Do we vote for the lesser of two evils?

[mary_bobo]

Obama has cut Medicare more than Romney and Ryan would

As to the supposedly draconian nature of Paul Ryan’s Medicare cuts, they’re only exceeded by the severity of the Medicare cuts in…Obamacare.

According to the latest estimates from the Congressional Budget Office, Obamacare will reduce Medicare spending by approximately $743 billion between 2013 and 2022, relative to prior law. These cuts directly affect current retirees. By contrast, both the Romney and Wyden-Ryan plans only affect retirees younger than 55. In other words, for better or worse, President Obama cuts Medicare more than Romney would.

forbes.com/sites/aroy/2012/08/11/why-the-democrats-mediscare-attack-wont-work-against-paul-ryan/

Well, somebody needs to address the issue of Medicare and SS. Perhaps our liberal friends have not heard, but the programs, as now structured, cannot continue. Changes have to be made because we cannot continue to spend money that we do not have. I don’t understand how people can continue to support this. And the Dems talking points, lying about what Ryan says about Medicare, are sickening and low life.

 

[JimG]

Well, somebody needs to address the issue of Medicare and SS. Perhaps our liberal friends have not heard, but the programs, as now structured, cannot continue. Changes have to be made because we cannot continue to spend money that we do not have. I don’t understand how people can continue to support this. And the Dems talking points, lying about what Ryan says about Medicare, are sickening and low life.

Exactly right. Medicare and Social Security already are unsustainable. I simply don’t understand how anyone can say “Don’t change anything!” and just be happy to continue along the road to bankruptcy. It’s insanity, and it leads to chaos.

 

[simple_soul]

Romney’s son and daughter-in-law had children through in vitro fertilization, which of course produces more embryos than are implanted. Romney supports embryonic research and those embryos come predominately from in vitro fertilization.

Jim

Is there some kind of legislation that shows he supports it?

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Is there some kind of legislation that shows he supports it?

Romney position on Stem Cells

Romney is a strong supporter of stem cell research, but he is against the practice of cloning or embryo farming as a source for cells. He is also against federal funds being used for embryonic stem cell research.

“I am in favor of stem cell research. I am not in favor of creating new human embryos through cloning.”

May 1, 2005, National Review Online,

2012.republican-candidates.org/Romney/Stem-Cell.php

Not in favor of cloning, but stem cell research from embryo’s produced through in vitro fertilization he favors.

Romney Says It’s OK to ‘Destroy’ Human Embryos Created Through In Vitro Fertilization

(CNSNews.com) – Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who recently had twin grandsons conceived through in vitro fertilization, has said it is okay for couples to "destroy’ human embryos conceived through in vitro fertilization if they do not want to implant those human beings in a womb.

cnsnews.com/news/article/romney-says-its-ok-destroy-human-embryos-created-through-vitro-fertilization

Jim

 

[scipio337]

Not in favor of cloning, but stem cell research from embryo’s produced through in vitro fertilization he favors.

Jim

Who favors FEDERAL FUNDING of said embryonic stem cell research?

President Barack Obama said Monday he is allowing federal taxpayer dollars to fund significantly broader research on embryonic stem cells because “medical miracles do not happen simply by accident,” and promised his administration would make up for the ground lost under his predecessor.

2009 story.

cbsnews.com/2100-503767_162-4853385.html

Again, the contrast is pretty stark. Romney doesn’t support your tax dollars going to such research. President Obama does, and reversed President Bush’s policy of ending federal funding.

But hey, Obama = Romney, right??

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Who favors FEDERAL FUNDING of said embryonic stem cell research?

2009 story.

cbsnews.com/2100-503767_162-4853385.html

Again, the contrast is pretty stark. Romney doesn’t support your tax dollars going to such research. President Obama does, and reversed President Bush’s policy of ending federal funding.

But hey, Obama = Romney, right??

Well I didn’t bring up Romney’s position in order to justify Obama’s.

Both are wrong, which is why I won’t vote for either.

Jim

 

[simple_soul]

Not in favor of cloning, but stem cell research from embryo’s produced through in vitro fertilization he favors.

Jim

*This is why my prayers are so with him these days. I know that he is trying to do the right thing and he is trying to look to God for guidance like all of us and I know he has a lot at stake on the subject. I do hope and pray that we continue to grow in the fullness of God’s Truths and Will for all of us.

 

[scipio337]

Well I didn’t bring up Romney’s position in order to justify Obama’s.

Both are wrong, which is why I won’t vote for either.

Jim

I know MA is pretty solidly in the Obama W column, but I appreciate your stand.

 

[simple_soul]

Well I didn’t bring up Romney’s position in order to justify Obama’s.

Both are wrong, which is why I won’t vote for either.

Jim

So who will you be voting for? I am serious about this question…is there another candidate running in this election who is of an even lesser evil?

 

[SalesianSDB]

I considered voting for Gary Johnson being that I am a libertarian (though registered Republican) and in the past year have been reading anarcho-capitalist arguments. But then the HHS Mandate came out and now I’m voting for the person with the best chance to beat the current president. Unfortunately, I’m not enthusiastic about the choice, but it’s better than the current occupant. (Luckily the libertarian in me is much more excited to see Rep. Ryan on the ticket).

Trying to decide to vote third party or the lesser of two evils, I read this from Murray Rothbard, my favorite political philospoher:

"For example, we can’t vote the Presidency out of existence – unfortunately, it would be great if we could – but since we can’t why not make use of the vote if there is a difference at all between the two people.* And it is almost inevitable that there will be a difference, incidentally, because just praxeologically or in a natural law sense, every two persons or every two groups of people will be slightly different, at least.** So in that case why not make use of it. I don’t see that it’s immoral to participate in the election provided that you go into it with your eyes open – provided that you don’t think that either Nixon or Muskie is the greatest libertarian since Richard Cobden! – which many people, of course, talk themselves into before they go out and vote,

“The Presidency, unfortunately, is of extreme importance. It will be running or directing our lives greatly for four years. So, I see no reason why we shouldn’t endorse, or support, or attack one candidate more than the other candidate.”
*
He’s coming from an anarchist/libertarian POV, but it convinced me. One is better for liberty and for the economy more than the other.

Though if there is no liberty candidate on the major party tickets in 2016, I’m voting Libertarian.

 

[jwinch2]

catholicleague.org/catholic-vp-v-catholic-vp/

CATHOLIC VP V. CATHOLIC VP

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the two Catholic vice presidential candidates:

In many respects, the Catholic community today is divided into pro-life and social justice camps. That is unfortunate, and while this division can be overstated, it remains true that most Catholic activists sit in either one camp or the other; cross-over Catholics are a rare breed.

Paul Ryan represents the pro-life wing, and Joe Biden represents the social justice wing. Indeed, both exemplify the differences, and not just on the issue of abortion. For example, Ryan’s idea of freedom of choice commits him to supporting school vouchers; Biden’s notion of choice commits him to abortion rights. Ryan is opposed to reinventing the institution of marriage; Biden wants to expand marriage to include two people of the same sex.

The Catholic Church opposes abortion and gay marriage. On both of these issues, Biden disagrees with the Church. Biden’s defenders, e.g., Catholics who identify with social justice concerns, argue that Ryan’s budgetary prescriptions make him the dissident Catholic; his ideas are said to hurt the poor. This assumes, however, that there is a clear Catholic teaching on what constitutes the best means to conquer poverty. There isn’t. For instance, fidelity to the Church’s preferential option for the poor can be realized by making a serious case to raise taxes, or to lower them. In effect, both Biden and Ryan can plausibly maintain that he is a champion of the poor. But only one, Ryan, can be identified as the champion of the unborn.

Not all policy issues are equal. Abortion is regarded by the Catholic Church as “intrinsically evil.” Moreover, the bishops’ conference has explicitly endorsed a constitutional amendment defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman. This puts Biden at a decisive disadvantage in making the case that he better represents Catholic teachings.

 

[YKohen]

The bottom line is that if you don’t vote for Romney/Ryan, you ARE, de facto, voting for 4 more years of Obama/Biden.

Same thing if you write in a candidate.

“Politics is the art of the possible, the attainable - the art of the next best”

• Otto von Bismarck

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

The bottom line is that if you don’t vote for Romney/Ryan, you ARE, de facto, voting for 4 more years of Obama/Biden.

Same thing if you write in a candidate.

One side says, “If you don’t vote, it’s the same as a vote for Obama,” whose partisans in turn say, “If you don’t vote, it’s the same as a vote for Romney.”

Whatever.

 

[scipio337]

The bottom line is that if you don’t vote for Romney/Ryan, you ARE, de facto, voting for 4 more years of Obama/Biden.

Same thing if you write in a candidate.

“Politics is the art of the possible, the attainable - the art of the next best”

• Otto von Bismarck

If I only had a dollar for every time I had to hold my nose and pull the lever. Realpolitik in motion.

Dans ses écrits, un sàge Italien
Dit que le mieux est l’ennemi du bien.
-Voltaire

 

[YKohen]

One side says, “If you don’t vote, it’s the same as a vote for Obama,” whose partisans in turn say, “If you don’t vote, it’s the same as a vote for Romney.”

Whatever.

Either way, not voting is a vote for the other side. Surely, one side is preferable- even if it isn’t perfect. Right?

 

[gnjsdad]

So one candidate commist and intrinsic evil, a little more than the other so we can vote for the lesser of the two evils.

It also shows how shallow a Catholic Paul Ryan is to link up with Romney as his running mate, when Romney supports such an intrinsic evil

I won’t vote for either candidate.

Jim

The problem is that the culture has been polluted to such an extent, that these intrinsic evils have been accepted as positive goods by large numbers of people who vote. Therefore, our politics is necessarily corrupted by these cultural influences. Those who hope for a remedy - a society with a more pronounced Catholic influence -from politics are bound to have their hopes dashed.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

Either way, not voting is a vote for the other side.

Depends on whose side one is seen to be on. But, thanks for agreeing that it’s not all one way.

 

[YKohen]

If I only had a dollar for every time I had to hold my nose and pull the lever. Realpolitik in motion.

Dans ses écrits, un sàge Italien
Dit que le mieux est l’ennemi du bien.
-Voltaire

Voltaire was correct.

And the only person with whom you agree 100% is yourself.

 

[jwinch2]

Catholic social teaching on a preferential option for the poor and the principle of solidarity must be viewed in light of the principle of subsidiarity which states that things are to be handled at the lowest level possible. Helping the poor is not a suicide pact. If we take the economy off a cliff, like is happening in Europe with the socialist democracy experiment, everyone will suffer, and the poor in America, who would be well off in many countries with their standard of living, will suffer greatly and be much worse off then they are now.

money.cnn.com/2012/04/02/pf/taxes/tax-freedom-day/index.htm?iid=Lead

Americans will spend an average of 29% of their income on federal, state and local taxes in 2012, the Tax Foundation announced Monday. That’s more than the average family spends on food, clothing and housing combined, the organization said. And it means that most Americans are going to need to work 107 days just to be able to earn enough money to pay their taxes.

moneynews.com/Headline/fed-debt-Treasury/2012/03/28/id/434106

The Federal Reserve is propping up the entire U.S. economy by buying 61 percent of the government debt issued by the Treasury Department, a trend that cannot last, Lawrence Goodman, a former Treasury official and current president of the Center for Financial Stability, writes in a Wall Street Journal opinion article published Wednesday.

“Last year the Fed purchased a stunning 61 percent of the total net Treasury issuance, up from negligible amounts prior to the 2008 financial crisis,” Goodman writes.

**Goodman also warns that U.S. economy and markets are “at risk for a sharp correction” if conditions aren’t “normalized.”

“This not only creates the false appearance of limitless demand for U.S. debt but also blunts any sense of urgency to reduce supersized budget deficits.”**

businessweek.com/articles/2012-05-30/what-we-talk-about-when-we-talk-about-recession

Three years after the Great Recession ended, 71 percent of small business owners indicated they “believe the United States economy is still in a recession,” according to a survey (PDF) of just over 1,000 of them released on Wednesday, May 30, by U.S. Bank (USB).

gasbuddy.com

When Obama took office, a gallon of gas cost you $1.85. Today, it’s up to $3.59 per gallon (July’s rise was 17 cents a gallon).

The poor are not being helped by such an economy, and things are not getting better anytime soon unless we dramatically change the way we are doing things.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

Dans ses écrits, un sàge Italien
Dit que le mieux est l’ennemi du bien.
-Voltaire

Il avait raison.