Republican Primary

[ProVobis]

A progressive tax system is fine and all (and I agree with it to a point).

But there are two issues currenty at play:

1. The government budgets have grown out of control.
2. There’s a ton of waste in government (they aren’t good stewards of our money)

And this is just as true today as it was in 1914.

 

[Roselle]

Should be a good debate tonight! And an important won with Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney so close in the polls.

Thought Jonah Goldberg had a nice article though about the difficulty of choosing a candidate this election go around. Maybe if we could combine them all together, that would make the perfect candidate.

“Mr. Right Eludes the GOP”

nationalreview.com/author/56454/latest

excerpt:

If we could just take a little bit from each of them.”

I’ve lost track of how many people I have heard say some version of this in the last couple of months. The “each of them” refers to the final four combatants for the Republican nomination.

You could take Newt Gingrich’s verbal dexterity, encyclopedic grasp of politics, and techno-optimism. Add in Rick Santorum’s authenticity and religious conviction. Combine that with the essence of Ron Paul’s principled passion for liberty and limited government. Stir vigorously and then pour into the handsome, squeaky-clean vessel of Mitt Romney (while keeping his business acumen and analytical skill). And voilà, you’d have the perfect candidate.

Of course, you could just as easily have a Frankenstein’s monster with Gingrich’s verbal pomposity, Santorum’s resentful and dour sanctimony, Paul’s conspiratorial nuttiness, and the full suite of Romney’s Stepford Republican qualities. It calls to mind Homer Simpson’s scheme to forcibly mate his pets in a burlap sack so as to create “a miracle hybrid, with the loyalty of a cat and the cleanliness of a dog.”
This is one of the amazing things about the GOP’s final four. The various factions of the Republican party and the myriad slices of the conservative mind are represented (with the one obvious missing ingredient being the lack of a southern evangelical Christian), but none of the pieces is in the right place. It’s like playing with a Mr. Potato Head when the feet are where the ears should be and an arm stands in for a nose…

 

[_Abyssinia]

70,000 Americans Tell Obama to Overturn the HHS Mandate

The White House has indicated Obama administration officials will meet with religious employers over the controversial mandate that requires them to pay for birth control and drugs that may cause abortions for their employees. Meanwhile, 70,000 Americans have signaled they want the mandate revered.

As The Hill reports:

A White House official said the administration will begin meeting “in the coming days” with religious organizations and insurers to try to hammer out policies “that respect religious liberty and ensure access to preventive services for women enrolled in self-insured group health plans sponsored by religious organizations.”

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius also emphasized last week that the administration is looking for a solution that will not require religious institutions to pay for contraception.

The White House gave itself a year to figure out how to deal with self-insured plans, meaning it won’t have to wade into the issue before the presidential election.

Jane Bedford, chancellor of the Washington Archdiocese told The Hill that Catholics and other religious employers are adamant that the mandate be dropped.

“This is really unprecedented, to have the government mandate something that would force us to violate our religious beliefs or else suffer a penalty,” Bedford said. “As long as that language stands, this mandate infringes on our religious liberty.”

Jay Sekulow, of the ACLJ, a pro-life legal firm, agrees.

“There are now reports that Obama Administration officials will begin meeting “in the coming days” with religious organizations and insurers to try to hammer out policies “that respect religious liberty,’” he said. “There’s a simple way to do that, if the Obama Administration is serious. As we have said from the very start, eliminate the mandate and all language that requires people of faith to violate their deeply help religious beliefs.”

“The opposition isn’t going away. The public outcry isn’t going to stop. Mr. President and Secretary Sebelius, are you listening?”

Sekulow said opposition to the mandate and compromise put in place by the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) continues to grow as pressure continues to be applied to HHS Secretary Sebelius.

“We have sent a detailed legal analysis to Secretary Sebelius on behalf of nearly 70,000 Americans - urging the Secretary to reverse the troubling regulations put in place – measures that violate religious liberty and the conscience rights of millions of Americans,” he said. “We’ve been reporting in detail on the problems with the HHS regulations. The mandate requires religious institutions, such as religious schools and hospitals, to include abortion-inducing drugs, sterilization, and contraception in their insurance policies for employees. A so-called “accommodation” was then issued after a tremendous public outcry occurred opposing the mandate.”

“The fact is that these regulations are not about health care. They represent a dangerous power play by the federal government. It’s the ultimate in government intrusion, representing a significant threat to religious organizations,” he said. “Our legal analysis is clear: this is not only bad policy, it is unconstitutional as well.”

lifenews.com/2012/02/22/70000-americans-tell-obama-to-overturn-the-hhs-mandate/

I guess Obama admin has realized this is not going away…

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Oh yes, please do Tell me I’m wrong that our taxes don’t go for paying for the public school system. Tell me that I am wrong that we are required to pay for our community services through our taxes for things such as garbage pickup, road repairs, snow removal, and yes, funding for the public school system.

I see no Constitutional requirement for the existence of public schools in the first place. Republicans should be proud of this one. The public school system is a brainchild of Horace Mann, a Whig (the party which would eventually dissolve and morph into the Republican Party…Abraham Lincoln was a major Whig Party officer). So I find it ironic that most of the people who clamour against the Department of Education are Republicans when Republicans are responsible for the implementation of the public schooling system.

 

[ProVobis]

They still had to pay their share of taxes to support the community in which they lived.

Are taxes the only way to support communities?

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Oh yes, please do Tell me I’m wrong that our taxes don’t go for paying for the public school system. Tell me that I am wrong that we are required to pay for our community services through our taxes for things such as garbage pickup, road repairs, snow removal, and yes, funding for the public school system.

I can see from your response that you have a difficulty with logic.

So I’ll let you explain to us how you justify your claim that “It’s the community’s responsibility to help fund the schools in the form of taxes” from the observation that taxes pay for public schools and that we are required by law to pay our taxes.

Now if you had merely claimed that taxes fund public schools, you would of course, be factually correct.

But that is not what you claimed.

What you claimed was that it’s the community’s responsibility to help fund the schools in the form of taxes. That’s an entirely different claim.

So is it the that you don’t understand the difference between these two claims or that you don’t care?

 

[Rence]

Are taxes the only way to support communities?

Of course not. Who said it was?

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Are taxes the only way to support communities?

Of course not, but Rence is obsessed with taxation.

 

[Rence]

I can see from your response that you have a difficulty with logic.

So I’ll let you explain to us how you justify your claim that “It’s the community’s responsibility to help fund the schools in the form of taxes” from the observation that taxes pay for public schools and that we are required by law to pay our taxes.

Now if you had merely claimed that taxes fund public schools, you would of course, be factually correct.

But that is not what you claimed.

What you claimed was that it’s the community’s responsibility to help fund the schools in the form of taxes. That’s an entirely different claim.

So is it the that you don’t understand the difference between these two claims or that you don’t care?

If it’s not the community’s responsibility to help fund the schools in the form of taxes, then why are taxpayers’ taxes funding the public schools regardless of the taxpayer not wanting funds to go to public schools? Or their choice to homeschool? or despite their choice to send their kids to private schools? If it’s not their responsibility, why is it required?

 

[Rence]

Of course not, but Rence is obsessed with taxation.

I just don’t have a problem with supporting my city’s programs with taxes. I don’t even have kids and you don’t see me whining about paying taxes that go to fund the schools. If you want to pay less taxes, then live somewhere with less city support to it’s citizens. My taxes are less than in the city because we don’t have garbage pickup and other perks that the city dwellers have. If you don’t like them, move somewhere you don’t have to pitch in for them.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

If it’s not the community’s responsibility to help fund the schools in the form of taxes, then why are taxpayers’ taxes funding the public schools regardless of the taxpayer not wanting funds to go to public schools? Or their choice to homeschool? or despite their choice to send their kids to private schools? If it’s not their responsibility, why is it required?

Are you intentionally confusing a claim about the community with an observation about individual tax liabilities imposed by law?

The fact that an individual has a legal tax liability does not imply that a community has an obligation to fund anything.

That is a logical non-sequitor.

I just don’t have a problem with supporting my city’s programs with taxes. I don’t even have kids and you don’t see me whining about paying taxes that go to fund the schools. If you want to pay less taxes, then live somewhere with less city support to it’s citizens. My taxes are less than in the city because we don’t have garbage pickup and other perks that the city dwellers have. If you don’t like them, move somewhere you don’t have to pitch in for them.

The fact that “you don’t have a problem” is not evidence of a responsibility.

 

[Rence]

Are you intentionally confusing a claim about the community with an observation about individual tax liabilities imposed by law?

The fact that an individual has a legal tax liability does not imply that a community has an obligation to fund anything…

Really? So if you don’t have an obligation to find the city’s community programs, then don’t I bet you do though…because it’s required…because it’s a civil obligation…

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Really? So if you don’t have an obligation to find the city’s community programs, then don’t I bet you do though…because it’s required…because it’s a civil obligation…

Are you really that confused? Or dishonest? I can’t tell.

I guess you’re given up trying to defend your claim that “It’s the community’s responsibility to help fund the schools in the form of taxes.”

 

[ProVobis]

Really? So if you don’t have an obligation to find the city’s community programs, then don’t I bet you do though…because it’s required…because it’s a civil obligation…

That may be but how does that justify the civils repossessing your paid-for property if you fall a little short on your property tax?

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

That may be but how does that justify the civils repossessing your paid-for property if you fall a little short on your property tax?

You can never really “own” your property. Even if you pay off the mortgage, the county can and will put a lien and begin confiscation proceedings if you stop paying your property taxes.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Surging gas prices threaten to derail economic recovery

latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-gas-prices-20120221,0,6682539,full.story
Obama’s War on Religion Will Unite His GOP Opposition: The uproar over the Obamacare contraception mandate is about more than just birth control and Catholics

chicagotribune.com/news/sns-201202211045usnewsusnwr2012021710cary1feb21,0,7285905.story
Will presidential candidates wear ashes at Wednesday debate?

religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/02/21/will-they-or-wont-they-wear-ashes/?on.cnn=2

 

[Rence]

Are you really that confused? Or dishonest? I can’t tell.

I guess you’re given up trying to defend your claim that “It’s the community’s responsibility to help fund the schools in the form of taxes.”

I’m neither confused or dishonest. I don’t understand what part you’re confused or dishonest about. You have not proved that a community is not responsible to help fund the schools in the form of taxes. Clearly ‘not wanting to’ does not equate to ‘not required to’ when one clearly is responsible by mandate or law, no matter how much you would like this to be. Public schools are funded by public dollars, whether one likes it or not. That’s how they operate, by tax dollars, which are taxpayers dollars. When one lives in a community, one has to take part of living in that community per the laws that govern that community. If there is a law or mandate in place that requires a part of taxes to fund the public schools, which there is, then it’s the community’s responsibility to help fund the schools in the form of taxes. I’m not confused or dishonest about it. If you disagree, then prove it. Which you can’t…

 

[Rence]

That may be but how does that justify the civils repossessing your paid-for property if you fall a little short on your property tax?

Because there is a law in place requiring homeowners to pay property taxes. The consequences of not paying one’s taxes results in the civils reprocessing that property.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Because there is a law in place requiring homeowners to pay property taxes. The consequences of not paying one’s taxes results in the civils reprocessing that property.

So your property REALLY belongs to the government. You pay a tribute, called property taxes, for the priviledge of them allowing you to live there.

 

[RACJ]

Santorum comments on “Satan” attract controversy

“Asked whether he still thinks Satan is attacking the United States, Santorum called the inquiry “not relevant to what’s being discussed in America today.” “If they want to dig up old speeches of me talking to religious groups, they can go ahead and do so, but I’m going to stay on message and I’m going to talk about things that Americans want to talk about,” Santorum said” - National Journal

“There is no way that a man who expresses such a dark view of the American national character can win the presidency.” - John Podhoretz

  IMO, Rick clearly stated that a fierce undermining of good that has been going on for over 200 years in America. It is not a "dark view of the *American*... character". Every Christian who knows the Bible understands that man is free to choose sin, and we all do from time to time. But, BTW, Jesus Himself understood Satan as very real. I have no problem with anything Santorum said in this speech from 4 years ago. :knight2: Rob

​