Paul Ryan!!

[Ridgerunner]

I will leave this thread because someone was offended and turn me in for a fraction twice. I am sorry if I offended anyone.

You’re free to leave, of course, and I wasn’t the one who complained. But if you received infractions they would have told you what they were for. Just avoid those kinds of things and you can still post.

 

[LisaA]

Biased CBS News Column Hits Paul Ryan’s Pro-Life Views, Catholic Faith

lifenews.com/2012/08/15/biased-cbs-news-column-hits-paul-ryans-pro-life-views-catholic-faith

Avyssinia thank you. It’s so demoralizing to read how desperate are the forces of evil that they want to use lies, hyperbole and emotionally charged rhetoric to disparage Paul Ryan’s obviously sincere Catholic faith.

I believe though that we are very blessed with his selection as he is SO likeable, positive and sincere. It’s going to be hard to paint him as some sort of anti-woman caveman. Oh and doesn’t he have the most beautiful family! Contrast the openness, kindly if strongly spoken defense of life with the glowering, screaming Joe Biden.

I am definitely praying for him…today especially.

Lisa

 

[rlg94086]

Some of the posters’ description of the Ryan budget - “inhumane,” “genocidal” - are so over the top, it is amazing. I’m pretty certain Romney and Ryan don’t eat small children or the elderly, but I won’t be surprised if I read that in one of the posts soon…

 

[tabycat]

Never has anyone produced specific provisions and demonstrated how, exactly, they’re inhumane in actual effect. Lots of talking points. No reality.

I guess you could produce actual provisions and show how, exactly, they will have an inhumane effect if you want to, and can. The two bishops who critiqued it only came up with the two I and others have repeated previously. Perhaps you can do better.

 

[tabycat]

Some of the posters’ description of the Ryan budget - “inhumane,” “genocidal” - are so over the top, it is amazing. I’m pretty certain Romney and Ryan don’t eat small children or the elderly, but I won’t be surprised if I read that in one of the posts soon…

You will.that is if they do not end up in the ‘13’ file.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

There is more to Paul Ryan’s budget of which many consider to be inhumane which has been explained to you by others in more than 1500 posts now.

Maybe you can provide actual facts to back up your claims other than the standard liberal talking points? But I guess that is too much for you.

 

[bellasbane]

Well, for one thing, it means the opposite of your understanding, which is frankly poor, and underdeveloped, at least as you have expressed them on this thread with regard to Catholic social teaching. I have already highlighted those poor understandings, earlier on the thread.

Full just means comprehensive as to essentials. It is a moral requirement of every Catholic beyond Confirmation to become fully acquainted with the essentials of Catholic moral teaching (including how those precepts and principles apply to contemporary political issues); those are insufficiently presented within RCIA programs, and they most certainly do not correspond with your telescoped and partial view of the Church’s social doctrine.

Another example in which you fail to understand your faith. Catholics have a grave duty, according to every Pope from Peter to BXVI, to apply their own full understanding of Catholic priorities to their voting decisions. It has nothing to do with selling out to a “non-Catholic nation” or to the original deist founders. Our grave moral obligation as Catholics is to witness to our faith in every realm, including the civic/political realm. This is just one of the many examples of your failure to understand your faith.

I’ve never been to an RCIA program. I am starting to wonder what they are teaching in those things. I teach religious education to the children of our parish who were baptized into the faith as babies - like me! I pass on the faith that was passed on to me by my parents, who received it from their parents, who received it from theirs - as far back as anyone can remember. I’m of Roman stock and the town my father comes from is named for the lance that pierced the side of the Lord. Legend has it that the centurion brought it back with him when he returned home from Palestine.

You can’t seriously believe that St. Peter had anything to say about voting. He wasn’t even a Roman citizen and had trouble enough trying not to get killed too soon. If our Lord hadn’t asked “Quo Vadis?”, he’d have skipped out of Rome to avoid it all together. But that’s just a legend too. It tells you something about Peter though. I grew up hearing those sorts of stories. How about you?

I’m glad you are so passionate about being a good Catholic. Just remember that you don’t own the monopoly on what that means. I am a good Catholic too and equally as passionate in defense of my faith - even to the point of seriously questioning what the Bishops are saying and doing. Certainly enough to go after Paul Ryan! If you know anything about our history, you will know about Saint Catherine of Siena (Doctor of the Church) and understand that pushing back and pointing out politically motivated hypocrisy masquerading as piety is also a traditional part of the being a faithful Catholic.

 

[LisaA]

I’ve I’m glad you are so passionate about being a good Catholic. Just remember that you don’t own the monopoly on what that means. I am a good Catholic too and equally as passionate in defense of my faith - even to the point of seriously questioning what the Bishops are saying and doing. Certainly enough to go after Paul Ryan! If you know anything about our history, you will know about Saint Catherine of Siena (Doctor of the Church) and understand that pushing back and pointing out politically motivated hypocrisy masquerading as piety is also a traditional part of the being a faithful Catholic.

Oh were you a fraction as concerned about the heretical views and hypocrisy of Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, Kathleen Sebelius, as you are about Paul Ryan who is clearly a faithful Catholic who preaches what he practices as well as practicing what he preaches.

Lisa

 

[bellasbane]

Maybe you can provide actual facts to back up your claims other than the standard liberal talking points? But I guess that is too much for you.

The Ryan budget proposes massive tax cuts for the wealthy and maintains military spending, all while being revenue neutral. He does not tell us what he proposes to cut in order to make this happen. Believe me, liberals would love for him to be more specific.

Here’re some his options of what to eliminate:

• Medicaid
• Medicare
• Food Stamps
• Education
• Law Enforcement
• Middle class tax “loop holes” like those on mortgage interest payments

You can read more about it here: latimes.com/business/la-fi-hiltzik-20120815,0,1949780.column

FYI: Here’s an interesting quote from the article:

“Ryan calls for eliminating consumer-friendly financial reforms enacted after the 2008 crash, removing environmental oversight of oil and gas production, and eroding legal protection for unionized workers. With a straight face, he lists these initiatives under the heading, “Ending Cronyism and Corporate Welfare.” The original version of his plan envisioned the national economic safety net as “a hammock that lulls able-bodied citizens into lives of complacency and despondency.” (He removed this Ayn Randian phrase from the 2012 revision.)”

Ha! Ayn Rand again.

 

[LisaA]

The Ryan budget proposes massive tax cuts for the wealthy and maintains military spending, all while being revenue neutral. He does not tell us what he proposes to cut in order to make this happen. Believe me, liberals would love for him to be more specific.

Here’re some his options of what to eliminate:

• Medicaid
• Medicare
• Food Stamps
• Education
• Law Enforcement
• Middle class tax “loop holes” like those on mortgage interest payments

You can read more about it here: latimes.com/business/la-fi-hiltzik-20120815,0,1949780.column

FYI: Here’s an interesting quote from the article:

“Ryan calls for eliminating consumer-friendly financial reforms enacted after the 2008 crash, removing environmental oversight of oil and gas production, and eroding legal protection for unionized workers. With a straight face, he lists these initiatives under the heading, “Ending Cronyism and Corporate Welfare.” The original version of his plan envisioned the national economic safety net as “a hammock that lulls able-bodied citizens into lives of complacency and despondency.” (He removed this Ayn Randian phrase from the 2012 revision.)”

Ha! Ayn Rand again.

The “financial reforms” have proved to be neither friendly nor beneficial to consumers. They have parylized the banking industry, favored huge banks over small community banks, and the whole Dodd Frank bill needs to be overturned along with Obamacare.

You consistently overstate your case which makes your claims totally lacking in credibility. As has been indicated time after time, the Ryan plan does not ELIMINATE any of these programs, not a one. Further it does not even eliminate expansion of the programs. It merely reduces the PLANNED increases.

Are you aware of the way these budgets are determined? Start with last year’s budget and add on. Instead of going line by line…another Obama promise that has been forgotten, all of these proven inefficient, bloated and wasteful programs are simply increased in size and scope.

This with a heavy percentage of BORROWED money. How is that sustainable? And who will be hurt when the whole house of cards collapses?

BTW with your strong Catholic faith, please tell me why you do not hold Biden, Pelosi, Sebelius et al to the same standards? They are all abortion proponents. Yet you seem far more concerned that food stamp increases are reduced.

Lisa

 

[estesbob]

The Ryan budget proposes massive tax cuts for the wealthy and maintains military spending, all while being revenue neutral. He does not tell us what he proposes to cut in order to make this happen. Believe me, liberals would love for him to be more specific.

Here’re some his options of what to eliminate:

• Medicaid
• Medicare
• Food Stamps
• Education
• Law Enforcement
• Middle class tax “loop holes” like those on mortgage interest payments

You can read more about it here: latimes.com/business/la-fi-hiltzik-20120815,0,1949780.column

FYI: Here’s an interesting quote from the article:

“Ryan calls for eliminating consumer-friendly financial reforms enacted after the 2008 crash, removing environmental oversight of oil and gas production, and eroding legal protection for unionized workers. With a straight face, he lists these initiatives under the heading, “Ending Cronyism and Corporate Welfare.” The original version of his plan envisioned the national economic safety net as “a hammock that lulls able-bodied citizens into lives of complacency and despondency.” (He removed this Ayn Randian phrase from the 2012 revision.)”

Ha! Ayn Rand again.

Actually he’s not cutting anything-he is reducing the rate of growth. IMO he doesn’t cut enough. It would be nice to compare it to Obamas budget but of course he doesn’t have one. his only plan is to raise taxes on the “rich” which, even if it didn’t depress the economy, would provide enough money to run the country for about a week.

We have a country that is broke, a country where 100 million people recieve govt assistance(not counting SS and medicare) and a country where nearly half the population pays no federal income tax. Yet Obama offers no solution and ryan is pilloried for offering hard but necessary choices on how to fix this mess.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I’m glad you are so passionate about being a good Catholic. Just remember that you don’t own the monopoly on what that means. I am a good Catholic too and equally as passionate in defense of my faith - even to the point of seriously questioning what the Bishops are saying and doing. Certainly enough to go after Paul Ryan! If you know anything about our history, you will know about Saint Catherine of Siena (Doctor of the Church) and understand that pushing back and pointing out politically motivated hypocrisy masquerading as piety is also a traditional part of the being a faithful Catholic.

Not being critical here, but I don’t think a single one of us can lay claim to being a “good Catholic”. The most we can claim is that we try to be one. In trying to be one, we can, at minimum, accept the teachings of the Church and attempt to follow them.

 

[Elizabeth502]

I’ve never been to an RCIA program. I am starting to wonder what they are teaching in those things. I teach religious education to the children of our parish who were baptized into the faith as babies - like me! I pass on the faith that was passed on to me by my parents, who received it from their parents, who received it from theirs - as far back as anyone can remember. I’m of Roman stock and the town my father comes from is named for the lance that pierced the side of the Lord. Legend has it that the centurion brought it back with him when he returned home from Palestine.

Your posts do not reflect the ancient tradition you claim.

You can’t seriously believe that St. Peter had anything to say about voting.

That wasn’t what I said. I said that the entire tradition of Catholicism, from earliest Christianity to the current Pope, has been unequivocal about public witness. (The “voting” part belongs to the proper noun Pope Benedict XVI, just fyi. ) That public witness, in the face of hostile cultures, plural, was the signature of the committed Christian, and still is. Both ancient Jews and ancient Christians were called upon to proclaim the One True Faith (of each), not my-faith-as-I-choose-to-interpret-it-because-I-consider-myself a-more-authoritative “scholar” cough than the combined wisdom of Roman Catholic Tradition. That included ancient Jews surrounded by pagan cultures not unlike some we have today; it included ancient Christians surrounded by a totalitarian empire and heretical cults. It included godlessness not unlike we have today.

I’m glad you are so passionate about being a good Catholic.

No, ma’am. I am passionate about truth, particularly about those who teach a “Catholicism” that is not in accord with what the Vatican teaches, but is an invented Catholicism. I despise ignorance, particularly when it masquerades as accurate information.

Just remember that you don’t own the monopoly on what that means.

I have never claimed to. I understand what the full faith is, and how that faith requires me to believe, and what is an absolute Truth and what is not an absolute truth. I know that the Holy Spirit speaks more authoritatively through the combined Magisterium and Catholic tradition than it does through me. It is you who have claimed to have a uniquely authoritative version of Catholicism, including here:

I am a good Catholic too and equally as passionate in defense of my faith - even to the point of seriously questioning what the Bishops are saying and doing.

If you know anything about our history

It’s transparently clear who knows not just “anything” but abundantly more about Church history.

you will know about Saint Catherine of Siena (Doctor of the Church) and understand that pushing back and pointing out politically motivated hypocrisy masquerading as piety is also a traditional part of the being a faithful Catholic.

You do not know your Church history, no matter how much you believe you are “informing” others. Catherine of Siena opposed certain practices of the Church. She did not oppose the absolute theological doctrines of the Church, such as moral theology.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Actually he’s not cutting anything-he is reducing the rate of growth. IMO he doesn’t cut enough. It would be nice to compare it to Obamas budget but of course he doesn’t have one. his only plan is to raise taxes on the “rich” which, even if it didn’t depress the economy, would provide enough money to run the country for about a week.

We have a country that is broke, a country where 100 million people recieve govt assistance(not counting SS and medicare) and a country where nearly half the population pays no federal income tax. Yet Obama offers no solution and ryan is pilloried for offering hard but necessary choices on how to fix this mess.

I read an interesting thing written by an economist recently. He said (and demonstrated) that capital in all its forms constitutes approximately 1/3 of gross national income, and always has. If it falls, then national income going to labor also falls, though the relationship remains the same. He graphed it out and it has been true ever since 1929 when they first started keeping records on it.

Some, but not all capital is “consumed”. It’s used up (a machine would be an example) and has to be replaced. It can only be replaced through income received by the person who is willing to replace it or the totality of capital is reduced. Since income from labor depends on that capital/labor ratio, failing to replace consumed capital causes labor income to fall.

That’s easy enough to understand if one thinks of it in terms of a factory machine that wears out. If the factory owner doesn’t replace it, at least some workers get laid off because there’s nothing for them to do. If the factory owner liquidates some other capital (let’s say he sells another machine) to replace the consumed capital, it has the same result, just in a different way. Therefore, consumed capital can only be successfully replaced by income. That’s what Obama wants government to have a greater share of; the source of replacement capital for consumed capital. Maybe he expects that to work out for the best and maybe he doesn’t, but there is absolutely no reason to believe it will not simply consume replacement capital.

 

[Havard]

Actually he’s not cutting anything-he is reducing the rate of growth. IMO he doesn’t cut enough. It would be nice to compare it to Obamas budget but of course he doesn’t have one. his only plan is to raise taxes on the “rich” which, even if it didn’t depress the economy, would provide enough money to run the country for about a week.

We have a country that is broke, a country where 100 million people recieve govt assistance(not counting SS and medicare) and a country where nearly half the population pays no federal income tax. Yet Obama offers no solution and ryan is pilloried for offering hard but necessary choices on how to fix this mess.

Federal spending would rise at a rate of about 3 percent per year under the Ryan plan, in line with the average rate of U.S. GDP growth since World War II. Obama’s budget would grow spending at an annual rate of 4.5 percent.

As Ryan said of his budget earlier this year at Georgetown University:

“Hardly draconian, I would argue…” “But that’s sort of the way Washington works, which is if you don’t sign up to the massive proposed increase and you increase spending at a slower rate or something, that’s considered a big cut.”

Source: youtube.com/watch?v=Ysu4wuHpJms

 

[bellasbane]

LisaA:
Oh were you a fraction as concerned about the heretical views and hypocrisy of Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, Kathleen Sebelius, as you are about Paul Ryan who is clearly a faithful Catholic who preaches what he practices as well as practicing what he preaches.

Lisa

I don’t see how it is possible to be both a disciple of the atheist Ayn Rand and a disciple of Christ. Paul Ryan is clearly a disciple of Ayn Rand. For years he has openly preached her “gospel”. There is so much evidence to support this - videos of him speaking about how much he is influenced by her philosophy, that it must require a huge effort of self delusion to think otherwise.

There are plenty of people on this forum attacking Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi and Kathleen Sebelius and I generally do not defend them when this happens. However, unlike Paul Ryan, I have never heard any of them claim that their support of reproductive rights is in any way an alternative interpretation of Catholic teaching. As far as I know, they use other justifications.

 

[bellasbane]

Not being critical here, but I don’t think a single one of us can lay claim to being a “good Catholic”. The most we can claim is that we try to be one. In trying to be one, we can, at minimum, accept the teachings of the Church and attempt to follow them.

Good point! I think we have found something we both fully agree upon.

 

[LisaA]

I don’t see how it is possible to be both a disciple of the atheist Ayn Rand and a disciple of Christ. Paul Ryan is clearly a disciple of Ayn Rand. For years he has openly preached her “gospel”. There is so much evidence to support this - videos of him speaking about how much he is influenced by her philosophy, that it must require a huge effort of self delusion to think otherwise.

There are plenty of people on this forum attacking Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi and Kathleen Sebelius and I generally do not defend them when this happens. However, unlike Paul Ryan, I have never heard any of them claim that their support of reproductive rights is in any way an alternative interpretation of Catholic teaching. As far as I know, they use other justifications.

Oh please! Are you simply being obtuse or do you not distinguish between someone who appreciates an economic theory of Rand but that does NOT mean he has elevated her to a deity. I am a great devotee of Ayn Rand’s ECONOMIC THEORY. I am also a Mass going, faithful and practicing Catholic. Your presumption that one cannot appreciate a secular economic theory without being unfaithful to the Church is rather arrogant I think. You presume to know another’s heart? Really?

Do you have ONE bit of evidence that Paul Ryan is not a faithful Catholic but instead is a devotee of an atheist objectivist? How many interviews, reports, articles will it take to get through to you?

And you are dead wrong in your second paragraph. Nancy Pelosi particularly has tried to explain that being pro abortion is not a violation of Catholic teachings. Now the lack of support or logic or actual Catholic teaching expressed by Ms Pelosi is legendary but that has not slowed her down at all. Ditto with Joe Biden who not only vigorously defends abortion rights but also same sex marriage. He claims this does not mean he is not a “good” Catholic.

I’m not sure why you are so invested in the Ayn Rand is Paul Ryan’s deity theory but it’s clear you have your mind made up and you aren’t really interested in either Ryan’s own words or those of his Bishop.

Lisa

 

[Ecoclimber]

It bothers me and it probably bothers a lot of other Catholics concerning the rancor on this thread. The media has you right where they want you. They are the cat playing with the mouse. To generate revenues, the national media create conflicts for a reason. It sells. Normalcy doesn’t sell. Plain vanilla movies don’t sell. So they create conflict by applying labels to groups and people, taking 15 second sound bites out of context. Do you know what the meaning behind liberal is? Do you know what the meaning behind conservatism? Are you talking about social conservatism or fiscal conservatism? Do you not see how the media pits one extreme element against the other. What about the independent viewpoint? How about the moderate viewpoint? Are there no more conservatives in the Democratic party? No more moderates in the Republican Party?

The power in America belong to the global national corporations with special interest groups, PAC, and powerful lobbyists spending enormous amount of money to shape legislation and policy. We all know that. But, who speaks for the voices that have no voices. I’m speaking about the mentally ill, the homeless, the poor, the sick and infirmed, the elderly… Abortion rights opponents are a voice for those who have no voice but do these other groups have a voice?

Catholic/Christians should not be for one party or the other, as each party is exploiting Catholic/Christians for their own purposes. A Catholic/Christians viewpoint should reflect the teachings and doctrines of Catholic Church including its social, moral and ethical viewpoints irregardless of party affiliations. Our behavior and attitude should reflect those teachings.

That is why my viewpoint reflects an independent affiliation. I cannot in good conscience endorse either party since they do not reflect the teachings of Christ.

Blessings to all,

 

[Mrs_Sally]

It bothers me and it probably bothers a lot of other Catholics concerning the rancor on this thread. The media has you right where they want you. They are the cat playing with the mouse. To generate revenues, the national media create conflicts for a reason. It sells. Normalcy doesn’t sell. Plain vanilla movies don’t sell. So they create conflict by applying labels to groups and people, taking 15 second sound bites out of context. Do you know what the meaning behind liberal is? Do you know what the meaning behind conservatism? Are you talking about social conservationism or fiscal conservationism? Do you not see how the media pits one extreme element against the other. What about the independent viewpoint? How about the moderate viewpoint? Are there no more conservatives in the Democratic party? No more moderates in the Republican Party?

The power in America belong to the global national corporations with special interest groups, PAC, and powerful lobbyists spending enormous amount of money to shape legislation and policy. We all know that. But, who speaks for the voices that have no voices. I’m speaking about the mentally ill, the homeless, the poor, the sick and infirmed, the elderly… Abortion rights opponents are a voice for those who have no voice but do these other groups have a voice?

Catholic/Christians should not be for one party or the other, as each party is exploiting Catholic/Christians for their own purposes. A Catholic/Christians viewpoint should reflect the teachings and doctrines of Catholic Church including its social, moral and ethical viewpoints irregardless of party affiliations. Our behavior and attitude should reflect those teachings.

That is why my viewpoint reflects an independent affiliation. I cannot in good conscience endorse either party since they do not reflect the teachings of Christ.

Blessings to all,

Hear, hear. There are problems on both sides of the aisle. I also hear and agree with the bishops that we cannot vote for a politician who espouses an intrinsic evil. That doesn’t automatically mean we *must *vote for the opposition in the other major party.