate George Bush will not wash the blood off your hands.
 
The you are going against the teachings of the Church. Ones view on Iraq, Pakistan, etc NEVER take precedence over abortion. When you vote for a pro-abortion canidate you are complict in the murder of 1.2 million children a year. Doing so because you hate George Bush will not wash the blood off your hands.
Not all Democrats are pro-choice and not all Republicans are pro-life. It’s unfair to classify them as one or the other. Or, you may a candidate from either party that claims to be pro-life but does very little in the effort to end abortion. They all seem to have better things to do than worry about abortion.
I hope I live to see the day when it’s outlawed but I’m not holding my breath, at this rate. 😦
 
SEEK said “20% of the American population owns 80% of the wealth”

KNOW THE FACTS…

Under the U.S. income tax system, most of the taxes collected are supposed to be paid by the people who make the most money. Thanks to President Bush’s tax cuts, that is exactly the way the system works, says the U.S. Treasury Department.

According to the Office of Tax Analysis, the U.S. individual income tax is “highly progressive,” with a small group of higher-income taxpayers paying most of the individual income taxes each year.
In 2002 the latest year of available data, the top 5 percent of taxpayers paid more than one-half (53.8 percent) of all individual income taxes, but reported roughly one-third (30.6 percent) of income.
The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid 33.7 percent of all individual income taxes in 2002. This group of taxpayers has paid more than 30 percent of individual income taxes since 1995. Moreover, since 1990 this group’s tax share has grown faster than their income share.
Taxpayers who rank in the top 50 percent of taxpayers by income pay virtually all individual income taxes. In all years since 1990, taxpayers in this group have paid over 94 percent of all individual income taxes. In 2000, 2001, and 2002, this group paid over 96 percent of the total.
Treasury Department analysts credit President Bush’s tax cuts with shifting a larger share of the individual income taxes paid to higher income taxpayers. In 2005, says the Treasury, when most of the tax cut provisions are fully in effect (e.g., lower tax rates, the $1,000 child credit, marriage penalty relief), the projected tax share for lower-income taxpayers will fall, while the tax share for higher-income taxpayers will rise.
The share of taxes paid by the bottom 50 percent of taxpayers will fall from 4.1 percent to 3.6 percent.
The share of taxes paid by the top 1 percent of taxpayers will rise from 32.3 percent to 33.7 percent.
The average tax rate for the bottom 50 percent of taxpayers falls by 27 percent as compared to a 13 percent decline for taxpayers in the top 1 percent.
The White House has announced it will lobby Congress to pass legislation making most of President Bush’s tax cutting measures permanent. Source: U.S. Treasury, Office of Tax Analysis
usgovinfo.about.com/od/incometaxandtheirs/a/whopaysmost.htm

The poor in this country do not pay Federal Income Tax…I am not saying that is a bad thing. The bad is they are still poor…right where the Democrats want them. The Democrats once known in the South as the Dixiecrats the same Democrats who were responsible for segregation, Jim Crow laws and the terrorist wing of the Democrats the Ku Klux Klan do not want to help the nations poor minorities they intentionally keep them oppressed. It keeps them out of there Country Clubs and out of there children’s schools…the new segregation is to pretend you are the friends of the very people you oppress. Don’t be fooled by the Democrats…voting Republican helps the poor and they are the platform of Pro-Life not the Democrats no matter how you sugar coat it.
 
You are the one that is wrong. You can vote for a pro-abortion candiate ONLY if they are running against another pro-abortion canidate. We have posted the Chuch teachings on this again and again and again. The Church makes it crystal clear that abortion and euthansia take precedence over ALL other issues.
I am sorry but you are incorrect. A Catholic may vote for a pro choice democrat (regardless if a pro life republican is running) as long as voting Catholic isnt voting for that Democrat soley because the voting Catholic agrees with the pro choice position of the Democratic candidate. Reread.
 
I am sorry but you are incorrect. A Catholic may vote for a pro choice democrat (regardless if a pro life republican is running) as long as voting Catholic isnt voting for that Democrat soley because the voting Catholic agrees with the pro choice position of the Democratic candidate. Reread.
Responding to requests to clarify the obligations of Catholics on this matter, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in Rome, under its prefect, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, released a statement called “On Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion.” Although it dealt primarily with the obligations of bishops to deny communion to Catholic politicians in certain circumstances, it included a short note at the end addressing whether Catholics could, in good conscience, vote for candidates who supported the taking of nascent human life in the womb or lab.

Cardinal Ratzinger stated that a “Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of a candidate’s permissive stand on abortion.” But the question of the moment is whether a Catholic may vote for a pro-abortion candidate for other reasons. The cardinal’s next sentence answered that question: A Catholic may vote for a pro-abortion Catholic politician only “in the presence of proportionate reasons.”

What are “proportionate reasons”? To consider that question, we must first repeat the teaching of the church: The direct killing of innocent human beings at any stage of development, including the embryonic and fetal, is homicidal, gravely sinful and always profoundly wrong. Then we must consider the scope of the evil of abortion today in our country. America suffers 1.3 million abortions each year–a tragedy of epic proportions. Moreover, many supporters of abortion propose making the situation even worse by creating a publicly funded industry in which tens of thousands of human lives are produced each year for the purpose of being “sacrificed” in biomedical research.
Thus for a Catholic citizen to vote for a candidate who supports abortion and embryo-destructive research, one of the following circumstances would have to obtain: either (a) both candidates would have to be in favor of embryo killing on roughly an equal scale or (b) the candidate with the superior position on abortion and embryo-destructive research would have to be a supporter of objective evils of a gravity and magnitude beyond that of 1.3 million yearly abortions plus the killing that would take place if public funds were made available for embryo-destructive research.

No candidate advocating the removal of legal protection against killing for any vulnerable group of innocent people other than unborn children would have a chance of winning a major office in our country. Even those who support the death penalty for first-degree murderers are not advocating policies that result in more than a million killings annually.

Certainly policies on welfare, national security, the war in Iraq, Social Security or taxes, taken singly or in any combination, do not provide a proportionate reason to vote for a pro-abortion candidate.

Consider, for example, the war in Iraq. Although Pope John Paul II pleaded for an alternative to the use of military force to meet the threat posed by Saddam Hussein, he did not bind the conscience of Catholics to agree with his judgment on the matter, nor did he say that it would be morally wrong for Catholic soldiers to participate in the war. In line with the teaching of the catechism on “just war,” he recognized that a final judgment of prudence as to the necessity of military force rests with statesmen, not with ecclesiastical leaders. Catholics may, in good conscience, support the use of force in Iraq or oppose it.
Abortion and embryo-destructive research are different. They are intrinsic and grave evils; no Catholic may legitimately support them. In the context of contemporary American social life, abortion and embryo-destructive research are disproportionate evils. They are the gravest human rights abuses of our domestic politics and what slavery was to the time of Lincoln. Catholics are called by the Gospel of Life to protect the victims of these human rights abuses. They may not legitimately abandon the victims by supporting those who would further their victimization.

Archbishop Myers heads the archdiocese of Newark.
 
Responding to requests to clarify the obligations of Catholics on this matter, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in Rome, under its prefect, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, released a statement called “On Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion.” Although it dealt primarily with the obligations of bishops to deny communion to Catholic politicians in certain circumstances, it included a short note at the end addressing whether Catholics could, in good conscience, vote for candidates who supported the taking of nascent human life in the womb or lab.

Cardinal Ratzinger stated that a “Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of a candidate’s permissive stand on abortion.” But the question of the moment is whether a Catholic may vote for a pro-abortion candidate for other reasons. The cardinal’s next sentence answered that question: A Catholic may vote for a pro-abortion Catholic politician only “in the presence of proportionate reasons.”

What are “proportionate reasons”? To consider that question, we must first repeat the teaching of the church: The direct killing of innocent human beings at any stage of development, including the embryonic and fetal, is homicidal, gravely sinful and always profoundly wrong. Then we must consider the scope of the evil of abortion today in our country. America suffers 1.3 million abortions each year–a tragedy of epic proportions. Moreover, many supporters of abortion propose making the situation even worse by creating a publicly funded industry in which tens of thousands of human lives are produced each year for the purpose of being “sacrificed” in biomedical research.
Thus for a Catholic citizen to vote for a candidate who supports abortion and embryo-destructive research, one of the following circumstances would have to obtain: either (a) both candidates would have to be in favor of embryo killing on roughly an equal scale or (b) the candidate with the superior position on abortion and embryo-destructive research would have to be a supporter of objective evils of a gravity and magnitude beyond that of 1.3 million yearly abortions plus the killing that would take place if public funds were made available for embryo-destructive research.

No candidate advocating the removal of legal protection against killing for any vulnerable group of innocent people other than unborn children would have a chance of winning a major office in our country. Even those who support the death penalty for first-degree murderers are not advocating policies that result in more than a million killings annually.

Certainly policies on welfare, national security, the war in Iraq, Social Security or taxes, taken singly or in any combination, do not provide a proportionate reason to vote for a pro-abortion candidate.

Consider, for example, the war in Iraq. Although Pope John Paul II pleaded for an alternative to the use of military force to meet the threat posed by Saddam Hussein, he did not bind the conscience of Catholics to agree with his judgment on the matter, nor did he say that it would be morally wrong for Catholic soldiers to participate in the war. In line with the teaching of the catechism on “just war,” he recognized that a final judgment of prudence as to the necessity of military force rests with statesmen, not with ecclesiastical leaders. Catholics may, in good conscience, support the use of force in Iraq or oppose it.
Abortion and embryo-destructive research are different. They are intrinsic and grave evils; no Catholic may legitimately support them. In the context of contemporary American social life, abortion and embryo-destructive research are disproportionate evils. They are the gravest human rights abuses of our domestic politics and what slavery was to the time of Lincoln. Catholics are called by the Gospel of Life to protect the victims of these human rights abuses. They may not legitimately abandon the victims by supporting those who would further their victimization.

Archbishop Myers heads the archdiocese of Newark.
Thanks for posting this. unfortunately many take the one line about proportionality out of context and use that to justify voting for pro-abortion candidates/party’s.
 
Sorry you are still misinterpreting this.
Misinterpreting this ?? How else can one interpret this:

“:Abortion and embryo-destructive research are different. They are intrinsic and grave evils; no Catholic may legitimately support them. In the context of contemporary American social life, abortion and embryo-destructive research are disproportionate evils. They are the gravest human rights abuses of our domestic politics and what slavery was to the time of LincolnCatholics are called by the Gospel of Life to protect the victims of these human rights abuses. They may not legitimately abandon the victims** by supporting those who would further their victimization**”
 
You are the one that is wrong. You can vote for a pro-abortion candiate ONLY if they are running against another pro-abortion canidate. We have posted the Chuch teachings on this again and again and again. The Church makes it crystal clear that abortion and euthansia take precedence over ALL other issues.
Estesbob, I think we should all stop trying to convince these folks of the teachings of the Church. They don’t want to hear it. They want to do what they want to do and all else be darned. There have been direct quotes by high up church personages, it does not matter. They know better. God help them.
 
SEEK said “20% of the American population owns 80% of the wealth”

KNOW THE FACTS…

Under the U.S. income tax system, most of the taxes collected are supposed to be paid by the people who make the most money. Thanks to President Bush’s tax cuts, that is exactly the way the system works, says the U.S. Treasury Department.

According to the Office of Tax Analysis, the U.S. individual income tax is “highly progressive,” with a small group of higher-income taxpayers paying most of the individual income taxes each year.
In 2002 the latest year of available data, the top 5 percent of taxpayers paid more than one-half (53.8 percent) of all individual income taxes, but reported roughly one-third (30.6 percent) of income.
The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid 33.7 percent of all individual income taxes in 2002. This group of taxpayers has paid more than 30 percent of individual income taxes since 1995. Moreover, since 1990 this group’s tax share has grown faster than their income share.
Taxpayers who rank in the top 50 percent of taxpayers by income pay virtually all individual income taxes. In all years since 1990, taxpayers in this group have paid over 94 percent of all individual income taxes. In 2000, 2001, and 2002, this group paid over 96 percent of the total.
Treasury Department analysts credit President Bush’s tax cuts with shifting a larger share of the individual income taxes paid to higher income taxpayers. In 2005, says the Treasury, when most of the tax cut provisions are fully in effect (e.g., lower tax rates, the $1,000 child credit, marriage penalty relief), the projected tax share for lower-income taxpayers will fall, while the tax share for higher-income taxpayers will rise.
The share of taxes paid by the bottom 50 percent of taxpayers will fall from 4.1 percent to 3.6 percent.
The share of taxes paid by the top 1 percent of taxpayers will rise from 32.3 percent to 33.7 percent.
The average tax rate for the bottom 50 percent of taxpayers falls by 27 percent as compared to a 13 percent decline for taxpayers in the top 1 percent.
The White House has announced it will lobby Congress to pass legislation making most of President Bush’s tax cutting measures permanent. Source: U.S. Treasury, Office of Tax Analysis
usgovinfo.about.com/od/incometaxandtheirs/a/whopaysmost.htm

Of course they pay more-- they’re richer! I’m talking about a redistribution of wealth back to Hoover, Pre- Roosevelt percentages. What real percentage of income do they pay though- NOT how much do they pay. What’s their Capital Gains
tax rate? What percentage of Social Security tax do they pay?

The poor in this country do not pay Federal Income Tax…I am not saying that is a bad thing. The bad is they are still poor…right where the Democrats want them. The Democrats once known in the South as the Dixiecrats the same Democrats who were responsible for segregation, Jim Crow laws and the terrorist wing of the Democrats the Ku Klux Klan do not want to help the nations poor minorities they intentionally keep them oppressed. It keeps them out of there Country Clubs and out of there children’s schools…the new segregation is to pretend you are the friends of the very people you oppress. Don’t be fooled by the Democrats…voting Republican helps the poor and they are the platform of Pro-Life not the Democrats no matter how you sugar coat it.
This section is downright scary. That’s why LBJ said we (Democrats) lost the South when legislation was passed
that helped poor black Americans. He was right of course
they, the Bluedog democrats, ran to the Republicans like they’re house was on fire? The real fools are the poor that somehow are convinced that if you just give more to the rich more will trickle down to you. Like dogs getting scraps from the table. Just not the Bluedogs.
 
The you are going against the teachings of the Church. Ones view on Iraq, Pakistan, etc NEVER take precedence over abortion. When you vote for a pro-abortion canidate you are complict in the murder of 1.2 million children a year. Doing so because you hate George Bush will not wash the blood off your hands.
Code:
     I did say I felt deep conflict about it. In my life, I have advised an old childhood friend when she was frightened,
and overwhelmed and 15 years of age that she shouldn’t get an
abortion. I was a wise old codger of 17 at the time. A handful of other times in my life I heaped on praise and delight when women friends of mine went thru the pregnancy and had the child, in-stead of abort. I oppose abortion. Had arguments galore. Maybe lost a few friendships along the way. That’s O.K… The struggle doesn’t end there though. Homosexuals, I’ve known since childhood were made that way. And almost all I’ve encountered later in life, were made that way. Following their desires means eternal suffering. Intellectually I know the Church’s answers.
Emotionally it seems to me an awful injustice. Woman priests,
the existence of Hell, I’m sure there are others that have slipped my mind are other sources of conflict. But I keep going to Church
receiving my Lord because all I can do is hope to have both my heart and mind changed. I dislike Bush II because I think he lied to us. He dodged a war with his use of privelege. Cheney and
Wolfowitz design this neo-con Hawk mess were in and they were
also too busy to fight and die in the 60’s but they’ll send others off
to do it when they wouldn’t and didn’t. I think that’s referred to as Chikenhawks. Mostly I dislike Bush because I think he’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing. I know my Chuch’s position. But I think more death occurs because of Republican politics than Democratic.
When will we love our enemies…when will we pour hot rocks on their heads because of this love. Why more swords and spears
and less plowshares and pruning hooks. I hope there is no blood on your hands or mine. LORD HAVE MERCY
 
Of course they pay more-- they’re richer! I’m talking about a redistribution of wealth back to Hoover, Pre- Roosevelt percentages. What real percentage of income do they pay though- NOT how much do they pay. What’s their Capital Gains
tax rate? What percentage of Social Security tax do they pay?

This section is downright scary. That’s why LBJ said we (Democrats) lost the South when legislation was passed
that helped poor black Americans. He was right of course
they, the Bluedog democrats, ran to the Republicans like they’re house was on fire? The real fools are the poor that somehow are convinced that if you just give more to the rich more will trickle down to you. Like dogs getting scraps from the table. Just not the Bluedogs.
Well for the record I am one of the folks paying most of the taxes…I grew up poor and by the grace of God I have been financially blessed. I pay 40% in taxes…and get robbed by Capital Gains taxes…I also pay just as much as anybody else does For Social Security I am looking at one of my pay stubs now 6% do you pay more?

As far as LBJ goes…he is one of the Social Democrats not looking out for the poor minorities I am talking about. In fact 69% of Democrats (46 for, 21 against) voted for the Civil Rights Act as compared to 82% of Republicans (27 for, 6 against). All southern Democratic senators voted against the Act. This includes the current senator from West Virginia and former KKK member Robert C. Bryd and former Tennessee senator Al Gore. And we are to believe that his son and the rest of the Democrats who allow Bryd to be apart of them are looking out for the poor minorities…I think not
In the House of Representatives, 61% of Democrats (152 for, 96 against) voted for the Civil Rights Act; 92 of the 103 southern Democrats voted against it. Among Republicans, 80% (138 for, 34 against) voted for it.
The Civil Rights Act was initiated under the Eisenhower administration and JFK sat on it and only under pressure from the Republicans did anything and LBJ gets the credit.

What do you mean by “The real fools are the poor that somehow are convinced that if you just give more to the rich more will trickle down to you. Like dogs getting scraps from the table”. How are the poor giving to the rich? If you mean tax breaks to the rich trickles down than yes this WORKS…it stimulated our current economy wouldnt you agree?
 
I dislike Bush II because I think he lied to us. He dodged a war with his use of privelege. Cheney and
Wolfowitz design this neo-con Hawk mess were in and they were
also too busy to fight and die in the 60’s but they’ll send others off
to do it when they wouldn’t and didn’t. I think that’s referred to as Chikenhawks. Mostly I dislike Bush because I think he’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing. I know my Chuch’s position. But I think more death occurs because of Republican politics than Democratic.
When will we love our enemies…when will we pour hot rocks on their heads because of this love. Why more swords and spears
and less plowshares and pruning hooks. I hope there is no blood on your hands or mine. LORD HAVE MERCY
:clapping: Well said!
My biggest fear is that Bush will re-instate the draft before his term is up and my husband could be forced on the front lines to die in battle, since he is not old enough to avoid the draft. The thought of that saddens me beyond belief. 😦
 
…I also pay just as much as anybody else does For Social Security I am looking at one of my pay stubs now 6% do you pay more?

Do you pay 6% on all your income? Or just part of it? Is laissez faire economic Darwinism your answer or something closer to
what our 1st Pope,set up in the 1st Christian Community in the Acts of the Apostles? How does any of this apply to the expanding poor and the shrinking middle class under Republicanism? That awful distribution of our country’s wealth

]As far as LBJ goes…he is one of the Social Democrats not looking out for the poor minorities I am talking about. In fact 69% of Democrats (46 for, 21 against) voted for the Civil Rights Act as compared to 82% of Republicans (27 for, 6 against). All southern Democratic senators voted against the Act. This includes the current senator from West Virginia and former KKK member Robert C. Bryd and former Tennessee senator Al Gore. And we are to believe that his son and the rest of the Democrats who allow Bryd to be apart of them are looking out for the poor minorities…I think no
In the House of Representatives, 61% of Democrats (152 for, 96 against) voted for the Civil Rights Act; 92 of the 103 southern Democrats voted against it. Among Republicans, 80% (138 for, 34 against) voted for it. The Civil Rights Act was initiated under the Eisenhower administration and JFK sat on it and only under pressure from the Republicans did anything and LBJ gets the credit.

The majority of those Democrats who voted against the Civil Rights act were your much hated Dixiecrats, Of course they’re not there anymore. They’re Republicans now.

What do you mean by “The real fools are the poor that somehow are convinced that if you just give more to the rich more will trickle down to you. Like dogs getting scraps from the table”. How are the poor giving to the rich? If you mean tax breaks to the rich trickles down than yes this WORKS…it stimulated our current economy wouldnt you agree?

I agree it looks great on Wall Street. But on Main Street and the
back streets of America it’s not nearly as rosy. Job numbers are
low paying service jobs with little or no benefits, food banks and soup kitchens in America are being overwhelmed. And I never said
the poor were givig to the rich. Trickle down lets poor Americans
get the scraps from the rich like service jobs w/ no benefits. The
current economy is being fueled by deficit spending and war spending. Most sensible goverment doesn’t start wars and cut taxes at the same time. Can government help the poor outside of
Economic Darwinism. I think so. Like minimum wages, which
Republicans consistently opposed. The history of labor relations says the poor and middle class deperately needs government.
Almost any change that occured for the benefit of the working class in America occured with some leverage some arm wringing
of the coporate elite by the Government. Child labor laws. 40 hr
work week, vacation time, safe and healthy places to work in…
you get the picture. To stand on the sidelines and say well
“stay out of the way of big money interests” they do the right thing
it will distribute wealth in our country fairly is delusional. Based on
what? LORD HAVE MERCY
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top