Paul Ryan Discussion

[stinkcat_14]

Exactly. That’s why I said perhaps.

That said, California has gone Republican in the past, so I would never put it at zero. Unlikely? Yes. Zero? No.

Yes, for Reagan. I think we can all agree Romney is no Reagan. Ryan perhaps, but not Romney.

 

[DeSanto]

You keep making silly claims that Romney has offshore accounts and somehoe this is illegal, immoral or wrong.

As far as we know, Romney has complied with US tax law, unless you have proof to the contrary - i.e. a judgement against him.

Also, as I have stated, many people own offshore investments and use the tax code to their advantage.

Therefore, Romney’s offshore accounts should have little bearing on whether we should vote for him.

Key word in that quote “as far as we know”…

and what does any of that have to do with where Obama was born?

 

[rlg94086]

Yes, for Reagan. I think we can all agree Romney is no Reagan. Ryan perhaps, but not Romney.

But, Obama is worse than Carter.

 

[estesbob]

Key word in that quote “as far as we know”…

and what does any of that have to do with where Obama was born?

As far as we know hexeas born in Hawaii

 

[stinkcat_14]

But, Obama is worse than Carter.

I agree with that, but I am not sure that most Californians agree.

 

[Ridgerunner]

There are serious problems with the Romney/Ryan economic agenda in terms of Catholic social doctrine.

Voting for either is morally problematic because both are opposite poles of an individualistic ideology that is antithetical to Catholic teaching. Obama’s promotion of sexual libertarianism is matched by Romney’s promotion of an economic libertarianism that coddles the wealthy and kicks the poor.

Read the articles linked by Contarini.

Simply stating Democrat talking points does not demonstrate anything. What, exactly, do you think is in the RR plan that is “antithetical to Catholic teaching”? Point those proposals out specifically, not just some “don’t care for the poor” stereotyping. Truth is, the current administration has done nothing for the truly poor. If anything, it has harmed the truly poor by various means. How, exactly, do Obama supporters think the RR proposals harm the poor?

 

[qui_est_ce]

What an astonishing discussion. Ryan is being attacked for being an acolyte of Ayn Rand even though no one has actually identified anything he has done or proposed that is outside normal political differences. Romney is being attacked because the possibility has been raised that he may have followed the law and employed tax shelters. In neither case is there any substantive charge about … anything. It is understandable why the administration would circulate such charges but it is truly incomprehensible why anyone actually takes them seriously.

For the true believers I don’t suppose it matters what the arguments are; they will vote to continue the policies that have so plainly failed. For those who are concerned about serious issues, however, like the level of unemployment and the ballooning deficit, it hardly needs pointing out that side shows “issues” like Ayn Rand and a global investment portfolio truly are insignificant.

Ender

Romney/Ryan will really have to hammer this message and not be distracted by the ad hominem attackes being levied against them by the left.

 

[ProVobis]

BTW IS there a third party candidate that has the support of every Bishop in the country?

I don’t believe the Catholic Church can endorse any candidate; otherwise they can lose their tax-exempt privilege.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Key word in that quote “as far as we know”…

Don’t you think he should be innocent until proven guilty? People are making unfounded personal attacks on Romney. They should stick to the issues.

I could make some wild accusation that Obama has secret overseas accounts. Prove to me he doesn’t.

 

[Roselle]

Over the weekend Lawrence Kudlow wrote a piece about an interview he had with the Vice Presidential candidate, Paul Ryan. He found Ryan’s economic ideas to be pro growth & more in line with Ronald Reagan.

“No, Paul Ryan Is Not A Root-Canal Republican”

news.investors.com/article/623530/201208241847/growth-oriented-paul-ryan-rejuvenates-republicans.htm

From his article:

…Ryan expressed dismay at the latest CBO recession forecast concerning a possible rollback of the Bush-era tax cuts. But he said the first order of business for the Romney administration will be to fix the tax cliff and avoid another recession, which would be devastating to America’s psyche.

Finally, Ryan summarized his monetary strategy in two words: sound money. He said, “We want to pursue a sound-money strategy so that we can get back the King Dollar, as you say it, Larry.” Indeed, the Republican platform committee, hopefully with Romney’s backing, is including a gold-commission study that would put much-needed discipline into Fed policy.

So let me say this to my skeptical supply-side friends: I don’t see one whiff of evidence that Paul Ryan has departed the pro-growth model. Flatter-tax reform, spending restraint, deregulation, bolstering entitlements — this is all from an updated Reagan-Kemp playbook.

 

[LisaA]

I don’t believe the Catholic Church can endorse any candidate; otherwise they can lose their tax-exempt privilege.

I did not say endorse,I said support. IOW a few posters claim that the RR ticket is “against Catholic social teaching.” Of course these claims are long on rhetoric and short on actual stated policies----more of the vague “the budget hurts the poor” type arguments without pointing out any real specifics.

Since a few of these posters have claimed that due to the RR policies being “opposed to Catholic Social Teaching” they cannot vote for this ticket and are going third party. I was just curious if anyone knows of a third party candidate whose life issues, social teaching issues, etc did not stir the objections of a single Bishop.

I’m rather heartily weary of claims that the RR ticket is unsupportable by Catholics because an individual Bishop or two raised an objection when I don’t believe ANY candidate or ticket has the 100% support–on their platform or proposals, not their individual candidacy

Lisa

 

[mary_bobo]

But of course, that is a matter for the prudential judgement of the individual. There is nothing in Church teaching that says we must consider the electability of the person we vote for.

Very true, but why vote for someone who has absolutely no chance of winning. That is a vote for Obama. If you want to vote for Obama, do so. And all this talk on this topic about RR being against the poor is just so much rhetoric. They would like to save Medicare and SS for future generations. Obama wants and intends to keep spending money that is not there. I know, being a thinking person, that you realize we cannot continue on the road we are on now.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

Key word in that quote “as far as we know”…

Unless you or the Federal Government has proof beyond a reasonable doubt, please stop engaging in the sin of detraction/gossip/lying.

and what does any of that have to do with where Obama was born?

Obama’s past has been called into question. How did he get into Pakistan? Why did he recieve scholarships reserved for forgein students? Why do many of Obama’s records remain sealed? How come people hold Mormonism against Romney but don’t hold Rev. Wright against Obama?

Quite clearly, people have a double standard.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

I did not say endorse,I said support. IOW a few posters claim that the RR ticket is “against Catholic social teaching.” Of course these claims are long on rhetoric and short on actual stated policies----more of the vague “the budget hurts the poor” type arguments without pointing out any real specifics.

Since a few of these posters have claimed that due to the RR policies being “opposed to Catholic Social Teaching” they cannot vote for this ticket and are going third party. I was just curious if anyone knows of a third party candidate whose life issues, social teaching issues, etc did not stir the objections of a single Bishop.

I’m rather heartily weary of claims that the RR ticket is unsupportable by Catholics because an individual Bishop or two raised an objection when I don’t believe ANY candidate or ticket has the 100% support–on their platform or proposals, not their individual candidacy

Lisa

Thank you for a well written post. Liberal Catholics overstate the objections that the Bishop(s) had about the budget. It was merely with 2 specific line items (and the rate of increase in one of them), not the whole thing. This is merely prudental judgement.

Until the USCCB speaks in unison against the budget, like they have about the HHS Mandate or Abortion, one can assume that Romney and Ryan are ok.

 

[DeSanto]

Don’t you think he should be innocent until proven guilty? People are making unfounded personal attacks on Romney. They should stick to the issues.

I could make some wild accusation that Obama has secret overseas accounts. Prove to me he doesn’t.

ok, this is ridiculous. My point is we can’t know because he won’t disclose
any info. His being secretive is the point. I don’t know what he does because he hides what he does. That’s all. I do not accuse him, we do know of his ability and the ability of offshore banks to skip around tax laws. that’s all. No wild accusations, just questions!

What blows my mind is the response I got, which has not been answered and quietly ignored, “Obama was not born in America” ??? Please tell me what that has to do with anything.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

Very true, but why vote for someone who has absolutely no chance of winning. That is a vote for Obama.

Or it might be a vote for Romney, looking at it from the Dem POV…

Why do the chances of winning have anything to do with it? Some decades ago, Judy Brown ran on a Pro-Life ticket. She hadn’t a snowflake’s chance in Hell of winning, but she ran. Should she have stayed out of the race?

 

[stinkcat_14]

Very true, but why vote for someone who has absolutely no chance of winning. That is a vote for Obama. If you want to vote for Obama, do so. And all this talk on this topic about RR being against the poor is just so much rhetoric. They would like to save Medicare and SS for future generations. Obama wants and intends to keep spending money that is not there. I know, being a thinking person, that you realize we cannot continue on the road we are on now.

Like I said, it is a decision that is left up to the prudential choice of the individual. The consequence of voting for a third party candidate is likely different in a swing state than in a deep blue state. You also have to think about the long run consequences. Our two choices are liberal and a little less liberal. No true conservative could support either social security or medicare. There is no justification for such programs and RR has no plans to cut spending in either program, just slow the rate of growth of spending.

 

[qui_est_ce]

ok, this is ridiculous. My point is we can’t know because he won’t disclose
any info. His being secretive is the point. I don’t know what he does because he hides what he does. That’s all. I do not accuse him, we do know of his ability and the ability of offshore banks to skip around tax laws. that’s all. No wild accusations, just questions!

Where are you getting the idea he has not disclosed?

 

[LisaA]

ok, this is ridiculous. My point is we can’t know because he won’t disclose
any info. His being secretive is the point. I don’t know what he does because he hides what he does. That’s all. I do not accuse him, we do know of his ability and the ability of offshore banks to skip around tax laws. that’s all. No wild accusations, just questions!

What blows my mind is the response I got, which has not been answered and quietly ignored, “Obama was not born in America” ??? Please tell me what that has to do with anything.

Look, if you actually had some EVIDENCE instead of speculation, innuendo, rumors and gossip it might be worth considering. So far that’s all you’ve offered. Have you ever heard the phrase “you cannot prove a negative.” You continue to ask us to prove negatives…IOW if Romney doesn’t prove XY or Z, then we must conclude otherwise.

No, I’d actually like to see some evidence that Mr Romney has violated the law, is hiding from the IRS, or that he conducts his affairs in an unethical manner.

Do you have any?

I believe the comment regarding Obama’s birthplace was tongue in cheek. Aside from that I heard an amusing turn of phrase…“We dont’ care where he was born, we care where he lives now!” That’s my concern for sure!

Lisa

 

[ProVobis]

I did not say endorse,I said support. IOW a few posters claim that the RR ticket is “against Catholic social teaching.” Of course these claims are long on rhetoric and short on actual stated policies----more of the vague “the budget hurts the poor” type arguments without pointing out any real specifics.

But that’s just it. I’m not saying the RR ticket is “against Catholic social teaching” per se but there aren’t too many specifics in Ryan’s budget. For example, he wants to lower tax rates, okay, but he leaves off the deductions he would eliminate. The Church may fear a limit of how much charitable contribution can be deducted. As well as elimination of certain credits that would help women bear children or encourage adoptions. Or increases (surprise, surprise!) to military spending to the tune of $2 trillion dollars. I think these are all legitimate concerns. Just saying.