Election 2012 - Who to vote for?

[Scott_Lafrance]

Wrong. You are playing what-if games here. Furthermore, we act according to our consciences in conjunction with the commandments of God. What eveyone has been saying here is: There is no way that a God- fearing Christian, in good conscience, could cast a vote for the most pro-death president (Obama) in the history of this country.

He is also the most directly anti-Catholic President in this nation’s history. Adam Smith talked vociferously against the Catholic Church, but never acted to violate our religious beliefs. This guy talks about “freedom of religion and conscience” and then enacts policies that directly impede on them. You know what they call a person who says one thing and does the opposite.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

I’ll definitely vote for Obama.

There’s a surprise.

 

[Mickey]

He is also the most directly anti-Catholic President in this nation’s history. Adam Smith talked vociferously against the Catholic Church, but never acted to violate our religious beliefs. This guy talks about “freedom of religion and conscience” and then enacts policies that directly impede on them. You know what they call a person who says one thing and does the opposite.

Let me guess. They are also sometimes referred to as “brood of vipers.”

 

[LisaA]

I’ll definitely vote for Obama.

Be still my beating heart! An Episcopalian who is for Obama…shocking I tell you, shocking.

May I ask what you think he’s done well? I am searching to be charitable and so far I can only come up with is that he appears to be a responsible (if misguided) father to his two daughters. Other than that, everything he’s done has been detrimental to our country and our citizens.

I am not being sarcastic Gamewell, you are obviously a union supporter and he has pandered endlessly to unions so I see you have a vested interest in his re-election. But other than some sort of self interest and desire for more government largesse for your interest group I am struggling to find anyone who can explain why anyone other than his cronies, bundlers and those beholden to him for government goodies would vote for the guy.

Lisa

PS the SEALs got Osama so don’t bring that one up…

 

[CMatt25]

What was handed down in oral tradition, and then recorded, reflected News, not old messages. The matter of abortion was an “old message”,

This statement holds no water whatsoever. For example the Old Testament spoke of giving food to those with no property, to the orphans, the widows, the foreigner. Deut 14:29 tells you they shall get all they need and the Lord will bless you. Sounds similar to what Jesus spoke in Matt 25. Help those in need and you shall be blessed. Giving to those in need was an “old message”, was not “News” and yet He still talked about it.

 

[CMatt25]

Because? He is incompetent,tyrannical, corrupt, and frankly downright evil. Aside from the abortion issue which is a non-starter for Catholics–although I understand you are NOT Catholic so do not subscribe to our beliefs on human life issues.

Please tell me what he has done that has been positive for this country…or as Ronald Reagan asked, are you better off now than you were four years ago? He is the worst president in my lifetime and I live through both Nixon and Jimmy Carter. The bar was high but he sailed over…

Abysmal and I cannot believe anyone with either a Christian conscious or even a semi-developed sense of self preservation would lift a finger to keep this despicable man in office.

Lisa

Hi Lisa, yes that was not my understanding until “Catholic Answers”. I’d say the worst in my lifetime, not necessarily in this order, would be Nixon, Reagan, and George W Bush. Nixon resigned in disgrace so for that alone I can’t give him high marks. Under both Reagan and George W, I am of the belief greed increased in our society. I’d probably have to say George W has been the worst in my lifetime. Led us into an invasion of Iraq. Fought 2 wars unpaid for while giving tax cuts to the wealthiest. Those tax cuts were supposed to help create jobs but all they did was fill the pockets more of the wealthiest. That’s an example of the greed I referred to. Obama proposed ending those tax cuts but had to compromise with the GOP in the Senate. He at least now says he would not agree to extend them for the wealthiest among us again. And they should not be. If the poor and middle class are going to be asked to sacrifice with budget cuts, surely the rich, who can afford the most sacrifice, should be asked to sacrifice more. Bush presided over a time in which we saw the beginnings of the Great Recession, our worst economic period since the Great Depression. Causing Obama to inherit such a mess that I sometimes wonder if we will ever fully recover. The economy though has shown signs of some improvement though we have a long ways to go to be sure. For the life of me I have no idea why anyone would want to go back to the same failed economic policies of the past Administration.

I think one of the most positive things Obama has done was to get the nation talking about the woes of the American healthcare system. So while I don’t think it went far enough, the Affordable Care Act, aka “Obamacare” around here, was a positive to me. Better than nothing. Which is pretty much what the Republicans gave us anytime they held power. Health care was hardly on their radar screen until President Obama. That’s why I have no confidence in them whatsoever to do anything to improve the health care system in this country that Obama has not already done, if Romney is elected and the GOP retains the House, and they were somehow able to get repeal through the Senate. Under President Obama’s leadership the sick for the first time will not be able to be denied health care coverage. “Obamacare” could be a “godsend” for them. It could even save their life.

While I would have captured him, finding Osama Bin Laden was a positive and is something we would never had heard the end of if a Republican Commander in Chief had been in the WH. His efforts toward a day of equal pay for women is positive to me. As was the end of DADT. So his effort in civil rights is a positive to me.

Hope this is some help why I don’t consider him evil, abysmal, and despicable as you do. Peace.

 

[CMatt25]

I’ll definitely vote for Obama.

Gamewell, good to see a proud independent votng for Obama. And you’re Christian I know because the Catholic Church accepts Episcopal Church baptisms as Christian and considers you part of the community of Christians!

 

[LisaA]

Hi Lisa, yes that was not my understanding until “Catholic Answers”. I’d say the worst in my lifetime, not necessarily in this order, would be Nixon, Reagan, and George W Bush. Nixon resigned in disgrace so for that alone I can’t give him high marks. Under both Reagan and George W, I am of the belief greed increased in our society. I’d probably have to say George W has been the worst in my lifetime. Led us into an invasion of Iraq. Fought 2 wars unpaid for while giving tax cuts to the wealthiest. Those tax cuts were supposed to help create jobs but all they did was fill the pockets more of the wealthiest. That’s an example of the greed I referred to. Obama proposed ending those tax cuts but had to compromise with the GOP in the Senate. He at least now says he would not agree to extend them for the wealthiest among us again. And they should not be. If the poor and middle class are going to be asked to sacrifice with budget cuts, surely the rich, who can afford the most sacrifice, should be asked to sacrifice more. Bush presided over a time in which we saw the beginnings of the Great Recession, our worst economic period since the Great Depression. Causing Obama to inherit such a mess that I sometimes wonder if we will ever fully recover. The economy though has shown signs of some improvement though we have a long ways to go to be sure. For the life of me I have no idea why anyone would want to go back to the same failed economic policies of the past Administration.

I think one of the most positive things Obama has done was to get the nation talking about the woes of the American healthcare system. So while I don’t think it went far enough, the Affordable Care Act, aka “Obamacare” around here, was a positive to me. Better than nothing. Which is pretty much what the Republicans gave us anytime they held power. Health care was hardly on their radar screen until President Obama. That’s why I have no confidence in them whatsoever to do anything to improve the health care system in this country that Obama has not already done, if Romney is elected and the GOP retains the House, and they were somehow able to get repeal through the Senate. Under President Obama’s leadership the sick for the first time will not be able to be denied health care coverage. “Obamacare” could be a “godsend” for them. It could even save their life.

While I would have captured him, finding Osama Bin Laden was a positive and is something we would never had heard the end of if a Republican Commander in Chief had been in the WH. His efforts toward a day of equal pay for women is positive to me. As was the end of DADT.

Hope this is some help why I don’t consider him evil and despicable as you do. Peace.

While I had some problems with George W, I would love to be back in the days of 4% unemployment, a booming economy and protection of our Constitutional rights.

What you have said about the Bush Tax Cuts is completely erroneous. The group that benefitted the most by the cuts was the lowest income group, more of which were dropped from the roles than at any other time. The lowest bracket dropped FIFTY PERCENT.

However reading your post I realize that your perspective and outlook is so different than my own that there is no point in confusing the issue with any more facts.If nothing else though I hope you really think about the support for unborn life as expressed by the Catholic perspective. I love the clarity, the consistency and the adherence to Jesus’ teaching to love one another. There is nothing loving about abortion.

My favorite Rabbi says clarity is more important than agreement. Reading your post I feel I am speaking to someone who lives and lived in a completely different country than did I. Your outlook on the world is very clear to me even if I cannot look at the same situation and come up with anything but the completely opposite conclusion.

Lisa

 

[CMatt25]

Reading your post I feel I am speaking to someone who lives and lived in a completely different country than did I. Your outlook on the world is very clear to me even if I cannot look at the same situation and come up with anything but the completely opposite conclusion.

Lisa

I was going to say the same about you. So we can leave it at that, to agree to disagree. That’s life. I hope God blesses you as you walk in faith and His peace be with you always along your journey. .

 

[Elizabeth502]

This statement holds no water whatsoever. For example the Old Testament spoke of giving food to those with no property, to the orphans, the widows, the foreigner. Deut 14:29 tells you they shall get all they need and the Lord will bless you. Sounds similar to what Jesus spoke in Matt 25. Help those in need and you shall be blessed. Giving to those in need was an “old message”, was not “News” and yet He still talked about it.

Wrong. Gospels encapsulated what was essential in Torah and reframed it all according to different paradigms. By the time of Jesus’ ministry, there had been a shift in emphasis, in terms of what was considered fidelity to the Law. External conformity (and what we would call “litmus tests” for that – or “visible” conformity) had too often superceded what was essential to Torah fidelity. Hence, Jesus calling attention to this in Luke (21:1-4) and Mark (12:41-44). The background prior to the Mark story, for example, focused on corruption operating within the Temple, then venality (the money-changers), and culminated with the question of authority and abuse of authority, with Jesus himself sitting in the Temple and personifying a new Authority while proclaiming the virtuousness of the widow’s contribution, not only for its proportionality, but also what it represented in terms of surrender (faith). Poverty and dependence have a different framework in NT than in OT. This is why it is useless to try to engage in piecemeal interpretations of Scripture passages – cherry picking here and there --, without the historical, linguistic, social, and literary contexts which give them their authentic meaning and spiritual value.

 

[CMatt25]

That is not only very generous, it is wildly inaccurate. One of the problems with increasing secularism and lack of moral teachings and standards in this country is that the destruction of unborn babies has become so remote, so antiseptic that is is given about as much consideration as removal of a wart. Do you think I am joking here Matt?

Do you REALLY think the millions and millions of women who have had abortions thought twice about doing it? Yes maybe some do, some are forced or pressured against their will but sadly the majority consider the act little more than “solving a problem.” Now many women come to regret the abortions later but at the time certainly did not “consult with their spiritual adivisor or pastor, family doctor blah blah blah.” This is utter baloney.

This is how it goes Matt, Suzie Q finds herself pregnant and although the pregnancy does not compromise her life it would be an inconvenience. I mean she might have to buy the large size jars of mayo at Costco…sarcasm intended because this IS a true story. The woman calls one of the abortion mills such as Planned Parenthood, makes an appointment and shows up, has the procedure and leaves. Done…problem solved.

Do you really think if most people really sat and thought about what they were doing that there would be so many abortions? Really? We have made it too easy, too guilt free and too lucrative for Planned Parenthoods of the world. One of the clearest proofs of my argument is that women who see their child via an ultrasound are much more likely to change their minds. It is the dehumanization of the unborn by society and by apologists for abortionists that allows this to happen.

Since you never responded to the same argument on another thread I’m gonna give it another go. Jesus never talked about abortion because it was NOT something that happened in his day among his people. There were few things more treasured than another baby. That he didn’t speak specifically of abortion (although you know he was pretty hard on people who dismissed BORN children which might be a clue!). He didn’t speak specifically about women in short skirts or men without facial hair or all of those other things that are part of our culture that were not of his culture.

Does this specificity negate the teaching thou shall not MURDER? Could the term “poor” be inclusive of unborn helpless children? Did you ever think about that? Do you really believe Jesus would have nothing to say about abortion were it brought up to Him? Would he shrug his shoulders and say “Well I didn’t have a uterus and it’s really a matter of free will.”

I don’t
Lisa

Hi again Lisa, I’m sorry. I missed this one. I’m not going to spend much time answering it though because I’m glad we have reached an understanding that our perspectives are simply different. But I wasn’t sure if you would accuse me of not responding if I didn’t at least acknowledge this one. No I don’t think you are joking. I think you honestly believe what you believe. As do I. I though wasn’t around thousands and thousands of yrs ago to know every person to know what did or did not happen in every case. I have read in the OT though where if a woman was struck and she loses her life, the penalty was greater than if her fetus was lost. Which sometimes gives me just personally a little pause to wonder about the fetus. But that’s just me. It’s not Catholic thought or anything like that and I certainly encourage you to follow your faith and church. Anyway I’ve already answered what I personally believe in many respects. So I think that catches me up now and we can move on with our understanding I hope.

 

[Jeanne_S]

Hi Lisa, yes that was not my understanding until “Catholic Answers”. I’d say the worst in my lifetime, not necessarily in this order, would be Nixon, Reagan, and George W Bush. Nixon resigned in disgrace so for that alone I can’t give him high marks. Under both Reagan and George W, I am of the belief greed increased in our society. I’d probably have to say George W has been the worst in my lifetime. Led us into an invasion of Iraq. Fought 2 wars unpaid for while giving tax cuts to the wealthiest. Those tax cuts were supposed to help create jobs but all they did was fill the pockets more of the wealthiest. That’s an example of the greed I referred to. Obama proposed ending those tax cuts but had to compromise with the GOP in the Senate. He at least now says he would not agree to extend them for the wealthiest among us again. And they should not be. If the poor and middle class are going to be asked to sacrifice with budget cuts, surely the rich, who can afford the most sacrifice, should be asked to sacrifice more. Bush presided over a time in which we saw the beginnings of the Great Recession, our worst economic period since the Great Depression. Causing Obama to inherit such a mess that I sometimes wonder if we will ever fully recover. The economy though has shown signs of some improvement though we have a long ways to go to be sure. For the life of me I have no idea why anyone would want to go back to the same failed economic policies of the past Administration.

I think one of the most positive things Obama has done was to get the nation talking about the woes of the American healthcare system. So while I don’t think it went far enough, the Affordable Care Act, aka “Obamacare” around here, was a positive to me. Better than nothing. Which is pretty much what the Republicans gave us anytime they held power. Health care was hardly on their radar screen until President Obama. That’s why I have no confidence in them whatsoever to do anything to improve the health care system in this country that Obama has not already done, if Romney is elected and the GOP retains the House, and they were somehow able to get repeal through the Senate. Under President Obama’s leadership the sick for the first time will not be able to be denied health care coverage. “Obamacare” could be a “godsend” for them. It could even save their life.

While I would have captured him, finding Osama Bin Laden was a positive and is something we would never had heard the end of if a Republican Commander in Chief had been in the WH. His efforts toward a day of equal pay for women is positive to me. As was the end of DADT. So his effort in civil rights is a positive to me.

Hope this is some help why I don’t consider him evil, abysmal, and despicable as you do. Peace.

Wow!

 

[colmywaykurtz]

It is very black and white. Thou shalt not kill.

That’s not what I was referring to. The difference between the collective violence of abortion and the collective violence against the “already-born” in the form of lack of decent healthcare and financial catastrophes wrought by the current healthcare system is NOT that black and white. Both are wrong, and the one probably causes more of the other than you might think. This arbitrary shunning of the one and exclusively focusing on the other is cold-hearted and callous, too. And focusing rabidly on junking the current legislation without ever giving it a chance to be corrected and adjusted shows what world YOU live in.

 

[colmywaykurtz]

Hi Lisa, yes that was not my understanding until “Catholic Answers”. I’d say the worst in my lifetime, not necessarily in this order, would be Nixon, Reagan, and George W Bush. Nixon resigned in disgrace so for that alone I can’t give him high marks. Under both Reagan and George W, I am of the belief greed increased in our society. I’d probably have to say George W has been the worst in my lifetime. Led us into an invasion of Iraq. Fought 2 wars unpaid for while giving tax cuts to the wealthiest. Those tax cuts were supposed to help create jobs but all they did was fill the pockets more of the wealthiest. That’s an example of the greed I referred to. Obama proposed ending those tax cuts but had to compromise with the GOP in the Senate. He at least now says he would not agree to extend them for the wealthiest among us again. And they should not be. If the poor and middle class are going to be asked to sacrifice with budget cuts, surely the rich, who can afford the most sacrifice, should be asked to sacrifice more. Bush presided over a time in which we saw the beginnings of the Great Recession, our worst economic period since the Great Depression. Causing Obama to inherit such a mess that I sometimes wonder if we will ever fully recover. The economy though has shown signs of some improvement though we have a long ways to go to be sure. For the life of me I have no idea why anyone would want to go back to the same failed economic policies of the past Administration.

I think one of the most positive things Obama has done was to get the nation talking about the woes of the American healthcare system. So while I don’t think it went far enough, the Affordable Care Act, aka “Obamacare” around here, was a positive to me. Better than nothing. Which is pretty much what the Republicans gave us anytime they held power. Health care was hardly on their radar screen until President Obama. That’s why I have no confidence in them whatsoever to do anything to improve the health care system in this country that Obama has not already done, if Romney is elected and the GOP retains the House, and they were somehow able to get repeal through the Senate. Under President Obama’s leadership the sick for the first time will not be able to be denied health care coverage. “Obamacare” could be a “godsend” for them. It could even save their life.

While I would have captured him, finding Osama Bin Laden was a positive and is something we would never had heard the end of if a Republican Commander in Chief had been in the WH. His efforts toward a day of equal pay for women is positive to me. As was the end of DADT. So his effort in civil rights is a positive to me.

Hope this is some help why I don’t consider him evil, abysmal, and despicable as you do. Peace.

This is what I think, Matt. The kind of post I wish I’d written.

 

[DoGodsBidding]

Hi Lisa, yes that was not my understanding until “Catholic Answers”. I’d say the worst in my lifetime, not necessarily in this order, would be Nixon, Reagan, and George W Bush. Nixon resigned in disgrace so for that alone I can’t give him high marks. Under both Reagan and George W, I am of the belief greed increased in our society. I’d probably have to say George W has been the worst in my lifetime. Led us into an invasion of Iraq. Fought 2 wars unpaid for while giving tax cuts to the wealthiest. Those tax cuts were supposed to help create jobs but all they did was fill the pockets more of the wealthiest. That’s an example of the greed I referred to. Obama proposed ending those tax cuts but had to compromise with the GOP in the Senate. He at least now says he would not agree to extend them for the wealthiest among us again. And they should not be. If the poor and middle class are going to be asked to sacrifice with budget cuts, surely the rich, who can afford the most sacrifice, should be asked to sacrifice more. Bush presided over a time in which we saw the beginnings of the Great Recession, our worst economic period since the Great Depression. Causing Obama to inherit such a mess that I sometimes wonder if we will ever fully recover. The economy though has shown signs of some improvement though we have a long ways to go to be sure. For the life of me I have no idea why anyone would want to go back to the same failed economic policies of the past Administration.

I think one of the most positive things Obama has done was to get the nation talking about the woes of the American healthcare system. So while I don’t think it went far enough, the Affordable Care Act, aka “Obamacare” around here, was a positive to me. Better than nothing. Which is pretty much what the Republicans gave us anytime they held power. Health care was hardly on their radar screen until President Obama. That’s why I have no confidence in them whatsoever to do anything to improve the health care system in this country that Obama has not already done, if Romney is elected and the GOP retains the House, and they were somehow able to get repeal through the Senate. Under President Obama’s leadership the sick for the first time will not be able to be denied health care coverage. “Obamacare” could be a “godsend” for them. It could even save their life.

While I would have captured him, finding Osama Bin Laden was a positive and is something we would never had heard the end of if a Republican Commander in Chief had been in the WH. His efforts toward a day of equal pay for women is positive to me. As was the end of DADT. So his effort in civil rights is a positive to me.

Hope this is some help why I don’t consider him evil, abysmal, and despicable as you do. Peace.

Jimmy Carter was the worst of my lifetime. Double-digit unemployment, double-digit inflation, and double-digit interest rates.

Until Obama came along. He is the most pro-abortion president in history, has attacked the constitution, and was just plain unprepared for the job. He has spent more money than all other presidents combined, and the economy continues to falter. We do not need four more years of his failed policies.

DGB

 

[CMatt25]

This is what I think, Matt. The kind of post I wish I’d written.

Thanks colmywaykurtz. The one above mine which you wrote was a good one too.

 

[LisaA]

That’s not what I was referring to. The difference between the collective violence of abortion and the collective violence against the “already-born” in the form of lack of decent healthcare and financial catastrophes wrought by the current healthcare system is NOT that black and white. Both are wrong, and the one probably causes more of the other than you might think. **This arbitrary shunning of the one and exclusively focusing on the other is cold-hearted and callous, too. ** And focusing rabidly on junking the current legislation without ever giving it a chance to be corrected and adjusted shows what world YOU live in.

Your post is full of specious arguments and strawmen bursting into flames.

There is and was no health care crisis in this country. The Obamacare debacle was an attempt to take control and force a single payer system on us. Oh it wasn’t going to come all at once but gradually like a frog being boiled. If there were problems in our healthcare system it was increasing costs and problems with access for outliers and patients with government (Medicare and Medicaid) program insurance.

What did Obamacare do to decrease cost and increase access? Nothing. Actually it has increased cost and will and has decreased access. The estimated cost has now tripled and we haven’t even begun to see the application of most of this nightmare. How are you doing finding a doctor these days? Not getting easier is it? Obamacare is a disaster and it needs to be reversed.

To say we can correct this debacle is overly optimistic. 2700 pages and 15000 pages of regulations. It would be easier to start over with the real issues at hand and focus on real problems instead of creating more.

However the most disingenuous and false portion of your post was the claim that those who support the Catholic consistent life ethic, focus EXCLUSIVELY (YOUR WORDS NOT MINE) on abortion etc and ignore other areas of concern for those in need, that they are “hard hearted and callous.” Nonsense. Don’t you realize how shallow your arguments sound when you make claims that are simply untrue?

The beauty of Catholic teaching is the consistency and solid foundation. The care for the unborn is matched, if not exceeded by the care for those here on earth. Show me a devout Catholic who says people should die in the streets for lack of healthcare or food. Show me a Catholic organization that turns needy people away. I don’t think you will find anything that supports your claim that we are one issue people who only care about unborn babies.

Lisa

 

[colmywaykurtz]

Your post is full of specious arguments and strawmen bursting into flames.

There is and was no health care crisis in this country. The Obamacare debacle was an attempt to take control and force a single payer system on us. Oh it wasn’t going to come all at once but gradually like a frog being boiled. If there were problems in our healthcare system it was increasing costs and problems with access for outliers and patients with government (Medicare and Medicaid) program insurance.

What did Obamacare do to decrease cost and increase access? Nothing. Actually it has increased cost and will and has decreased access. The estimated cost has now tripled and we haven’t even begun to see the application of most of this nightmare. How are you doing finding a doctor these days? Not getting easier is it? Obamacare is a disaster and it needs to be reversed.

To say we can correct this debacle is overly optimistic. 2700 pages and 15000 pages of regulations. It would be easier to start over with the real issues at hand and focus on real problems instead of creating more.

However the most disingenuous and false portion of your post was the claim that those who support the Catholic consistent life ethic, focus EXCLUSIVELY (YOUR WORDS NOT MINE) on abortion etc and ignore other areas of concern for those in need, that they are “hard hearted and callous.” Nonsense. Don’t you realize how shallow your arguments sound when you make claims that are simply untrue?

The beauty of Catholic teaching is the consistency and solid foundation. The care for the unborn is matched, if not exceeded by the care for those here on earth. Show me a devout Catholic who says people should die in the streets for lack of healthcare or food. Show me a Catholic organization that turns needy people away. I don’t think you will find anything that supports your claim that we are one issue people who only care about unborn babies.

Lisa

Splendid! A person with all the answers (like yourself) should have no problem answering my question, which remains unanswered.

 

[colmywaykurtz]

And here’s a little refresher for your memory.

Originally Posted by Jeanne S
Bad analogy.How does that line up with abortion NOT being murder?

Question: do they have capital punishment in your state?

 

[jay29]

There is and was no health care crisis in this country.

Sure there is! I just saw a pile of dead kids on a street corner because they didn’t have health insurance.